pizza shop owner picked up the president? physical contact can be hit or miss. ted cruz was a hit when he elbowed his own wife. joe biden wasn't the only politician to get too close to comfort. barack obama accidentally planted one smack on jill biden's lips. make it's safer for amigos to shake. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. i'm brianna keilar in washington in for poppy harlow. "smerconish" is in in a few minutes. first, the fbi grills hillary clinton for three and a half hours today about her e-mail usage when she was secretary of state. fbi sources say they expect no charges against clinton as long as no evidence of wrongdoing

emerges from her interview today with the fbi. today's meeting indicates that investigators are actually close to wrapping up the clinton probe and announcing the results of it. for clinton, timing is crucial. we're 23 days away now from the start of the democratic convention in philadelphia, where she is expected to accept her party's nomination for president. the next few weeks so important as clinton waits for the fbi to announce its findings. her campaign says, "secretary clinton gave a voluntary interview about her arrangements while secretary. she is pleased to have an opportunity to as the department of justice to bring this matter to a conclusion. out of respect for the process she will not comment further." chris, give us this new reaction that you're hearing. >> that's a new reaction after this fbi interview. i want to start off with hillary clinton herself. she was just on msnbc.

she called in. here is what she told chuck todd, "i have been eager to do it," talking about the interview, "and i was pleased to assist the department to bring the matter to a conclusion." she's kind of staying on message there. of course donald trump not really staying on message, continuing to hit hillary clinton on twitter in the way that only donald trump does. if we can show our viewers that tweet. he said, "it is impossible for the fbi not to recommend criminal charges against hillary clinton. what she did was wrong. what bill did was stupid." of course donald trump talking about bill clinton's meeting earlier this week with loretta lynch. their planes were together on a tarmac in phoenix, arizona. bill clinton took the occasion to pop over and make a social call on loretta lynch, republicans saying that because lynch is overseeing the investigation into the private server of hillary clinton and her e-mails, that's a conflict

of interest, that she couldn't be impartial, and loretta lynch saying in fact she wouldn't do that again and that she'll accept whatever her career prosecutors in the fbi recommend on whether or not to bring charges. and bill clinton's camp also weighed in today on that meeting with loretta lynch, an aide telling cnn, "the president's conversation with the attorney general was unplanned, it was entirely social in nature." but recognizing how others could take another view of it, he agrees with the attorney general that he would not do it again. you have on the one side the democrats trying to minimize this and move on, republicans continue to pounce on this. brianna, you and i both know that no matter what happens with the fbi investigation here, as you point out, sources say that unless there's a big game changer in the work, doj will probably announce that there will be no charges. but republicans are going to continue to hammer this, they're going to continue to point out that loretta lynch, you know, is

close with the clintons. of course bill clinton made her a u.s. attorney in new york. and also she's appointed by president barack obama. president obama is going to out there hard for hillary clinton. no matter what happens with this fbi investigation, republicans will continue to hit at it. democrats want to be able to put it away before the convention, to come together without threats of an indictment hanging over their presumptive nominee when she takes that nomination in three weeks, brianna. >> thanks so much. joining me, paul callan, criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor. and on the phone, tom fuentes, a cnn analyst and former fbi assistant director. tom, take us inside what it is like to be in an interview like this and what the length of it tells you. >> i was surprised that it was

this short. maybe it was preliminary and there will be additional interviews later. it's an intense situation, you don't know what questions are going to be asked. the fbi has a mountain of documents they've gone through, hundreds of witness statements from other employees, colleagues, as well as the individuals that set up the server, the private companies. so there's a lot of information that the fbi brings to the table, brings to the meeting. and you as the subject of the interview do not really know what's going to be asked. what you do know is that whatever is asked, politically she's not in a position to say i don't want to be interviewed and exercise her rights not to be interviewed, because it's just politically almost suicidal. but from a legal standpoint, once she talks it has to be the truth. if they can find documentation or evidence that she doesn't tell the truth, she can be prosecuted for that. so it's a very intense situation. and there's a lot of risk in it, obviously, for her.

