a really horrendous terror attack there today, but it could have been worse if that second bomb had gone off and had not been disarmed. that's it for me. thanks very much for watching. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room". "outfront" starts now. president trump using fox news to create a smoke screen diverting attention from the russia attention. president obama top security adviser weighs in on russia's interference in the election. should have obama done more. she is my guest tonight. a troubling crime trend this evening. what does it have to do with president trump? let's go out front. trump's russia dodge, the president trying to change the subject tonight. he doesn't want the focus on his team's contact with russia, instead he's focusing on a fox news report that a high level

obama administration official unmasked the names of recordings during surveillance. such amazing reporting on unmasking the crooked scheme before us. spied on. the real story. then tweeting the report supported his month's old widely debunked claim he was wire tapped by the obama administration. there was electronic surveillance of trump and people close to trump. this is unprecedented. the surveillance was of non-u.s. citizens and it was legal. trump and his associates were caught up in it by having conversations with those non-u.s. citizens under surveillance. contrary to trump's assertion this is not a new story. then it was reported that obama's national security advisor susan rice was the one who requested the unmasking of trump campaign and transition

members names in that intel gathering. the fact is it's not unusual for a national security advisor to request the unmasking of identities and this is important. unmasking those identities to the national security advisor is not the same thing as leaking those names to the press. more importantly this is, of course, a distraction from the core investigation into trump associates and their contact with russian's. evan perez is in washington. the facts don't support the narrative the president is pushing today. >> reporter: that's right. as you mentioned unmacsking doe not mean leaking. this theory is true, but it's not clear how it helps sean spicer and the white house in their quest to come up with something to explain the false tweet accusing president obama of wire tapping him. here is the context of the time. it's during the transition after the election and donald trump is taking a phone call from the leader of taiwan and intervening with leaders in egypt and israel

over a vote in the united nations. these cause international incidents that the obama administration was having to deal with because the principal of one president at a time didn't seem to apply during the transition. susan rice would be one of a handful of people that can ask the nsa or an intelligence agency to unmask the name of an american mentioned in an intelligence document. if there is a national security purpose that is. >> the big question here, of course, from what trump is saying in his tweets also is any of this unmasking illegal separate again from choosing once it's unmasked to leak it to whoever may be responsible, was the unmasking itself legal? >> we can listen to devin nunes who began all of this with his visi visit to the white house. he told us it's all legal. the issue is the white house

won't tell us, devin nunes and adam schiff won't tell us what the intelligence is about and we won't know if there's a real issue until we learn more about the these documents. >> thank you very much. the chairman of the house investigation, the republican devin nunes is saying that all of this intelligence gathering was legal. his issue, of course, is with the leaking of the information within it. and this news tonight comes as democrats accused president trump and the white house of creating a smoke screen to distract from possible evidence of conclusion with russia. >> reporter: tonight russia's meddling in the election is taking shape. the house panel once again meeting after weeks of turmoil. but the white house and republicans now raising new questions over whether the identity of any trump associates were improperly revealed or unmasked within the intelligence community during barack obama's

final days at president. the president tweeting sunday the real story turns out to be surveillance and leaking. >> serious allegations have been made invading the privacy rights of american citizens who may have been caught up in the collection of foreign intelligence. that's a serious matter. >> reporter: democrats say the white house is focused on unmasking of trump associates is a smoke screen intended to distract from allegations of coordination between the trump campaign and russians seeking to influence the election. >> i think the answer to the question is this effort to point the congress in other directions, basically say don't look at me, don't look at russia, there's nothing to see here. i would tell people whenever they see the president use the word fake, it ought to set off alarm bells. >> reporter: the house intelligence committee is trying to finalize a list of witnesses to interview as part of the russia investigation and the senate panel is looking to talk to at least 20 witnesses as part of its inquiry in addition to

