well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

so you'rhow nice.a party? i'll be right there. and the butchery begins. what am i gonna wear? this party is super fancy. let's go. i'm ready. are you my uber? [ horn honks ] [ tires screech ] hold on. [ upbeat music ] the biggest week in tv is back. [ doorbell rings ] who's that? show me watchathon. xfinity watchathon week! now until april 9. get unlimited access to all of netflix and more, free with xfinity on demand. topping our second hour of "360," island intrigue. one more item in what seems to be the almost bottomless story of contact between associates of donald trump and a parade of

russian figures. the latest came to light early today. cnn's jim sciutto's looking into it. tonight he's got new developments. >> reporter: tonight the timing and proximity of meetings between trump advisers and russian officials during the transition is raising questions among hill investigators, a congressional intelligence source tells cnn. in particular, whether the loosening of u.s. sanctions on russia was discussed. the meetings are just one part of an expand web of contacts between trump advisers and russia during the election and transition. one of the latest revelations, a meeting in january on the island nation of the seychelles, hundreds of miles off the east coast of africa, a diplomatic source tells cnn. a little more than a week before president trump took office, blackwater founder and trump donor erik prince met with a russian businessman close to president vladimir putin to arrange a possible back channel of communications between moscow and the incoming administration.

>> there was no reason to find some russian business person or some contact with the russian government when you could easily have asked the state department or the obama administration to help create contacts. >> reporter: prince claimed to have influence with then president-elect trump, though both the white house and the foreign diplomat tell cnn the administration was not involved in arranging the meeting. still, gop lawmakers acknowledge growing questions. >> this is a centipede. a shoe will drop every few days. the latest, the meeting in the seychelles. look, this is a requirement in my view why we need a select committee in order to get through all this, because there's lots more shoes that are going to drop. >> thank you very much. >> reporter: ties between former trump campaign adviser carter page and russia are also under renewed scrutiny after revelations page was in contact with a russian intelligence operative in new york in 2013. court documents reveal a transcript of the russian spy's account of a conversation he had

with page, who is referred to in the document as male number 1. speaking about page, the russian says, "i think he is an idiot and forgot who i am" and "i will feed him empty promises." page admits that he was in contact with at least one russian spy in 2013 but claims he thought the russian was working for moscow's u.n. office and insists he did not release any sensitive information to him. page saying in a statement, "i shared basic immaterial information and publicly available research documents. in doing so i provided him nothing more than a few samples from the far more detailed lectures i was preparing at the time for the students in my spring 2013 semester." the connections, however, do not end there. former white house national security adviser michael flynn, a key adviser during the trump campaign, sat next to rgs president vladimir putin in 2015 at a black tie gala for russia's rt propaganda network. we now know the kremlin paid flynn more than $33,000 to

atte attend. income he did not initially report, as required, to the u.s. army or to the white house. flynn was fired less than a month into the administration for lying to the vice president about discussing sanctions with russia's ambassador, sergei kislyak. >> when i looked at the information, i said, i don't think he did anything wrong. if anything, he did something right. but the thing is he didn't tell our vice president properly and then he said he didn't remember. so either way it wasn't very satisfactory to me. >> reporter: the connections to russia extend inside the trump family. president trump's son-in-law and close adviser jared kushner met with russia's ambassador and with sergei gorkov, the president of russia's state owned bank veb, who is under u.s. sanctions. >> jared did a job during the transition in the campaign where he was a conduit to leaders, and that's until we had a state department, a functioning place

for people to go. he wants to make sure that he's very clear about the role that he played, who he talked to, and that's it. >> reporter: and the ties extend as well to the very highest levels of the trump campaign. former trump campaign manager paul manafort worked for years in ukraine for pro-russian politician viktor yanukovych. manafort also partnered with a russian oligarch on business deals. and according to the associated press, he worked for russian oligarch oleg derapaska to benefit the putin government. manafort denies his work was representing russian interests. >> as far as the yanukovych administration is concerned you will see if you do any fact checking that i was the person that negotiated the framework which is based upon which ukraine is now a part of europe. that was my role. that's what i did. and when it was completed, i left. >> reporter: and now trump's own attorney general, jeff sessions, has had to recuse himself from russia investigations because he also met with russia's ambassador, twice.