>> paul -- >> if i could add one more thing, brianna, so many people have commented that there's no expectation of charges here because there hasn't been much said about this. you know, the fbi has maintained an incredible silence, as you would hope they would, in not allowing information to leak out. that doesn't mean they haven't obtained evidence one way or another. that just means they're doing what they're supposed to be in keeping their mouths shut during the course of the investigation. maybe she won't be charged, but that's why everybody is speculating that she's not going to be charged. >> paul, what do you think about that? >> as tom was saying moments ago and i said earlier in the day, i thought the three and a half hour length of it was very, very short. most people were saying, wow, that's a long time to be grilled by the fbi, but it's actually

very short, because remember, they have thousands of documents, and they have all these subjects to question her about. why were you keeping an e-mail server in your personal residence? how did you handle security for it? then they have statements by all of her aides to see if she was contradicting them in any way. and then the individual e-mails. what did you know about this e-mail, when did you know about it, did you know it was classified. an awful lot of information for them to cover if they're thinking about proceeding with an indictment. they finished it, however, in three and a half hours, which means it was relatively perfunctory. as tom says, they can bring her back for other questioning. but we're not hearing those things from the hillary camp, that she expects to go back and finish cooperating with the fbi. so in the end, brianna, it looks to me like it's going to be a no charge situation and recommendation. but of course you never know until we get a definitive statement from the fbi. >> that's right. paul callan, tom fuentes, thanks

to both of you. let's talk to someone who knows a thing or two about white house scandal. back with me on the phone is carl bernstein, he won a pulitzer prize for his coverage of watergate. he's also the author of "a woman in charge: the life of hillary rodham clinton." carl, i want to ask you about something. even if we don't see any charges, there have been some semantic things that we've seen coming from the hillary clinton camp. today in the statement where they say this was a voluntary thing, maybe it was, but she really didn't have a choice. and even throughout this whole investigation, her campaign had been referring to it as a security inquiry. and when the fib director was asked about that, he said that's not a term he's familiar with. they were clearly trying to minimize it with language. what do you make of this? is this something that even matters, that people pick up on, that works for the clinton campaign, or is this something that hurts her? >> oh, i think we're getting too far down in the weeds.

this is a criminal investigation, period. and the real question, as you know, i've never thought it very likely that she would be indicted. that doesn't mean, however, that something hasn't occurred here which is a terrible setback for her in the campaign. and the most awful thing that could happen as a result of this is that because of her recklessness with setting up this server and then lying about it, the fact that she's lied about it in terms of the public and on the air and in debates in terms of the purpose of why she set it up, the fact that she hasn't been truthful about that does not mean she should be charged with a crime. you have to show real intent of breaking the law to have an indictment that is effective here. but it's going to go on. and if donald trump were to be elected president of the united states, a neo-fascist running a neo-fascist campaign, a break with our history, if he were to

be elected president because of hillary clinton's conduct with this server and how she has handled this situation, it would be a great tragedy, including bill clinton's incredible self destructive visit to the attorney general of the united states. and now all of this is playing into the narrative of donald trump and his campaign, with the exception of, of course, if she is not indicted, that is helpful to her. >> you say that this is incredibly destructive, what bill clinton did. he has hurt her in the past as well. eight years ago, he certainly did some things in the primary battle that were to her detriment. what do you make of this? what do you make of this odd decision to go on loretta lynch's plane on monday? and i do have to warn you, carl, you have about one minute left

then i'll have to head out to continue the next show. >> sure. i'm not a psychiatrist. i don't know what motivated him. he's bill clinton. the big dog and all of that. it might have been innocent as can be. it might have been unconsciously trying to bring some kind of pressure. i just don't know. but the real thing is, what we are seeing here are reminders of why the clintons are so toxic to so many voters who they need and who are democrats and support them, and that is this idea of a kind of perpetual circus that attends their governance, their entitlement, sense of entitlement. and if hillary clinton is lucky enough to get by this without an indictment, which i expect she will, if she can find a way to talk to the american people about what this episode has been about, and how important it is to move on and in a way that

acknowledges what she has done here that's been wrong, and go to the importance of making sure donald trump is not the president of the united states, and that's the great issue here, she will have served herself, at least saved herself in some way here. >> carl bernstein, really appreciate you talking with us. thank you so much. some breaking news here on cnn, a different story. renowned holocaust survivor and nobel peace laureate elie wiesel has died. his family was ripped out of romania, sent to auschwitz in poland. his experience is chronicled in his memoir "night" that so many people have read. he received the nobel peace prize in 1986. in a statement israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu said the jewish people deeply mourn the death of elie wiesel. he gave suppression through his fascinating books about the victory of the human spirit over

