>> what do you think of that? what is ivanka's role in this? >> both of them grew up with fathers largers than life. they both had to learn to grew up around that and live wit. i think they're both very controlled personalities, but they are also a little out over their skiis. who wouldn't give up an the opportunities they're getting, but that is a separate issue on whether or not they are qualified. >> look, again, he values family. i don't think anybody has got a problem with that. it's just where you put family. these are unvetted positions. they have always been controversial because they don't go in front of any confirmation process, but usually the people who occupy them are known. that's what's so different is there is a bunch of people in there that nobody has ever heard of before and they're learning on the job. >> and they've still got

conflicts. they'll still got important financial conflicts that will cloud any decisions they make as to whether or not they are talking sound policy or whether or not they're talking their wallets. >> thank you so much. >> we have breaking news to get to out of syria. let's get after it. >> this is cnn breaking news. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to your new day. we do begin with breaking news for you. this is out of syria. dozens of people have reportedly been killed, including at least ten children and hundreds others injured following a gas or chemical attack. some of the images that we are seeing they are very hard to watch. these are raw images. you can see children are being treated and doctors there attending to them. >> also the truth of what is happening right now in a part of the world that seems to be benefitting from the collective negligence of the u.s.

coalition, the allies who all say way want to make a difference in syria. the timing matters. this attack you are seeing the product of right now comes days after the trump administration announced a major shift in the u.s. policy on syria. that shift was no longer will the u.s. have any interest in regime change and ousting syrian president. is it just a coincidence that right after that we saw what could have been an attack on his own people? good to have you both. now, as expected from our earlier conversation, the syrian regime is coming out and saying we didn't have anything to do with this. but again coming from the air with directed attacks that seem to have some type of noxious gas capabilities, that's not something you will see from some run of the mill rogue type running around in the desert. >> you're not necessarily. and the broader issue is what

happens next? what does the international community do? do they allow this attack to happen with impunitimpunity? >> france is calling for an emergency meeting of the un security council, but who knows what that will result in. >> and those kinds of calls have not resulted in anything shifting when it comes to happening in syria. that's what's so confounding for those covering it. the world is watching it happen and it seems as if no one is willing or able, but probably willing to make the sacrifice it is going to take in terms of what political chips they have in their pockets to put pressure where pressure is needed to stop the syrians and their backers from attacking the civilian population. no matter who is responsible for this, there are civilians dying from air strikes by the russians and by the syrians every day. >> we know from the trump white house they are going in the

opposite direction. we have secretary of state rex tillerson who just said on a trip to turkey, quote, the longer term status of the president will be decided by the syrian people. >> i think you have to be a little bit fair here because while the trump administration has come out and said this, the obama administration did next to nothing to really make a difference on the ground in syria. >> which is what they say is motivating this new kind of recognition of the reality there, that you drew your red line. it meant nothing. >> it meant nothing. it embolden russia. it embolden the regime. it embolden proxies on the ground and there have been major consequences to pay for that. there is a strong argument to be made. we can't be getting involved in every war. we don't have a lot of skin in the game. these people need to sort it out for themselves. let me make one thing clear for our viewers. for any muslims watching these

images of small children apparently killed by some kind of chemical gas, there is no greater rallying cry for extremist groups than to see the international community stand there on the sidelines and allow this type of war crime, if it is indeed against the civilian population. >> syria continue tosser ch as a magnet for gee haddists to come there. >> syria has reactivated the whole movement because many young people, and some of them not even extremists, see these images, day in, day out, being blasted at them on social media. they feel powerless to help. they feel no one else is helping and at a certain point they become enraged. >> so that effect f y, if you l at what's happening there and the radicalization of the revolution, why did it become

radical? why did extremist groups have the capacity to come in and basically alter the nature of what started out as a basic cry that hopefully most people can relate to of freedom and democracy? it is because when the killings began, no none, and no western nation that claimed to uphold these principals actually stood by the syrian people and stopped the slaughter. when you have nothing left, you will take what the devil has to give you, and that's what happened. >> for context, where can we point to in that part of the world and show here is an example of where it worked, where there was a bad guy doing bad things and we, the united states, the coalition, people who value freedom, went in, took him out and now the place is better for it? >> this is the argument that obama administration always put forward. it's a disaster.