despite testifying that he never had contact with the russians during the campaign. >> in retrospect i should have slowed down and said but i did meet one russian official a couple of times. that would be the ambassador. >> reporter: finally, among others, there is long-time trump associate roger stone, who communicated with someone known as guccifer 2.0 through private messages on twitter. the u.s. intelligence community says that the guccifer 2.0 persona is actually a front for russian intelligence and claimed responsibility for hacking the dnc before the election. it is russia's election-related hacking that is at the center of fbi and house and senate intelligence committee investigations that continue. >> and jim sciutto joins us now along with cnn's jessica schneider. jim, you have some information on where the senate is on the investigation. what are you hearing? >> well, that's right, the republican chairman of the senate intelligence committee, that is senator richard burr, asked today if he might question the former national security adviser susan rice regarding

these allegations that she improperly unmasked the identities of americans caught up in incidental surveillance. he said that yes, if the intelligence leads them there they will call her as a witness to his committee and ask her questions about that. so a possible expansion of this investigation yet again. >> and jessica, what are the next steps for the house intelligence committee in the investigation because they seem to be somewhat more on track. >> yeah, a little bit, anderson. the house committee finally showing some movement after those two weeks of turmoil. in fact, democrats say they've cut a deal with republicans and they've agreed on that list of witnesses they plan to interview. the witness list actually could include trump associates. republican congressman peter king today alluded to the likelihood that both parties on the committee have agreed to interviewing people like former trump campaign manager paul manafort, adviser roger stone, carter page, even former national security adviser michael flynn. chairman devin nunes, though, said they could bring in witnesses as soon as two weeks from now but cautioned that timeline's a bit optimistic.

democrats haven't agreed on a schedule yet, anderson. >> and paul ryan seemed optimistic with the committee at least. >> he did. he said today he's met with committee members. he said that all the committee members have the speaker's full confidence. and then speaker ryan reiterated that the committee has to work on a bipartisan basis, something they haven't exactly been doing. he wants them to get to the bottom of things and investigate in his words all things russia. anderson? >> jessica snyder, jim sciutto, thanks. want to bring the panel in. jeffly record, carl bernstein, juliet kayyem, van jones and jeffrey miller. jeff, it the administration had just from the get-go laid out on the table there was this meeting, this meeting, this meeting, would it have been better? would they have avoided this now 70-plus days, however long it's been? >> if this were some sort of organized event, then probably yes. but frankly -- >> if the transition was organized? >> no, no, no. i mean the whole business about they talked to the russians. >> okay.

>> i think these things all happened in sort of disparate connections here, there, everywhere. and so i'm not sure that they know at this point who met with whom. i mean, because they're not watching the private life of, say, roger stone or carter page or what have you. so it's not as if they had like a log of what everybody did so they could just lay it out. >> carl, do you buy that? >> well, the most significant thing that we have seen is the attempt by the president of the united states and those around him to impede and obstruct the investigations. instead of saying, hey, here's everything we know, here are our logs, here's everything that we know, here's where i the president of the united states have said to my campaign officials and to my family go down there, tell those committees everything that you know. that's not what has happened. trump keeps saying that people are trying to delegitimize his presidency through these investigations. he is the legitimate president

of the united states, and the only thing -- and certified by the electoral college and nothing is going to change that. the only thing that is delegitimizing his presidency are his actions in trying to inhibit and impede these investigations because he's calling into question for republicans and democrats alike why not open up and show us what is truthful here. >> you know, jason, now you have this new story broken by the "washington post" about erik prince meeting with a russian close to vladimir putin with the kind of mediation of the premier from the uae and his national security adviser. the administration is calling it flimsy. but according to the "washington post," the fbi is investigating. and again it's one of these many odd unexplained contacts. we should say they say there was a meeting but it has nothing to do with trump. >> in reading the "washington post" story there were a couple

of things that jumped out. number one, mr. prince had no role with the campaign, no role with the administration -- >> according to the "washington post," though, not only had he donated a quarter of a million dollars at least after the convention but he was in trump tower in december and so was this -- >> anderson, but there are a lot of people that come into trump tower and i didn't see him in it so i can't speak to that point. but the fact of the matter is this was a meeting that looks like it was set up by someone from the uae and it looks like the uae person was doing it to prop themselves up. but again -- >> at trump tower. >> but if the fundamental point of this investigation is to get to some supposed coordination between the campaign and some foreign government, then immediately upon leaving that meeting mr. prince would have had to have walked out, gotten into his blackwater time machine, gone back months, and then hatched some devious plot to go and influence the election. the fact is after months of the democrats pushing this speculation there has been

