misunderstanding about exactly what he says in that room. look what happened this week with the deputy attorney general, rob rosenstein. all of the different stories we're hearing about what happened. >> our special coverage continues right now with erin burnett "out front." . good evening, i'm erin burnett "out front" breaking news, cnn learning tonight that white house lawyers have started research researching impeachment procedures. the new york times reportsing if. telling russian officials, one accused of spying. according to the times, trump said in full, i quote him, i just fired the head of the fbi, he was crazy, a real nut job. i faced real pressure because of russia. that's taken off. we have all angles to cover this

season. from the justice department to the white house. i'll speak with the times reporter who spoke the story of what trump told the russians. i want to begin our juchtd correspondent evan perez. you are reporting first here on cnn. what are you learning from your sources. >> reporter: erin, they've begun researching impeachment proceedings. this is to prepare for what officials say is a distant and unlikely possibility. the president could have to fend off an attempt to remove him from office. two people briefed on the discussions tell cnn the research efforts are informal and they're being done out of an abundance of caution. they believe the president has the backing of allies in congress and that impeachment is not in the kashds according to the people we've talked to. even dwems have tried to calm the wrim people talk this week out of kesh that it's premature. they've begun collecting

information on how such proceedings would work. a white house official we spoke to this evening afternoon the story just aired is saying that white house lawyers are denying that they ever started researching impeachment. erin. >> does this mean that the president at this time is going to go ahead and hire an outlawyer? >> that's a discussion that's now being had right now in the white house. there's a broader internal effort to bolster the president's legal defense which has become a lot more complicated with the appointment of a b special count. earlier this week, close advisors to the president, including two lawyers who have served as surrogates for the president visited the white house to discuss the needed to hire personal attorneys for trump. erin? >> thank you very much, evan. more on that in a moment. i want to get our other breaking news story in here. what president trump told the russians in the oval office

about jim comey. matt rosen berg is out front front. matt, i told the russian -- the u.s. intelligence -- i just fired the head of the fbi, a real nut job. i faced great pressure because of russia. that's taken off. now, just to be clear, right, this is a quotation. this isn't a paraphrase. this is a quotedation. >> yeah. that's what we're -- that's what was in the notes. we were read portions of the summary. there's a note taker. they write a summary which is circulated to people in the white house, department of defense and obviously, the cia. that's what was in the notes was that quote. this is trump telling the russians, you know, that he just fired and bragging almost, boasting about firing the head of the fbi who obviously runs

all our counterintelligence against the russians. it's a pretty remarkable statement. >> it is remarkable. you also know a little more about what he said, right? >> yeah. and we're going to have an update on line soon. he joked with ambassador kislyak, i'm the only guy who hasn't met you. kislyak has met a lot of people. he discussed how americans were obsessioned withst ukraine. it wasn't clear what he was acting. during that same meeting trump shared intelligence with the russians that was given to the u.s. by the israelis with the express condition that we do not share that with any of our allies, let alone russia. >> the statement i faced pressure from russia, that's taken off. but hi made a joke about kislyak. kislyak's conversations with

general michael flynn, general michael flynn never met you fro my campaign, apparently. joke i joking. the barch that trump is making this joke to again, to be clear, we've reported is believed by u.s. intelligence to be not only a top russian spy but a top spy recruiter. what was their reaction to all of this? >> they seemed to be in a great mood. at one point in the meeting somebody asked if there was any fake news and the russian foreign ministers replied, no fake news. they seemed to have a pretty

good time chatting with each. in ordinary times this would be probably a good reaction. there's a lot of -- special counsel investigating that. and i'm not quite sure the white house seems to either understand what it looks like and how bad this looks. there's also the possibility a lot of people talking about obstruction of justice. not a lawyer, not going to get into it. this is trump saying i fired jim comey to relieve pressure on the russia investigation. that can't look good. >> it's clear that's what he was saying. you've been working your sources for this. we have two major bombshells and the president joking to the russian ambassador. notes taken by an american in the room. someone who would be a note taker. then that information was shared. we know the president shared classified information with the russians.

we know as you've reported tonight that he faced pressure from the russian vaegs. that's why he fired jim comey. do you feel now that you've been read essentially the full rundown? >> look, i can't say if there's more to come up. if there's more to come from this meeting. i'd be stunned. what else could they have gone over here and -- what else could have happened in that room? i just -- at some point it had to end. right? i guess we'll find out, though. >> all right. and quickly before you go, matt, i know you're not going to disclose your source, but why do you think all these leaks are happening? >> on the far right they're saying it's the deep states out to get president trump. there's no deep states, there's no great spy network who takes down presidents here. people are serving our government, both appointees and career people. there's no hold overseas or anything like that.