the fbi's criminal investigation. a major question, how will congress deal with former trump national security advisor michael flynn who has asked for immunity in exchange for his testimony. some republicans called the proposal a strange idea. do you think congress should give immunity to michael flynn? >> i don't know what he has to offer. i wouldn't give immunity unless i knew they had something to offer. >> reporter: what about the president saying he should be given him immunity. >> i think he's trying to encourage him to come forward. if there were contacts between the trump campaign and the russian intelligence services that were inappropriate, i want to find out about it and i want the whole world to know about it. >> reporter: today's interviews at the senate intelligent committee occurred with some people who are in the intelligence community itself, but that happened on the staff level. i am told that the first transcribed interview of the senate intelligence committee's investigation will actually occur on wednesday with another

member of the intelligence committee before the big interviews happen with michael flynn or paul manafort who both committees want to talk to. >> thank you. let's go to the democratic congressman who sits on the intelligence committee. congressman, obviously this meeting just finished. what did you talk about? >> not russia related, but we really, really want to get back on track and have the public hearing that we were supposed to have with sally yates and directors clapper and brenin. we want to show the american people we're up to having a credible investigation that shows progress and right now we don't have anything scheduled. >> so you're trying to schedule things. have you seen or been briefed on the intelligence about wire tapping that both congressman schiff and the chairman have seen at the white house? >> not yet. we hope it is opened up to all committee members. we believe this is nothing more

than an effort to roll more smoke bombs into an investigation that was making progress and we have no reason to believe that anything illegal was done here. we want to go forward. that's what people at home asked me to do this weekend when i was in the bay area and i think that's what most members across the country are hearing. >> when the chairman spoke about what he saw at the white house, he was clear to say that this information, the wire tapping, had been caught up in a legal manner that trump and his associates to the extent that any were caught up in this it was incidental. they were talking to people who were not americans who were under surveillance. this morning president trump went on to twitter and said this, citing fox news, there was electronic surveillance of trump and people close to trump. this is unprecedented. can you say that this is false? >> from everything that i have seen, yes. i also want to say when i was a prosecutor conducting

investigations, often time the behavior of individuals after something had occurred is just as important as what you're investigating and the president putting out these false wire tapping claims, a number of people on his team lying or trying to cover up their contacts with russia that calls us a lot. i think we're seeing a pattern here of deception when people are confronted about their prioritize to russia. >> you say you don't have these hearings scheduled yet. one thing that will determine whether you indeed do is the status of chairman nunes. you said he betrayed his duty and should recuse himself from the investigation and others have gone further saying he should resign as chairman. did he address those concerns today? >> that is not something we were focused on today. we do a lot of non-intelligence related matters. if the chairman wants to have credibility in presiding over the urgent and important matters we conduct not related to russia, he should step aside with the russia investigation. whether he does or not, we're going forward.

i'm going to visit an agency this week to review more evidence. we just don't want this investigation to have an asterisk around it. >> i want to ask you about susan rice, the new report out today from fox and bloomberg which claims that white house lawyers learned that susan rice was the one who wanted to unmask the names of trump officials in those intelligence reports. you have seen any evidence of this to this point? >> no, but what i can say is this is very common. also i want to clear up something that chairman nunes and others have suggested. just because susan rice would have been able to unmask this information does not mean that anyone else is able to see it. it's often the case that only one individual or someone on their staff sees it. this isn't a sent out a reply all to the whole intelligence community where names are being released. it's usually just one person. >> you make that point, but i have to ask you about what john mccain said. we caught up with him this

afternoon and asked him if he was aware of these reports about susan rice and here is how he answered the question. >> i have not been made aware, but if it's the case, of course it's just dereliction of duty. >> when you hear dereliction of duty from john mccain, you're saying this is very common, what do you say to the senator? >> this would be like foreigner a talking to foreigner b and perhaps someone's on the trump team name came up. if susan rice wanted to see that person's name, that would only go to her. until they show that was not legal, i think it's more efforts to distract. >> this conversation about what conversations were picked up has absolutely nothing to do with the investigation at hand about possible collusion with russians, correct? >> the timing of it is very very

i think telling. it happened the tuesday after the public hearing that the fbi director confirmed there were counterintelligence and criminal investigations into the trump team. it's obvious what they're trying to do. >> good to have you. >> my pleasure. next, are republicans about to change the rules just to get gorsuch confirmed. jared kushner today in iraq. is a man with no government experience qualified for multiple top level white house jobs. every time trump fires off another tweet, this robot gets fired up too. you can't predict the market. but through good times and bad... ...at t. rowe price... ...we've helped our investors stay confident for over 75 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