cruelty and evil. elie wiesel was 87. still to come, with the conventions around the corner, the vp picks are down to the wire. the latest rumors have donald trump thinking about newt gingrich and chris christie. would either ticket make political sense? michael smerconish talks to pat buchanan. and the political big shots are saying they're not going to the republican convention. is anyone going to stick up for the nominee? and some among us are embarrassed to tell a pollster who we intend to vote for. "smerconish" is next. what if we made a paint that was so special that was such a jewel among paints that you had to seek it out. nope, even easier than that. more like taking a left on that street where you usually take a right

that wasn't so hard. and if finding that paint made you and your walls beam with pride, is it still paint? benjamin moore. paint like no other. find one of our 5,000 authorized retailers near you.

just two weeks from today i'm going to in cleveland for the gop convention. here's who won't be. the past two gop presidents, both named bush. and the past two gop nominees,

john mccain, mitt romney. plus the home state republican governor john kasich remains uncommitted. who will be showing up? reportedly, some sports figures and other celebrities. people will tune in, of course. but what does it mean for the party and the general election? former presidential contender pat buchanan joins me now. patrick, i want to know, have you been invited to speak at the rnc? >> no, i have not. and i'm not sure i'm going out there, frankly, michael. but what you described is the reason all those elites and the leadership of the party. and the old leadership of the party is not showing up is because donald trump, the nominee, is conducting an insurrection against those individuals and the policies they produced in trade and foreign policy. >> your argument is it's an actually a good thing that the past two republican presidents and past two republican standard bearers won't be there?

>> i'm not saying it's good or bad, i'm saying i understand it. donald trump is running an insurrection against the political, corporate, and media elites in washington, d.c. and he's running an insurrection against the republican elites. and he's succeeded. it is populist, patriotic,e patriotic,ethnonational. that is not the philosophy of paul ryan and mitt romney. >> after one of your appearances with me here on cnn, trump himself tweeted, "congratulations." so one more question on this. if he asks, pat buchanan, will you speak in cleveland? >> i don't expect any requests to come to cleveland and speak. >> but? >> but i think donald trump should speak what he believes. and he knows what i believe. >> i ask that question because, you know, your culture wars speech from '92 remains famous, or infamous to some. i went and reread the transcript this week. let me remind you of one

paragraph from that speech that maybe stands the test of time. >> the agenda that clinton and clinton would impose on america, abortion on demand, a litmus test for the supreme court, homosexual rights, discrimination against religious schools, women in combat units, that's change, all right. that's not the kind of change america needs. it's not the kind of change america wants. >> does that paragraph stand the test of time? >> it does indeed. i said there's a cultural war going on in this country. at root it's a religious war about what we most deeply believe. there's no question about it, michael, that the left and the radicals have made extraordinary gains toward a victory in that war with a majority of america's young and a significant slice of the american population. that culture war, and the phrase, i was denounced for the phrase but it's been used in a00 book titles, everybody knows we

have a culture war going on in this country. >> the speculation is that newt and chris christie are on the short list. which of the two, or someone else, should he select? >> i think he's looking in the right direction for this reason. as i said, i think he's conducting an insurrection. i think when you're doing something like that you don't go for a balanced ticket or pick up a moderate in order to make us look good on capitol hill. i think you go all in. so i think that if trump picked a chris christie or a newt gingrich, he's saying to hillary rodham clinton and to elizabeth warren, let's get it on, you are over here, we are over there, let's get it on and let the american people decide which way they want to go. you would have political clarity. >> it doesn't sound like people who have eyes on both sides of the political spectrum. >> both parties have about 40 to