these are a broad group of people seeing what's happening and they're horrified. that's why they're talking to reporters. people are seeing things that they think are wrong and that most people think is wrong. they want that out in public because there seems to be no way to stop it in private. >> we're back in a moment. i want to go to athena jones at the white house. these are stunning developments. what is the response from the white house tonight to this reporting? >> hi, erin. the white house is not denying this report, which is notable. white house press second sean spicer put out a statement that read in part, by grandstandingant politicizing it, james comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engaged and negotiate with russia. now he's referring there to some deals the president hoped to make with russia on syria, ukraine, defeated isis. he closes that statement by

saying the threat to national security from these leaks of private and highly classified conversations. so the white house clearly not happy about this. but also not explicitly denying this bombshell report. this is all happening, erin, as you know, the white house team, sean spicer among them, are on a plane heading to their first stop in this high-stakes foreign trip. they're expected top land in saudi arabia early saturday morning, our time. a little before 4:00 a.m. we'll have to see what else breaks during the hours in the air. >> thank you, athena. they are fully wired on that plane. it's not as if they don't have wi-fi. they could be responding if they choose to. out front, alan dershowitz, john avalon, david chal on, julia and

former senator rick santorum. matthew rose berg is with us from the new york times. alan, the president is quoted by an american official in the room from this -- as i think matthew was fair to point out, what else could have happened in this meeting. again "i just fired the head of the fbi, he was crazy, a real nut job. obstruction of justice? >> not when it comes to president trump who's known top puffer and exaggerate and b.s. and say anything that comes to his mind. >> so for anybody else that would be obstruction of justice but not him? >> the president has the authority to tell the director of the fbi you shall not investigate a, b, and c. you must investigate c. the president is in charge.

thomas jefferson told his attorney general, get aaron burr. he called witnesses in. he gave them immunity. he called the chief justice of the us, john marshall and said if you don't convict that guy, i'm equipment peechg you. we have since created rules that say no contact between the president and the fbi, nothing contact between the president and justice department. those are not capitol hill law rules. those are internal rules. so to make a case of obstruction of justice -- >> on a criminal level. >> i'm talking about -- >> impeachable level that is different. >> then we have a hard constitutional record. do you really need an offense, high kriemts in order to get an impeachment. the answer is yes. >> when most people hear this, 245i8 have the reaction matthew had. i faced great pressure because of russia. now that's off. it's clear, he fired him because

he didn't want anymore of the russia investigation. up understand what his point is. so what? most people wouldn't think, so what? they'd think this is a problem. >> i agree. impeachment is a political question. the congress in looking at this -- yeah, they look at the criminal statue and say -- an on the other hand citizen says would this be obstruction of justice. did he really fire comey to suppress investigation. we were talking about the flynn investigation at that time. the very next time he invites the russians in who, by the way, are being investigated in a counterintelligence operation and he says to them celebrating, hey, the pressure's off. no more russian investigation. and by the way, the fbi director is a nut. from a criminal standpoint that could create an article of impeachment. >> that's what we're hearing

from evan, lawyers who have known the president for a long time rl researching just that. impeachment procedures so they are prepared. >> yeah. well, i think it would be der liktd in duty if they didn't. i think your job if you're a white house lawyer is to prepare for every eventuality even though we are miles and miles away from impeachment proceedings, actually, beginning here. but erin, step back for a moment and look at these last ten days. this has moved from what was a distraction to the young trump presidency to completely consuming it. >> yeah. >> it may go down in history as the -- even if he weathers through this, the single greatest squandering of opportunity to be elected the president of the united states and now his entire presidency is defined by this very investigation. >> so, john, let me make a point here. the president was in the oval

office with two top russians, that it appears from his own joke he'd never met before in his life. apparently, he said he was the only one in his campaign that hasn't met kislyak. he told them that the man who ran america's fbi, the top law enforcement official in the united states was a crazy nut job. >> yeah. >> everyone think about that for a second. whatever your politics are, it's stunning. how damaging is it? >> it's damaging, it's disrespectful to a man who's widely disrespected out of the u.s. government. it's the kind of cartoonville ain language you would not expect a president to say. there is no way, i think to sugarcoat or spin, or oh, this is just locker room talk with the russians. this is incredibly disrespectful. others worthy of some psychological analysis. i don't think we should be so

