good evening. we begin this hour with the national security kneecapping donald trump got late today right in the middle of his attempt to get his campaign back in gear. donald trump has had a rough couple of weeks and today's speech in detroit on prompter, on message, about the economy, was step one in trying to put it behind him. he delivered it but then this. donald trump is not qualified to be president and commander in chief. indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous president and would put the country at risk. he would risk our national security and wellbeing. the letter signed by 50 former republican national security experts including former nsa and cia director michael hayden and two former republican secretaries of homeland security. this evening, donald trump reacted. cnn's dana bash joins us again with more on that and some of the other harsh words in the letter itself.

this letter from foreign policy experts is pretty stark. what are the main points in it? >> it is stark. i think one of the things that's most fascinating about it is that they don't go after donald trump for his policy, for lots of reasons, maybe a lot of them differ within the republican establishment, those who signed this letter, but they go after him for his temperament. let me show you more of the letter. they say he lacks self-control and acts impetuously. he cannot tolerate personal criticism. he has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. all of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be president and commander in chief with command of the u.s. nuclear arsenal. if that isn't dire enough, here's the kicker of the letter. we are convinced that in the oval office, he will be the most reckless president in american history. it doesn't get more jarring than that to be writing that as a

republican and frankly a lot of these people who are writing it are non-political -- not political. they are diplomats. they are kind of wonks when it comes to foreign policy. that is certainly why it took donald trump off message quite a bit today to have this kind of blindsiding him. >> the trump campaign basically is denouncing the letter saying the people who signed it are quote, failed washington elite. what else are they saying? >> he responded exactly how you would expect somebody who is an outsider to respond. somebody who has been really trashing the bush administration. many of these experts and officials came from the bush world, trashing them for the iraq war and much more. let me read to you part of the trump campaign's response. i offer a better vision for our country and our foreign policy, one that is not run by a ruling family dynasty. it is an american first vision

that stands up to foreign dictators instead of taking money from them, seeks peace over war, rebuilds our military and makes other countries pay their fair share for their protection. so again, really goes at the theme that carried donald trump through the republican primaries and he's trying to get back to today, which is he's an outsider, they're part of the system which is rigged, which hasn't worked on a whole host of levels. >> you brought up his message today. this was delivered in an economic policy speech that was very important for the campaign. what did he say there? >> he said a lot and a lot of things that were right on point when it comes to what republicans were hoping and praying he could do, which is not have any unforced errors, not insult anybody. in fact, he was interrupted 14 times, which is kind of astonishing, by protesters at various points during his speech. he pretty much let it go. he had one kind of funny quip but he didn't go after them.

more importantly on the substance, he really tried to reach out to some potential middle class voters. he tried to incorporate theories and credo and philosophy from traditional republican tax plans. he even scrapped his own tax reform plan and adopted the house republicans' plan. so he did everything that he was supposed to do both in terms of temperament for the speech and in terms of substance and policy. he didn't have an unforced error on his own. he just kind of again got knocked off message by very influential group of republicans saying he's unfit to be president. >> dana bash, thanks so much. we will fact check a new tweet from donald trump linking hillary clinton's use of a private e-mail server to the execution of an iranian nuclear scientist who helped the united states. first, though, our panel joining us this hour, "new york times" political correspondent patrick healey and all of or friends who have been with us for the previous hour. i want to start with this letter

from the 50 national security people who worked in various republican administrations over the years. what's the history here? is this fairly unprecedented to see something of this scope? >> absolutely. to come out of a convention, two conventions, usually you're having the two campaigns that are trying to annihilate each other. usually you are having the clinton campaign would be sending missive after missive putting opposition research out on donald trump, making various kinds of attacks. silence from the clinton campaign. all of these sort of other groups now, these 50 who have signed this letter, are to some extent sort of doing the work of the clinton campaign just in terms of overshadowing donald trump's day, sort of changing the message from him. it's creating a dynamic now that really does favor her. she wants this to be an election based on his character. she wants it to be a character debate, not a policy debate.