♪ ♪ wanna get away? now you can with southwest fares as low as 59 dollars one-way. yes to low fares with nothing to hide. that's transfarency. [ om[ sniffs ]c ] little girl: daddy! trapped by your unrelenting nasal allergies? [ meow ] [ sneezes ] try clarispray clarispray provides unsurpassed relief. it's 24 hour, non-drowsy and prescription strength. free yourself with clarispray, from the makers of claritin.

he's a nascar champion who's she's a world-class swimmer who's stared down the best in her sport. but for both of them, the most challenging opponent was... pe blood clots in my lung. it was really scary. a dvt in my leg. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. my doctor and i choose xarelto® xarelto®... to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner... ...that's proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt and pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. here's how xarelto works. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least six blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective... ...targeting just one critical factor, interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function.

don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures and before starting xarelto® about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. you've got to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from dvt and pe blood clots. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know. a tense face-off over the supreme court nomination neil gorsuch. right now there are enough votes

to support his confirmation so that has republicans threatening to change the rules. it's called going nuclear. >> reporter: it's a fight on the way to the senate floor and the nuclear option is eminent. the delaware senator was the 41st senator to support a filibuster on the nomination seemingly erasing any chance for republicans to get the 60 votes needed to end debate. senator mitch mcconnell foreshadowed the scenario on sunday. >> what i can tell you is that neil gorsuch will be confirmed this week. >> reporter: the near certainty of the rules change sparked add monishment on both sides of the aisle. >> hamilton is rolling over in his grave. we are where we are and i'm going to vote to change the rules because i'm not going to be part of the senate where democrats can get their judges

and republicans can never get theirs. >> this nomination is not the usual nomination. it comes in a different way and it has proceeded in a way of excessive spending of dark money that in the time i have been on this committee i have never seen before. >> i'm appointing a supreme court justice. >> reporter: democrats are angry that republicans wouldn't hold a hearing on merrick garland and they're use ing it to justify a filibuster. >> there has never been a filibuster, but i question what a seven months refusal to hold a vote is not the longest filibuster on this committee ever. >> reporter: the white house pinned the problem on democrats. >> i think democrats are setting a very dangerous precedent when it comes to how they want to do this. >> reporter: democrats say

they're worried about gorsuch joining the highest court in the nation. >> this isn't about finding a consensus nominee who only calls balls and strikes. a nominee like merrick garland. this is about confirming a nominee who will guarantee 40 years, 40 more years, of 5-4 decisions favoring corporations overworkers and consumers and preventing americans from getting access to the courts. >> reporter: the crucial vote on that nuclear option could happen on thursday. democrats have 42 is that rigse their side so republicans have to strike a deal with two of them to break a filibuster. however the option was left open for a compromise, but again that's also looking unlikely. the final confirmation vote on neil gorsuch right now is scheduled for friday evening. >> obviously going to be a

crucial day. thank you. now with my our senior panel. just for the politics of this, smart move for the democrats to go ahead with a filibuster here to force republicans to change the rules to quote unquote go nuclear to confirm him. >> it depends on a smart move for whom and to what end. jeffry and i have been going back and forth about whether or not it matters all day. i'll let him give you his answer on that. i suspect i know what it is, but let's talk about raw politics and election politics. in that sense it is a smart move in that the democratic base has such fervor and they're so angry by not just donald trump's presidency, but specifically by the idea that president obama's nominee wasn't given a hearing for 11 months. they're begging, demanding that the democrats do exactly what

they're doing right now, which is filibuster president trump's nominee. however, if you look at the politics of the supreme court, very different politics, i would argue, and i've talked to several democratic senators who actually agree with me today, that the idea of filibustering this nominee, who is filling a conservative slot, is certainly would get a short-term gain in that you're showing the base that you're standing up to the republicans, but they know that the result will be, as jessica said, for the republicans who are in charge in the senate to change the rules and that leaves open the idea the next nominee should there be one and there likely is going to be one, which is going to be a swing vote on the supreme court for the democrats to have no leverage whatsoever at all and for the president to be able to put up the most conservative possible choice. we'll see.