glib. i was under a lot of pressure because of russia he says to the russian foreign ministers and the ambassador. now that pressure's off. in what rational world does not that not reference to what certainly looks like to the layman obstruction of justice. >> senator santorum, what do you say? when you read it, i just fired the fbi, he was crazy, a real nut job. i faced great pressure because of russia, that takes it off. how do you intercept that? >> first of all, i don't believe that the president thinks the firing of jim comey is going to take away the russian investigation. i don't think he believed it when he said that or i don't think he believes it now. >> why did he say that? >> donald trump -- the idea that people are outriejd, that trump says outrageous things. wrv you been during the last 18

months? this fayning of outrage. this is who the american public elected. they elected someone who is why outrageous in some of the things he says. it does put people, you know, off. it creates all sorts of incendiariry remarks from hose who don't like him. but donald trump, i don't believe, fired jim comey because he thought it would end the investigation. he's not a fool. it's fully created more of an investigation. the idea that joking around -- >> senator, i know it has in the past few days because of these revelations but clearly when he had these meeting he thought witte relieve the pressure. >> i don't believe he thought that was going to end the investigation. he knew the investigation was going to continue. >> senator.

what you're saying is the president is a liar. >> as you well know, sir. >> nert senator, senator. >> you can't take a lot of what he says -- >> you're saying the american public understands that the president used high personally/lies all the time. you would have son an entirely different tune in the clinton impeachment. you would have said it's part of bill clinton's nature. so you got to apply the same to both sides. you know you're spinning. >> i'm not spinning. i ran with against this guy. i understand the high personally. i understand what he does. do i believe it's proper conduct from a president? no. i wish he wouldn't do that. i'll continue to say this. don't, you know, overreact to a president who's been doing this for 18 months. >> under the bus for the russian

foimts? >> what is worth overreacting to, then, senator? >> i would say what's worth overreacting to is to show that the president of the united states, actually, number one has tried to obstruct justice. i don't think there's any evidence of that. number two, the whole basis of this investigation, that there was collusion between the trump campaign and the russians, there's still no evidence to point to that. the joke about that in my opinion would be appropriate p given what's been made of this. >> in the new york times ashl, he talked to several government officials. juliette, one of them who was defending the president, they're not denying this occurred, ok? >> ok. it was a negotiating tactic, the white house is saying that's why he said these things. does that make sense to you? >> it makes sense in the sense that that's what we hear from

the white house. this is trump adds mitted, right, to disclosing class night information about a likely israeli asset in an isis cell who was delivering us information and said that was a hue imagimanitarian declassific. one of the challenges with these unbelievable head looibs from the new york times and other newspapers is we tend to forget the cumulative evidence. we're talking about this one piece today and looking at it from someone who's been a lawyer and has been in international security. i've got the firing of comey, right. i've got an sbruf with lester holt in which the president setds he wants it to end. i've got tweets that say he views the entire russia investigation as a joke. three -- i'm sorry. we have comey's memo, a wink and a nod. i want to clear up. we have to look at this

cumulatively. it's bad. there's no question about it. you can say it's a joke, but it's not. it's actually the rule of law. it's about the investigation. >> which -- >> one fierchl thing on the senator's point. this is not about collusion only. people like me have not been talking about collusion. it's likely this investigation has to do with financial dealings which we've talked about as well over the past 18 months. if we put collusion on a pedestal, we may not get there but still, a lot of bad things have been done. >> white house lawyers are looking into impeachment. so viewers understand here, obviously, there is a legal standard for obstruction of justice. many believe this wouldn't make but a lot of people would. >> fine. >> when it comes to impeaching a. of the united states, the criminal standard for justice is not what needs to be met. >> nobody knows the answer to that question. i'm a civil libertarian. i'm shocked that so many

libertarians want to broaden one of the worst statutes on the books. they want to convict somebody based on huffing and hyperbole. i am consistent. i was strongly opposed to the impeachment of president clinton. the aclu is not doing it, the departments aren't doing it. the republicans are happy with the special counsel. the media is relying on blockbuster reports every day. somebody needs to stand up for civil liberties. >> you say intent doesn't matter. what he's saying, to most people, i think would be the intend to obstruct juflt. now we know that the investigation's going to continue and if anything has gotten more intense because we have a special prosecutor. he didn't succeed, so therefore, it's not obstruction?

