see the president of the united states heading into the white house with king abdallah of jordan, the first lady and the queen rania. jordan coming into the white house a couple days after the president of egypt was here.

huge meeting for the president in mar-a-lago, florida. he will meet with the president of china. and the united states nations a big day of breaking news. testing time for the commander in chief who has been on the job just 76 days, an apparent chemical weapons attack in syria, scores of children and others. pyongyang patience exhausted. pressure for the president on two big fronts, pressure to consider a much needed response. first at the united nations this morning, an emergency securities council session. >> when the united nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of state that we are compelled to take our own action. for the sake of the victims, i hope the rest of the council is finally willing to do the same.

the world needs to see the use of chemical weapons and the fact that they will not be tolerated. >> remember those words from the united states ambassador nikki haley saying the united states could feel compelled to act if the president does not. the meeting at the united nations a complication, bashar al assad's protector, russia, why the rush? why doesn't the council slow down? again, we're going to hear from the president on this. yesterday, he ishled an attack blaming the attack on president obama's hawkish policy. saying the president-elect trump white house may emhave emboldened assad by no longer demanding regime change. >> it's my belief if you're bashar al assad and you read that it is no longer a priority of the united states to have you removed from power, i believe that is an incentive to act with impunity. >> with us to share their reporting and insights, ashley parker of the "washington post,"

michael bender of "the wall street journal." terry bannon of 538. and bloomberg politics. i want to start with what we heard a moment ago from the ambassador to the united nations. this is a candidate trump and president trump relukt tants to react. nicki naleigh said there at the united nations she was essentially laying out what we used to call the bush doctrine. either the world acts or we will act alone. i assume she will not go out there and freelance. i assume we'll hear the same from president trump with king abdullah in the next hour. >> that's exactly right. nikki haley has seemed to operate from a distance from the administration. she said previously we're putting russia on notice. we don't trust them, we believe they meddled the u.s. election what is not exactly what the president is saying but at this point, it seems like there may be a call to action. and the president will actually have to make a decision and it

will be interesting to see how much in line he is with what she just laid out. >> is it would be pretty hard and cause a diplomatic dustup of its own if the president of the united states didn't back up what she just said? >> it would. but it wouldn't be unprecedented here. we've kind of seen different approaches from different members of the administration. ambassador haley is definitely owning this, not just what she said, but holding up the pictures from the victims with from the chemical weapons attacks would give the trump administration own decision. we'll wait to see what he says, trump, just the other day, you know, seemed to double-down on his sort of isolationist daen i tendencies. we haven't heard from secretary tillerson. >> and 75 days in when they're facing a lot of pressure. we'll get to north korea in a minute. and turmoil in the white house again, we're told that steve

bannon the chief political strategist has a seat on the national security council. but we'll get to that in a minute. it's actually noted it has seemed at times, nikki haley a more tradition am hawkish establishment republican seems at times she's trying to pull the president along to be tougher against russia. to say things that are more traditional orthodoxcy in the republican party. it's a big moment for her. she just assumed the president of the security council. to michael's point we'll show you the images over the hour. they're heinous and horrible to see images of young children hurt in the attack. nikki haley decided as she made her plea to the united nations to be quite dramatic. let's watch. >> yesterday morning, we awoke to pictures to children, foaming at the mouth, suffering

convulsions, being carried in the arms of desperate parents. we saw rows of lifeless bodies, some still in diapers, some with visible scars of a chemical weapons attack. look at those pictures. >> that's drawing a pretty sharp line. >> look at those pictures. >> so, there has always been this kind of natural strain of tension inside the trump administration between the kind of nationalistic threat and messaging, we've got to take care of our own first. and the idea of projecting strength in the contrast of obama who president trump would repeatedly say during his candidacy didn't show his strength and was weak. and that was a signal to world leaders. yesterday seems to have been a tipping point inside the trump administration. however he's going to go has yet to be determined. one of the real questions about how all of this comes together

is that on president trump's initial approach towards russia, on president trump's initial approach towards the idea that we're not going to insert ourselves into what other countries do and on president trump's initial approach to human rights none of the policy has been tracking in this direction. so, if yesterday was indeed a turning point, it sets off a series of recalculations both inside the white house, the oval office and the national security council where we wille now see the kind of mcmaster/dina powell theory of how this will conduct itself playing out. we may be seeing that now. >> of the last ambassador giving us a speech saying this carnage here, a very direct, angry speech on what is happening in syria, now, a policy change. nikki haley gave a similar kind of speech. donald trump and barack obama neither one of them have taken aggressive action to remove assad.