one -- there has not been one piece of evidence saying that there's any coordination between the campaign and some foreign entity. i mean, this is just -- at a certain point here this is just a wild goose chase. >> let me add one thing here to contradict that. i know beyond any doubt from people who worked in the trump campaign on national security areas that indeed erik prince was a part of the campaign, did see president-elect trump, that -- >> who said that? >> i'm not going to say who said it. but believe me, i think you have the ability, sir, to go find out -- >> when you say part of the campaign -- >> carl, i never heard his name come up a single time during the campaign. >> i suggest you go back and talk to those who were involved in the national security area of the campaign and of the transition and you will find as i and many other journalists have that erik prince indeed had a role, talked to a number of people including the president-elect and indeed

bragged about that role. i think this idea that to cut what is really true out of the story in a defensive way is hurting everybody's ability to find out what the truth is here. and the truth might be innocuous. but let us get there. >> i've got to jump in on one point real quick because specifically the allegation here is that there's some type of coordination between the campaign and some foreign entity. that's the allegation. but now you're mentioning transition. you're mentioning some other time. i mean, the fact of the matter is in all of my time on the trump campaign i never heard mr. prince being brought up or brought in to discussions. did he call or speak with somebody during the transition time? i don't know. i can't say that definitively because i'm not every single call. but i can tell you i did work for the president for a series -- or a stretch of eight months and i think your information on this is just bad. >> van jones, let me bring you -- we haven't heard from you. greg mill of the "washington post" who broke this story about erik prince and the seychelles and his meeting he said his sources indicate it's hard to

imagine the crown prince from the uae doing something like this without a green light from people in the trump team or the putin team if not the primaries themselves. yet we should point out this is hardly a smoking gun. this is a meeting that erik prince says took place but had nothing to do with trump. >> you know, chaos has its costs. it is entirely conceivable -- i don't think so. but it is entirely conceivable that all of these co-ink-a-dinks are just co-ink-a-dinks. it's just weird. but chaos has its cost. the trump campaign has been run -- was run in such a crazy way, in such a scattershot way the white house itself is being -- >> and won. >> it has its benefits to. but it was run in such a scattershot way. jared kushner is on his tricycle

going all around the world. nobody knows what he's doing. and so it's almost -- it almost seems like a good strategy to have so much crazy stuff happening that you can say look, nobody knows what's going on, so you can't blame us. but i think it smells to me like a smoke screen. it seems like somewhere underneath all of this nonsense there is a consistent pattern of russian influence. and then a desperate effort to conceal and to distract. but you know, going back to you guys, you're there. you don't know who's involved because i'm not even sure trump knows everybody that's involved because this whole -- it was a chaos candidate. jeb bush was right about one thing, and now he's a chaos president. >> juliet, it did seem -- it certainly looks chaotic when you have someone like carter page, who was named by donald trump during the transition as a national security adviser, then it turns out he never actually met donald trump and despite claims made by carter page in

moscow about attending meetings with donald trump he was really talking about going to rallies with thousands of people i think in bismarck, north dakota and considered that a meeting because he was using the russian term for meetings which seems -- again, it just seems kind of like a ludicrous explanation. so it does seem somewhat chaotic that the president names this guy as his national security adviser but in truth he's never met him. probably never got any advice from him at all. and then finally he was booted out of the campaign. >> yeah, i mean, this idea, though, this notion that trump is allowed to sort of become president and be president on training wheels, that somehow it's okay that all this madness is going on and that carter page is running around the world and manafort did this but we fired him, it's just wrong. he is president of the united states. and the most k say right now is that where there is smoke there is smoke. in other words, the idea of dismissing it at this stage