she doesn't want to talk about free trade and jobs in states like pennsylvania, where she feels like it's going to be a closer contest with donald trump if it's the issues. she wants it on the character. >> wlet me ask you about what patrick started with there. the idea that day after day, more and more republicans are coming out. at least one a day. there were 50 today, last week you had meg whitman, sally bradshaw. it just seems to keep on happening. how much of a concern should this be to the trump campaign? >> i don't think it's a concern if donald trump can break through some of the off messaging he's had and stick to the message we saw today, the economic message he put forth today. that's a message that resonates. the idea that the washington elite have failed you on both sides is what brought bernie sanders to the point of getting 43% of the democratic vote and what won donald trump the nomination. if he speaks of a real anger against the very same people among washington insiders who are coming out against donald trump, but i think these folks in this letter, some will come around to trump. those who don't, i do think they

have an obligation to explain to the american people how they think hillary clinton's poor judgment is an acceptable alternative to donald trump because at the end it's a binary choice. someone who spoke about an iranian scientist in her e-mail, as senator cotton pointed out, even if it didn't lead to her execution is incredibly irresponsible to do given the vulnerabilities of her server. they have an obligation to articulate a positive message. >> joe borelli, donald trump supporter, if trump is going to run against the democrats and also the republican establishment, the 50 people in this letter and also other folks, jeb bush, are there enough voters to give him 50 plus one on november 8? >> that's the point i was going to make. these are people who are part of administrations, for the most part, bush people, who donald trump has spent most of his time sort of rebuking. i don't think it's too surprising that a lot of them are now lining up against him. i think a lot of the motivations are questionable because a lot of these people have gone on to different things, working for

different companies, there are companies right now people work for that are named in that letter who have close ties with the clinton campaign. that's all fine. they are entitled to their opinion. to your question, he's got to rally people who are disaffected. whether they be republicans, democrats. he's got to abandon the typical mantra of solidifying everybody in the republican side before you reach out. i think he has no choice but to reach out to people who are upset with sort of the beltway elite. these 50 people are the beltway elite. >> you are a republican. a lot of these 50 people are people you no doubt worked with on the hill. >> yeah. i'm familiar with them. it's not just bush people. they go back many years, longer than working in these areas longer than some of us here have been alive. they are experts in these areas and should not be dismissed just because they are expressing their opinion. looking at their experience in world affairs and they have worked for several different presidents. they have seen world affairs from a front row seat and they are concerned legitimately about donald trump's temperament and

fitness to be president. he himself has made unbelievable statements that have concerned people. the president's number one job is to be commander in chief. with the things donald trump has said and done throughout this campaign have been very disqualifying from putting a price tag on supporting our nato allies, for goodness sakes, to making up things like the iranian video to going after p.o.w.s saying he likes ones that didn't get caught. these are -- there are so many other things that he has said that people don't think are great for the presidency of the united states and to just dismiss these people, that's not fair. >> let me chime in here. really quick. as a former house committee homeland security staffer who was on the committee when secretary chertoff was serving in bush's cabinet, i never agreed with secretary chertoff. i didn't agree with the levels red, orange, yellow, anything in between, none of it.

what i will say to you is i never thought that we would be in this moment in 2016 when republicans and democrats could use language that sounds like unfit and unqualified to refer to the republican nominee. it is damning. we shouldn't call it anything less than that. this isn't about being establishment. >> i'm not fighting you. i'm saying we can agree on that. >> i worked on foreign affairs committee. i get it. >> we talk about fitness over and over again. your candidate was under investigation by the fbi for making -- >> hang on. >> but she -- >> ever -- >> let kayla. >> perhaps even imperilling cia asset names. we don't know what was on those top secret e-mails. it is krus. >> doug. >> at this stage of the campaign usually you have a nominee of a party who is being validated by other leaders and members of his party and it's the opposition that tries to get headlines

about clinton attacks trump. every day that the headline, that the top line is republican civil war still, that these experts are not validating him. >> today's speech on the economy that donald trump gave, he also littered with words like i'm an outsider, i'm coming from the outside. his response to these 50 people was i'm an outsider, these are insiders. the outsider message could be one that appeals. no? >> i think it does, but you just can't look at things in a vacuum. donald trump being an outsider, that's fine. but you can't say an outsider who one weekend plays footsie with david duke, the next weekend has carter page, his policy advisor, going out demonizing democracy and praising putin in russia. you just can't have those things happen. but just to push back on patrick slightly, i think that hillary clinton wants to have a policy debate with donald trump. i think that most people want to have a policy debate with donald trump. because one thing we have learned, i said it before,

donald trump on foreign policy especially is a shallow bathtub. there's not a lot there. one of the things hillary clinton will continue to do is press him on those issues. today's economic speech, one thing he didn't answer is how do you pay for it. >> i know you have a lot more to say. we have a lot more time in the broadcast. stick around. just ahead, the new claim that donald trump links hillary clinton's e-mail server with the execution of an iranian nuclear scientist. is this just a conspiracy theory? next, we turn the spotlight on hillary clinton. her answer to donald trump's economic plan and how even some supporters still have questions about her honesty over those same e-mails. hey. hi. you're that guy from verizon who switched to sprint. i used to ask if you could hear me now, but it's 2016 ...and sprint's network reliability is now within 1% of verizon. and sprint saves you 50% on most verizon, at&t and t-mobile rates. that's why millions have switched.