has that now changed? >> that's a fascinating question, let's be honest, the united states under the obama administration lost credibility. the united states drew a red line with president obama about chemical weapons attacks, but he did not knowdo anything with assad. a lot of inaction by the obama administration. i think what we heard from nikki haley i think the question is does the trump administration want to end up in the same box with having the word look at what the united states says it's just words. this is a decision that the president will make by listening what does it mean with steve bannon, eyebrows raised, from chief political strategist in the administration someone who thinks george w. bush made a mistake in iraq. who doesn't think that it is and should be worried about its economy. the white house says he was there to help former national security adviser michael flynn to organize the place, to send

more power back to the pentagon, more power to the state department. they say mission accomplished, i would say that's spin. but you guys sitting at the table for the white house, what does this mean? >> well, part of this is say reshuffling of the white house and then settling in. i think think there's truth from the points about steve bannon. steve bannon likes to have his hands in almost every issue in the white house but the problems with flynn were early and often for them. and early and often within their own team and steve bannon and jared kushner were called in quite frequently to settle down the secretary of state or secretary of defense over how flynn was handling the nsa. and there's truth that bannon was on that council as reassurance to others, there's no question about steve's ambition and interests in wanting to be involved in those issues. we'll see how this plays out. i think we're seeing this on a

couple of different levels. and that they're just now figuring out the staffing issues. >> but this is a white house also, more than any white house, where rules and titles are absolutely interchangeable and in many cases meaningless, you see secretary of state secretary of state as secretary of state and but jared kushner is essentially secretary of state. i don't think bannon has walk-privileges where he friend can call the president late night at and influence policy and means he won't be involved in decisions he wants to be involved in. >> look, my colleague this morning, a lot of the implications are still being borne out. but steve bannon retains the clearances and steve bannon reserves the ability to sit down in a national security meeting anytime he wants to. but if you have a storied military career and you want to set the policy, a couple of

things happened, the bannon announcement happened as bau baustert was moved back in. >> i don't think that is, but in this case, people are now talking about foreign policy like nikki haley agree more with john mccain or marco rubio than the president himself. but the people who are speaking like nikki haley doll view the u.s. agency the leader of the free world, the more traditional world. and the more influence they gain and the diminishing influence on foreign policy say big story. and i think potentially means we're going in different directions with foreign policy. >> i think you're right. i think sometimes we overemphasize titles in washington. the president never served in the military. most of the senior staff never served in military.

it is interesting to watch, plus what we know about this president, he's a loyaltyist. and ivanka trump, whether steve bannon, he likes people loyal to him. so they're his antenna to what's happening in the administration. >> and that was known for trump voters. they understand that dynamic. you're saying this is a guy without any political experience but he will put good people around him. >> we're waiting now. we're going to see the president of the united states, you saw him going into the white house with king abdallah of jordan. we're going to see tape of that in a moment. we'll play you that tape as soon as we can. this is someone who knows the neighborhood. a a traditional ally in about la. there are good choices here. there are no good choice for obama or president trump. when it comes to assad. they publicly said whether it was accepted knowledge in the obama administration, assad is not going anywhere in the short term especially if he gets

economic and political help from pru russia, you heard political hawks this morning saying do something. take out command and control centers. pocket the air strips. crater them. take them out. is this a president of the united states who is also going to deal tomorrow with the chinese president and the possibility of provocation of north korea, is this a president who is prepared to do that with syria? >> well, you have a president who has two conflicting world views. he cares more about the projection of strength and about winning, even though that's a different way to apply to war. but he does not view his role the way president obama did or george w. bush did as exploiting democracy or american values abroad. you'll see this scum into sort of a stark conflict as he grapples with what to do in

syria. >> he said i don't want to be president of the world. but the president said, i know you want to focus on the economy, guess what the world has a way of crossing your desk. we'll take you inside the white house with the president's meeting with the king of jordan. and also, for republicans, the mere mention of one former obama administration's name inspires big questions about the big spy novel playing out here in washington. getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com.