seems both unfair to the trump administration which clearly does have speculation around it but also unfair to the process by which investigators and congressional committees look at this. look, investigations like this are not a straight line. we don't hear about a story in the "washington post" and all of a sudden we're in the oval office to collusion. they take -- i'm looking at the chart now. they take a lot of twists and turns. and i think patience is really important. but what is also important is this sort of rush to judgment that trump absolutely did nothing wrong because there's no proof of him doing anything wrong is very premature. and so if we can just let these investigations go. and they may lead to collusion. right? and that's one end of the spectrum. they may all be benign. and in between there might be questions about financial dealings and other things like that. >> we've got to take a break. coming up next, is this smoke or a smoke screen? president obama's national security adviser susan right and how the trump administration has

painted her as the true culprit. we'll take it up with the panel. and why so many advertisers have bailed on bill o'reilly in the last few days and whether it has the potential to seriously sink his program. my business was built with passion... but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet? the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom... let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong. i like it.

promote that guy. get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed. when you book direct at choicehotels.com. book now. (de♪p breath) (phone ringing)

they'll call back. no one knows your ford better than ford and ford service. right now, during the big tire event, get a $140 rebate by mail, on four select tires. ♪ does it look like i'm done?yet? shouldn't you be at work? [ mockingly ] "shouldn't you be at work?" todd. hold on. [ engine revs ] arcade game: fist pump! your real bike's all fixed. man, you guys are good! well, we are the number-one motorcycle insurer in the country. -wait. you have a real motorcycle? and real insurance, with 24-hour customer support. arcade game: wipeout! oh! well... i retire as champion. game hog! champion.

the leaking of their names. the leaking, boiy the way, is conflated with unmasking. one is illegal. the other is part and parcel of analyzing intelligence. the current link to the administration's form of thinking is former obama national security adviser susan rice who spoke out today on msnbc. >> the notion which some people are trying to suggest that by asking for the identity of an american person that is the same as leaking it is completely false. there's no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking. >> previously when asked by pbs's judy woodruff about incidental collection as described that day by the house intel chairman devin nunes susan rice said, "i know nothing about

this." back now with the panel. carl, i mean, when you see these two statements by susan rice saying a short time ago i know nothing about this and there she's talking about saying she did nothing improper and there's unmasking and there's leaking. >> it looks to me like she's contradicted herself perhaps. but it's also a question of a total red herring here. what this story is really about is a foreign power, an adversary of the united states, trying to hijack our election. president donald trump has acknowledged that the russias tried to do that. what is trying to be found out by legitimate investigators and the press is what happened, was there a role by the trump campaign, his family, his associates, in what the russians did. and instead of trying to cooperate with these investigations and let the people of the united states know what if anything happened involving him and those around him the president of the united states and his associates are trying to inhibit every bit of investigation and trying to make

susan rice or the press or, quote, leaks the issue instead of the conduct of the president and the people around him. it's absurd. i hate to bring up the example of watergate, and i really do, but it is as if the example of watergate is that the press was responsible for what happened in watergate, not the president of the united states. >> which back at the time -- >> our conduct at the "washington post" was the real issue and deep throat and leaks were the real issues. >> and wasn't nixon trying to do that at the time? >> of course he did. the other thing is we keep hearing the word "leaks." usually, including in this story, reporters are working hard as hell to try and find out what happened. there is nobody that i know of that is jumping over transoms and bringing reporters tons of documents that show what happened with the russians. this is about reporters trying to extract information under very difficult circumstances from people with little pieces of information. it's called reporting. not leaking. >> so jeff, i mean, do you see a

continuum of the white house attempting to divert with susan rice now, ms. farkas last week, before that -- you know, the morning of the house intelligence committee donald trump was tweeting about hillary clinton and uranium deals in russia. >> right. >> that seems like a lot of shiny objects being thrown around. >> i just feel that there is now enough out there all the way across the board that we should really get into this. and it strikes me as interesting that you have paul manafort and carter page and roger stone saying i want to volunteer and come testify and you ask susan rice, well, you know, i'm not sure, da, da, da, da. let's get it all out. get all these people out there. what did they know? what, to borrow a phrase, what did the president know? when did he know it? and what did susan rice know? and what did president obama know? >> jeffrey, what's the issue here? what's the central issue -- >> there's two issues. and i know you want it to be the