>> isn't that sort of what this does? this is a nomination in a sense that doesn't change the balance of power. the next one does. >> i don't disagree with anything that dana said except if they don't change the rules this time, they'll change the rules next time. so it's not like the democrats have some leverage that they're losing. they don't have the votes. there are 52 republicans in the senate. as long as they stick together as they have, they can change the rules and they can confirm someone a majority. >> so it's inevitable. >> right. democrats are hoping that ruth bader ginsburg eats tons of yogurt and lives forever, but if there is another vac csy it wil be filled by a swing vote. i don't see what the democrats gave up by invoking a filibuster this toime.

>> there were choice comments made last year when the republicans blocked merrick garland. democrats said a court without nine justices is a crisis we can't have it. we can't have it. here they are. >> supreme court of the united states has nine members, not eight. we need that ninth member. >> the supreme court needs nine justices to function properly. it is vital to our judicial system. >> every day that goes by without a ninth justice is another day the american people's business is not getting done. >> now it's the democrats who are essentially forcing the court to go longer with only eight. >> right. the democrats would argue that it's not that they're saying we don't think that there should be eight supreme court justice, they say we don't think it should be judge gorsuch. they don't think he is the right guy. some of them are saying we don't

support judge gorsuch like elizabeth warren put out a statement saying she opposed him not necessarily because of his views, although she certainly doesn't support many of them, but she views them as a stolen seat. >> right. >> the majority of them said this is not the right guy and they want that seat to be filled, just with somebody they consider more moderate. >> this is all politics towards the democratic base. the gorsuch nomination is past committee. >> calling it politics, it's about who should be on the supreme court. that's political. but it's political about something very important. should abortion be a constitutional right? may universities consider race in admissions. is citizens united a correct -- those who are supreme court justices decide. those are political issues. >> the democrats can go ahead and pander to their base or do what their base wants. pander may not be the correct

word, but they can do that because the outcome is not in question. >> they would do that even if the outcome was in question because they believe what their base believes on these issues. this is a substantive fight about important issues. i don't think either party is engaged in democracy. i think it's a disagreement about what the supreme court should stand for and that's really important and it's going to matter for decades and decades. >> it will. thank you both very much. next, jared kushner in iraq tonight on behalf of the president. that's what they told us in quotes. why is kushner with no government or diplomatic experience doing the job of the secretary of state. a deadly subway attack, a bomb kills nearly a dozen people and dozens more injured. is isis to blame. tween you and life's beautiful moments. flonase allergy relief delivers more complete relief. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances that cause all your symptoms, including nasal congestion

and itchy, watery eyes. flonase is an allergy nasal spray that works even beyond the nose. so you can enjoy every beautiful moment to the fullest. flonase. 6>1 changes everything. working on my feet all day gave me pain here. in my knees. so i stepped on this machine and got my number, which matched my dr. scholl's custom fit orthotic inserts. so i get immediate relief from my foot pain. my knee pain. find a machine at drscholls.com. after becoming one of the largest broadband companies in the country. after expanding our fiber network coast to coast. these are the places we call home.

we are centurylink. we believe in the power of the digital world. the power to connect. and that's what drives us everyday. i mwell, what are youe to take care odoing tomorrow -10am? staff meeting. noon? eating. 3:45? uh, compliance training. 6:30? sam's baseball practice. 8:30? tai chi. yeah, so sounds relaxing. alright, 9:53? i usually make their lunches then, and i have a little vegan so wow, you are busy. wouldn't it be great if you had investments that worked as hard as you do? yeah. introducing essential portfolios. the automated investing solution that lets you focus on your life. but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me.

every great why needs a great how. anyone ever have occasional constipation,diarrhea, gas or bloating? she does. she does. help defend against those digestive issues. take phillips' colon health probiotic caps daily with three types of good bacteria. 400 likes? wow! try phillips' colon health.