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. welcome back. just moments away from an inside look at the white house. president trump meeting this hour with king abdallah of jordan. an important conversation anyway, all the more urgent today because of the heinous

apparent chemical weapons attack in syria yesterday. if you've seen the pictures, children among the scores of people killed and named in this attack. president trump's ambassador saying that the united states won't act but the united states might feel compelled to act. the president with a press conference in the next hour. stay with cnn. we'll bring you that live as the president himself has issued a paper statement, we have not heard from him at all. he will meet with king abdallah. he'll also have a press conference in the next hour. a line drawn thatting if the u.n. will not act she feels that united states might feel compelled to act. let's listen. thank you very much. hold it, hold it, hold it. i just wanted to thank our friends, our great friends,

these are very troubled times in the middle east. and we see what happened just recently yesterday in syria, horrible, horrible thing. unspeakable. but i want to thank you both for being at the white house. and we're going to have some very interesting discussions. >> okay. thank you very much. >> syria attack of the chemical weapons, you say it's terrible, do you plan to take any action? >> i condemn it, it's terrible. you'll see. >> you'll see. the final words from the president of the united states there. reporters being ushered out of

the oval office trying to ask will there be any action from the united states related to the attack in syria that the president was talking about. he called it horrible, he called it unspeakable. the king of jordan sitting silent. the first lady as well. horrible and unspeakable but he didn't give any clue whether he will embrace the words of his ambassador to the united nations. >> it's also a question whether or not the american people are -- how they're going to feel about this, right? these images remind me of the isis beheadings back in 2014 that focused americans for the first time on isis. but that still wasn't enough to get congress to vote on obama's request for military authorization. will this be any different? will the sort of rhetoric about these images resonate back home and convince the trump administration to take action? >> and convince the president that maybe understanding the mood in the country that

sometimes a president has to look a country in the eye and say i know you don't want to do this, i know we've been in the middle east a long time, but i feel a moshl obligation to act. the other is to use tough words and yesterday he put the blame on the obama administration. >> on the one hand, president of the united states trump would be especially well positioned if he does choose to act. he could plausibly say to voters of the country, as you said, i know this is a hard choice. i was against the war in iraq. i'm very hesitant to go in. but you saw these images. this is something that we absolutely have to do. it's a question of what the president wants to do and if he has the will to do it. >> understanding anything he does do, the domino is, "a," a complication with assad is a complication with putin. >> yes, and the war and military action, and the political issue, or reality, which is the president's poll numbers, among

americans, and how americans view him on issues like credibility. because part of everyone's resistance ties back to the war in iraq and the questions of wmds. unquestionable, we've seen what happened or the effects of yesterday. that part is undeniable. but what is going to be kind of the end game of any sort of military maneuver that one would undertake? you've seen republicans now today consistently saying we have to revert to the policy of assad must go. that has to still be the policy but then what? then what? >> but no disrespect intended it's also easy for people in congress to say things. they're not the commander in chief, they're not accountable. it will be interesting to see with the new national security team, with the president, whether that will play out in the hours ahead. let's shift gears for a minute, bring up the name susan rice, embrace for swift condemnation from the right. >> susan rice is the typhoid

mary of the obama administration foreign policy. every time something went wrong, she seemed to turn up in the middle of it, whether it was the allegations of the improper unmasking and potential improper surveillance. >> she's back in the news because of what some republicans say should now be a critical piecing of the rush meddling investigation. allegations by team trump that the white house played loose with sensitive intelligence information. two weeks ago, rice was on pbs and said she knew nothing about such allegations, but she changed her story yesterday, still insisting she did nothing wrong. >> allegations that somehow obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes, that's absolutely false. there were occasions when i would receive a report in which a u.s. person was referred to. name not provided, just u.s. person.

and sometimes, in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report, and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out, or request the information as to who that u.s. official was. >> okay, but let me give the name of mike flynn. >> i leaked nothing to nobody, and never have and never would. >> she said she did her job. one complication said i knew nothing about this to judy two weeks ago saying there was another way to answer that question without saying that. democrats say the issue is what did russia do in the election? they think this is a bright shiny light. but if susan rice says that was a great sunrise or the sun sun rises in the east, republicans saying, no, it doesn't. >> she's the boogiewoman. saying i know nothing about it, that people will be able to

point to it and say she lied down and also going back to benghazi and how that attack happened and it ended up not being true. she very well may be correct that she did nothing wrong in what she was doing in the routine sort of portions of her job. but the issue, as you said, is so polarized that the republicans are going to demonize it. >> so polarized that staffwise, republicans trying to make this about susan rice. listen to joaquin castro yesterday. democrats saying we need to get to the investigation, we think there's something there and then this. >> if somebody asked my impression, my impression is somebody will probably be charged and i think people will probably go to jail. >> i used to cover the cops, the cops and prosecutors have this interesting theory that we'll