make that millions plus one. can you hear that? don't let a 1% difference cost you twice as much. switch to sprint today. clicking around and start saving at hilton.com book direct... and get the lowest price online

and an early morning mode.ode. and a partly sunny mode. and an outside... to clear inside mode. transitions® signature adaptive lenses... ...are more responsive than ever. so why settle for a lens with just one mode? experience life well lit®. ...upgrade your lenses to transitions® signature. now get up to a $90 rebate by mail. when you purchase glasses and sunglasses featuring select brands. ask your eyecare professional or visit transitions.com for details. justice is spelled b-o-x.hero, say hello to a powerful tool that gives you options to fit your budget. ♪ oh, i'm tied to this chair! ♪

dun-dun-daaaa! i don't know that an insurance-themed comic book is what we're looking for. did i mention he can save people nearly $600? you haven't even heard my catchphrase. i'm all done with this guy. box him up. that's terrible. ♪ ♪

breaking news just moments ago in "the washington post" there is a new op-ed that was posted by republican senator susan collins from maine. the title of this op-ed is "why i cannot support donald trump." want to bring in cnn's jeff zeleny, who has been covering the campaign for us. jeff, what can you tell us about susan collins and what she wrote? >> reporter: john, an interesting op-ed in tomorrow's "the washington post," no question. susan collins is becoming the first republican senator to say explicitly she will not vote for donald trump. this is one explanation why. she says mr. trump lacks the temperament, self-discipline and judgment required to be president. now, of course, susan collins is a republican from maine.

she is a more moderate republican. she is quite close to hillary clinton as well. when they served together in the senate, they had a good working relationship here. so certainly she does not speak for all republicans, but you get the sense that this is just the beginning and the continuation of what could be more of a republican groundswell the closer we get to election day. at least among establishment republicans. >> again, i haven't had time to read this but senator collins doesn't say she's supporting hillary clinton, just not voting for donald trump? >> reporter: that's right. >> interesting. >> reporter: that's right. that's what we're seeing right now. right. exactly. that's the question here. some republicans aren't willing to go the step further here so where do they go? >> all right. talk to me about what secretary clinton is doing today. she responded very quickly to donald trump's speech on the economy. what did she say? >> reporter: she did. she painted donald trump as having old ideas. it almost seemed like a flashback today. this campaign seems so new and fresh. today it seemed old and stale.

she said his ideas are old, she talked about trickle-down economics. but more importantly, she went hard after his business record. again trying to make the point that he is someone who hasn't always paid his bills. he's someone who does not make his products here in the u.s. so trying to undercut his strength as a businessman. of course, it works among her supporters. doubtful it works among his. >> jeff zeleny with this breaking news, senator susan collins, republican from maine, will not be voting for donald trump. so more now on that notion of wherever you stand politically, it is safe to say that hillary clinton has done well in the polls for the last couple weeks but there have been some issues. it goes to one of her biggest weaknesses with the voters, questions about her honesty. more on that from randi kaye. >> reporter: a warm greeting for hillary clinton as she swings through the swing state of florida, where she's leading her opponent by six points.

>> this is history in the making. >> reporter: history, perhaps, but what about hillary clinton's own history? benghazi, her private e-mail server, false claims about landing under sniper fire in bosnia. it's all part of the same narrative and why many voters don't trust her. the latest cbs poll shows just 34% of registered voters say clinton is honest and trustworthy. compared to 36% for donald trump. even among her supporters at this rally in st. petersburg there were lingering questions about her e-mails. >> of course we have concerns. we would like to know definitively. we may never know definitively. >> reporter: voter denise fowler lost trust in mrs. clinton after the attacks in benghazi. >> i thought that was a cover-up. that's when my distrust really started to step up. >> reporter: still, both of these women say they will vote for hillary clinton, even despite her repeated false claims that the fbi director had said she told the truth about