42%. they're going to get that, each party. you're doing a battle for the 16 or 18%. i think one of the major things that's in the hearts and minds. they want people who represent real change. i've got doubts about this foal low trump, but he'll do that. >> i want to show you the most provocative headline of the week in "the washington post." it reads, i hate donald trump but he might get my vote. it got a huge reaction, pat. i had a lot of callers on my sirius xm radio show who said, that guy speaks for me. why would rational, affluent, informed citizens consider voting for the donald, short of not voting at all? he's the only one who appears to

want to preserve the american way of life as we know it. pat, those are fighting words to some because they hear those words and think, that's a preservation of white america, that this guy is talking about. >> there is nothing wrong with the country i grew up in, michael. it had some things wrong on civil rights and things like that. but it was a good country. and what these fellas see, and the same thing i'm seeing, we're losing the best about the country we grew up in. the government here in washington, a, is incompetent, b, the system is rigged, c, we're being pulled away from the center. i can understand entirely what that fellow is saying, because there's a lot of people i run into, i grew up with, who feel exactly the same way, i don't know about this foellow trump, but i'm going to vote for him. >> i had this conversation with my father, i said, dad, you're not recognizing all the advancement and good things that are taking place around us, we're so fortunate to be in this country in 2016, it's still the

greatest country on the face of the earth. >> look, the growth rate, we had 1% in the first quarter of this year. you've got the nation divided as it's never been divided. you have words like racist, sexist, homophone, every day, every way, on every tv set, people are calling themselves names. in that sense we are not people and one nation. the way we were in 1960 under eisenhower, when we were making progress on some of these things that concern you. i see it, and you see the country abroad, we've gotten into all these wars all over the middle east. you see the trade deficit. look, you know the place in pennsylvania. >> where your family is from. >> that's where my uncles and mom, i went up there after world war ii as a kid, that place was booming, it was a steel town. my wife she willey is from downn detroit. her daddy went to war.

that's the city that built up america, that won that war. look at detroit today and look at hiroshima today, and you'll see a real change that's taken place and it's not to the better. >> but patrick, look, it's the nation's birthday this weekend. there is still no place you would rather be than here. that's the only acknowledgement i want from you. >> it's the greatest country in the world and it can be made greater still. >> on that we can agree. pat, thank you. >> good talking to you, michael. >> there's another line in that essay i was sharing with pat buchanan. it says, come november 8 you'll find many of us sheepishly sneaking into voting booths across the united states. which brings me to polling. everybody loves polls including we here at cnn, but they're sometimes off, dead wrong, on both sides of the aisle. nate silver, the poll guru who had so successfully crunched numbers in the last couple of election cycles, last august put trump's chances of getting the gop nomination at 2%.

as recently as january he said it wasn't it was at most 12 to 13%. yet we're still clinging to polls. this week we're told hillary clinton will trounce donald trump in november. as i've said before, these numbers are way off until after the conventions and indeed even up until election day. are the pollsters still missing huge swaths of the electorate who are going to show up and maybe vote for donald trump? joining me now, republican pollster and strategist ed goas and strategist adam goodman. why is donald trump such a difficult figure to poll on? >> i don't think he is. i don't know that i agree with the premise. what you have in a lot of the polling today, there's a methodological differences, sampling differences. i think that's a carryover from the 2012 campaign when many of the public polls are trying to pull or weight a sample to what they thought the electorate

would be as opposed to sitting back and using the methodology to get to the right place. but i see no indications in these polls that they're missing anything in terms of the trump voters. it's more the individual polls. this week alone we had one poll with clinton leading by 12 points, another poll had trump leading by 4. nothing happened to change those polls. they're just approaching them in a different way. they'll come together as we get closer to the campaign. >> but they all can't be right, adam, right? something is going on out there to cause that disparate. >> "the washington post" had a sample that had democrats oversampled over republicans by 12 points. it's probably going to be closer to 4 to 5. it's a bad sample. that's part of this. i believe what's going on, michael, and this is going to be different, is more persons than ever have seen behind the curtain. they've seen how the process works. they're kind of upset about it. i think this is a referendum on

the system. we had two candidates who clearly right now had very high negatives. and if you were to have a popularity contest, i think ed goaes gets elected. i think what people are looking for is someone that's going to take on the system that's been letting the country down. the polls have been consistent for 12 years showing by two to one americans think we've been moving in the wrong direction. i think at the end of the day, in the quiet of the ballot box or the voting booth or the absentee who is filling it out at home, in that quiet, hidden moment, i think a lot of people are going to weigh in and that's what they'll be weighing in on. that's why i believe donald trump at the end of the game, if he's close to hillary clinton, will be right where he needs to be to win. >> adam has written on the subject. i don't think he called it this but i will, the reverse bradley factor. he made reference to a campaign on which i worked, the rizzo campaign in '87. frank rizzo would always out wherein perform the polls