jared kushner is in iraq. he is there with the chairman joint chiefs of staff. he is there to see the situation in iraq for himself and show support for the iraqi government. it sounds like something the secretary of state would be doing, right?

he hasn't been there yet. kushner has no previous diplomatic or government experience which is raising questions about why he is a top foreign policy advisor along with a growing list of other responsibilities. >> reporter: calming nerves in the middle east and working back channels on chinese relations and weighing in on infrastructure plans and more. all that is on the desk of 36-year-old jared kushner, husband of ivanka trump and trusted advisor of his father-in-law the president. >> he's very good at politics. >> reporter: he appears on have the president's backing to weigh in on almost any domestic, international political or economic matter. >> as he looks at various aspects of government he works with different people in the white house that oversee different parts of that portfol portfolio. >> reporter: it is more

startling considering his resume. >> the last place i thought i would be in brooklyn. >> reporter: years ago he was a real estate tycoon building on his family's fortune, but he's made costly mistakes. he bought this building in new york in 2007 for $1.8 billion. then prices collapsed and a proposed chinese investment in the building brought screams from critics who saw a potential conflict of interest. as a man chasing foreign investments he developed friends around the globe, but his russian ties are under scrutiny. while kushner has plenty of muslim contacts, the president wants his help with the israel

dispute. >> he was never small. >> reporter: kushner's lack of political experience is the sticking point for many. when he announced the desire to make the federal bureaucracy for like a business is our hope is we can achieve efficiency for our customers who are the citizens. critics pounced. >> we're not customers, we're citizens, which means we own the store. you work for us, buddy. >> reporter: so what is kushner going to do with all of this power. that's something of a mystery because he rarely appears on camera talking about anything. he goes about his work in a quiet way. when he speaks it seems to be only in a whisper that can only be heard by donald trump. >> thank you. former president obama advisor and jeffry lord former

reagan white house director. you have been reporting on his trip to iraq. >> this makes him the zel ek of the white house. china, israel, middle east, opioid, fix the white house, but the iraq announcement caught lot of republicans by surprise. i got a text from one senior republican. why? what does rex tillerson think about this. something that someone pointed out, no matter how smart you are and how much experience you have, one person who not be doing all of these things. a republican source who is really watching the white house closely said that he did not think this was about jared grabbing power. he said he thought it was about donald trump has lost confidence in a lot of people around him and what is president trump do when he loses confidence? he pivots to the people he knows

the best, pivot to jared. >> now, the former foreign policy policy to barack obama tweeted in response to this iraq trip today, kushner in iraq before the national security advisor or secretary of state, totally normal. a source told me at one point rex tillerson was very upset with kushner's interference. it is stunning that he is in iraq before the secretary of state and national security advisor isn't it. he does not have any foreign policy experience. >> just in general, presidents always do this. harry hopkins was famous as a social worker and franklin roosevelt made him famous. robert kenny was trash by no less than "the new york times" because he was 36 years old and had no experience and shouldn't be attorney general and now the department of justice is named off him. jared is 36 years old. i would argue i'm sure dan would

disagree, but i would argue that valerie jared no business being a senior aid to the president of the united states. i think president obama trusted her and people like that are replete in every administration from the get go. alexander hamilton was like this. >> people who are unqualified but trusted? >> yeah, right. >> i'm trying to summarize what you said. >> yes. >> dan? >> first, i'd make a couple of points. i think even if jared kushner was the most experienced, most talented person to serve in government he has more on his plate than that person can do. you can't handle iraq, middle east peace and reorganizing government. this speaks to i think problematic elements in president trump's management style and the lack of talent and

experience in that white house. it makes sense for presidents to put people around them that they are close to. it makes sense -- valerie is someone who has more experience in business and in life than jared kushner before he showed up here. but she had a portfolio specific to her experiences. she wasn't given the entire world like president trump has given jared kushner. it's not possible to succeed like that. >> we know it's china. we know it's opioids and it's infrastructure. here is donald trump talking about jared kushner in a variety of different environments about what jared is going to do. >> i'd love to have jared helping us with deals on other nations and see if we can do peace in the middle east. i want to thank jared kushner who has been so involved. so jared, maybe i'll let you take over for a little while. >> jared, you know his wife is about two minutes away from having a baby so he's here. he's coming to aipec. where is jared?