her e-mails to the public. >> the fbi director never actually said she had spoken the truth to the public, which is what she was repeating. so is that okay with you? >> that's okay with me, because you know something? the only other alternative, that is not an alternative to me. >> reporter: clinton later walked back her comments saying she had short-circuited her brain in her answer, a comment her critics immediately jumped on. but voters here accepted that explanation. >> she could have made it quick to talk about but i think she gave the answer. it's been beaten to a pulp. >> it's a misspoken word. sometimes words just flow out. i don't think it was any attempt to lie to us. >> in her heart, she knew there was no ill will on her part. that was her perception. i accept that. >> reporter: voters we met

seemed to be okay with a few untruths here and there. >> politics, you have to fudge a little bit but i think on balance, she is truthful, she is honest. >> reporter: while voter derek haynes didn't call trump a liar -- he did call him a few other things. >> he's a racist, mysogenist, xenophobe, and homophobe. >> i don't trust him with my children. i don't trust him to lead this country. i don't trust a word he's saying. >> reporter: trump's latest suggestion that clinton isn't fit to be president if her brain quote, short-circuits, was lost on these voters. >> i don't make too much of anything that trump says because if there's anyone that's not fit to be president, it's trump. >> reporter: randi kaye, cnn, st. petersburg, florida. >> thanks to rindi for that.

reaction now from a hillary clinton supporter, former michigan governor jennifer granholm joins us now. thanks so much for being with us. if i can ask you a simple yes or no question. has hillary clinton been honest about her e-mails? >> yes. she has been honest in the sense that she has not lied. she did not intend to mislead anyone. she honestly believed that she was telling the american people the truth, that she did not send or receive any e-mails that were marked classified. that was why she wasn't prosecuted because there wasn't intent. so director comey said there were e-mails that were classified. there's a disagreement about whether those were classified or not. the point is, she has said repeatedly that she understands why people are concerned about this, that she made a mistake and that she is sorry. i don't know how many times she's got to repeat it but she will continue to repeat that. >> i was going to ask, i know you think hillary clinton has been honest about her e-mails. do you think over the last two weeks she has been as clear as she can be in explaining why she thinks she's been honest?

>> you know, i agree with her statement to the journalists on saturday. i thought i was so relieved because i thought it was so clear. then all of this follow-up suggested that it wasn't so clear. i guess it wasn't. but the bottom line is, she acknowledges that she made a mistake and if you compare this with donald trump, who will never acknowledge that he made a mistake. there was a really interesting article on sunday in the "new york times" which compared -- >> op-ed. >> right. an op-ed, of course. what he did was he went to the fact checkers, the politifact and "washington post" fact checker who evaluated all the statements by both candidates. what he found is the most egregious lies, trump has nine times more egregious pants on fire lies. >> but look, comparing who has the worst lies i think doesn't lead the an uplifting election. >> of course. of course.

>> our job is to test both candidates and make sure both are telling the truth. >> but also to be fair about it. >> hillary clinton got to the short-circuit answer on friday after having two answers which fact checkers gave four pinocchios to where she suggested james comey suggested that hillary clinton told the truth to the american people which he never directly said. then she had the short-circuited explanation on friday, where she did explain if you listen very carefully how she got to where she was. my question to you is again, i hear from democratic advisors, nonpartisan analysts who say the issue here, what they can't understand, is why she can't find a way to explain this more clearly and move past it in a way that is more accessible to voters. >> i think that she did on saturday but again, that's me. she has said repeatedly i'm sorry, i did not intend to send or receive classified information.

she takes it very seriously, lesson learned, she would never do it again. but when you look at who's most risky to america, donald trump takes the cake as all of your program today has demonstrated, by all of these people who have worked in national security and who believe he's a danger. >> thanks so much for being with us. appreciate it. when we come back, the tweet and the controversy surrounding it. donald trump suggesting that hillary clinton could be to blame for a man's execution. the question is, do the facts, do any facts support this insinuation? energy is a complex challenge. people want power. and power plants account for more than a third of energy-related carbon emissions. the challenge is to capture the emissions before they're released into the atmosphere. exxonmobil is a leader in carbon capture. our team is working to make this technology better, more affordable so it can reduce emissions around the world. that's what we're working on right now. ♪ energy lives here.

great grains cereals are made fromreal fruit,clusters, wholesome nuts and crunchy flakes. good things come together to make one great thing. great grains. why be good when you can be great? "you don't want to live with mom and dad forever, do you?" "boo!" (laughs) "i'm making smoothies!" "well...i'm not changing." "so, how can i check my credit score?" "credit karma. don't worry, it's free." "hmmmm." "credit karma. give yourself some credit." runstaying in a differentns hotel every night. so i use the hotels.com rewards program to earn free nights. which i can use for my new friends here. thanks, captain obvious. you're welcome. roger that, sir. my name isn't roger. supported by hotels.com.

