>> the biggest comeback in super bowl history. the first over time, and i think confirmation that the patriots are the best ever. >> why aren't you even mentioning lady gaga, that was spectacular, her half-time show. >> she was good. the commercials were good, but it was a football game. >> a lot to talk about. >> good morning. welcome to your "new day." it's monday, 8:00 in the east. a federal appeals court refusing to reinstate the order after it was blocked by a lower court on friday. so now the justice department has ten hours to put in its supporting brief and the legal arguments are going to continue. >> president trump on twitter going after the federal judge who temporarily halted his ban, suggesting americans should blame him if something bad were to happen. the president also making news in a super bowl sit-down interview. we are day 18 of the trump presidency. let's begin with jessica

schneider live in tampa, florida, with the latest. good morning, jessica. >> reporter: good morning, alisyn. the president very vocal this weekend. he was on television, on twitter. his social media feed taking direct and controversial aim at the federal judge who halted his executive order. president trump launching attacks against the judge who temporarily halted his travel ban, accusing judge james robart of opening the country to potential terrorists, suggesting america should blame the judge and court system if something happens. all this after calling robart a bush appointee, a so-called judge when the ruling was handed down on friday. >> the president of the united states has every right to criticize the other two branches of government. >> reporter: vice president pence defending the tirade against the judiciary and saying the white house believes robart's ruling will be overturned. >> we're very confident the president is operating within

its authority as president. >> reporter: this intensifying legal battle comes as president trump faces criticism for comments he made in a super bowl interviewee kuwaiting the american government's actions with russian's president putin's actions. >> do you respect putin? >> i respect a lot of people. that doesn't mean i'm going to get along with him. >> putin is a killer. >> we've got a lot of killers. you think our country is so innocent. >> putin is a former kgb agent. he's a thug. i don't think there's any equivalency between the way the russians conduct themselves and the way the united states does. >> there is no moral equivalency between the united states of america, the greatest freedom loving nation in the history of the world and the murderous thugs with putin. >> also announcing vice president pence will head a commission to investigate voter irregularities, but providing no

proof that millions voted illegally despite repeated claims. >> we can be babies. you take a look at the registration, you have illegals, dead people. it's a really bad situation. >> reporter: the president acknowledging that the timetable to replace obamacare could take longer than promised. >> i would like to say by the end of the year, but we should have something within the year and the following year. >> reporter: president trump spending the weekend in florida at his estate in mar-a-lago. he did wake up there this morning. he'll make his way here to tampa to macdill air force base and attend a special briefing at central command and have lunch with some of the service members and will be making remarks to the coalition reps as well as u.s. commanders. chris? >> thank you very much very much, appreciate the reporting. lawyers from washington state and minnesota argue that reinstating president trump's travel ban would, quote, unleash chaos again.

they filed new briefs a few hours ago with the federal appeals court. that means the doj, the justice department has about ten hours to put in their own supporting briefs. cnn's dan simon live outside the 9th circuit in san francisco. you are in the right place because that's where any hearing will be held. >> reporter: that's right, chris. the 9th circuit has to decide whether or not the suspension will remain in place, and the next step in all this is for both sides to file their legal briefs. we know attorneys for washington and minnesota have already filed theirs. the federal government has until 6:00 p.m. eastern time to make its position known. i don't view a lot of people weighing in on this issue. you have tech companies, about 100 of them, they filed an amicus brief basically saying this ban will harm business, that it's unfair to immigrants and their families. you also have a declaration from many former federal government officials ranging from john kerry to madeleine albright to

susan rice saying they're not aware of a specific threat in the world that would justify this kind of ban. you're talking about a three-judge panel. they will have to decide whether or not they will have a hearing. if there is a hearing, it could be in person or by video or by phone, or they could simply rule. we don't know what they're going to do. ultimately most legal observers think that after this court hears this ban, that this will then go to the supreme court. we'll have to see what happens. alisyn, back to you. >> thank you for that background. how will this legal battle play out and how could the supreme court vacancy affect this case. let's discuss it. thank you very much for being here. dan, i want to start with you. you like and support the president's travel ban, you think he'll be victorious. why? >> well, as a constitutional

