airline flights to russia following warnings about toothpaste tube bombs. and if that sounds like a joke, watch what one of them does to this car. now listen to what senate intelligence committee chair dianne feinstein just told cnn's jake tapper. >> i think people going to the olympics should be careful. i think they should watch their backs. i think they should stay out of crowds if they can. >> like that's doable. the olympics is one giant crowd. if i were a ticket holder or an athlete, i'd be scared. wouldn't you be? >> well, i'd be sobered, but i do think senator feinstein sort of tried to get it both ways. if you shouldn't be in a crowd, you shouldn't go to the olympics. if you're in the olympics you're going to be in a crowd. the question is whether something terrible happens or happens somewhere else in the world. in the "crossfire," adam schiff

and ron johnson. let me ask you, if i might, congressman, you all were briefed i think today. what's your sense? as you know, senator feinstein who is the chair of the finance committee in the senate, from your state, indicated she probably wouldn't go if she had a family member participating. what's your sense of how big a challenge it would be to go to sochi right now? >> if i had tickets to the olympic, i would go. there's certainly a risk. no place around the world regrettably is safe any more and certainly the olympics with the threats we've been hearing about, but i think it's a manageable risk. you won't be able to avoid crowds, but you can't avoid straying off the beaten path. you can take certain precautions in how you get to sochi and not deviating from instructions given to you by personnel on the grounds. you can take precautions to reduce the risk. the risk is greatest outside of sochi, outside of the olympic village, the transportation hub. we've been hearing a lot about aircraft risks but probably the

train stations may be at greater risk. >> you've said that the russians are not sharing adequately in terms of information on what they're doing and what they thick the threats are. what do you think they should be doing in terms of working with us that they're not? >> they'll give us information when there's an exterior threat. so if there are people in france or austria or elsewhere that they have reason to believe are a threat, are going to come to russia and pose a problem, they share that information because they have to. they need us and our european allies to act on it. but if it's information from inside russia that would reflect badly on russia, that would disclose some of their sources and methods, they won't share that. they haven't been sharing that at least not to the degree they could. if we had the advantage of that information, we could better protect not only our people but theirs as well. >> let me pose a similar question to you. you've received briefings as well. you know the threat in sochi as well as anyone. would you go? would you recommend to your constituents that they go or they stay home? >> the congressman's assessment

is pretty accurate. there's a heightened sense of concern. there should be. i think any reasonable person understands that there have been threats made. i think probably the greatest thing we've got going for us in terms of security is vladimir putin's reputation is on the line. let's face it, russia is probably not quite as concerned as the u.s. in terms of civil liberties and they're not quite as respectful of human rights. so they have been afraid to kind of roll up plots and that type of thing and they have a lot of people on the ground. so inside the olympic village i think the security level is about as safe as it is going to get. the greatest threat would be traveling. we live in a dangerous world. these threats that we face are real. and people need to be mindful of that at all times. >> the brutishness of putin may actually be an advantage. say more about the fact that -- >> i'm not endorsing -- >> i didn't think you were. the russians have said if something does happen, god forbid, the u.s. interests, the

fbi, will take a backseat to the russian response. the russians will coordinate the response on the ground? are you comfortable with that? >> i would like more cooperation. that's probably natural. if you were in the u.s., it would be the exact same thing and be difficult not to have total cooperation. i would like to see probably more u.s. presence, there's no doubt about it. but that's -- it is what it is. >> let me build on something that senator johnson just said that i think is really troubling about the world we live in. this is not a comment on putin so much, but they have been extraordinarily brutal, particularly in dealing with the chechens and they've killed an amazing number of people. and the results have been breeding a new generation of determined terrorists. it was no accident, i think that the two bombers in boston were chechens and the chechens seem pretty good at terrorism and they seem extraordinarily determined. as you thing about our role around the world and you think about the enemies we have anew

england radical islamism around the world, don't you find it really sobering that after all this effort and bloodshed, the russians are at this very moment having to bring in 37,000 additional police just for the sochi area because they can't -- they can't break the back of this resistance? >> i think that's exactly right. and it shows the double-edged sword that the russian heavy-handed tactics bring. on the one hand, yes, they can have this ring of steel, they can bring all these resources in, yes, they can surveil everything electronically and otherwise and quite ironic that snowden would be there with so much electronic surveillance going on in russia right now. but by the same token their vigorous crackdown in places like dagestan, chechnya, has resulted in fans the flames of a lot of this militancy that has in part contributed to the problem they're trying to confront. i think a sobering lesson in russia. it's instructive not just for the russians, i think it's