jar jared spoke to many of his friends from israel and we put it together with a lot of great people. >> does it give you any pause to hear him constantly i guess calling him out or maybe using him as a crutch? >> one of the underlying things here if i can go back to jfk, he went through the bay of pigs a few months after he was inag rated. it was a disaster. he listened to all these professional career people who got it wrong so thereafter by the time of the cuban missile crisis he was relying on his brother and his speech writer all of whom he trusted, but he felt they had common sense and that the bureaucracy had failed him. i think there are a lot of presidents who have that sensation so therefore they turn to the people that they trust.

in this case it's jared kushner. >> jared was in the room for every meeting. quiet, said nothing, but there listening. here he is with the german chancellor and the deputy crown prince of saudi arabia and last week in that meeting on opioids and drug abuse. do you think he could end up being a calming or muting factor for trump, a good influence on trump. >> that's what i think jared and the people around him would like you to think. i would say if you follow president trump's twitter account it was suggested he is not succeeding in that fact. i think the point here is that jared can play an important role and i think president trump has the right to have the people around him that he wants to have around him, but you have to give them a set of issues that make sense for them and they have a chance of succeeding in. you have to delegate in your white house. it's not physically possible for someone to do all the things that president trump has assigned to him. he has no experience in any of

the issues assigned to him. >> i understand from sources tillerson, mattis, wilbur ross, have been recentful of jared kushner at times. can that hurt him? >> it can because that also -- it can hurt the president, right? you have to build a team and what have we heard over and over again about how things are going? chaos, internal power struggles, no discipline. that's not good for the president or the country or jared, but i asked someone who's been in a lot of meetings with jared and they say this is not about ideology. he's pragmatic. if you asked what his ideology is, it would be one word, loyalty. in this case, to his father-in-law. >> that is, of course, what the president values above all else. thanks to you all. next, terror underground on

a subway in moscow. is isis responsible. certify russ crimes in los angeles are not being reported by some victims. are president trump's immigration policies to blame. 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. usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. the process through usaa is so effortless,

that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. imy moderate to severeng crohn's disease. i didn't think there was anything else to talk about. but then i realized there was. so, i finally broke the silence with my doctor about what i was experiencing. he said humira is for people like me who have tried other medications but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease.

in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief. and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. if you're still just managing your symptoms, talk with your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.

breaking news at least ten people are dead and dozens wounded on an attack on a busy train. the train was traveling between two stations in st. petersburg. this video captured people jumping from the train after the explosion. another video taken at the scene shows smoke filling the station. russian officials say they then found a second device. they were able to diffuse that one before it was able to explode. no group claims responsibility at this hour. president obama's top homeland security and terror adviser also happened to announce the obama administration review of russian hacking into the election. welcome. we're so proud to have you here. thank you for coming on. >> good to be here. >> let me start by asking you about this breaking news out of russia with this bomb at st.

petersburg's metro. who is a bigger target for isis right now, russia or the u.s.? i presume you think this is likely isis. >> it is still early. we have to be mindful of that it's still early in the investigation and no doubt that officials will be doing, but there's two things to keep in mind and there's two potential ways this could go. one is isis. it's got all the hallmarks of isis. an attack on a soft target, a train station, a public area and a well traveled commuter path in st. petersburg. the use of what appears to be a homemade explosive, reports of shrapnel having been embedded in this explosion. it has the hallmarks of isis. we know there have been dozens of video references from isis threatening to undertake attacks against russia and this emanates

ever since putin engaged and started his bombing campaign into syria back in october of 2015. of course we know that isis and its affiliate in egypt was responsible for bringing down the metrojet airliner in 2015. >> russia has been a significant target. i want to turn to our other big story tonight. multiple reports that the national security advisor susan rice under president obama requested the unmasking of trump associate's names picked up in intel gathering. incidental pick ups of non-u.s. citizens. usually when american citizen easy names are picked up their names are hidden. is the unmasking of those names, her request to do so would that be normal or suspect? >> let me be very clear. i'm not going to comment on any investigation that's ongoing or comment on any specific