>> no, no. this is a completed obstruction, arguably. i disagree with alan's assessment. he's reaching back to aaron burr's trial and -- >> those people wrote the constitution. >> yes, i know they did. but richard nixon was -- you know, the impeachment charges against him, one of the biggest ones was based on obstruction of justice. and of course bill clinton obstruction of juflt so -- >> they did illegal -- >> modern history suggests that obstruction is a perfectly acceptable charge if you can prove it. i say that after today, when he talks about comey being a nut to the russians and he says the pressure is off in the russian investigation, it certainly looks like he fired comey to suppress the russia investigation. >> you're not saying -- >> that's obstruction. >> you trying to jump in? >> no. it was david. >> david. >> impeachment is a political

process. what is the political trigger to it, not the legal trigger to it. remember, republicans are in charge -- >> to do it, david, the cumulative bill -- >> but what i'm saying -- >> is so rapid, it has consumed the presidency. >> we're not there yet. we haven't seen that yet. we need to watch for this. the moment that republicans feel that donald trump is a threat to their political power is the moment you will see this escalate quickly towards something like that. we'll look for the polls to come out. we have two special elections coming out. when members of congress, republicans, start feeling that their jobs are at stake here, that is when you're going to see this move very rapidly. >> i want to ask matthew, i know we still have you here. their lack of response tonight or their lack of denial could perhaps be significant. let's see if it is. when the story on leaking classified information came out,

the white house fate back. when the allegations of trump trying to stop the investigation, they fought back yesterday. remember this? >> came out tonight as reported is false. >> did you tnt urge former fbi director james comey in any way, shape, or form to close down the investigation of michael flynn -- >> no, no. >> and also -- >> next question. >> clearly they have no fear of denying when they want to. the story in the washington post also involved classified information. they're saying we're not confirming or denying because this kangs classified information. that doesn't seem to add up. how significant do you think it is that they are not denying tonight? >> they fwoibasically denied it >> by not speaking on it. >> they've got notes. they can't deny this. they're in the air right now.

i think they took off, we were in touch with them and our story published probably half an hour after the plane got airborne. i guess we'll see in the next few days how the trip goes. in israel trump will have other things to talk about. >> yep. >> he leaked their swejs. it's going to be a rough trip, i suspect. >> senator santorum who's doing all the leaking? this is a white house document. >> ask the reporters, they're talking to the leakersers, not me. >> matthew answered he's not going to disclose the sources. he says it's people who care deeply about this country. >> i don't think there's any secret that there are a lot of people in this administration who are not fans of donald trump or and who are republicans, who are not for donald trump in the primary, who see trump as somebody who's different than

any kind of republican we've seen before and i wouldn't be surprised that a lot of those people are trying to leak things trying to undermine his presidency. >> we're looking at lawyer privileged information, lawyer-client privileged information. planning for a possible impeachment. if anybody ever leaked my lawyer-client privileged information or yours, we'd be up in arms. the civil lib erlts union would be jumping up and down and they're not. >> someone who actually has voted in an impeachment, i can tell you what david is saying is right. this is a political decision, not a criminal law decision. republicans are not anywhere near that, but i would say this. unlike democrats who will never break with the president, no matter what they do, i don't care. they can find him with a smoking gun and a picture, they wouldn't break with them. i would say this to president trump, this can't continue for a lot longer.

i any one reason they're not responding is they want to change the narrative. they want to talk about saudi arabia, israel and the mooegs. hopefully that will beginning to give comfort to republicans this he's actually interested in doingbeing president and doing something positive. >> i want to say something about who's leaking. look, i've dealt with sources who have axes to grind, don't like the policy. that isn't who these people are. these are people who care for this government and what they're seeing, they think is wrong. these are people -- to say a few of them would never talk to me. they are seeing things that they believe is genuinely wrong. >> ok. but you have two guys. former intelligence official and a current intelligence official who take the fact that president trump leaked to the russians

information about security of israel. ok. isis doesn't know about this. only the russians know about it. now you have two intelligence officials going to the washington post and publishing to isis a fact that is unknown to them -- >> no. >> namely, the city where this occurred -- >> they cannot post -- >> it's not included -- >> no, no, no. >> you're missing the point. >> informationing from russia. most likely given to iran. you have to remember that. >> iran has very good relations with isis these days. >> they have past regs with russia. >> let him finish. then alan respond. >> the fact is that when you tell the russians what israel's came blimts are, that goes to iran, that in itself is intelligence. that in the itself is useful. >> but the sources made it much worse. >> they compounded it. >> why? >> we wouldn't know about this