we mentioned it several times, donald trump seems to be trying to link hillary clinton's e-mail issue to something new, tweeting this. many people are saying that the iranians killed the scientist who helped the u.s. because of hillary clinton's hacked e-mails. he's referring to iranian nuclear scientist who was executed over the weekend accused of spying for the u.s. the clinton campaign says trump is crossing a line. however, the real question now is, what do the facts say? cnn political analyst josh rogen wrote about this specifically. before we fact checked donald

trump, quickly, if you can, explain to us who this nuclear scientist is and what happened to him. >> sure. sharam amiri was an.iranian nuclear scientist who, according to every u.s. official i have talked to, was working clandestinely for the united states giving us information about iran's nuclear program for many years. in 2009 he went to the u.s., was here for about 14 months, at which point he decided he wanted to go back to iran. the u.s. was trying to help him go back to iran. he didn't like how it was working out, hopped in a cab and headed to the iranian intersection and the pakistan embassy. at that point the story became public and everybody became aware of this guy. he told this crazy cover story how he was kidnapped in saudi arabia and wasn't a double agent but the iranians took him into custody and put him on trial and unfortunately, yesterday executed him. >> okay. so when donald trump says many people are saying the iranians killed the scientist who helped the u.s. because of hillary clinton's hacked e-mails, first

of all, the e-mails we are talking about weren't hacked. these are part of those that have come out in the investigation. is there any truth to the idea the iranians killed this scientist because of what was in the e-mails? >> let's unspin this for a second. what he's talking about is that yesterday on "face the nation" senator tom cotton pointed to the fact that clinton's staff had discussed these -- this guy in a couple of e-mails as this controversy was coming into the public light, and then he sort of just said it was reckless. cotton never made an accusation. the drudge report put up a banner title saying was she responsible for the execution and trump retweeted that and doubled down on that. when he says many people he's really talking about himself and matt drudge. that's about it. >> but to the substance of it, to the idea that somehow the e-mails were responsible for the execution. >> right. first of all, we should say his identity and the fact he was most likely spying for us was public six years ago. i covered it at the time. everyone did.

everyone knew about it. hillary clinton spoke about it publicly. the idea the release of the e-mails gave us any new information is wrong on its face. also, it's clear if we knew what he was doing, the iranians did, too. they had a very clear understanding. so you can't ever say never but there is simply zero evidence that the e-mails or the release of the e-mails had anything to do with his fate. he basically outed himself, again, six years ago in public and just paid the price now. that's when donald trump sort of realized it. >> so it was -- the idea, the gist of it is that the knowledge was out there, the e-mails weren't saying anything that wasn't part of the public record and you weren't reporting on at the time. they wouldn't have needed the e-mails to find out what was going on. the e-mails probably post-dated a lot of reporting out there. when you get to this type of information being tweeted by donald trump, whether it be the phrasing many people are saying, there are people who say donald trump traffics in conspiracy theories, whether it be about ted cruz's father, whether it be

about the birth certificate of president obama, whether it be about the notion that ted cruz -- sorry, that justice scalia may have been murdered, his death was suspicious. this is the kind of thing we hear from donald trump. >> that's exactly the point. he sort of gives oxygen to these rumors and in doing so, sort of poisons the discussion about them and prevents any real discussion of what were the mistakes and trade-offs made in this very difficult case years ago. it's not just a matter of is he right or wrong on the facts. he happens to be wrong on the facts. it's a matter of him convincing his followers that something happened, that didn't happen, and then it's up to us in the media or the clinton campaign to unconvince them which is a very hard thing to do and in the end the public discussion of important national security issues just becomes impossible and he's done this over and over again. it's really hurting sort of the serious consideration of these important issues. >> josh, thanks for being with us. >> thank you. just ahead, we will hear from evan mcmullin. his name may not ring a bell for you, but he has been recruited by some conservative republicans

to try to unring the trump bell. he is running for president. we will speak to him next. 98,352 what's that? the number of units we'll make next month to maximize earnings. that's a projection. no, it's a fact. based on hundreds of proprietary and open data sets folded into a real-time, actionable analytics model. nine. eight. three. five. two. you're not gonna round that up? you don't round up facts. powerful analytics driving decisions for the world's most valuable brands. hewlett packard enterprise.

be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients.