investigate first. they're getting way out ahead of themselves here, aren't they? >> well, yeah but -- but, let's go back for a second. this is to the question, which is entirely probable, there's at least an intense discussion about calling her in circumstances, the danger zone for the republican is if they call susan rice to testify on questions that inevitably will lead back to benghazi, seusan rice is going to attempt unmavnu unmasking with questions on what gets declassified. >> well, the president kol coul declassify this with a stroke of a pen. describing what she did whether right or wrong, she could be questioned on that, with respect to the president. next up, the president is betting on serve two terms. his poll numbers 75 days in, pretty horrible.

i'm ricardo, a sales and service consultant here at the xfinity store in bellevue, washington. here at the store, we offer internet, tv, phone, customer service, home security. every situation is a little different. it could be about billing, simple questions like changing the phone number. sometimes, they want to upgrade, downgrade, but at the end of the day, you want to take care of the customer. one of the great things about comcast, there's always room to move up. of course, it depends on you, how hard you work. ♪ got to be made in america,

we want american steel made in america. right? and you'll be hearing more about this in the very near future. but as time goes by, let's say over the next 7 3/4 years meaning 8 years -- >> that's an optimistic president trump yesterday. that was day 75 yesterday speaking to a labor did group here in washington. promising to keep his promises on the economy. and promising he'll be around for two terms. well, 76 days in, the poll numbers not so great for the president. he's defied the polls before, but his overall approval rating, just 35%. that's a bad enough. among republicans, 79% approved. that's a strong number down from a week ago or two weeks ago. white noncollege degree voters, they were critical to the president's coalition. here's the problem for president, big issues, character quality, his numbers are pretty

bad. 51% of americans in the quinnipiac poll says the president is not on here. 57 said he lacks leadership skills. 66% say he's not level headed. 61%, he's not honest. here's an interesting one here, 62% of americans, more than half the americans feel excellent or good about the economy, that ties most approval ratings. even republican voters, all americans, think president obama still gets more credit on how the economy is doing than the president. as a matter of fact, his handling of the economy under water. more americans disapprove than prove. some of this has to do with the function in washington more than the economy. the president in that speech yesterday, promising even though he didn't get a win on health care. listen to the president here, when you talk to people in congress, they say, this is months away, the president

talking big about his infrastructure plan. >> -- the back bone of america, with the talent in this room, we can build any city at anytime, and we can build it better than anyone. but we're going to do even better than that, together, we are going to rebuild our nation. >> now, we're not anywhere close to an an infrastructure plan. we'll come back to that in a minute. 76 days in, i applaud him trying to stay optimistic, i think you have to do that but this administration at the moment has zero big legislative wins because of disaster in health care. there's some efforts apparently to reboot that. when you look at those poll numbers 76 days in, again, this president has defied the rules of gravity many, many times but those numbers are pretty bad. >> in terms of re-election, the big stepup -- >> you jumped right to

re-election -- >> that's interesting. everybody hates the other party. in 2020, his numbers might go up slightly because republicans will be in mode hating the democrats like in 2016. he won the presidency by being quite unpopular. for governing, this is really hard because no one feelings the need to support. you saw rubio earlier very strongly criticizing him. you have the freedom and moderates criticizing him. >> that's a key point to this administration. his approval rating. you jumped to 2020, i'll go with you, if the approval rating goes down let alone elizabeth warren. mike pence spent the last couple days on capitol hill meeting mostly with the freedom caucus and other members. just to see if they can pull a rabbit out of the hat, somehow to get to the 100 day mark. to get bair repealed and

replaced. it was an embarrassment for the president. listen to the head of the freedom caucus saying they're making some progress -- if you want to take that at face, they're making some progress, saying maybe they can delay a congress 'recess if they get to the finish line. >> well, there's a concern on my part that if we're making real progress that going home sends the wrong message. and, you know, it is certainly important that if we're close to a deal, that we should, you know, work it out, over the next few days. to make sure that we get here, even if it means we have to cancel a few plans to get that done. >> congress likes that we're all laughing -- congress likes breaks, number one, number two, it's tough when you got nothing to sell. if you're saying if you're a republican, the last four sessions you're going to repeal and replace obamacare and now you didn't do it. to mark meadows point, he alsor.