instructive probably to all of us about some of the consequences of how we approach the terror problem and making sure that the actions that we take aren't counterproductive, that they don't grow the problem instead of shrink it. >> it's really surprising when you realize that russia is under the same threats we are, that they're not far more cooperative with us in the world. i was hoping that we had some shared interests, for example, in syria, where we had the chemical weapons trying to get our arms around there. but we've only recovered 4%. they're way behind schedule. i don't think there's any hope that we'll actually stay on schedule by june 30th. and it's really russia's role to make sure that happens. they're not making sure that happens. they're not cooperating anywhere near sufficiently with iran. that was state sponsored state terrorism. i wish russia were a friendly rival, instead they're unfriendly adversary, that's a

real shame. it is puzzling to me. >> i'm glad you brought that up. we can all wish things for russia that were different but nobody can deal with putin. the situation seems to be deteriorating despite all attempts, yet republicans have been fairly -- to bring this back to domestic politics for a second. republicans have been fairly consistent in criticizing president obama and his foreign policy in general and in particular with respect to russia and yet i'm curious, is there anything vis-a-vis russia in general or specifically to syria or to iran that you would do differently? >> first of all, i would like to think that politics can end the water's edge. >> so would i. >> i'm not sures that the case. i would like to do that. in the senate foreign relations committee, its a ps a pretty bipartisan atmosphere there. these are enormously challenging problems we have. but the fact of the matter is this president has created some huge blunders. first and foremost, he's not negotiating the status force

agreement for iraq which would prevent the iranian overflights. syria wouldn't be as big a disaster as it is. we sacrificed so much blood and treasure and we didn't even leave behind a stabilizing force who could have been helped in the middle east. again, i really don't want to be -- >> well, i would have not liked to have gone to the war in the first place. i would have not liked to have gotten into the iraq war in first place, it would have solved it much better. how would you deal with russia differently? >> i think we need to be dealing with them with reality. you just can't hope. that's a terrible strategy. for example, i think we ought to be talking to poland and czech republic. we union llaterally did not ins those defense shields. russia is not abiding by the nuclear treaty. that is a real problem. i think we need to make sure that we show real strength toward russia and that's probably the best way to deal with them.

>> so sochi is a real problem, but so is boston. so is silicon valley. when we get back, i'll share with you the scariest story i read this week.

if yand you're talking toevere rheuyour rheumatologistike me, about trying or adding a biologic. this is humira, adalimumab. this is humira working to help relieve my pain. this is humira helping me through the twists and turns. this is humira helping to protect my joints from further damage. doctors have been prescribing humira for over ten years. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. for many adults, humira is proven to help relieve pain and stop further joint damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal events, such as infections, lymphoma, or other types of cancer, have happened. blood, liver and nervous system problems,

serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure have occurred. before starting humira , your doctor should test you for tb. ask your doctor if you live in or have been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. tell your doctor if you have had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have symptoms such as fever, fatigue, cough, or sores. you should not start humira if you have any kind of infection. ask your doctor if humira can work for you. this is humira at work.

welcome back. in the "crossfire" tonight, representative adam schiff and senator ron johnson. we're only 16 hours from the olympics opening ceremonies and cnn has just learned the tsa is banning all carry-on liquids on flights heading to russia. but the most important competition at the sochi olympics may not involve any of the athletes. it is the very hard, very real competition between security forced a es and terrorists.

both president bush and president obama have suggested at times we're winning the war on terror. it is simply not true. here's the scariest example i've read in are long time. we're just learning details about an attack in silicon valley last april. a group of snipers shot out an electrical substation knocking it out for a month. they go away. the fbi as of today has no idea who they were. from silicon valley to boston to sochi, this planet is not getting safer. and let me say, before i ask you about the events in your home state, what i found particularly sobering were the estimates that this was in fact a training exercise. and yet there has been no effort, i think, at a national level to really respond aggressively to the possibility that you may have a whole group of people out there trying to think how to take down our electrical system. as a californian, what was your reaction when you got briefed on the silicon valley incident?