you go in and do a minn mini-intervention, it is a sis saser. there is no question there is a sense here of dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. at the same time allowing people to be slaughtered, particularlidy villains, does have consequences and raises questions about our moral high ground. >> but of course it is complicated and we heard a lot about this during the election. arming the rebels. that's complicated. we don't know exactly who they are. safe zones, that's complicated. who is going to supervise those? there just seems to be in easy solution to this. >> there isn't. and there never has been. but to go back to her point of you do nothing and you have syria, the problem is they didn't do anything militarily that was sufficient, but then behind the scenes politically,

the u.s. still tried to manipulate the situation. so if you are going to do nothing and actually let the situation unfold as it would, then let it be. don't give people false hope. the other thing is even today, talk to most syrians, and they still fundamentally believe that if america truly wanted to help them, it could and they still have this hope that america because of what it is meant to stand for can actually come in and alter the course of history. >> there was a lot of lip service paid as well. it is one thing to got get involved. it is another thing to say this must stop and then not doing anything about it. that makes you look weak. >> the red line was really the epitome of that. the president said it. he then got criticized because there were these types of attacks going on and he wanted to take military action and you wound up in unrest.

thank you. we wish there were better answers, but at least we are giving people the reality. all right. so what are we going to see from the white house? this is a real-time demonstration for a call for leadership. we have no tweets from the commander in chief this morning about this situation in syria. but president trump is very active in trying to deflect from his owns own political problems again, expanding the web of ties from his team and russia by peddling another fake scandal to justify an unproven claim about surveillance. jim shoe doe live with more. >> reporter: listen, at this point the open question is was this information unmasked and then made public, leaked? we don't know that. but unmasks itself, one, not unusual. i have spoken to senior intelligence officials from both republican and democratic

administrations. not unusual. it is done to learn more about intelligence reports that these officials see. certainly not illegal. protocol is put in place since 9/11 and it is also private, only shared between the briefer and that senior intelligence official. based on what we know right now, this looks like another chapter in an attempt by the administration to justify the president's unfounded claim of surveillance of trump by the obama administration. >> former president obama's national security advisor, suzanne rice at the center of president trump's latest attempt to renew his unproven wiretapping claim and divert attention away from russia. seizing on conservative media reports that claim rice unmasked trump officials caught up in surveillance. >> at its core, this was surveillance for political reasons. >> tweeting he was spied on

before the nomination and calling it a crooked scheme. telling cnn, the allegation she did anything unusual or improper false. the white house meanwhile blasting the media for ignoring the scandal. >> from a media standpoint, somewhat greeged from the lack of interest we have seen in these public revelations. >> something different from leaking this information to the press. >> if somebody feels there is intelligence value and of course there is a whole series of procedures you have to go through and lawyers look over your shoulder. so there is nothing at all unusual about unmasking. >> the administration latest justification, a far cry from president trump's initial claim one month ago, that president obama wiretapped trump tower, an accusation that mr. trump has attempted to really redefine and justify, even after his own fbi

director refuted the claim. >> i think you will find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. >> last week the trump administration tried to distort comments made by a former obama defense official. >> dr. farkus's add mamissions e are devastating. >> she says her comments are wildly misinterpreted. and the week before that devin nunes got wrapped up in the white house's diversion. >> the president needs to know these intelligence reports are out there. >> briefing the commander and chief and the media before his own committee about classified information on the president and his associates. >> i appreciated the fact they found what they found. >> trump calling nunes's announcement vindication. later it turns out that officials inside trump's white house were the source of the

documents shown to nunes. >> we believe this is nothing more than an effort to roll more smoke bombs into an investigation that was making process. >> unmasking cannot happen on the order of one official. that official has to make a question to the intelligence communities, who have to make a decision on whether there is appropriate to unmask that and a paper trail that is not done in the dark. one former senior intelligence official described it to me like irish baptismal records. it cannot happen secretly and in the dark. back to you. >> that is a helpful analogy, jim. thank you for all of that reporting and explaining it to us. joining us now is the democratic senator who serves on the foreign relations and judiciary committee. you are a busy man and very relevant to us today to talk to about all of this. okay.