is there anybody at the table who thinks they're close enough to get a vote? >> paul ryan does not think they're close. he kind of counts. >> he counts. very much downplaying it saying, no, no, we have conceptual ideas that we're discussing and we'll be coming back to this. he's staying away from that smartly. >> and yet, the vice president comes back to the table here. saying is this not good for the president. there's huge philosophical differences among the republican party. walk away. why does he keep coming back? >> well, he has to keep coming back. mike pence is the one who is supposed to deliver the congress to donald trump. not the freedom caucus, maybe not the one group that he's most aligned with, but the congress. and i think that it's, you know, the -- excuse me, the point here is that he's a big influence here. meadows' sentiment is a correct

one within a weekend of closing the deal, great. stick around the weekend. it's hard to imagine after eight years they're a weekend away. and it's hard to see where the next victory is here. if he gets that victory with the freedom caucus, i assume when that bill gets sent to mitch mcconnell and the senate he's laughing on the inside, not crying. >> exactly. you know, if you deem from one side the way it's worked, you're taking from another. so, i mean, that gain is also a net loss. it's basically a zero sum, as you pointed out. even within the house, not to mention the senate. going back to mike pence, there was earlier question will he be the shadow president or the one that understands legislation and gets get the house guys and get them on board. i think the answer is he is not. everyone likes him and wants him to be the president. and there's a question of how much he speaks for the

president. if these guys aren't afraid of donald trump with all due respect, to mike pence, they're not afraid of him. >> if you accomplish two things going to whether the health care bill is still breathing, one is you could say on behalf the president, we kept trying. we promised to do this and we're trying. and number two, you have your ear to the ground on a number of other things around important know which is where does congress stand on the investigation. what to do about syria. is congress behind the president or not. all of that under the cover of working on hit care. it's not a bad deal. >> to the question about the polls, too, trump has got to worry about his base. the promise to voters is not that you're going to get sick of us trying. the promise is you're going to get sick of us winning and again, it's hard to see where these influences come from. >> can't do it if you never try it? >> i agree. up next, the blame game has

begun. the nuclear option and the partisan fight over who's responsible for the state of dysfunction in washington, including the united states senate. your insurance company 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.

[he has a new business teaching lessons. rodney wanted to know how his business was doing... ...so he got quickbooks. it organizes all his accounts, so he can see his bottom line. ahhh...that's a profit. know where you stand instantly. visit quickbooks-dot-com.

welcome back. who do you blame for the latest partisan divide in congress that's likely shaped by your own political leanings. democrats say they stole a seat from president obama. republicans say democrats changed the rules for all federal judges a few years ago so changing the rules now to change it to confirm judge neil gorsuch. senator john mccain, don't like where this is heading. >> i'd like to meet that idiot, i'd like to meet that numskull that would say that. that after 200 years. at least 100 years of this tradition where the senate has functioned pretty well, they'd think it would be a good idea to blow it up.

whoever says that is a stupid idiot. they've not been here and seen what i've been through and how we were able to to avoid that on several occasions. and they're stupid and deceived their voters because they're stupts stupid. >> i'm unclear what senator mccain falls on this. stupid. and it employs consensus which you don't hear about. it left a bad taste but he's going to vote for judge gorsuch. >> yeah, it's really a bad taste. and it also raises a concern of could they ever do away with the legislative filibuster. you remember when we first changed the rules, they said we're changing to get through president obama's lower level appointments we would never touch a supreme court

filibuster. now they're about to go nuclear on the filibuster. they all behave like a bunch of mani maniacs, but the senate is easier to cover because they behave as rational adults even in this polarized era. >> mighty kind of you. >> i think what you're seeing happening, as these things sort of slip away, there's a concern especially that the senators could become like the house which everyone believes is good for no one. >> if you're watching anywhere in america, outside of washington and the suburbs, you think, here they go again, nuclear options, we use a language that didn't make sense. for those of you who actually go about your lives, you do a lot of things at once. the founders wanted the senate to go more slowly. the big question is if you take away the phfilibuster on suprem

court justices, would you do it on others? mitch mcconnell, again, a traditional says, no, at least not yet. >> who would be the biggest beneficiary of that right now? it would be the majority, right? there's not a single senator in the majority who thinks we ought to change the legislative filibuster. not one. there's no sentiment to change the legislative filibuster. i think senator schumer said after being on one the sunday shows, we are were on back to back, i think he said no sentiment on that side either. there's no threat to legislative filibuster. >> again, the language doesn't make sense for a lot of people watching in the country. they probably thing this is boring, partisan, sometimes, children but actually this matters in terms of legislative fights to come and the attempts to run the senate. >> the point of the senate, like