matter, the president enjoys very high deference. this is the zenith of his powers as jonathan turley has said over and over again. remember, the commander-in-chief is responsible for public safety and national security. historically, the idea an article three judge in seattle has the ability to second-guess national security judgments, arguing equal protection grounds which is so absurd, the analogy would be for the federal judge to adjoin the bombing of isis and syria unless the government bombed syria out of fundamental fairness. this is outside the competence of the judiciary to be second-guessing the president's judgment on a vital area to protect the american people for our public safety. the same thing is true of this three-judge panel. >> let me get andre in here. he disagrees. this is about national security and that trumps everything. >> i think what we have to remember, when anyone says

second-guess, what we should be doing is second-guessing the president when he attempts to institute a preference for certain religions or disfavor certain religions. the president's authority is not unchecked. that's a myth. the president does not have authority to, for example, create a national religion. the easiest way to do that is to prevent immigrants of certain faiths from entering this country. >> hold on one second, andre. it want to stick with you. according to the immigration and nationality act of 1952, whenever the president finds the entry of any aliens, any class of aliens into the united states would be detrimental to the united states, he may suspend the entry of all aliens. there you go. >> that is not without check. there are immigration laws that have been passed after that, after that particular statute was passed that prevents discrimination, for example, on

national origin. we have to be careful about individuals who come out and say the president should receive absolute authority. >> i happen to have an excerpt of one of those pieces of legislation that has come out afterwards. dan, here is a portion of the 1965 immigration act. no person should receive preference or be discriminated against because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth or place of residence. how is the travel ban not a violation of that, dan? >> that's not intended to actually influence the selection criteria that congress passes or the broad authority the president has to determine refugee admissions. that's about preventing discrimination arbitrarily in processing applications as a ministerial matter. that's a complete corruption of the idea. look, refugee policy is about protecting people on the basis of, among other things, religious persecution. you have to make distinctions on the basis of religion. obama wasn't admitting people

from syria for most of his administration. all of a sudden, the aclu is claiming it's an establishment of religion to give christians in the middle east because they've been discriminated against from a prior administration. that's the most ridiculous. >> what's ridiculous is not listening to the president's words and intent and effect of this order. this is disfavoring people of the muslim faith and placing a preference over other individuals. >> this is neutral. there's nothing about this order that singles out muslims. to call it a muslim ban -- >> the president's words matter. i don't view to look at the intent. >> you're playing into isis' hands when you call it a muslim ban. >> hold on, dan, hold on. let's be honest about this, dan. this is originally what the president said he would do. this is what rudy giuliani said he was tasked with doing, coming up with something that this

would be a muslim ban. >> judge hobart was looking at the facial terms of the executive order. the judge did not even give washington state what it was asking for. he gave it far more than what it was asking for. this entire ban was nothing like washington state ever dreamed of. the aclu wasn't anywhere to be found when president obama was letting in hundreds of thousands of aliens, putting them in our schools, hospitals, housing. they don't seem to think the civil rights of americans matter in controlling administration. these silicon valley outfits are not affected in any substantial way manner by the president's temporary suspension to improve vetting and not identifying the identity of the people. this is executive authority and need not be tampered with by the judiciary. >> there's no language about this being a particularly muslim ban in the executive order. >> i would say first, as a lawyer when you engage in that rhetoric, you know you have a losing argument.

when you have to report to fear tactics about immigrants coming in and overcrowding, you're losing the argument. the president's words were clear, he wants to institute a muslim ban. we heard from rudy giuliani. >> you also hear from his advisers right now saying there are all sorts of muslim majority countries that are not included in this. these are just the terror-prone countries already identified by president obama. >> this goes directly to another point. a complete mismatch with this executive order and what it purports to do which is keep americans safe. this is a limited subset of countries, does not include several other countries who would potentially be on a terror-related list. >> andre, what's going to happen here, is this going to go to the supreme court? >> i think it will get to the supreme court quickly. we don't know how quickly the 9th circuit will act. >> dan, given the 4-4 split, what do you think happens? >> no question the president has to win. it's terrifying, the whole order. the idea that the president