presumably because there were people who were embarrassed to tell a stranger in their kitchen, yeah, i'm going to vote for rizzo. is the same thing going on with trump? >> no. everybody is looking for nuances and movement. this campaign started a year ago with both nominees at a 55% unfavorable rating. after a year of campaigning, they're both hovering around 55% unfavorable. not only that, you have 80% of the electorate having strong feelings either favorable or unfavorable on both these candidates. these numbers are baked in. everyone is looking for big nuanced jumps when in fact this is going to be a campaign of inches. if you look at the segmentation of the data, only 3% of the country like both candidates. 26% of the country dislike both candidates. there is going to be voters voting on election day that it's not that they're hiding their vote. they're trying to come to a conclusion of which person do i

dislike most. that's what you're going to see with some undecided or some soft votes going into the election. but, you know, when i look at the data, i agree with adam. there is absolutely nothing in the data that shows that trump can't win this election. he has some plusses, he has some minuses. hillary has some plusses and minuses. both have huge minuses. at the end of the day, with this campaign, it's going to come down to, who do they perhaps dislike most as opposed to who do they like most. >> adam, i'll give you the final word. i would typically say maybe we should follow the money and follow the lead of the bookies, except they didn't do so well with brexit. >> right, they were pretty off with that. as an alum of the frank rizzo club, he won that campaign tend because he said you and your family will be safe again. it's the one thing in the cool of night that brought him to victory. i believe this campaign, in the

cool of night, after what we're going to see in terms of the debates, which will be like super bowl epic contests, that we'll actually have a break in the polls and they'll go for what they feel is necessary to get this country back on its feet again and working again. and that's where i believe, if he's close, donald trump will pull a frank rizzo and peek president of the united states. >> i wish i had more time. thank you, men. the war on pocahontas is not going away. donald trump continues to go after elizabeth warren for her claims of native american heritage. might he actually be right? >> pocahontas is not happy. she's the worst. you know, pocahontas -- i'm doing such a disservice to pocahontas, it's so unfair. ♪

americans are buying more and more of everything online. and so many businesses rely on the us postal service to get it there. because when you ship with us, your business becomes our business. that's why we make more ecommerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. the us postal service. priority: you the possibility of a flare was almost always on my mind. thinking about what to avoid, where to go... and how to deal with my uc. to me, that was normal. until i talked to my doctor. she told me that humira helps people like me get uc under control and keep it under control when certain medications haven't worked well enough. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure.

before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. raise your expectations. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible.

donald trump continues to go after elizabeth warren for her claims of native american heritage. he's repeatedly called her pocahontas. on wednesday, at a trump rally in maine, one of his supporters mocked warren by introducing trump with a native american war cry.

warren's heritage was an issue four years ago. in 1994 she was recognized as a distinguished faculty member at my alma mater, university of pennsylvania law school, listed in the committee's 2005 report. eight names are listed in bold, meaning minority status. three are african-american, three asian, one puerto rican, and then there's warren. while teaching at the university of texas and penn, warren listed herself as a minority in the association of american law school's directory. warren only removed her minority label after harvard hired her in 1995 and still at harvard the school paper noted, although the conventional wisdom among students and faculty is that the law school faculty includes no minority women, professor warren is native american. although she insists she never capitalized her minority status,

she last has never substantiated her claim. a native american has said that she should substantiate her heritage. he joins me now. simon, for what should she apology? >> she's perpetuating stereotypes, like high cheekbones, that doesn't make you native american. also when she wrote to trump that this country was built on things like decency and concern for our neighbor, that's a blatant lie. she needs to apologize for that one. not just to native americans. we know this country was not built on decency and concern for our neighbor. >> you say she's played the indian card for decades and has avoided the community. how has she played the card beyond perhaps what i just offered and how has she avoided