they kcould deliver a body is t encourage grow myself, right? so how much does power have. it encourages democrats and republicans and coalitions to fight. all of that -- by the way, mitch mcconnell has had a lot to do with that because the flip side of a filibuster, of the threat of a filibuster is they won't use it all the time. the threat of fill buster is a special thing that never got triggered. well up to mitch mcconnell's rise, he's threatening filibuster all the time. he helped push this button. and then democrats pushed back. who pushed first. this has been building for a long time what everyone is calling for right now to a large extent. >> it's not always been a good thing. filibuster was used to stop the recklessness of the '70s. i don't think it's always

bringing people together. the case can be made that maybe the party that controls congress and voters can punish them by pushing them out of office, instead of what we have now which is in a constant gridlock. >> we're going to see where this one goes, how far it goes. when we come back, the president just gave an interview with his favorite newspaper, "the new york times." at blue apron, we're building a better food system.

where instead of paying for middlemen, we work directly with family farms to deliver higher quality ingredients for less than you pay at the store. get $30 off at blueapron.com/cook

welcome back. a little breaking news near the end of the program. the president of the united states gave an interview to two reporters to "the new york times." in that, he suggests that the former obama national security adviser may have committed a crime by unmasking by getting the names of trump officials listed in a document. here's what the pled told "the new york times." i think it's going to be the biggest story. it's such an important story for

the country and the world. it's one of the big stories of the time. asked if he thinks susan rice committed a crime. the president answered -- do i think? yes, i think. we have the president of the united states to say he thinks someone has committed a crime when that president of the united states and his team are being looked at by the fbi, by the senate intelligence committee. by the house intelligence committee. some people's back and forth, the finger pointing. this is a big deal. >> there are two reasons, one, in the campaign, it's worrisome when the president threatens to jail his political opponents. whether hillary clinton before and now susan rice. that's not what we do in america. and you ask the president of the united states to weigh in on what the doj can do. usually, obama was always aware of not saying yes, someone committed a crime or no, they

didn't. it's very unusual to see that. a real break with norm is important. >> he dines to say, michael, the president, to bolster his claim but pledge at the right time? >> this is not exactly president obama manipulating the microwave inside trump tower. but it is a legitimate distraction for him. i can tell you that the news on susan rice yesterday, inside the white house, they are asking additional questions about what other decisions they made inside the white house that should have been made. >> and if, if, if, if, if, if obama administration officials were improperly unmasking these names or improperly spreading this around they should be held accountable for that. just as if the president's team colluded in any way with the kremlin, they should be held accountable but aren't they supposed to say let's wait for the facts and this responsible

party is the president of the united states. i think it's going to be the biggest story. do think? yes, i think a crime. >> this is turning into a spectacle of some type of allegations. and it takes one step further with what happened on twitter a few weeks ago which is the president saying without substantiation that he thought president obama had tapped him. which it turns out would not be legal and therefore would be a crime. this is more directly saying yeah, i think someone who hasn't actually been charged. >> i want to sneak this in. mr. trump criticized media including "the new york times" for failing to cover the rofrgs. sick naling out fox news and bill o'reilly for praise. and then he went on to say bill o'reilly, advertisers and the heat. i think he's a person i know well, he is a good person. i didn't think anyone would want that one. >> it's a -- well, from that

statement, it came from the very serious and weighing in on -- the president doesn't way in on random legal issues. that's a strange one, too. >> and he doesn't say these are serious allegations, but i've known him for a long time. there's a way to strike a balance as president. he does black and white. he didn't do gray. everybody, thank you for joining us. just moments away from a live news conference with president trump and king abdullah of jordan. wolf blitzer in the chair, after a quick break. it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we've used real ingredients, whole nuts, and natural flavors from the very beginning. give kind a try. does your makeup remover every kiss-proof,ff? cry-proof, 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.

>> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. hello, i'm wolf blitzer in washington. wherever you're watching from around the world, thank you very much for joining us. up first -- president trump meeting right now with a key middle eastern ally, outrage grows over the chemical weapons attack in syria. the president and jordan's king abdullah will hold a joint news conference set to begin minutes from now in the white house rose garden. we'll bring it to you live on cnn. the two leaders will discuss the