>> i think it's quite staggering when you consider the sophistication of the attack and how little we still know about what took place, whether this was an act of domestic terrorism like the oklahoma city bombing, whether this was preparation for something more sophisticated later. but it just kind of brings home the fact that, when we talk about sochi and we talk about soft targets outside the city, we have lots of soft targets here. and some of those power stations are among the softest targets and the damage they could do is extraordinary. i had a breakfast this morning with secretary of defense hagel. and one of the top issues that he raised, one of his paramount concerns is cyber. and this attack on our infrastructure could have brought down our energy grid. you might be able to do the same thing through a cyber attack. >> although we spend more energy on the cyber. but let me ask you a follow-up for a second. it strikes me that the point of homeland security in the story that related to this said

protecting these kind of stations isn't our responsibility. now, if we lose the electrical grid, the fact ha the secretary of homeland security can say we plan for a cyber attack but not a physical attack, so it's not our fault. doesn't it seem to you that we ought to have a much more militant and aggressive response to this and the congress ought to be holding the department of homeland security's feet to the fire on what is our preparation also the fact that these are very hard to replace and take a long time to replace. we clearly don't have an adequate stockpile to replace them if there was a serious attack. shouldn't we be more aggressive in responding to this? >> i think we have to be more aggressive in responding not only to this but the need to protect all of our critical infrastructure. honestly, i don't understand the statement that it's not a part of the core mission of the department of homeland security. a lot depends on who carried out this attack, but it's very much in the homeland, it could be

devastating to our economy and to operations of hospitals that run on power even though they may have backups and other critical first responders. it's part and parcel of their mission and there are a lot of other targets like that we need to be protecting for better than we do now. >> senator, to that point, there are obviously threats abroad, there are so many threats here. given that, isn't this the time the united states should be investing more in our intelligence, in our capacities through the fbi and the cia rather than cutting their funding as you and republicans have voted to do? >> it's a dangerous world. our best defense is a robust intelligence gathering capability. and part of the problem is when you have all these instances, when you have an administration that minimizes the threat, we can get in these debates, is it terrorism, what we need to understand is this is a dangerous world. >> so then why -- then why cut the cia funding? >> well, what we need to do is prioritize spending.

the first role of government is national defense. but when we are spending all this money that we don't have creating all these deficits, creating a spike in interest rates that would totally consume our budget if we were starting to return to historical interest rates -- >> i'm confused. you just said national security was a top priority. >> it is. so we have to prioritize spending, get control of our debt and deficits. but there's no doubt about it we need a robust intelligence gathering capability. and what we need is we need the american public to actually trust our government and have faith in the administration that we're not going to be snooping on americans, that we're not going to be utilizing the irs as a weapon against americans. >> it would be nice to see republicans voting as if intelligence is the most important thing. >> that liberals/progressives that more money is always an answer. the enormous challenge the russians have. we have spent since 9/11 an

estimated $4 trillion plus on the various aspects of national security, homeland security, et cetera. i think we are not particularly safer. in fact, i would argue we're clearly not safer, that the threat is mutating at a faster rate. isn't part of the problem here a relentless rethinking of our bureaucracies is and a willingness to cut through -- we have i think 16 intelligence departments, for example. it just strikes me as sort of madness. >> certainly we need to do a far better job using the resources we have. part of this is a resource question, part of it is are we structured to confront the new challenge we have. you say we're not safer. i think we're safer from the mega attack we saw on 9/11. we're safer from the core of al qaeda and that kind of massive coordinated attack. what we're not safer from are the one-offs, the spin-offs, the boston marathon bombings, shoe bombings, underwear bombings and now toothpaste bombings.

those threats have really proliferated. syria is now becoming the new afghanistan, the new training ground, the new magnet for jihadis, we may be dealing for the next 10 or 15 years with so the problems have mushroomed. the question is are we marshalling our resources and the best way to deal with that new phenomenon, and how are we dealing with that so-called pivot to asia. from my point of view, i would reorient the defense department to -- not massive invasions -- but being able to stand up the capacity in some of the other countries, so in mali, they can take the fight to the terrorists in their own ranks and have a smarter, faster, cheaper defense in the diminished budgetary days. >> senator, you're both saying what should feel refreshing which is this important role for the government to play in