russians and collusion. >> collusion. not collusion. the russians. and what occurred. it's not about the press. this is a story about the national security -- >> let me finish. >> it is about the national security of the united states being endangered -- >> correct. >> -- and what the russians did. that's what people are trying to find out. and that's what's being inhibited. if in the course of this people talked to people in the press, and i'm not talking about susan rice in this question of unmasking, which is a totally different question, that's not the central issue here. >> but you see, carl, this is what my friends carl on my side the liberal narrative. is that -- >> for you the leaks are more important than -- or as important -- >> i think they're both important. >> you think the leaks to reporters are as important as russia being involved in the u.s. election? >> no, i don't. >> that's the point. >> i don't. because they're getting the leaks. and frankly look, i've been around washington -- the town leaks like a sieve. i'm just saying classified information, deep throat

notwithstanding, somebody could go to jail for this and should go to jail for this. >> i want to thank everybody. quick programming note tomorrow at 9:00 p.m. eastern pacific on cnn van jones holds a "messy truth" town hall. his special guests are arnold schwarzenegger. just ahead tonight our breaking news on capitol hill. the latest on republicans' efforts to reboot their health care bill. the freedom caucus once again a pivotal player. i'll talk with one of their members, congressman tom garrett, ahead. or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view, it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious.

while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine.

alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®.

there's breaking news tonight on capitol hill where vice president mike pence is meeting right now with key republican lawmakers about finding a way to pass a new gop health care bill. last night the vice president presented a new proposal to the house freedom caucus, the group of conservatives who wouldn't back the bill the last time. jeff zeleny joins me now with

the latest. how serious is the white house about a new health care plan? president trump didn't address it today. >> that's a good sense. the president talked at a couple of public speeches today. the words health care did not come out of his mouth. so we hear from the white house that the president is intent on reviving this and the vice president as you said is up on capitol hill as we speak. he was there last night as well. but you don't get the sense there's a full tlo-throated eff here at the white house for the president to get this done. one of the reasons is the same issues are standing now that happened a couple weeks ago. if you push this bull too far to the right, the moderates won't be into it. if you change it too far to the left, the house freedom caucus won't be into it. but a lot has happened since the big collapse of the health care bill. the presidential has gone after the house freedom caucus members. what the vice president is doing at this hour is trying to reassure these republicans that look, we want to get this done eventually. but boy, anderson, this was anything but a full court press

here today. >> is there a strategy that the more the white house talks about health care the less time they have to respond to questions about russia or is there concern that if they talk about it too much or if the president is too much out in front on this and just lets the vice president work behind the scenes that if it doesn't -- if it doesn't happen the second time around then there's no blowback on him? >> there's going to be blowback on the president regardless of this. and i think a couple of things are happening here. one, the white house is very aware of what the electorate is thinking, republican voters out there. they've been wanting this as their priority for, gosh, seven, eight years here. so republican members of congress and democrats as well are on the cusp of going back to their districts for a two-week spring recess period here come friday. they want to show some motion. but anderson, there's no question. today was a day of changing the subject at the white house. the top advisers here at the white house want the president to be surrounded by news other than russia.

it's been all but consuming over the last few weeks or so. they had them with friendly audiences, hearing campaign applause, campaign-style applause, talking about infrastructure, health care, other things. but at the end of the day russia of course hasn't gone away. the question is how much has that impacted the legislative agenda? and it actually has because this president has less juice than he had a month or two ago and we are not even at the 100-day point tonight, anderson. >> jeff zeleny. jeff, thanks very much. congressman tom garrett is a member of the house freedom caucus. i speak to him earlier. congressman garrett, you and the freedom caucus have been meeting with sprierpt pence trying to put together a health care bill that will get through the house. pence is coming back up to the hill again to talk to your group as well as the moderate tuesday group. what do you want to hear from the vice president to vote yes on a health care bill? >> so there are three things -- there are two things primarily that hung us up last time. we talked about essential benefits but the community rating was also one that i think a lot of the members of the freedom caucus had a hang-up on. what we've had so far is i think

with good intent and good faith a series of hypotheticals. if this then what? and so we're not where we want to be yet but we're trying to get there. and i think that's why the vice president's been so attentive and we look forward to talking to him again. >> the proposals from the freedom group that would allow states to apply for federal waivers exempting them, certain mandates like essential health benefits, is that -- isn't that going to not get moderates on board? is there a sweet spot for this? >> yeah, i think there is. what the president's team has come back with is how about if we power this down to the states? if you can get to an essential benefits removal, you can get to a community rating removal, you can get to a work requirement, that sort of thing, but it's powered down to the states, we like that. i will say the way it was originally drafted or presented to me was that it would be at the desk of the governor of the various states. i would submit that it belongs in the purview of the legislature. but i'm not going to let little