can't protect public safety and national security, absolutely he's going to win. >> dan, andre, thank you very much for the debate. chris? the new england patriots pulling off a wild and historic win to become super bowl champs. tom brady is the first quarterback to win five super bowls. let's bring in coy wire live in houston with the highlights in this morning's bleacher report. coy, you played for the falcons. i hate the patriots. i'm a jet fan. at the end of the day, can you argue anymore that brady ain't the best, that the patriots ain't the best? >> reporter: chris, you know playing with the bills for six years, played against the patriots twice a year, every year, i knew he was the greatest of all time. i had no problem saying it before the game. having the deflate-gate suspension, missing the first four games of the season. they were down 21-3 at half-time, chris.

here is the drive. down 28-20 in the fourth quarter, 2:00 to go. julian edelman will be the spark that lit the fire for the patriots and stuck the dagger in the hearts of falcons fans everywhere. look at this catch. can you imagine this catch? his teammates can't believe it. the patriots would go on to score. they would need to go for two to get a chance here. tom terrific clicking it to danny amendola who bowls in across the line. we go to the first ever over time in super bowl history. you can feel as soon as those patsz won the coin toss, you knew how it would play out. james white punches it in. the greatest comeback in super bowl history, down by 25 points at one point in this game, no team had ever come back from down by ten in super bowl history. after the game, brady was over come with emotion. here is brady letting that emotion out. i caught up with roger goodell, robert kraft and gronk to talk

about tom brady after the game. >> thank you to all our fans, everyone back in boston, new england, we love you. you've been with us all year. we're bringing this sucker home! >> it's the biggest stage and always steps up on the biggest stage and plays unbelievable. he did it again tonight. to bring that team back, it's just unbelievable. >> i think what happened to tommy the first four games engaged fans even more because they know we weren't treated fairly. now we had a chance to go through the year, and i think results speak for themselves. >> brady is the best ever and belichick is, too. >> reporter: how did they pull off this comeback? i talked to a patriots coach after the game. they said bill belichick looked every person in the eye when they were down 21-3 and said 21 points is not enough to beat us. they rallied behind that. also, they won because of tom brady, greatest of all time.

>> that's a good point. 21 points ain't enough to beat us. >> 25. 28-3 they were down. went into the half-time, got gaga'd and still came out. >> president trump expressing confidence the travel ban will be restored. we'll ask one of his top advisers why they're so confident. that's next. so they can keep watch over operations below the sea, even from thousands of feet above. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.

because safety is never being satisfied. why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis. what makesheart healthysalad the becalifornia walnuts.r? the best simple veggie dish ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple dinner ever? heart healthy california walnuts. great tasting, heart healthy california walnuts. so simple. get the recipes at walnuts.org.

tech: don't let a cracked windshtrust safelite.plans. with safelite's exclusive "on my way text"... you'll know exactly when we'll be there. giving you more time for what matters most. (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace. ...one of many pieces in my life. so when my asthma symptoms kept coming back on my long-term control medicine. i talked to my doctor and found a missing piece in my asthma treatment with breo. once-daily breo prevents asthma symptoms. breo is for adults with asthma not well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. breo won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. breo is specifically designed to open up airways to improve breathing for a full 24 hours. breo contains a type of medicine that increases the risk of death from asthma problems and may increase the risk of hospitalization in children and adolescents. breo is not for people whose asthma is well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. once your asthma is well controlled, your doctor will decide if you

can stop breo and prescribe a different asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. do not take breo more than prescribed. see your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. ask your doctor if 24-hour breo could be a missing piece for you. learn more about better breathing at mybreo.com. will the president beat the legal system and get his ban back? does he really think the united

states is morally equivalent to russia? and are they retooling their strategy in the white house as reports suggest? we've got lots of questions and we have a man who can answer them all. deputy assistant to president trump, author of "defeating jihad, the winnable war" s sebastian gorca. good to have you. >> thanks for having me. >> what's your take on what happens in the courts? >> i think it's very clear if you look at the statements that came out of the federal court in boston about how this is a completely legal measure. if you look at the original act from the 1950s and the more recent one that gave the president the exclusive right to determine if there are national security concerns with immigrants coming into this country, it's a slam dunk. he's completely within his mandate. there is a problem with these seven nations. i expect the courts to decide in favor of the white house.