suzanne rice, is this business as usual? or was there something controversial about how the name of someone on team trump got out into the public sphere? >> there is unusual or alarming here. but that's why we need the senate intelligence committee to work well, to work hard and to work in a bipartisan way. there were also allegations earlier this week that the uae set up a back panel between a putin crony and the founder of black water. there is more and more black smoke that we can keep track of. we need a solid bipartisan investigation of all the different allegations on this. and an important point here is the white house keeps trying to find some way to justify president trump's tweet from a month ago that he had been

wiretapped. i don't think this provides any sort of cover for that. and given the very important developments this week, president trump's meetings with the president of egypt, with the king of jordan, with the president of china, this isn't reality tv anymore. this is no time for twitter d t diplomacy. >> one more question about what happened with suzanne rice. if this was business as usual, if this was a customary practice where you see an american identified as only american one and your curiousty is aroused that you would ask for the name to be unmasked, why didn't suzanne rice disclose that or even be straightforward about that in the past week or two when he was on pbs and he said basically something to the effect of, no, i don't know anything about that. >> i didn't see her pbs

interview. obviously thrks ly obviously, this is a topic subject to a number of controls. there are processes by an intelligence official can request unmasking, but that is very closely tracked. and, so, she would have had to articulate an intelligence justification for doing that. this is exactly why we need a strong and thorough investigation, to make sure where there are allegations made, they are thoroughly investigated. i am hopefully. i remain very concerned given congressman devin nunes's side scurry over to the white house that the house intelligence committee has gotten badly offtrack and i hope they get off to our core mission in the house and senate oversight. >> let's talk about judge gorsuch's confirmation to the supreme court. as you know, the nuclear option is now very real, where

forevermore or at least breaking precedent, he will only need 51 votes, as opposed to 60 because, as you know, the democrats filibustered and blocked his nomination. aren't you guys cutting off your noses to spite your face? because you're standing on principal here because of what happened with merrick garland, but then going forward the next judge might be even less appealing to you than judge gorsuch and then you are going to lose this again when only 51 republicans are needed to install that person. >> but that's right, alison. that is a very legitimate concern. if we look down the road, the further erosion of the system here in the senate that has kept us different from the house, the erosion of the protections for minority political rights of the filibuster would be, i think, a very grave step. we have got just two days now until the closure vote. what that really means is we are

ready to stop debate and move to a final vote. i said yesterday that i intend to vote against it because i don't think we are yet ready to close debate. i will vote against closure unless we are able to find some way together, republicans and democrats to preserve the tradition of consultation and the nomination of a president who can win confirmation by both parties. that didn't happen on this case. >> he's fill ago conservative seat. let's be honest here. you're talking about lots of sort of formal terms that i don't know that americans know about sort of all of the workings of how it works in the senate. however, gorsuch would be fill ago conservative seat. so why are you digging in on this one? >> i'm not digging in. i'm saying i am open to

conversations about how we might preserve the filibuster. there is three paths forward here and now it is clear to the republican majority if they choose to break the roules, to change the rules, that will be on them. there are democrats and republicans who i hope will be talking this week, in the next two days to see if we could find some path forward where we preserve the filibuster for exactly the reasons you are laying out. but they can break the rules and force judge gorsuch on to the court. they could step back and recognize this is a historic moment. now it's clear both sides have the votes and we need to have a conversation or they could consult with us and reconsider judge gorsuch's nomination. it is my open the senate will play its historic role and folks here will be talking in the next few days. >> thank you as always for being on new day. chris? >> there is an international crisis happening right now. we are witnessing these

horrifying images of an apparent chemical attack on krit seve kr citizens of syria. we have john kennedy joining us next. stay-proof look? neutrogena® makeup remover does. it erases 99% of your most stubborn makeup with one towelette. need any more proof than that? neutrogena. 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. with chantix.d i quit smoking i was very grateful to have chantix. at times when i would normally go smoke, i just didn't. it's kind of like "wait a minute, i would normally be running out the door to go grab a cigarette." along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. some reported seizures or sleepwalking with chantix. if you have any of these,

stop chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of mental health problems, which could get worse or of seizures. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you have these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have heart or blood vessel problems, or develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution driving or operating machinery. most common side effect is nausea. thank you chantix. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. the market.redict 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.