intelligence reports or classified information. i think it would be helpful to step back and understand the context and the process that goes into handling these types of intelligence reports. it is not uncommon, in fact for decades and absolutely since 9/11, national security officials have received intelligence reports and there are reports that the professionals have decided are critical to our national security. those go out to senior officials across the government recollection the white house and other agencies. >> you're saying if it was on her desk, someone had already determined it was of national security importance. >> that's correct. >> we start there. >> we start there. it's not unusual at all as many intelligence professionals over the last few weeks have talked about, it's not unusual for american citizens to be referenced in those reports or to be picked up in those reports. that's if the foreign

intelligence target, which has been deemed a legitimate target by a court and by our intelligence professionals, if that foreign intelligence target is referencing or talking to an american citizen, but what's very important is for people to understand the handling of that information, there's very rigorous process and controls on that which are overseen by all three branches of our government. >> if she did that unmasking, it would be because she thought it was important to know that name in a national security context. >> this is the last point that people should understand. it is also not unusual or uncommon for individuals who receive national security officials who receive those intelligence reports to get additional information, including the identities of persons referenced in those reports if it's important to understand the significance of those reports. i'll give you a case in point. if there's a threat or a reference to cyber criminals trying to attack a business, you

want to know who the reference is to. also people should understand that the determination about whether to unmask and provide that information is made by intelligence professionals, career professionals in the intelligence community. >> she could say i want it and it's done. she has to request and someone has to decide and they unmask if they choose. what you're saying is there wouldn't have been a request to unmask unless there was something in there that indicate from a national security perspective that would be important or helpful. >> i'm saying these are not uncommon or unusual for americans to be referenced for there to be a process that is approved by the intelligence community to provide that information and it's done through a process that has gone on for years. >> right. so who knows the nature of the conversation might have been something that seemed suspicious or whatever it may have been would have led to the request i want to know who that american

citizen was involved in this conversation. >> correct. >> when john mccain said he wanted the factual evidence to make sure he had the evidence but it could have been a d dereliction of duty, what's your reaction to that. >> i didn't see those comments and he has a lot of experience and is a principal consumer of intelligence, i don't really understand that reference because as i said there's a long standing rigorous process that goes into the protection of this information and the handling of it that's overseen by the congress as well as the court and executive branch. >> one more crucial question i think, because there is two stories here. there's the unmasking of names and the leaking of information to members of the press. how many people do you general would have known if susan rice had asked for an unmasking. would she have been the only person to know or others.

how many people unmaskin unmasking. >> here again, stepping back from the specifics and this is something that intelligence officials who have served the administration, it is a very specific process, there's only about 20 people in the national security agency that has the ability to approve the unmasking and then the process is to have that information go back solely to the requester. >> so very few people. and the story's literally moving as we're talking. jim sciuto is reporting that both susan rice and a colleague of hers were responsible for that unmasking. what do you think's going on. >> i'll let others do the

political prognosticating, and the process that's put into place for the privacy of american citizens, but national security professionals need to understand what's in reports that the intelligence community has already said by definition are critical to our national security to understand. >> you of course have announced the obama administration review into the hacking specifically, russian hacking into the election, you obviously knew about this hacking long before the american public did, the obama administration, you knew, why didn't the obama administration say anything or do anything about it earlier? >> i understand it in terms of hindsight. what i think is very important for people to understand, and it's a valid question to be asking because we need to learn everything we can about what went on, which is why president obama ordered the review, the full review he did before he left office. and the reason is, because we want to make sure we understand what happened because as intelligence professionals have

told us, this is going to happen again. we're going to see increasing aggressive actors in the cyberspace, whether it's russia or others, try and get at our critical systems. so in terms of what the obama administration did, i think it's very important to recognize, we did take a number of steps, there was statements to and discussions with putin at the highest level, including by president obama himself. we also -- >> and when did those happen, last summer? a direct conversation between president obama and president putin? >> last summer, and this is the president, president obama talked about this, very direct messaging, telling him that this was unacceptable and if there was any intrusions into and affecting our election systems would not be tolerated. there were statements by the secretary of homeland security backed up by the entire intelligence community, unprecedented statements, calling out russia including the highest levels of the russian