>> do you believe you may get a situation in part, but that the part of the ban that deals with either a selective potential religious test or how you compromise the rights of visa holders and maybe even citizens of the united states abroad, that that may be struck down? >> i'm not going to predict what's going to happen in the future. i have full confidence that the executive order as written will stand and will be implemented as it's meant to be implemented. it's important for your viewers to understand, there is no religious test. this isn't about a religion islam at all. this is about nations where jihadis are most active, specifically the islamic state, isis or al qaeda. it's about the national security of all americans, has nothing to do with which god you pray to, chris. >> you had a judge see exactly those kind of implications in the drawing of his district court order stopping the ban. there is language in the executive order that goes to a case-by-case basis to deal with

religious minorities, maybe the yeah received difficults as cultural minorities, christians, all the countries picked are muslim majority. as we all know the president has said he wanted a muslim ban. what do you make of those factors? >> exactly what i said previously. another judge completely dismissed those accusations. if it were about religion, it wouldn't have these seven nations on there. why isn't egypt on the list, the largest arab nation in the world. it's about the threat to america, about people being mowed down in nice, about people being killed in mass numbers in paris and brussels and istanbul. we don't want that to happen on our shores. that's why we did what we did. again, this is where isis is established, iraq, syria, this is where al qaeda is most active, yemen, somalia, nothing to do with religion.

it's about threat assessment and preventing the types of attacks we saw happening here in the united states. >> why did the president say he wanted a muslim ban? >> you're not going to catch me out by repeating accusations that are fallacious. >> it's what the president said when he was running. >> it's about national security, chris. that simple. >> i understand. an accusation means i'm coming with something from an outside source. this is what the president said. rudy giuliani said he was tasked with finding a legal mechanism to put into effect a muslim ban. i'm not making this up. he said it. >> just read the executive order. it has nothing to do with religion. >> but the intent of the order is going to wind up becoming part and parcel of the litigation. i'm sure you want nothing to do with that. to your own point, if the ob techive here is to stop the places where the threat comes from, why aren't any of the countries that had ownership on some level of what happened here

on 9/11 included? >> well, because terrorism is not an issue that stands still. these are not threat groups carved in time. the islamic state did not create their new caliphate in saudi arabia, they didn't create the caliphate outside the countries that we listed. this is really important. we are 16 years down the line. it's not about what happened 15 years ago. it's about where baghdadi is creating his new proto empire and where that threat is going to go next when we hit harder in places like mosul. it's about trying to prevent what's going to happen next and about what the bad guys are doing right now, not about history 16 years ago. >> what threat assessment tells you that refugees are whom you should target right now? and what do you make of all the intel people who have come out, former chairman joint chief of staff mullin this morning,

hayden, the head of the nsa said this actually helps propagate the isis motives to get more people in their ranks, that hurts our spies, hurts our connections around the world? >> i can't talk about classified threat assessments. i can talk about what we know in open source. your viewers should check it out. there's an isis magazine called dabiq. they have said in english on numerous occasion, we will ke stroi you the infidel, your countries by inserting our operatives into the refugee stream. they eve written it. we've seen it happen in europe. at least one of the attackers was on a false syrian passport. this isn't hyperbole, it isn't theory. it has happened. we don't want it to happen here. >> it hasn't happened here. as you know -- >> we want to prevent it. >> -- most exhaustive is.