this is cnn breaking news. >> all right. dozens of people have been killed, including several children in a gas or chemical attack in syria.

those numbers are preliminary estimates. this comes days after the trump administration announced a major shift in u.s. policy saying the united states is no longer trying to oust syrian president. so what should the united states do, if anything, in response to this horrific attack? joining us now is republican senator john kennedy of louisiana. sorry to have you on with hard news, but it is important to have you on because this is an important question. the concern is if you do nothing as the united states, as the united nations, as the allies, are you surrendering the romora authority to call out this kind of horror. >> the first thing we have to do is get the facts. and if the facts are confirmed, i think it is probably the case that asad is testing president trump and he's testing our new secretary of state, tillerson, and we can't do nothing.

we'll have an appropriate response now. of course, what's appropriate will be much debated, but we can't just do nothing. we can't let them cross this line without having consequences. >> we have seen another chemical attack. it is hard to confirm these things 100%. you're not even in the country to do the investigating and nothing was done. the red line by obama apparently crossed. there was not the resolve in the united states congress to put boots on the ground or military action. so what would be an appropriate response if, in fact, it is asad attacking his own? >> i don't think we know yet. i think what we do know is asad is a thug and you can't hand feed a shark and expect to get anything but bitten. if asad is doing this to test the new american leadership, he

would kill people, murder people to test a theory, that proves he is a thug. what the appropriate consequences are, if reports are confirmed, i'm sure the secretary of the state, the president and their people are discussing it right now. we'll have a response, i can tell you that. >> well, you may not get the cover -- >> it is debatable. >> you may not get the comfort of 100% of what happened. we will have a range of different people with different citings. some intelligence coordination of who was in the air at that time and it will be as likely or not that it was the syrians. so the question becomes on what basis do you act and what basis do you see we've heard nothing from the president so far about this. is it time for him to put out a statement? >> i don't know what he's looking at. i trust our intelligence officia officials. when they tell us they are reasonably certain asaz is doing

this, i will be certain to act on that. >> does that trust extend to the notion that suzanne rice, if she asked for any unmasking of american citizens because of the volume of contact them and russian points of foreign contact that it was done for rightful reasons? >> well, masking is not infrequent. the issue here is whether it was done for intelligence reasons or for political reasons. and i think we've got to get to the bottom of it. >> is there any indication it was done for political reasons? we know there was a paper trail in requesting it. we don't know that the names were brought out. we haven't been given that information by those on the right trying to forward this as some type of magic solution for president trump's allegations. >> that's all true. we don't know one way or the other. that's why i suggest we just throw it into the pot. i've got a lot of confidence in warner and burr in the senate.

they're going to investigate all of this. they're both i think as objective as they can be, given the different sides of the aisle and i just add it to the list. we'll get to the bottom of all this, and once we get the facts, we'll let the chips fall where they may, report it to the american people. i think it would be appropriate for mrs. rice to come to the senate committee and explain what happened and what. >> but is it helping in the aim of truth and clarity, or is it just muddying the water? this is being called a crooken scheme by the president of the united states and there is no basis in fact for that assertion. it is more likely a distraction than it is anything else. why just keep adding things to the stew because of some rogue suggestion? >> i understand your point. my guess is the white house would disagree with it. i don't know whether you're right or the white house is right. that's why we've got a committee investigating this. and i would just throw it into the stew, as you put it, it is