most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®. that i was ion the icelandic game show. and everyone knows me for discounts, like safe driver and paperless billing. but nobody knows the box behind the discounts. oh, it's like my father always told me -- "put that down. that's expensive." of course i save people an average of nearly $600, but who's gonna save me? [ voice breaking ] and that's when i realized... i'm allergic to wasabi. well, i feel better. it's been five minutes. talk about progress. [ chuckles ] okay.

not even 100 days to go until the election and we have a new presidential candidate to tell you about. his name is evan mcmullin. used to work at the cia, worked at goldman sachs and was a congressional policy aide for the house republican conference. a republican. today, a new mission began as he launched an independent bid for the white house. there will be logistical problems getting on the ballot to name one as many states' deadlines have already passed but he says it's never too late to do the right thing. we spoke a short time ago. let me start by asking the question a lot of people were wondering this morning, i think when they first read this in print. who are you? >> good question. well, my name is evan mcmullin. i was born in utah, raised outside of seattle, washington. i served in the cia for about ten years, most of that overseas as an operations officer undercover, where i ran

clandestine operations. i left and went to the private sector, then accepted an opportunity to return to government service on capitol hill, where most recently i was the chief policy director in the house republican conference. >> so most of the people running for president got in this race like 14 months ago. there was an entire year-long primary process. there was a convention. >> indeed. >> a few weeks ago. why did you wait? why now? >> well, like many americans, i have been very frustrated with the choices we have been given this year and i hoped for something better for months and months and months, and that somebody would step forward, somebody with national name i.d. who could advance another option for americans, a better option, but it became clear as time passed that that wasn't going to happen and of course, i have been in touch with people who have been trying to organize such an effort and it looked like it wasn't going to happen at this late hour.

and finally, the opportunity was given to me and i wrestled with it for some time, for a couple of weeks, and ultimately decided that it needed to be done and decided to move forward. >> republican party leadership, reince priebus, speaker of the house paul ryan, other republicans around the country in different degrees but they are essentially lining up behind donald trump. you just couldn't bring yourself to do it? >> no. i don't think donald trump is good for this country, nor is hillary clinton. in fact, i think both are dangerous in their different ways, in their unique ways. donald trump i believe is a real authoritarian. i believe he has no respect for our system. i believe he's inhuman. i don't think that he cares about anyone but himself. >> inhuman is a pretty harsh accusation. what do you mean by that? >> i don't think he cares about anyone other than himself. you know, you look at sort of some of his remarks in the past week or couple of weeks, where he's attacked the families and those who have served our country and risked their lives, or even given their lives.

he attacked the khan family. of course he attacked john mccain early on in his campaign. i think this shows you have to be a special kind of person to attack those who risked their lives to protect you. >> can i talk about one state which could be a microcosm of what's going on? people say utah, that you could do particularly well in utah. you are mormon, you are lds, you grew up near there. if you split the votes, split the republican vote in utah, there are some people who suggest you could actually hand the state to hillary clinton. utah's a state that hasn't voted democrat in a long, long, long time. if you deprived, if all you did in this election was deprive donald trump utah, would that be worth it to you? >> look, donald trump is already losing badly to hillary clinton. he is a weak candidate and he's performing that way. and he continues to get worse every day, every week, with the things he says. it seems that he can't control what he says because the things he says don't serve his best interests.

so the big picture is that donald trump is already losing badly. he's competing against a democratic candidate that i think is one of the weakest in decades, if not the weakest in decades and he's losing. he was losing before i entered this race. >> 50 foreign policy experts, national security officials who worked in past republican administrations, signed a letter today saying they're not going to vote for donald trump. they say they are not necessarily for hillary clinton either but they are not for donald trump. >> i know many of them. >> any of these people on board with you right now? >> we just launched today. we moved very quickly and didn't share our plans with hardly anyone outside of the team. so i expect to have conversations, especially with all of those who signed that letter as i agree with everything they said in it. but we haven't had a chance to do that yet. i'm excited to have those conversations. >> three months until election day. >> it will be an intense three months.