>> that's not true. my parents were refugees. when they escaped dictatorship, they went through exhaustive investigation. we don't do that. some have interviews that last 60 seconds. that's ridiculous. that's why the president has done this. >> i haven't heard that sourced by any of the people involved with refugee vetting. >> check it out. >> deals with multiple layers of u.n. involvement. they first designate who is even applicable. then you have many different layers of the vetting on the u.s. side. >> i'm talking about immigrants. i'm not just talking about refugees. >> i was talking about refugees. why are you targeting them when that's the most exhaustive assessment we have for entry into this country? >> it's not the slowest, not advocate. it's simply not adequate. there have been attacks by people here on refugee status. this is not about theory.

it's about stopping the next boston bombing, chris. you've got to agree with that. we don't want another boston bombing. >> of course. nobody is going to tell you they want another boston bombing. >> then we have to improve the system. we have to improve the system. >> i understand that. instead of being playful with what people want and don't want, then improve the system. this would have been better met if you had come out with new procedures as obama did when the iraqis slipped through. they changed the vetting and put it in place. you did it in reverse. put in a ban, have no extreme vetting, all you have is a slogan. >> isn't it interesting when he did it, nobody had a problem. he didn't tell the press in 2011 when he brought his ban in. >> it wasn't a ban. >> when he put a temporary moratorium -- >> it wasn't a moratorium. it slowed the process down. >> can i finish? >> yes. i just want you to be accurate. >> can i finish? there was no problem. none of your colleagues had an issue with it.

isn't it interesting when we have a republican president, it's an issue. that's double standard. >> it would be if it were apples to apples. the president with bill o'reilly seemed to create moral equivalence between the united states and russia when o'reilly said why do you respect putin, why do you like him? he's a killer. the president said, we've got lots of killers here, too. do you think the two countries are morally equivalent? >> no two countries are morally equivalent. that would be an assanine statement. every community, every society has its problems. if you deny that, you're living in some kind of alice in wonderland. i think that's what the president is trying to say. the media is trying to spin it into a story. there's no story there, chris. >> you don't think it's newsworthy that when confronted with the problems of vladimir putin as a moral agent in this society, the answer of the president of the united states was to point out his country's

perceived failing? you see that as spin? >> i do. i think the issue is he was being very fair. every society, every community, every nation, even america, the greatest nation on god's earth has its problems, has its issues. that's a really honest call and i commend the president for it. >> your own party, the republican party is calling out the president for apparently sheltering vladimir putin and russia for moral and objective responsibility for actions it has done. this seemed to be another example of that, mr. gorka. you didn't see it that way? >> no. because i listen to everything the president says. i don't take a tiny sound bite and try to create a story out of it. that's reprehensible from the point of view of your journalism. i look at the statements he made in his press conference a couple weeks ago where he was very blunt about the problems with vladimir putin and russia and our relations. he said, look, i'd like to be friends with this guy, but if i

can't be, so be it. that is what the president believes. one two-second sound bite, let's not create fake news out of two-second sound bites, chris. not worthy of you. >> they are his words. you are also accusing your federal republicans of -- what's the analogy of fake for them? they're just lying about the president, taking what he said out of context because they want to attack their own? follow through your logic on that. >> not at all. not at all. i'm trying to say, if you want to judge a president, you look at everything he says. would you like to be judged on something you said for two seconds? not fair. you take a man in context. you take a leader in context. otherwise you're being biased. that's the bottom line. >> mr. gorka, appreciate your take. always welcome on "new day." >> through for having me. >> some republican leaders trying to distance themselves from president trump's soft stance on russia and touched stance on a federal judge.

next, ana navarro and jeffrey lord give us their take. that's next. stop, stop, stop! sorry. you make it sense what's coming. watch, watch, watch! mom. relax! i'm relaxed. you make it for 16-year olds... whoa-whoa-whoa!!! and the parents who worry about them. you saw him, right? going further to help make drivers, better drivers. don't freak out on me. that's ford. and that's how you become america's best-selling brand. mattress firmness? fortunately there's a bed where you both get what you want every night. enter sleep number and the ultimate sleep number event, going on now. sleepiq technology tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. she likes the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store. and right now save 50% on the ultimate limited edition bed. go to sleepnumber.com for a store near you.