not going to be the first thing the committee is going to investigate because there are a few other things are ahead of it. but the american people are wondering what in god's name is going on in washington, d.c. why aren't we fixing problems instead of talking about russian? as far as these issues come up, okay, let's put them out there, investigate, find the facts and tell the american people who they are and then we could move on. if somebody did something wrong, they ought to be punished. if they didn't, let's move on. >> it doesn't trouble you that the president of the united states keeps muddying the water to distract from that investigation of all the all-important russian interference and he does seem to be doing it for political motivations? >> chris, this is america. you are entitled to your opinion. i just think that's not an objective statement. i think the white house and others might see it otherwise. i'm not saying you're wrong. i'm just saying i don't know. i know some names were unmasked.

there was an allegation mrs. rice was involved. if she was involved she either did it for intelligence reasons, the right reasons or political reasons. now that the issue has been raised and the interest of the american people has been tweaked, we've got to get to the bottom of it. >> you can have an allegation that is in search of proof. you know, as opposed to proof that leads to an allegation. the idea that well maybe she did it for political reasons, there is sere you reason to believe that at this point. you know there was a trail that she asked for the unmasking the way you are supposed to, which would be stupid if you were doing it just to leak, right? so she had the proper trail. there is no proof that it was le leaked and it suggests such a volume of contact that it spurred her curiosity in it and yet it's been used as a scheme to advance the president's notion of him being a victim.

that doesn't seem troubling to you? >> all valid points. and you may be right. but we don't know whether you're right. yours is one point of view. we've got to find out. consider the context, chris. if we weren't in such a politically charged environment about russia, we might just move on from this. i remember studying about russia. i'm scared to admit this. i think the fair thing to do now that the allegations have been raised is to just add it to the list that the committee is going to investigate, get the facts, do it in a transparent manner and then tell the american people. and the american people, they'll figure it out. i mean, not all americans read aristotle but they usually figure things out pretty well. >> what do you think about judge

gorsuch? do you think it will take the use of the nuclear option and making this a straight up and down vote? are you okay with that? >> i hope we don't get to that. i really do. and if kneel gorsuch were a marginal candidate, if we were some chucklehead, i would say, okay, you know, let's talk about it. but this guy is a legal rock star. no reasonable person can listen to judge kneel gorsuch testify for 20 to 30 hours and come away not thinking that he's qualified, eminently qualified to be on the united states supreme court. now, i think the democrats, they don't want him on the supreme court. they want a liberal. well, that's not going to happen. la-la land is a movie. we don't live it in here. well, maybe we do in washington some days, but that's not going to happen. trump is not going to nominate a liberal. so what are we fighting over

here? i hate to see us change the rule. but we didn't start it. it really started back in 1992 when then senator biden talked about it and then in 2013 the senate changed the rules to require just a majority vote for all judicial nominees, except supreme court. i'd rather it not happen. but if it does happen, it's not going to be the end of the kriflization and the world won't spin off its axis. the man is qualified. he is brilliant and has a consistent judicial philosophy. you may not agree with it, but you can't say he's unqualified and i'm hoping my friends on the democrat side see that and let us have an up and down vote. that's what we're fighting over, chris. all this nuclear option and culture, that's complicating it. all we're fighting over is whether kneel gorsuch should have nominated by duly elected

president of the united states that some people like and some people don't whether kneel gorsuch should have an up or down vote by the united states senate, which is why my constituents sent me up here. i don't think it is unreasonable to say let's have an up and down vote and let the chips fall where they may. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, chris. >> chucklehead, that is not a word i use enough. >> i was going to say. >> why is president trump peddling another scandal? what will he do today about the very real international crisis unfolding in syria? our all-star panel discusses all of that next. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin trusted advice for life.

kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.

the president calls it the real story, allegations that president obama's former national security advisor, suzanne rice, improperly unmasked the names of trump associates. joining us is former new york city council speaker and president of women in need.