no doubt. >> good luck. thanks for coming on. >> thank you very much. back with our panel. katie, i want to start with you. evan mcmullin, the never trump movement, every time you think it's gone, it keeps coming back. any reason for concern? >> no, not at all. no way. he's barred from being on 26 ballots already. the deadlines already passed. the never trump movement did die. there was always the option to write in a candidate of your choosing but this is a binary choice. that's what an endorsement of hillary clinton looks like what we just saw. when you're not with trump you are supporting big spending liberalism. that's what he's supporting. >> you are a republican who is not supporting donald trump. is evan mcmullin the answer to your dreams? >> answer to my dreams, absolutely not. i commend him for trying but ballot access alone is insurmountable for him, unfortunately. it reminds us of why people didn't step up earlier when there was an opportunity to take

donald trump out. that hasn't happened. i commend him for standing for principle. no, it's not a binary choice. there is gary johnson, there is jill stein. >> it's a binary choice. >> someone choosing to stand on principle and not sell their souls out to vote for someone they find morally reprehensible like donald trump, good for him. >> nothing against mr. mcmullin, i'm sure he's wonderful but he uses the word weak many times. think of how weak the never trump movement is when they go around the room and who can run for president and this is the best they come up with. he was a capitol hill staffer. >> watch that shade. watch that shade. >> hold on. >> this is how weak the never trump movement is. i don't know why we are giving this person -- i hope someone signs his book deal so he can move on and do something else. >> i am obligated to respond. what i will say to you is my

friends are better than evan's friends because they would not let me sign on to run for office this late in the game. i'm not sure who his boss was when he worked for the house republican conference but it's horribly unfortunate. i thank him for his service but we should move right along. >> he matters only as much as he can take votes away from donald trump. and get on the ballot in important states like new hampshire, virginia, ohio and also i think your point was really right on. utah, in utah, he needs about 1,000 signatures, pay a few hundred dollars by mid-august and he's on the ballot. can hillary clinton win utah? it sort of blows the mind but -- >> it's in play. >> it's in play. >> this is not something you look at in isolation. you don't look at him in isolation. you look at him and you add him to the list that includes susan collins. you add them to the list that includes the 50 others. add them to the list to include the hispanic communications director from florida, sally bradshaw, and the list goes on

and on and on and on. donald trump when you are down 10, 12, 13 points in the polls, you have to start adding. you can't keep subtracting. >> when we were in break, i don't want to quote you, you were saying susan collins from maine just wrote an op-ed in "the washington post," we talked about it, saying she will not vote for donald trump. doesn't say she's voting for hillary clinton. a republican senator adding to the list of people she's not going to vote for trump. >> it's a powerful piece. she basically says if republican values are important to you, if the history of the republican party is important to you, that you can't in good conscience vote for donald trump, that he's shown himself to be unfit and lacking in temperament and other lines that are right out of the clinton playbook. >> there are a lot of people who would say susan collins doesn't know what republican values are all about. she just confirmed a judge, judge wright, who called into question property rights. she has a long history of being on the wrong side of conservative issues. >> she's a moderate new england republican. >> no doubt. >> also a voice in new hampshire. >> there is no partisanship in

decency and principle which is what she brings up and the fact that donald trump is incapable of ever apologizing and that he goes after people who can't defend themselves necessarily. these are things that are decency and character and integrity that doesn't have a d and r. >> how many republicans do we nightly have to discount? earlier in the day, you were discounting republicans who worked for nixon and reagan. now you discount susan collins, sally bradshaw. >> she is the only senator who has come out against donald trump. >> that's not true. >> mark kirk. >> for all of this talk about donald trump being so bad for down ballot and on and on and on, you have paul ryan really lobbying for an endorsement along with john mccain who wanted an endorsement. for being so bad for down ballot -- they wanted donald trump's endorsement. >> you think they need donald trump? >> what's your message to other republicans right now like susan collins who might want to come out against donald trump?

you think they should keep their mouth shut? >> i think they should. donald trump raised $40 million from small donors. it proves he has a lot of grassroots support. you don't want to be on the wrong side of that in election year. for your own interests alone, come out and support trump this year. >> guys, thanks for being with us. a lot to talk about. coming up, there is breaking news having to do with fox news and the roger ailes scandal on top of the damaging reporting from a day ago. we have the very latest next. this car is traveling over 200 miles per hour. to win, every millisecond matters. both on the track and thousands of miles away. with the help of at&t, red bull racing can share critical information about every

inch of the car from virtually anywhere. brakes are getting warm. confirmed, daniel you need to cool your brakes. understood, brake bias back 2 clicks. giving them the agility to have speed & precision. because no one knows & like at&t. clicking around and start saving at hilton.com book direct... and get the lowest price online

"are you okay?" "yeah, i just got charged for my credit monitoring. that's how i know it"s working." "ah. you know you can go on creditkarma.com and check

it out there. it's completely free." "really?" "yeah" "oh, that didn't hurt at all." "yeah, completely painless." "credit karma. give yourself some credit." esuthey offer a claim-freece a smarter discount.h saves money. because safe drivers cost less to insure, which saves money. they let you pay your bill electronically, which saves postage, which saves money. they settle claims quickly, which saves time, which saves money. and they offer home and auto insurance, so you can bundle your policies, which saves money. esurance was born online and built to save. and when they save, you save. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance, an allstate company. click or call.