won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

all right. republicans are denouncing president trump because of his apparent defense of russian president vladimir putin and his putting of the united states and putin's kremlin on moral equivalent grounds. we just heard from saab bastian gorkan, deputy assistant to the president. he claimed the media, we're taking trump out of context. listen for yourself. >> putin is a former kgb agent, he's a thug, he was not elected in a way that most people would consider a credible election. the russians annexed crimea, invaded ukraine and messed around in our elections. no, i don't think there's any equivalency between the way the russians conduct themselves and the way the united states does. >> let's be clear. has the u.s. ever made any mistakes? of course. is the u.s. at all like putin's regime? not at all. there is no moral equivalency

between the united states of america, the greatest freedom loving nation in the history of the world and the murder rouse thugs. >> we asked mr. gorka about this perspective from the gop, he dismissed it as fake news and potentially bias. that w let's discuss with cnn political commentator ana navarro and former white house political director jeffrey lord. the insistence, brother lord, of calling every criticism and every hard question fake and bias seems a little weak at this point, does it not? >> chris, chris, let me ask you, where is your clip of donald trump saying there is a moral equivalent between russia and the united states. do you have it? >> yes, we have it. >> he says moral equivalence? >> he says putin is a killer and he say, so, we have killers here. >> does he say moral equivalent?

>> let's listen to him. >> do you respect putin? >> i do respect putin. >> do you? why? >> i respect a lot of people. that doesn't mean i'm going to get along with him. he's a leader of his country. i say it's better to get along with russia than not. if russia helps us in the fight against isis which is a major fight and islamic terrorism all over the world, that's a good thing. will i get along with him? i have no idea. >> he's a killer now. putin is a killer. >> a lot of killers. we've got a lot of killers. you think our country is so innocent? >> so, ali, chris, he didn't use the phrase moral equivalence. he said we've had killers. have you read the church committee report on the cia and the attempts to kill fidel castro? >> jeffrey, jeffrey, didn't you call this kind of rhetoric the blame america first crowd for the past eight years.

>> what? >> when there was criticism from the obama administration of the united states, did jt you say they were blaming america first? >> look, all i'm saying is he is saying fact. america is still the city on a shining hill. have we made mistakes, yes. are we morally equivalent, no. he never said that. >> what he did do, anna, when asked basically to condemn vladimir putin -- i think that's where o'reilly was going, he's a killer, you seem to be deferential to him. why? he chose instead to levy similar criticism levied against putin on the united states. >> he's been doing it over and over again. donald trump has been consistent on anything, it has been on protecting, sheltering, commending putin throughout the campaign and now since being president-elect and being president. i would say to the leaders in my party who are offended, outraged by this equivalency, by these

words, stop being offended, stop tweeting at me about how we're not equivalent and address a -- get a select committee going and investigate russian hacking. we've gotten our eyes off the ballment that is the issue. that is something that every single american should continue to be worried about. our democracy is integrity, transparency is a bastian of this society. now we're arguing about all sorts of things, because there's been so much coming at us, right? it's been hard. it's been drinking out of a fire hose. we need to focus on that. mitch mcconnell who has refused to name a select committee on investigating russia even though folks like john mccain, lindsey graham and other leaders of the republican party have asked him, should do that. yes, go ahead and say publicly which you should, you should confront trump when he tries to make a -- we don't do the things

that they do. >> that's not true. >> i don't think fidel castro was any ally of the united states, but i'm not going there. i am sticking to my focus. we need an investigation of the russian hacking on the elections. we need to find out why donald trump is so against that. and republican leaders, instead of getting all tied up in knots about this, should be focusing on that. >> i think the president's issued an executive order on cyber security. he wants this improved, absolutely. >> and he wants no investigation of the russian hacking. every time he can cover them, he does. i'm old enough to remember when republicans got very upset with president trump telling medvedev he'd have more flexibility after the election. those same republicans should be as outraged. now they've got leadership, they've got the ability to set the agenda, to name select committees and they should. >> jeffrey, other than playing word defense with the president, we all know what went on there and we know why he's getting