at all. why do we need to know about it? >> well, we -- >> we don't need to know about it. >> -- commit a felony. we ought to be putting them jail. >> best of luck. >> i think matthew's absolutely right. one of the reasons why i don't stay up late at night, because why? this became public. the president has a solemn duty to protect the allies and what they are willing to disclose to us. >> so did -- >> excuse me, alan. the failure to do that, i think was a story, period. also will impact, i think rightfully so, the extent to which other allies will want to tell us what sources and methods are. look, the president arrived -- the president took off with more political -- than he's about to land. if you think the rest of the world is not following matthew in the new york times, you are

wrong. they are also watching this. this is not a witch hunt. this is not democrats going crazy. this is serious stuff. >> i disagree with that. you're missing the important point. our allies would never have known about this if the washington post didn't publish it. we wouldn't have known it either. >> how do you know that our allies didn't already know? >> didn't know about it -- >> information -- >> new york times, the washington post. >> sit better for them to find out that way or when their agent gets killed? >> it's better that they not find out at all. they wouldn't get killed because isis would have never known about it. >> quickly -- >> why trump is wrong, even as alan is right. the president of the united states, prior presidents got along with people like j. edgar hoover, j.f.c.k, lyndon johnson.

can i finish? >> yes. >> he picks a fight with law enforcement and the intelligence community. now, the intelligence community does have the pour to destroy him and by picking a fight with the intelligence community he's undermining his ability to be an effective. . >> all right. >> don't you wish john f. kennedy -- >> all of you staying with me. i want to go to sunlen on capitol hill. of jim comey we are learning he's going to teff, not just that he's going to testify, he's going to do it in public, right? >> that's absolutely right, erin. in front of the snetd intelligence committee. democrats and republicans on that committee calling for him to do just that. we know that no date has been firmly set yet but the committee saying they hope that will be scheduled after memorial day. they want this to happen in the

short term future. this is significant, as you said, because it's not happening in a classified behind closed doors setting. this will be in public, an open session on camera. the chairman saying tonight that he hopes that will bring more clarity to the questions and the acting member mark warrener saying that mark comey deserves to tell his story. and this is also a significant development because there was some concern and some doubt up here on capitol hill this week in the wake of the special prosecutor bob mueller being chosen that that would really take the option off the table for james comey to testify in public. a big development tonight that he's actually doing that. >> sunlen, you have been talking to lawmakers tonight on 2ru6r7's comments as reported by the new york times what are they saying? >> it's been silence so far from

republicans but democrats are wasting no time to seize on this. some have called it unpatriotic, the comments by trump. they say it could show a clear attempt at obstruction of justice. here's what dan killedy said earlier tonight. >> it's dumb founding. just when we think this president has gone as far as he can possibly go, we hear this sort of a report. if it's true, i mean, this is -- it's bad for the united states of america. you got to wonder what is going on inside the head of donald trump. >> so strong words there, of course, and we also heard from patrick leahy. he was a former chairman of a committee. he said on twitter "this is what obstruction looks like" and he quoted that quote in the article that says that donald trump said i face great pressure because of

russia, that's taken off. >> in a couple of moejts we'll get some answers. now ri678d blumenthal who sits on the judiciary committee, senator, second time we've spoken this week. you heard someone quote. i'll say it again. "i just fired the head of the fbi. he was crazy, a real nut job. i faced great pressure by russia. that's taken off. kwoilts that's what he said to the russian ambassador. >> it is sadly, tragically for our nation, mounting evidence of obstruction of justice. not proof, but evidence that has to be put together in a mosaic that could lead to charges. the president shoovbl putting

pressure on the russians because they interfered in our election. there is bipartisan consensus that the russians meddled in our democratic institutions in an unprecedentsed scope and scale and they are testing us around the world and then donald trump is saying to them that he was relieved because he had just fired an fbi director who was investigating ties between his campaign and that russian interference. >> i don't know if you heard but the new york times reporter was on. he said the president was joking with sergey kislyak. oh, nice to meet you. i appear to be the only person in my campaign who hasn't done so yet, joking. sean spicer is saying it was actually -- to your point he's saying comey's investigation was the problem. it was creating unnecessary pressure on the white house's ability to negotiate with