i won this 55 inch tv for less than $30 on dealdash.com. visit dealdash.com for great deals. and start bidding today! it's been less than three weeks since roger ailes resigned after allegations that he sexually harassed multiple women who worked at fox news. now there are new allegations that he also used fox news money to try to bring down his enemies including journalists who criticized him. and now in addition to that there is even more. new information breaking tonight. cnn senior media correspondent and "reliable sources" host brian stelter joins me now with the latest. and brian, the latest news is reporting that 21st century fox wants roger ailes to pay some of the settlement with gretchen carlson. gretchen carlson the fox news anchor who brought up this lawsuit to begin with against roger ailes.

they want roger ailes to pay some of it with his own money. >> this suit one month old. it's in court. hasn't really gone to a jury yet. it's still in the early stages. now we know there are settlement talks under way. "vanity fair" reporting that tonight and my source confirming those talks are under way. an eight-figure settlement, we're talking more than $10 million. some of it possibly to be paid by roger ailes who continues to deny all the allegations against him. but these allegations are piling up. just today a new accuser, andrea tanteros. she was a boldfaced name on fox, one of the co-hosts of the show at noon, earlier the show at 5:00 p.m. she says ailes harassed her and when she tried to report it he retaliated against her. >> what are some of the numbers being tossed around in terms houf big the settlement will be? and do, is it really surprising fox is asking him to pay some of it when in fact he was the only one who was sued really. wasn't fox news not named in this lawsuit? >> that's right. it was only ailes named in this lawsuit four weeks ago. this lawsuit then snowballed, causing other accusers to come forward resulting in his resignation and now a deeper investigation inside 21st century fox. the big question is who else

knew what and who else knew what when? did the murdochs, who employed ailes, know anything about this and if they didn't why the heck not? this company was embroid in a phone hacking scandal in britain a few years ago. rupert murdoch had to testify about it. we remember his then wife trying to defend him when a man trying to put a pie in his face. if that could happen in britain, that kind of corporate culture, people wonder whats with the corporate culture in the united states that allow ailes to have this go on for years. >> there's other reporting in "vanity fair" suggesting there may be telephone recordings that are pertinent. >> yes, that gretchen carlson may have been recording ailes, may have recorded their conversations to prove he was sexually harassing per. >> that would be a big deal, i imagine. >> this lawsuit had quotes but we didn't know if there was evidence to back it up or not. this suggests there was evidence. >> how deep could this go, do you think, in terms of how much of an effect it would have on fox news long term? >> the big question is what other executives may fall as a result. this continues to be a deepening investigation. how far does it go? it's a question that no one knows the answer to. >> finally, what's the latest

comment from roger a snlz what is he saying? what is his team saying about all this at this point? >> he continues to deny the allegations but "new york" magazine reports that he was using fox news money in order to have private investigators tailing some of his opponents. as you mentioned, including journalists and others. we always knew roger ailes was a paranoid kind of guy, a political pro. but some of his tactics now sound downright nixonian. >> brian stelter, thanks so much for being with us. appreciate it. we'll be right back. what if a company that didn't make cars made plastics that make them lighter? the lubricants that improved fuel economy. even technology to make engines more efficient. what company does all this? exxonmobil, that's who. we're working on all these things to make cars better and use less fuel. helping you save money and reduce emissions. and you thought we just made the gas. energy lives here.

california's clean air laws we've cut toxic pollution.

we're seeing fewing cases of asthma in kids. and the new clean energy economy has created more than half a million jobs. i'm tom steyer. just when we're making progress, the oil companies are trying to weaken our clean air laws. but we can stop them. send them a message. we're going to protect our kids - not their profits. ♪

he. that does it for us. thanks for watching. time now for "cnn tonight" with don lemon. exactly three months till election day. did you know that? and a giant vote of no confidence. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. dozens of prominent republican national security experts signing a letter stating that trump lacks the temperament to be president and that he would be the most reckless commander in chief in american history. trump firing back tonight calling them part of the failed washington elite who should be held accountable for making the world a dangerous place. and tonight a top republican senator says she will not vote for donald trump. meanwhile, trump and hillary clinton slamming each other's economic positions. >> all hillary clinton has to offer is more of the same. more taxes. more regulations. more bureaucrats. more restrictions on american energy.