kailey mcnay knee and amanda carpenter. it is hard to follow all of these threads. but here we are today. you have heard the cnn reporting, amanda. there is nothing out of the ordinary. in fact, it is quite customary for a national security advisor to get an intel report, see a masked name. let's say it refers to american number one and say this is intriguing. who is this? and ask for it to be unmasked. where is the controversy? >> there is a big debate between surveillance and targeting. here's what we need to find out. were trump associates the target of any improper surveillance. >> and james comey has said no. >> we do know mike flynn's name was leeked, but is there anything improper about what he is doing. it is important to remind everyone that flynn resigned, not because he was doing

anything necessarily improper, because he lied to the vice president. so we're getting tangled up in this big mess and suzanne rice should answer some questions but there is no evidence she did anything improper. >> no evidence this suzanne rice did anything improper or illegal. why is the trump white house fixated on it, therefore? >> they know things we don't know. they have actually seen these documents purportedly. unmasking is par for the course under two circumstances, if they are suspected of committing a crime or if you need to know the name for intelligence information. his congressional sources told him that the information they've seen and the conversations they've seen were conversations about the trump family and conversations about trump's plans for the administration. how does that have foreign intelligence value? how is that evidence of committing a crime?

there are real questions here. >> hard to know what it is that all of this has done because devin nunes was quite complicated in his explanation. he didn't even seem to know what he was saying. >> and, remember, that nunes had to go to the white house to check his source. that is curious to me. but let's take a step back. on this show this morning we have seen tragic coverage of events and real catastrophic events in syria. what we need now is a united states government at every level that's working in a professional, forward-moving way. many of these diversions, my word, and these random tweets thrown out there for us to chase the new shiny thing all came around in the context of the investigations going on and that will hopefully still go on about russia.

this is not -- these all may be on a list of things that should bed looked up by the investigation, but they are not things that should be thrown out to distract the american people, the media and lawmakers when we have truly crisis things going on. >> but what we should be concerned about and what the trump administration may be toying with, do we want the intelligence committee to be doing their jobs? we know mike flynn was talking about sanctions with russian officials. trump associates with r talking with russian officials. is trump saying he wants the intelligence committee to turn off all surveillance whenever a trump member of the administration comes into play? that would mean no one is doing their job. there is a reason for that information and trump needs to be put in the hot seat and asked, do you want this to end or not? if this is where you are going, go make that request and let's have that debate. >> but is this getting in the

way of the real crisis? what we're seeing with the gas or chemical attack in syria that the president of the united states should weigh in somehow? >> what has happened to the syria people is inexcusable and i think he should work on those safe zones he mentioned during the campaign. that is paramouparamount. but democrats are throwing out all these accusations of trump campaign collusion with the russians. left and right we hear leaking. we hear democrats bringing this up. trump is responding to those allegations with what should be the real concern -- >> wiretapping allegations that he claims that president obama wiretapped him. that's this sort of wild goose chase that we have been on. >> and he started that. and this is par for the course with president trump. when things aren't going exactly the way he wants and he can't control the circumstances, he deflects, throws out new ideas

and blames others. this president says that the former president of the united states has bugged him, wiretapped him. that would be completely illegal. he started this conversation and then it's been carried on by other members of the republican party like chair nunes. so, look, this isn't a time for partisan blaming. there is an investigation that must be completed on the question of russians attacking the american. >> between the russian investigation and the leeks, which right now minimal is -- completely within the trump administration control to clamp down on. take responsibility. own it. >> lots of different threads. we'll following all of them. let's get over to chris. >> president trump has tweeted about a lot of controversiecont. yet, at this hour there is a real controversy going on in

syria. children have died. we have not heard from the president yet. what will he do? that's part of the bottom line next. knowing where you stand has never been easier. except when it comes to retirement. at fidelity, you get a retirement score in just 60 seconds. and we'll help you make decisions for your plan... to keep you on track. it's your retirement. know where you stand. to keep you on track. essential for him, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections,

lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™".