keeping us safe. we should be protecting our vital infrastructure more. senator, you're saying foreign policy and our domestic security should be our number-one priority, and yet -- >> do less in other areas. >> and yet, not to forget the $232 million that you, sir, voted to cut from the fbi's budget, but also more broadly, that's not bureaucracy. those are our machine and women who are protecting us. those are fbi agents, those are police officers, those are people listening in on threats. >> the senate is so dysfunctional. >> not bureaucracy. >> nobody specifically voted to cut individual programs. here's a hobson page omnibus spending bill, vote yes or no. homegrown terrorism is a huge threat and the department of homeland security is an utterly dysfunctional bureaucracy itself. you have to look at the history of that and should we have bure

ra -- >> it's nice to hear a defense of government coming from republicans. next, the "outrages of the day," and believe it or not, i'm outraged at president obama today. i'll tell you why in a minute. we also want you at home to weigh in on today's "fireback question," would you feel safe traveling so sochi? we'll have the results after the break. and it feels like your lifeate revolves around your symptoms, ask your gastroenterologist about humira adalimumab. humira has been proven to work for adults who have tried other medications but still experience

the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief, and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal events, such as infections, lymphoma, or other types of cancer, have happened. blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure have occurred. before starting humira, your doctor should test you for tb. ask your doctor if you live in or have been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. tell your doctor if you have had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have symptoms such as fever, fatigue, cough, or sores. you should not start humira if you have any kind of infection. ask your gastroenterologist about humira today. remission is possible. eight million new jobs. new businesses. new factories. anncr: you're working hard. all day. every day. and it shows... new hope. still, it's harder than it should be to raise a family... save for retirement.

so president obama is urging congress to give america... a raise. his plan raises the minimum wage to ten ten an hour. and requires equal pay for women to boost family incomes. congress...give america a raise, we've earned it.

we're back with representative adam schiff and

senator ron johnson. it's time for our outrages of the day. i'm generally a supporter of president obama, but today i'm outraged. earlier, the white house made clear the u.s. will continue to deport 1,100 undocumented immigrants per day. a rate that's higher than any previous administration. the white house says it doesn't have the legal authority to stop deportations. it does. and arguably, given the president's rhetoric, he has the moral obligation to act. what president obama doesn't seem to have is the political guts to do what's right, especially as republicans continue dragging their feet on immigration reform. so on behalf of american families ripped apart every day by this administration, i'm outraged. >> i'm outraged on behalf of an 11-year-old girl who was told she couldn't bake cupcakes. she was baking cupcakes, selling them on the street, which attracted favorable coverage in a local newspaper. as a result, the county health department informed her parents

that not only hadn't obtained the right permits, they either had to buy a bakery or build a separate kitchen just for baking cupcakes. to quote the county health official, there are rules and regulations. so the 11-year-old girl stopped selling her cupcakes. she told the local paper she feels bummed. the rest of us should feel outraged. >> look, newt, i'm bummed for the little girl baking the cupcakes, too. i'm a little happy if government is using its power of public health to protect us all from noro virus, and, you know, that to me is far less -- >> that's okay? >> that feels far less egregious than government coming in and ripping up the families of people who've come here because businesses want them here, and they want to work here and -- >> so your outrage -- >> my outrage is bigger than your outrage. [ laughter ] >> i think for that little girl it was sufficiently outrageous.

but the bigger thing, this is what ron and i were trying to say a while ago, you want structured activities by government, but there are times when bureaucracies become truly stupid. you happen to think the current activity of the administration on immigration is stupid. obviously, what the little girl experienced was stupid, and we need to rethink what we're doing on national security, because i'm a hawk but i'm a cheap hawk. i don't think you should automatically salute something just because it happens to be out there waving a flag. i think you have to be -- >> congressman, what do you think? >> a dose of common sense in both areas. it's ridiculous to crack down on an 11-year-old selling cupcakes. my son and i were selling hot chocolate last year. >> i apologize, but i have to thank representative schiff and his son, selling hot chocolate, and senator johnson. go to facebook or twitter to weigh in on the fireback question. would you feel safe traveling to sochi? right now, 27% say yes.

73% say no. the debate continues on cnn.com/crossfire, as well as on facebook and twitter. join us tomorrow for another edition of "crossfire." "erin burnett outfront" starts right now. breaking news. hours away from the olympic opening ceremony, u.s. officials on high alert tonight. the president has just responded to the terror threats. plus, tonight, how toxic is chris christie. why republicans are refusing to be seen with the new jersey governor today. will they live to regret that choice? and philip seymour hoffman remembered by his friends and family. let's go "outfront." good evening, everyone, i'm erin burnett. we begin with breaking news. the u.s. responds to terror threats at the