russia. those are their words. now they're saying the investigation was what was hurtsing the united states's ability to negotiate with russia. do you buy that? >> the russians need to pay a price for their sbrrns in our election. they need to be told and shown that they cannot test us around the world, in ukraine, in violating the inf treaty in syria and other places where we're going head-to-head with russia that they cannot in this way interfere with our elections and do other things without paying a price. they're going to continue to meddle in our elections in 2018 if we don't do something. >> you used the word mosaic. you have been saying that there has been mountsing evidence. senator leahy your colleague tweeted out "this is what obstruction" in all caps "looks

like." are you closer tonight than you were two nights ago or three nights ago. are you closer now than you were then that this truly is obstruction of justice? >> speaking like a prosecutor which i was for a number of years just like my colleague senator leahy was, every piece of evidence puts the case closer. but first we fwheed to follow the facts wherever they lead. >> you're not -- >> that's the job of the special prosecutor, bob mueller, and i will be happy toe tell you when i am there. >> yeah. >> the point here is that we need an independent -- truly under went well resourced investigation that has a mandate to pursue this issue. i asked rosenstein yesterday point blank will you permit this obstruction of justice investigation to be pursued under the terms of what you've

directed bob mueller to do and he was pretty unequivocal that yes, he would. >> you believe that level of inquiry will continue. quickly been we go. when a layperson hears "i fired the head of the fbi, i faced great pressure because of russia, that's taken off," you're saying that to a layperson that may sound like obstruction of justice but to you, not yet. >> well, it soundsed to me like obstruction of justice. i agree with senator leahy that it looks like obstruction of justice but it has to be put together with evidence. >> so it is, but it's not enough. >> it's going in that direction for sure. and we're not there yet in terms of a charge, a criminal charge. but you know, a prr r prosecutor puts together a case with a mosaic. at the same time other investigations have to proceed and an independent investigation is necessary. the american people will be told

the full story whatever the charges are and they will know how to stop this russian aggression and interference in our democratic institutions. rather than telling the russians kwfl and classified information, rather than telling them jokes or saying that the pressure's been relieved, the president of the united states needs to be tough with them and make them pay a price. >> senator, thank you very much. i appreciate your time. our breaking news coverage continues. we'll fake a brief break and we'll be right back. hi guys. it's great to be here. in the desert. at the mall. on the mountain. at school. at the beach. in the big easy. yeah. yeah. today i want to show you guys the next-gen chevy equinox. what do you think? that's pretty. pretty sexy. it's all-wheel drive. look at that. it looks aggressive. but not overbearing. it's not too big. not too small. it looks like it can go off-roading. but at the same time, it looks like a car you can take to a nice event. you can dress it up

or dress it down. seems like the perfect car for anybody. i would take it anywhere. i want one. i love it. she's a bad mama jama. chevy stepped their game up. my belly pain i could build a small city with all the over-the-counter products i've used. enough! i've tried enough laxatives to cover the eastern seaboard. i've climbed a mount everest of fiber. probiotics? enough! (avo) if you've had enough, tell your doctor what you've tried and how long you've been at it. linzess works differently from laxatives. linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. it can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements that are easier to pass. do not give linzess to children less than six, and it should not be given to children six to less than eighteen. it may harm them.

don't take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain and swelling. talk to your doctor about managing your symptoms proactively with linzess. ykeep you sidelined.ng that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. but with my back pain i couldn't sleep or get up in time. then i found aleve pm.

the only one to combine a safe sleep aid plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. and now. i'm back! aleve pm for a better am.

. a breaking news bombshell tonight as the president embarks on his first international trip. he's actually in the air while this breaks. we want to make it clear, he's got the ability to communicate. they know what's happening. white house lawyers researching impeachment procedures out of an abundance of caution. jim comey, whom he had just fired day before, 2 head of the fbi was crazy and a nut job and his departure had relieved great pressure on the president reported today. >> thank you to our panel for

being here. congressman, you just heard the interview with senator blumenthal. he's talking about obstruction of justice. i'll be honest with you, it wasn't completely clear but he's saying what the president said to the ambassador of russia was obstruction of justice. he doesn't believe a full mosaic is there for charges. >> there's nothing there for impeachment. i think this is the democrats getting ahead of themselves. unemployment is going down, economic growth is going up. border crossings are down about 60%, economic optimism is high. health care reform has passed the house and the democrats haven't been part of any of i would. all they've said is resist, resist, resist. this has given them something to rally around. i'm surprised the senator would say we need to punish russia. they've given russia just what