tiny things get in the way of success here. >> there was some talk when it failed the last time about not trying to do one kind of overarching, you know, health care repeal and replace and trying to kind of go piece by piece by piece over time. it doesn't seem like that's now on the table. >> well, you know, look, there are 435 members of the house, 100 in the senate. i've said all along, i said on your show i think more than once, what i'd love to see is a repeal consistent with that which tom price put forward in 2015 that every single republican voted for. and then you take, you know, the ahca -- and i believe i could vote for 18 out of 20 pieces of it if it were broken up piecemeal. again, we've said the road to hell is paved with omnibus legislation. it's funny because it's true. >> what do you say to those who say they believe this is essentially a smoke-screen from the trump administration to try to distract from the failure the first time around on health care? they're trying to make up for not having a plan b. >> look, there's a certain component of american society that right now if president

trump cured cancer they wouldn't like it because it would have to do with president trump. if you want to create a smoke-screen to distract from having not succeeded on your first run at health care, by all means don't talk about health care. >> you know, it's interesting. you were saying you'd vote for 18 out of 20 of the items on this are things you can support probably right now. for a lot of lawmakers that would be enough. i mean, to say that you know what, i can never get 100% of everything i want, got to compromise a little bit, 18 out of 20 isn't bad. >> well, 16 ounces of -- with one ounce of strychnine will still kill you. there's certain things we're not going to swallow. the way the tax credits were initially structured i thought created an entitlement. the core functions of title 1 were still there. we know that if we remove the community rating if we remove essential benefits that we'll see premiums go down for the vast bulk of the people. that's what we're trying to do, is make health care affordable. turn this paradigm into one where you don't have coverage, where you can't actually get

care because you can't pay your deductball but one where you actually have access to care. and that's what the argument should have been all along. >> you know, last week obviously president trump took to twitter calling out the leader of the freedom caucus as well as congressman meadows as well as congressman jordan and labrador. the president's director of social media urged a primary campaign against gop congressman justin amash. how much lingering bitterness is there? i don't know if bitterness is too strong a word. but what are the lingering feelings between freedom caucus members and the white house? >> i'll tell you that i've led soldiers into a designated hazardous duty area. i've tried murder trials. i've done a lot of stuff in my life. and i can't describe the pressure that i felt during this process. and i'm one of 435. >> really? >> i believe the president is -- absolutely. but i think the president is trying to do what he thinks is best for america. he didn't get it done the way he wanted to get it done the first time and he was frustrated. that makes him human just like the rest of us. he has my forgiveness and my support. but he doesn't have my vote until we get a bill that will be

consistent with what i told the voters who i ran for election in front of. >> bottom line, what do you think the chances are the republicans are going to be able to get this done? >> we're going to pass a health -- look, we've already passed the mccarron ferguson repeal. we've passed association plans. we're starting to work on this around the edges. we should declare victory on bills like that. we haven't. i'm not sure why. but if you break this thing down into subcomponent parts we could pass the vast bulk of it now. i understand there are some concerns with the rules of the senate. i also know that the jordan repeal bill that mirrors the tom price 2015 repeal bill passed the senate last time. so i'm curious what the difference is now other than a president who will actually sign it. >> congressman garrett, i appreciate your time. thanks. >> god bless you and thank you for the opportunity. have a great day. just ahead, the advertisers fleeing bill o'reilly's program over claims of sexual harassment are growing. the number of advertisers now reaching 20 tonight. details ahead. [ engine revs ]