your community? >> she hasn't been involved. nobody knows where she's at. she plays the card by saying she's native american and then disappears. we want to know why she isn't involved in the community she claims to be a part of. that is problematic. she is only addressing trump for his poor business record, calling him a loser. she has not addressed the racism directed at native americans. we're made into political fodder and she's not saying anything about it. she has this history of claiming to be native american but she's nowhere to be found. >> there's something that you wrote that i want to put on the screen and ask you about. it begins this way. "yet warren continues to perpetuate a false reality of who native americans are today while in turn inadvertently or not encouraging the claims of millions of convenient indians who self identify as native american for their own gain." is that what you think she is, someone who is a convenient indian who has self-identified for her own gain? >> she's convenient in the sense that she's claiming to be native

american but she's not addressing these issues. i don't hear her say anything about, for example, that native americans are statistically more likely to be killed by police. i don't hear her talking about domestic violence of native american women 3.5 times more likely than women of any other demographic. we don't know why she's at. she uses this heritage and she's gone, and we're left to have to pick these fights, we're left to tell people, you know what, you can't mock us that way, that war cry is very racist. even though people still do that at baseball and football games, it's still racist. she's not addressing those. >> simon, what about the way in which donald trump is using this issue against her by calling her pocahontas? >> he uses it like a pe jojorat. obviously he's a troll. he has a documented history of attacking native americans. so we expect it from him. we're wondering where she's at in this situation, why she doesn't recognize the indigenous peoples now, why she only

attacks his business record and not his racism against allegedly her people, us, native americans. >> i'm hearing that he's a troll and she's played the indian card without being a full member of the community, that's your beef. >> she perpetuates the stereotype of things like high cheekbones. she's the patron saint of the wannabe, there's millions of people who claim to be native americans because they think they'll make casino money. she's completely silent. >> simon, you're an equal opportunity offender, that's a good thing in my book. thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> up next, a tourist is egged on to sing the national anthem and it took the internet by storm. she's here and i intend to ask her to sing. ♪ over the land of the free

♪ and the home of the brave after a long day, dave stops working, but his aleve doesn't. because aleve can last 4 hours longer than tylenol 8 hour. what will you do with your aleve hours? fight heartburn fast. with tums chewy delights. the mouthwatering soft chew that goes to work in seconds to conquer heartburn fast. tum tum tum tum. chewy delights. only from tums. you've wished upon it all year, and now it's finally here. the mercedes-benz summer event is back, with incredible offers on the mercedes-benz

you've always longed for. but hurry, these shooting stars fly by fast. lease the gle350 for $579 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

for this fourth of july weekend, nothing has moved me more than this story. lincoln memorial. it's crowded. people of all backgrounds are roaming around. they're taking in the scene.

then one tourist, an assistant principal from tallahassee is encouraged to sing the national anthem. listen to this. >> don't do it. let the music speak. go ahead. ♪ o say, can you see by the dawn's early light ♪ ♪ what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? ♪ ♪ whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight ♪ ♪ o'er the ramparts

we watched were so gallantly streaming? ♪ ♪ and the rockets' red glare the bombs bursting in air ♪ ♪ gave proof through the night that our flag was still there ♪ ♪ oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave ♪ ♪ o'er the land of the free ♪ ♪ and the home of the brave? ♪

[ applause ] >> the clip has become an instant youtube sensation. joining us is starr swain. i was going to say where did you learn to sing like that, but you're blessed, you have a gift. >> indeed, it is a gift. >> where have you sung before? >> oh, my, i've sung so many different places. i did a whole lot of singing when i was in the band in college. that afforded me an opportunity to sing in front of thousands of people. but never millions of people. >> do you sing in church? >> i do, all the time. that's something i've been doing for a long time since i was a kid. >> i love your voice and i'm paying attention to what i'm

hearing. the 15 million views, five of them are mine. i'm taking note of the people in the audience. initially they're like, what's going on over here, then all of a sudden, wow, where is this going. where you aware of that while you were singing? >> i wasn't. i was kind of in my own world at that moment. when i close my eyes, i have to go somewhere else just to keep me in the groove and not nervous. i didn't know what was going on with the people. >> at the moment when you're finished, you must know, hey, i got their attention. when did it hit you that all of a sudden you are a youtube/facebook sensation? >> i don't even know still that it's hit me. it's like an out of body experience. i can't really believe it, like it's a dream. >> you're an assistant principal. this is summer vacation. you came up from florida as soon as the kids went home. >> mm-hmm. >> has it occurred to you when