government for this intrusion. >> you said there were multiple conversations between president obama and president putin. did that begin before the hack into dnc emails was discovered aroundconventions, was it before that or after that? >> what other cyber security firms have talked about, that the hack into the dnc predated the summer. so the conversation with president obama that was already talked about with president putin occurred over the summer. but what's important for people to understand is that the focus at the time was critical to make sure that our election system continued to have integrity, that there was not an intrusion into that process. and our priority at the time was to make sure state and local election systems were protected. >> i guess the question is, though, did you maybe not take it as seriously, or were you worried that by going public with it earlier, it would look

as if president obama was helping hillary clinton and inadvertently helping donald trump. >> there was a concern that there did not appear to be a politicalization of this. we were very focussed on making sure that the election itself had integrity and that the systems were not intruded upon. and that there was confidence. this is a very important point. there's a lot of debate about what the russian motives might have been here. but everyone agrees across the intelligence community that one of their main motives was to sew discord, confusion and a lack of confidence in our democracy, and we didn't want to do anything that did the russians' work for them. out front next, a disturbing crime trend tonight, what does it have to do with president trump? and we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression,

including preservision areds 2. my doctor said preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula the national eye institute recommends to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd after 15 years of clinical studies. preservision areds 2. because my eyes are everything.

president trump has declared this national crime prevention week. this comes as the police chief is warning of a new -- sara sidner is out front. >> reporter: also almost unheard of for a police chief to say that a decrease in crime reports

may where a dangerous trend, but that's exactly what's happening in america's biggest cities. >> in los angeles, domestic violence reports are down 10% in the hispanic community. 10%, imagine somebody being a victim of domestic violence and not calling the police because they're afraid that their family will be torn asunder because of immigration enforcement. >> reporter: what's even more alarming, he said, reports of rape dropped 25% in the latino community, compared to the same time last year. the fear is crime isn't actually dropping, but victims are too scared to report it. after donald trump with his tough stance on immigration took office. >> there's no direct connection to it. but there is a strong correlation. >> reporter: heightened fears of deportation have scared away

four domestic violence victims. >> they contacted our office to let us know they were afraid to proceed with the case for fear of deportation. >> reporter: they were not afraid to face their alleged attacker, but instead afraid of this, i.c.e. agents waiting outside the courtroom to detain undocumented imgrants, these pictures of a private law firm show that the fear is not unfounded. local law enforcement worried about the impact on potential victims and witnesses. >> if crime goes unpunished and there are no consequences, obviously crime can rise. >> reporter: according to i.c.e. policy, courthouses are fair game. still, their actions are having a chilling effect on victims too. >> where are you afraid to go now? >> translator: the courts, it frightens me to think that just by going there, immigration will

get me. >> reporter: this undocumented mother of two american born daughters says she used to live in terror inside of her home because of her abusive spouse before fleeing, he was never charged, but now she's even more terrified when she leaves her home. >> translator: every single day i think about this, my daughter said, mom, i'm afraid when you pick me up from school, imgrargs will be there. >> reporter: there's some things to note here, it's not a very large amount of data, it's only the first three months of the year, so hard to tell if there's a real trend there. and ice faced major backlash after women were in court trying to obtain restraining orders. >> sarah, thank you very much. and thanks to all of you as

always for joining us, don't forget, you can watch out front, any time, anywhere on cnn go. acc 360 with anderson cooper starts right now. good evening, we begin tonight with new tweets and a new chapter in the president's ongoing effort to divert attention from the russia story and just moments ago push back from a close associate of the obama administration, just like the president's early morning tweets more than a month ago that accused president obama of wiretapping his phones, the latest allegations are big on insinuation and short on evidence. these tweets on saturday, quote, wow, at@fox news just reporting big news, source, official behind unmasking is high up, known intel officer is responsible. trump t