they warm fronted. certainly they'd have enough sense to shut up and say let's fight these s.o.b.s on our own quiet terms and do to them what we've done to north korea and jam some computer systems but instead they're givingst russians exactly what the russians wanted. >> what in the world are you talking about? >> let's not pass the graveyard with talking points about economic indicators. >> when you say -- >> we're not dealing with facts. talk about what is happening right now, congressman. right now. >> if you -- >> you'll get a full chance to respond. >> the president of the united states to the russian foreign ministers calling the hid of the fbi a nut job and saying that he's -- >> that's not -- >> hillary clinton -- if hillary clinton said that to the russian foreign ministers you'd be screaming bloody murder on tv and you know it.

>> i think you've had the bloody murder portion ever since the election. >> deal with the news tonight. >> congressman -- >> here's tonight. >> here's the situation. if the liberals were really concerned about russia -- >> that's not it. >> they would get in the back room -- >> congressman may i ask you a question. >> you guys have lost your moral authority, pal. >> oh, i -- >> do you support, do you condone what the president said? >> i don't know the circumstances and -- >> it was a meeting in the oval office with the russian foreign ministers and the russian ambassador talking about firing jim comey. >> and who was the source? the new york times reporting on an undisclosed source. >> the white house is not denying it. it was taken on notes by someone in the trump white house who

took notes. >> and the context was he said it jokingly or he said it this is a matter of national concern that this guy's a nut job. we don't know. we know that the new york times has thrived on undisclosed sources ever since president trump has been -- >> congressman, they're not denying that it happened. no one is denying it. >> i have to say this -- >> congressman, congressman listen. i appreciate that you are doing the best that you can in what is the indefense building -- >> now. >> i'm going to talk. you've had a good long run at it. i'm going to say my part. i know you very well. you're a patriotic american. you said you want to see us defend our country from the russians and yet we have a president that puts down americans and defends the russians, including one that served as honorably as the fbi chief. this president is now letting me down even at the level of just

being a bad crook. listen, a crook knows to be quiet. what -- the thing he's saying right now, the president of the united states, the things he's saying right now, if he were doing something, if he were trying to figure out a way to get his administration through these problems, he should be dwooit. he is being louder and talking more than anybody involved in anything criminal or otherwise. >> but -- >> you have a president that cannot get the administration through this situation. he cannot deal with the facts in front of him. he cannot attack did russians. you want to attack the russians. he's attacking americans. how can you sit here as a patriot and say he's doing anything right at all? >> it was against -- he was so in with the russians why would would he drop the bombs in syria. >> rrnt you a parent? have you ever had a kid get in

trouble and point to the other kid? that's what you're doing. don't talk about the other kid. >> what i'm saying -- >> let's talk about the other kid. >> the kid right now dropped bombs on the syrian forces that russia is backing. how is that in with the russians? question. question to the panel. how's that? >> i'll tell you right now. he is not doing anything that is remotely causing problems for the russian agenda all he wants. he can bomb all the concrete he wants. you have not said anything about the elections. you have a president who defends elections. why b don't you care more about this country than -- >> reply to that, jack. when mueller continues the investigation and with people like sue rice and unmasking, and if he follows where the senator

said let's follow the facts and i think we're going to learn that there was absolutely no collusion with the trump administration. >> let's just be real here, but for once, wouldn't you feel more comfortable right now if pike pen mike pence were president right now? >> i like mike pence, but not necessarily. >> mike pence is in the white house when the president is gone. >> but trump is my president and pence is my friend and vice president. >> i think a lot of people are frustrated about the leaks and the single sourcing, by the way this did not have single sources, it had multiple sources. david sanger, let me give you a chance to respond to this, as a

reporter, as someone from the media, as a reporter for the "new york times." >> sure. thanks, erin. yes, there are anonymous sources involved in this and if you go back over the obama administration, the bush administration before that, you're going to see anonymous sources, but that's not the issue. the issue is do we fichundamenty believe i story. but this came from a note taker. this isn't even a participant in the conversation. the stories earlier in the week were jim comey's account versus president trump's account. it's the official note taking that took place during this whole thing. secondly, the white house has not disputed the facts, they have just put a different interpretation on it. they have said that the

president's comments meant that it reduced the pressure on him that was keeping him from conducting the diplomacy. people are going to have to decide whether they believe that interpretation of events or whether they believe the interpretation of events that erin was exploring with senator blumenthal, and one would suggest that it took the pressure off the investigation. that's all that's out here right now. but the absence of a white house disputing the facts what we have right now. >> we know that the statement is untrue. nobody believes that comey is crazy or a nut case. so the president starts by telling the russians an absolute incredible untruth. but now we want to say, but the second thing he told them about the pressure, that we believe. now you have to reconcile the fact that we all don't believe the first half, we want to believe the second half. but the second half sounds as puffy as the first half.