[ screams ] [ shouting ] brace yourself! this is crazy! [ tires screeching ]

whoo! boom baby! rated pg-13. [ screams ] the intelligence reports that the white house has portrayed as evidence of surveillance abuses by the obama administration will soon be available to the full house and senate intelligence committees. that is according to the top democrat on the house intelligence committee, congressman adam schiff. he also said this today. >> i find it more than ironic that some of the same people who are so vociferous in condemning leaks of classified information are condemning me for not leaking information about these -- >> i know you've got to -- >> those comments follow a presidential tweet on sunday. the real story turns out to be surveillance and leaking. find the leakers, said the president. whether that's a deflection or a real complaint, there's one

thing no one can dispute. leakers, well, they've shaped history. >> the story behind the story in the unmasking of deep throat. >> reporter: he was the most famous anonymous source of the 20th century. >> just follow the money. >> reporter: mark felt, the high-ranking fbi official who for more than three decades was known to the world only as deep throat. after helping fuel bob woodward and carl bernstein's blockbuster reporting on watergate. >> therefore, i shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. >> reporter: but felt was neither the first nor the last washington figure to rock the country with insider knowledge. in the early 1970s a military analyst named daniel ellsberg leaked a top secret defense department study to the "new york times." the resulting bombshell, known as the pentagon papers, revealed the government had lied to congress and the american people about the scope of the vietnam war. >> the smallest chance of having some effect on the war was worth my going to prison for the rest

of my life. >> reporter: charged with espionage and facing 115 years behind bars, ellsberg went free after a federal judge dismissed the case, citing improper government conduct. in 2003 conservative writer and former cnn host robert novak wrote a "washington post" column blowing the cover of cia operative valerie plame. >> my name was intended to be leaked in retaliation against my husband, who was a fierce critic of the bush administration and the iraq war. >> reporter: then vice president dick cheney's chief of staff scooter libby ultimately was convicted in connection with the leak. his sentence commuted by president bush. seven years later wikileaks posted hundreds of thousands of classified documents on the wars in afghanistan and iraq. a young army private now known as chelsea manning was sentenced to 35 years in a military prison for giving the documents to wikileaks. just before leaving office president obama ordered manning to be released in may of this year.

>> the sentence that she received was very disproportional -- disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received. >> the privacy of -- >> reporter: but there's been no presidential reprieve for edward snowden. the former nsa contractor whose 2013 revelation of secret government surveillance programs left him fleeing charges of espionage -- >> this guy's a bad guy. and you know, there is still a thing called execution. >> reporter: and accepting asylum in of all places russia. >> well, a lot to discuss. back with us jeffrey lord and carl bernstein. jeffrey, we saw deep throat there. do you think deep throat should have stayed silent? >> you know, this is a difficult question because you know where this led. the problem i have with this is the classified nature of this. i can see my friends at the harrisburg patriot news editorially and journalistically waiting to see if i'm going to say they shouldn't have leaks.

>> what about daniel ellsberg who leaked classified information -- >> right. what bothers me here is it's not up to a private citizen in the government somewhere to make the decision unilaterally that they're going to leak classified information. i mean, that is, at least in the case we're currently talking about, that is against the law. the espionage act. that's what troubles me. on the other hand, i am a first amendment crazo here, and i want carl to have the right or you to have the right if you've got a story, get it out there. i mean, the onus is on the government to stop the leaking. it's not on the press. and no reporter should ever be going to jail, period. >> carl, it's an interesting thing. there are leaks which lead to important changes. daniel ellsberg, you know, was revealing lies that the government had been perpetrating for years. >> look, real whistleblowers know that they risk going to jail. it's a risk that they take. ellsberg took that risk.

mark felt took that risk. but let me say something about the mythology of leaks, including deep throat. most of our sources in watergate and the important ones were republicans who worked for richard nixon. the information that we got from deep throat primarily was to confirm what we had learned already from, for instance, the treasurer of the committee to re-elect the president. so in the current instance i think it's very important for people watching shows such as this to understand the reporterial process which is about trying to get to the best obtainable version of the truth, not to come to a conclusion that convicts donald trump, that says donald trump is innocent of something. we're trying to get to what has happened or has not happened. and what we are seeing is for our process to be called into question as the central issue in and that is the problem here, we

should not be nor should the whistleblow ee eer be the issue, all of it is endangered by a hostile power. >> there have been plenty of instances where newspapers and news organizations have gotten information about you know, classified events and the government you know -- and gone to the government gofor a comme, and the government said look if you publish it, it will put operations in danger, and they have held back on reporting it responsibly. >> i would be interested in your thought on this, jeffrey, every day on most presidencies, the president of the united states and those who work for him in the national security bureaucracy quote, leak national