criticized. >> no, no, no, chris. i'm not doing that. >> just because he doesn't use the words doesn't mean that's not his obvious implication. it's like saying, i can't wait to see you and give you a hug and a kiss, but you never said you like me. >> chris, chris. >> stop repeating my name for a second. answer this question. why do we keep having these situations where president trump seems to shelter russia from responsibility without benefit of fact, whether it was the hacking or now with this when he's being confronted with putin's criticism as a moral agent, why does he keep protecting him? >> he has said he may well not get along with him. he speaks in plain english. >> that's hardly condemnation. >> chris, look, i think it is safe to say as the new president of the united states, he's trying to give everybody that we have to deal with a clean slate and that they are -- he's going to judge them based on their performance. that's what he's done his entire

life. why would he stop now? >> jeffrey, ana, thank you very much for the debate. we'll see you both soon. >> thank you, ali. >> what about me? >> president trump spent a full two weeks in office. is he delivering in his campaign promises. >>

people confuse nice and kind but they're different...

nice tells you what you want to hear. but kind is honest. this bar is made with cranberries and almonds. so, guess what? we call it cranberry almond. give kind a try. . president trump made a lot of promises, of course, on the campaign trail. with 18 days now under his belt, is he delivering on them? let's get the bottom line with cnn political director david chalian. david, walk us through his big campaign promises and where he is. >> this is the 18th day. we took a look at his biggest campaign promises. you see the extreme vetting promise. that started initially as a muslim ban, then it moved into extreme vetting. we've seen the controversies around that, the executive action caught up in courts. right now it is on hold. it has majority opposition in our latest poll, 53% opposed.

the border wall, still claiming mexico will pay for it. the mexican government says no. also in our poll, 60% of americans are opposed to that wall. an uphill climb on those two promises. then obamacare repeal and replace. he said he would get congress to repeal this on day one. now we're hearing that he's resetting expectations. it's going to be all this year, maybe into next year before replacement can be fully formed. you hear different language coming from hill republicans as well. it is going to be tricky since it is the number one promise over a series of six years now from republicans to their base voters that this law was going to be removed when they got power. and now you're seeing republicans face the reality that something as large as their health care system is complicated. >> don't you have to cut him slack on that? he did sign an executive order on day one or certainly the first week about beginning the first week about repealing

obamacare and he can't do that single-handedly. congress has to get in line. >> certainly. congress has passed legislation to deal with this in a certain fashion called reconciliation that allows them to deal with certain 50 votes instead of 60. the promise of a full repeal and replace, it seems portions will be repealed. some portions will get replaced before there's a full fix in place. that wasn't quite the nuanced way of the campaign trail rhetoric. >> repair seems to be the operative word. i think you'll see all the main mechanisms stay in place. i don't think the president deserves a break, i think deserves credit. can you think of another administration. in terms of straight one to one productivity of what you said you were going to do and what you did and when when you got in, he has to be at the top in terms of productivity. >> at a blistering pace.

no doubt about it. it clearly has been a focus inside his west wing to tick through those campaign promises and show some strong action on them. of course, but it gets bound up, chris, in these controversial ways of rolling it out. the executive order on the travel ban was not well communicated, created a lot of chaos in the system. that probably could have been avoided and perhaps even avoiding the length of the legal challenges on the wall, the same thing, that call with the leader in mexico canceling the trip, that was not exactly how i think he envisioned enacting the campaign promise of getting the wall up and running. yes, he is ticking through a lot of things, but he's also dealing with crashing into the reality of washington government, these things are not as easy as running a campaign or running a business when everything is handled by your own declaration. >> truer words never spoken. david chalian, thank you very

much for "the bottom line." >> did you see "saturday night live"? a new member of the trump administration gets spoofed. do you know who that is? wait until you hear what happened. >> stop writing that down!

what a night. the drama, the history, the patriots did it again. a record comeback. lady gaga's performance much anticipated. how did it deliver?

let's discuss. cnn senior media correspondent and host of reliable sources brian tell tar and bill karlter. you got ratings, stuff the president is doing, sean spicer, the action on "snl." >> overnight ratings of the super bowl, of course extraordinarily highly rated, the number three super bowl in television history. we'll get more numbers later in the day. what this shows is even if some folks tuned out after lady gaga after this was a blowout, it came back for over time. i was this close to bed. let's talk about amazing. talk about uniting the country. >> she danced, she sang beautifully, she jumped off high things. >> high things, right.