>> it's not true, even if he believed it, it's not true, it's demonstrably false. >> i think we can say it was offensive to a lot of people, but maybe the question from allen they want to know, is that on obstruction, is that you have to have jury tampering and a criminal case. i don't know if this meets that threshold at all. as offensive as it is to the "new york times," and other lovers or donald trump, i don't know why there was necessarily this great cry for obstruction all of a sudden. >> nixon was charged with obstruction of jaws. >> you don't need jury tampering to have obstruction of justice. >> it was all in terms of with what they want, what they say the story is, versus what others are interpreting it as. and allen, the first part of the statement we know to be untrue, obviously the second part is

where the dispute is. >> i think what the professor misunderstands, it's not whether it's true or false, most of what donald trump says are false, the question is what is he frying to achieve? i think what holds it together is he's trying to a ing ting to russians. and he's trying to appease the russians in that meeting, he's probably trying to appease the russians not that meeting, so firing of the fbi head who's not part of the russians. >> if i'm donald trump's lawyer -- >> you've been his lawyer all night. >> you have now given the best possible defense, not to obstruct justice, but to appease the russians, which he has a perfect right to do. >> i have to hit pause here, because we do, van, finally have

to make a commercial break. thank you, we'll be right back, because one republican breaking his silence talking about this tonight will be my guest next. (avo) come with us... ...to a new world. deeper than the ocean. as unfathomable as the universe. a world that doesn't exist outside you... ...but within you. where breakthrough science is replacing chemotherapy with immunotherapy. where we can now attack the causes of disease,

not just the symptoms. where medicines once produced for all, are now designed to fit you. today 140,000 biopharmaceutical researchers go bodly to discover treatments and cures unimaginable ten years ago... ...and are on the verge of more tomorrow.

breaking news, the white house now researching impeachment proceedings, the white house is bracing for that situation. congressman, good to have you back. not many republicans are talking about this tonight, let me give you a chance to respond to the president's words as reported by the "new york times" about feeling relief that the russian investigation was over because of the firing of jim comey. your reaction? >> can you say that again? >> your reaction to the president's words as reported bring the "new york times" today? >> listen, there are a couple of things, he had several words that were reported by the "new york times" today, i think it was the nut thing with comey, and i got to say, this is a patriot, he has served his country very well, i don't agree with that assessment. but of course there is context with text, and we don't know the context of the meeting itself

and what he was trying to do. we don't know that of course, but i don't agree with that assessment, obviously, i think there has been such a microscope of course, some of it legitimate, you have an nyt reporter on here earlier that said that comey was seeking more resources in the investigation when the deputy attorney general said absolutely not, that did not happen at all to his knowledge and he was even in the story. so there's this -- we have a special prosecutor who's been appointed, let the facts lay where they may and let's see what happened. >> you talk it about president trump's fitness for office. the fbi director says that the president asked him to stop the investigation into general michael flynn, that's in the comey memo, that's of course according to comey, the president denies it. and the president said, i faced

great pressure from russia because of the firing, has your opinion of the man, the en. >> i would be hypocritical if i said it's not worrisome to leak information and endanger people's names. i mean that's a big deal. obviously it's a big deal. i haven't lost my confidence in the president to be our president. i just haven't. so there was some stumbles this week, and there will be more stumbles, there always are with every president. >> but you believe he is still fit to be president of the united states? >> i believe he's still fit and the people around him are as well, many of whom i have great respect for. and obviously any president has

to have great things around him to perform. >> i appreciate your time and thank you so much for coming on. and to all of you, i hope you have a good weekend, thanks as always for joining us, a. i'm about to utter the single shortest looped phrase in news today. our top story is, because as quickly as we say it it is made obsolete by the next story and the next one after that. on top of the president boasting to the russians in the oval office about that nut job comey. we have just gotten word that james comey will testify, will testify publicly before the senate intelligence committee. for that, let's go to the capitol. when is this going to happen? what do you know? >> reporter: we know as of now no date firmly has been set. there's the