more information continues to come out of syria. dozens reportedly dead. hundreds injured in a chemical or gas attack. leaders from england, france and turkey condemning the attacks. so far we have heard nothing from the president of the united states. he did just recently tweet or re-tweet moments ago once again about his fake suzanne rice scandal. let's get to the bottom line with cnn political reporter, chris. yes, trump's tweets will be worthy of criticism. but the united states has not found a successful path in syria and now we see fresh evidence of the problem. >> right. i mean, look, this is one of president obama's biggest foreign policy nightmares, chris. the red line and when it was crossed and then what we would do and no solution.

so this is not an easy problem to solve. the hard thing here is that donald trump is a total knee you fite when it comes to foreign policy. you can make the exact same comparison to barack obama. but trump is more focussed on economics and his business. this is all new to him and it comes at a time where we're not entirely clear who is at the tiller, i'm using that word advisedly because of rex tillerson. he's sort of a non-entity pubically at the moment and we have jared kushner, son-in-law with a surprise trip to iraq. who is the person that trump is relying on when it comes to advising him on the best way to react here in what is an extremely complex and difficult situation. this is not on donald trump as

it relates to the u.s.'s involvement or lack thereof in syria. this is a difficult issue. but how he responds is an early test of his foreign policy. we have very little indication of what that will be based on prior actions. >> we have a little bit of indication. this week based on what secretary tillerson as well as the am bar door said about syria, they said that the goal is no longer to remove the president and that the future of syria is in the hands of the syrian people. >> well, and alison, that's consistent with what donald trump outlined in a broad sense during the campaign, which is, you know, we can't get involved in every conflict that happens everywhere. i'd also say this will re-open a conversation about human rights that begin with the alsisi visit. it comes baa tiller not not

holding a press conference when the human rights report comes out. look, donald trump has said from the beginning we need to let people handle their own business and he's put a priority on counter terrorism at the moment over human rights. we'll see if that continues. obviously, this is a horrifying event. we'll see sort of what he says. my guess, chris, i think you're right not to -- he hasn't said anything yet. my guess is he will say something. >> that's true. but it does go to what his instincts are. this is not a man who thinks twice before acting on his own gut and his instinct this morning was to talk about s suzanne rice and not about what's going on in syria. would not take a lot of intelligence help from other agencies to say our sympathies go out to the victims here. their murders will have a just

response. as the question comes, you don't want to do anything that's a policy position. you don't say anything, that's a moral position. as those who have traveled to these parts of the world and see what's going, moral authority is the biggest advantage and where will that be now? >> which is the argument against torture that john mccain and others have offered, if we sacrifice moral authority, what do we have. there is no question what donald trump cares. he latches on to certain things and he cannot give them up. he cannot walk away. the russian thing is the latest, the wiretapping claim. trying to prove he is right. trying to find evidence for an unfunded allegation he made on twitter a few weeks about. >> thank you for being our bottom line. be sure to check out his new piece on cnn.com. it is up now. >> how about some good stuff? up next. >> let's do it.

all right. little brought spot here. a virginia bridal shop owner giving a couple the wedding of their dreams for free. >> come on? >> yes. like many they couldn't throw a big wedding. all their cash went to erica's medical treatments for lymphoma. >> there is nobody else that i would rather be on the rest of this journey with. >> christine greenberg heard about it.

you see she loath her fiance to cancer. >> she was dealt a pretty tough blow and she never felt bad for herself. >> instead, christine took charge, reaching out to local vendors who are covering the cost to everything, to the rings, to the venue, everything that goes into it. a magic moment. >> that is so beautiful. again rossty and love covers all. we'll see you tomorrow.

♪ can i get some help. watch his head. ♪ i'm so happy. ♪ whatever they went through, they went through together. welcome guys. life well planned. see what a raymond james

financial advisor can do for you. >> she was dealt a pretty tough generosity and love conquers

this is cnn, the most trusted name in news.

president trump contacts with russian intelligence, reports of a secret meeting on a remote set of islands. all of this as new debate emerges about whether the obama administration was eyeballing the trump campaign. >> the meeting on health care appears to bring health care from the dead. but could coverage of pre-existing conditions be in jeopardy. we could learn what is really going on behind closed doors. plus a horrific attack. dozens killed, hundreds injured in northern syria after air strikes give off a