security information on background as it's called to reporters who cover the white house, the state department, et cetera. the defense department. that is their process. many of the same people that we are watching decrying leaks up on capitol hill, all of them practically have been anonymous sources quote leaking classified information at one time or another in their careers, there is so much hypocrisy about this, what about that, jeffrey? >> we're going to have to take another time out. we're out of time, jeffrey lord, thank you. carl bernstein, up next, more on the o'reilly factor. we'll be right back. and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

but shouldn't it be about firsts?d in zeros. and seconds... how about adding a third? we think there's a bajillion ways to measure success. and whether you have hundreds or millions... we think you deserve the financial freedom to sleep like this at night. this is the new success story. and at t-i-a-a, we're with you. start today at t-i-a-a dot org. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do.

which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. well fox news and their prime time host undergoing pressure, with many pulling their commercials from "the o'reilly factor." with the allegations of several women accusing him. for the second night in a row he did not address the accusations, and the fox news saying we value our partners and are working with them to address their current concerns about the o'reilly factor.

joining us is host of "reliable sources," and cnn's legal analyst, laura coats. >> this is very unusual, with many saying they're going to distance themselves from o'reilly. others say we don't want to be anywhere near o'reilly. glenn beck was the subject of an ad, eventually his show, fox, went away. >> some of these are not new, you know the one that he allegedly paid out i think 9 million -- according to "the new york times" $9 million from his own pocket to a book -- or a producer, that has been known for quite a while and he seemed to have weathered that. >> what is new is the spotlight, bill cost by, roger ailes, who resigned under pressure from

sexual allegations from many women, including carlson and many others, and now fox has said it cleaned up its house, o'reilly is still the top man there, the question is, is he invincible. >> laura, how did all the past settlements from fox affect other lawsuits that fox is facing and may face, because when you hear the sheer volume of lawsuits and the behavior going on there, i just can't believe that this went on for so long, it's just stunning. >> you know that shock and awe that everyone had was one that was shared by fox news, with the gretchen carlson case, saying we didn't really know there was this hostile work environment and that was one of many things that employers across the country clinged to with both hands, saying if there was a problem it was an isolated

incident, or we're not liable because we have no track record, well, now that there is a track record, you can't hide behind that claim of ignorance any more. and going forward, it affects every potential future allegation and lawsuit against fox saying listen, this is so ingrained that you renewed the contract of one of the person s who was the biggest offenders. >> and anybody in the public eye is a magnet for lawsuits, with all due respect, i was sued once years ago, not anything to do with the work place, somebody fell in my house. >> that is the case for sean hannity, anybody on tv, news or entertainment. >> these are all very specific kinds of lawsuits. >> exactly and i can't point to anybody else in television news that had this pattern of lawsuits and settlements. >> laura, if this person was accused of this behavior and

paid out settlements in any other business in a corporation, i guess the question is would they be allowed to stay? >> they would be a liability and therefore the employer would be liable. and so it would tend to show you that other corporations and other environments, this behavior is not acceptable practice. and so while it may now be an industry setter within the organization that is the problem they have to face. a hostile work environment claim is very difficult to prove with just innuendos and anecdotes. now you have a company who is aware of a pattern of practice and behavior and a series of women who make the allegations, it starts to smell like fact and culture, and it's follow the money. >> and how much money they could lose from advertisers. >> laura coats, brian seltzer,

thank you. we'll be right back. you get more money. that's what you could get. h&r block with watson. get your taxes won. sorry, just getting a quote on motorcycle insurance from progressive. yeah? yeah, they have safe rider discounts, and with total loss coverage, i get a new bike if mine's totaled. but how's their customer service? great. 24/7. just like here. meat loaf! [dings bell] just like here. anybody got a pack... that needs leadin'? serving all your motorcycle insurance needs. now, that's progressive. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress.

who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®.

time to hand things over to "cnn tonight," and don lemon. >> russia bombshell, a member of the house intelligence committee warns somebody may go to jail. this is cnn tonight, i'm don lemon lemon. >> my impression is that people will probably be charged and i think people will probably go to jail. >> that is as president obama's national security adviser susan rice fights back, saying she never leaked any names, and never would. is this another distraction? but first i