>> there was a question beforehand about whether she would be political. >> i think she's very smart. she did a celebration, "this land is your land." >> unity. >> and then did her song which has themes about acceptance for lesbians and transgender people. i don't think people probably heard the lyrics that clearly in that atmosphere, but she did get that message absz cross. i think she did it very well. no controversy, spectacular performance. she gets an a. >> this morning she announced her world tour. she was big last night, patriotic performance, beautiful songs, very inclusive and announces the world tour. >> good for her. the last time we had you on, earlier this morning, we hadn't heard from the president yet and sean spicer yet. both of those things have changed. what did the president react to? >> first, should we see sean spicer on "snl." >> we have to. >> do the podium piece with melissa mccarthy as sean spicer. you've got to see this.

>> "wall street journal." are you okay? [ laughter ]. >> first of all, melissa mccarthy is a physical comedian par excellence. she's so good at that. >> apparently spicer at the super bowl told extra it was a little exaggerated. he thought the gum chewing was too much. thought she could have toned it down a little bit. no surprise, that reaction. when you see spicer, you see melissa mccarthy. it was that on point. >> that's what happened to slal with tina fey. you couldn't separate them after that. he has to embrace it more. he has to go with it and maybe make a joke himself about it. >> it's a shame there's no briefing today, no on camera briefing because potus is traveling. >> let's see if tomorrow he comes out with a prop box.

>> that would be fantastic. >> let's watch. >> super soaker. >> my words too big? i got to show you in pictures. great. here we go. when it comes to these decisions, the constitution gives our president lots of power, and steve bannon is the key adviser! our president will not be deterred. in his fight against radical muslams. >> i love how serious she was during the whole thing. they did a parody of steve bannon as the grim reaper with a darth vadery voice. the pitch of it was that bannon is the over lord of trump and is the real boss. >> real president. >> trump had not responded. but now he has.

>> on twitter this morning saying no, i call the shots around here, seemed to be a response to all this talk about bannon being the real boss. trump saying he's the real boss at the white house. >> also, "the new york times" had the story about him sort of not knowing that bannon was named which is also remarkable. sort of stunned by that. the idea he's sort of subservant to anybody i don't think sits well with him. >> i think trump was also reacting to your program, chris and alisyn. david chalian sharing the data about the travel ban. the president is tweeting about how he says all negative polls are fake news. i know we're having fun here. but that's a serious, disturbing thing to say. he's taking his poll denialism to the illogical extreme saying if the polls aren't favorable of me, they can't be real. >> if you catch the media being

wrong about something and it regards you, you have high ground and you should go after it. that's part of politics. but they use it now for every hard question and every criticism that they don't like. i think it makes its lose its teeth. >> it does. every time you say you got this wrong and that wrong, it doesn't mean this is wrong. frankly, saying the polls are all wrong, he lives by approval. he's the guy who defines ratings. everything about his ratings when he's on tv. how is he going to say ratings don't matter. >> bill, brian, thank you for all that. thanks for joining us. "newsroom" with poppy harlow and john berman -- yes, it is a new day for them. >> berman's patriots won and he gets to sit mekt to poppy for the new news hour. what a lucky little man. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine.

the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. knowing where you stand. it's never been easier. except when it comes to your retirement plan. but at fidelity, we're making retirement planning clearer. and it all starts with getting your fidelity retirement score. in 60 seconds, you'll know where you stand. and together, we'll help you make decisions for your plan... to keep you on track. ♪ time to think of your future it's your retirement. know where you stand.

good morning everyone. so glad you're with us. i'm poppy harlow. >> i'm john berman. thanks for joining us. this is exactly how bill belichick always planned it, even though it looked all but impossible about 10:00 last night. talking about the debut of our new cnn "newsroom" right now. also, the patriots came from 25 points back to win the super bowl.