you go back to tallahassee, starr swain has a pretty good summer vacation story to tell. >> that i do. >> you're in new york city, you have options here, i'm thinking the statue of liberty, the memorial to the september 11th victims downtown. where might you pop up at a monument next? >> i don't know, you'll just have to stay tuned. >> you come to my hometown in philly and show up in independence hall or at the liberty bell, this is your thing. >> that would be wonderful, actually. i would love to do that. >> am i embarrassing you if i ask you to indulge us, maybe just with the last portion, because it is a holiday weekend, we're celebrating the birth of the country. it's only the cnn newsroom. >> oh, it's only. >> can you dig deep and just do the final portion? >> i sure can, yes, sir. ♪ oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave ♪

♪ o'er the land of the free ♪ ♪ and the home of the brave? ♪ [ applause ] >> you got a rise out of this crowd. and at home too. happy july 4th weekend. thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> a pleasure on our part. the media love reporting that anger is the buzzword of the 2016 presidential campaign, that the electorate are acting like the anchor in the 1976 oscar-winning movie "network," screaming their rage. i have a different theory. i'll announce it in a moment. >> i want you to get up right now, go to the window, open it, stick your head out, and yell, i'm as mad as hell and i'm not going to take this anymore!

it's here, but it's going by fast. the opportunity of the year is back: the mercedes-benz summer event. get to your dealer today for incredible once-a-season offers, and start firing up those grilles. lease the c300 for $379 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

if the 2016 presidential campaign were a movie it would surely be the 1976 oscar winner "network." you remember, the newscaster pleads to his viewers to go to the window and yell, i'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. and they obey. reports of that can a kcophony

anger are many in this electoral cycle. but callers to my sirius xm show are rarely anger. when i poll them, 68% of them report themselves as hopeful, not angry. that's backed up by one of the longest running measures of americans' views of the economy, which found that by the end of last year people were nearly as upbeat about the economy as at the end of '93, when ronald reagan was president and it was morning in america. why the disconnect? i would argue it's the outsize influence of the passionate people and what they exert on our political process. those who are most participatory versus the rest of the nation. passion is always strongest at the extremes of the political

spectrum. it's where you find the activists, the most reliable voters, the people who put up the yard signs, hang a bumper sticker, write the checks. i believe the loud voices of those who are angry have muted too many of the rest of us. that's because we let them. i also believe there's a new silent majority in the nation and they are neither tea party activists nor millennials feeling the "bern." they are tens of millions of americans who are not angry but are remaining silent. one of the ways they're remaining silent is not voting. that's a huge problem. the iowa caucus turnout, after all the hype, when all was said and done, only 20% of the people who voted in the general election of 2012, and they were an even smaller percentage of the total eligible voters. so the highly motivated voters dominated the primary process and donald trump was the beneficiary. whether there are enough angry voters to win the white house, that's a different story. my answer is it depends on

whether we let them. general election voters tend to be more racially and ethnically diverse, more female, more young. but perception in politics can become reality. if coverage continues to highlight views of the angriest among us, portray them as being more omnipotent than they really are, the less passionate people may stay at home. more overall participation, more open primaries, fairly drawn congressional districts, campaign finance reform, expand the debate participation to allow third party independents, all of that would help. most of all we need to recognize that entertainment choices have consequences. and more of us need to stop conflating our news and entertainment choices and differentiate between information and blather. and we need to hurry. you remember when "network" anchor howard beale asked americans to shout outside i'm mad as hell and many followed?

it's time for the rest of us to close our windows. have a great holiday weekend. follow me at twitter @smerconish. see you next week.

♪ some neighbors are energy saving superstars. how do you become a superstar? with pg&e's free online home energy checkup. in just under 5 minutes you can see how you use energy and get quick and easy tips on how to keep your monthly bill down and your energy savings up. don't let your neighbor enjoy all the savings. take the free home energy checkup. honey, we need a new refrigerator. visit pge.com/checkup and get started today.

♪ it's a time of enormous turmoil. >> '60s are over. >> here's michael at the foul line. good! >> we intend to cover all the news all the time. we won't be signing off until the world ends. >> isn't that special. >> any tool for human expression will bring out both the best and worst in us. and television has been that. >> they don't pay me