>> the president has a right to fire the fbi director. it is just a fact, david. >> matt, it's not. >> go ahead, david. >> if you ask the question, am i a person of interest, you are not asking that to a person over whom you have the power to fire. that's what the president did. am i person of interest, will you shut down this whole investigation is embarrassing. >> he gave the answer he liked. he said you are not a person of interest. >> matt, matt, matt. >> go ahead, david. >> this is turning into an ugly dog contest for pathetic talking points, really. >> thanks a lot, i appreciate it. >> it's true. it's true. >> matt. >> the president confirmed he fired comey to shut down an investigation into espionage. the president asked -- whatever talking point you give, we have the fact here. everything the president said about the encounter was a lie. there was an investigation into

espionage, the president confirmed to the american people and to the russians this is why he shut down the investigation and the idea that comey smu -- sorry, the president is vindicated because at that time he was not the target of the investigation he wanted shut down, sad. >> matt, i have a question for you. is it ever appropriate for any president, president trump or president bush or president obama, to ask the head of the fbi for a loyalty pledge? >> yeah, absolutely. as a matter of fact, i sat in on the personnel process in the whole beginning of the bush administration. and with every single person -- by the way, the head of the fbi serves at the pleasure of the president. it is slightly unique in that they get these five year terms. five at a time. the president can serve the fbi director -- can fire the fbi director any time he wants. it was implicit in every person we hired to serve in the

administration. it happened with every person he interacted with. >> this is what president -- >> let me finish. >> quickly. >> this question of loyalty is a question of this. can you see yourself serving this president? do you respect this president? and do you respect the agenda on which he is trying to push. >> okay. >> matt, matt. >> and people add that loyalty means you are asking blood oath to do something wrong. >> okay, okay. matt, you made your point. go, david. >> taking all the air time won't make your arguments better. >> david, i'm not an ugly dog and i'm not taking the air time. sorry, buddy. >> as i said, the president of the united states and his supporters are enunciating a new rule. it has never been true in american history the director of the fbi is a tool of the president. that has never been true. yes, the president could fire the fbi director theoretically. in the past it has always happened for good cause. it is incredibly dangerous.

it is something that does not happen in free countries. >> that's the last word. gentlemen thank you very much. matt, thank you. thanks to all of you. we have a lot of news. let's get right to it. >> all right. good morning to all of you. welcome to your new day. it is friday, june 9th, 8:00 in the east. president trump breaking his silence on twitter. lashing out at jim comey. he wants you to know that comey is a liar, except for the things he said that were good for the president. he also calls him a leaker. now, comey repeatedly told senators that it is the president who was lying about why he fired him and some of his efforts to get him to drop the michael flynn investigation. >> i think it is our segue that people enjoy the most. >> what i enjoy is when people get to see just how on the edge of getting it done we are when it comes to live television. >> and there is this. meanwhile, republicans are defending president trump's

actions, argue guing that he's new to the job. there is a steep learning curve and they are pouncing on comey's concerns about former attorney general loretta lynch. that's what they think the biggest nugget is from yesterday. let's begin with joe johns live at the white house. >> the president stayed off of twitter for a long time. and then when he weighed in, it was very cautious essentially echoing the words in a statement by his attorney marc kasowitz before the comey testimony. let's take a look at the tweet. despite so many false statements and lies, total and complete vindication and, wow, comey is a leaker. trump and his attorney seizing on the fact that comey did tell the president he was not under investigation, but all of this really sort of ignores the bigger picture, the headline of

the comey testimony is that the former fbi director weighed in on no uncertain terms saying the president is a liar. >> although the law required no reason at all to fire an fbi director, the administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the fbi. >> james comey repeatedly calling the president of the united states a liar, both when discussing president trump's initial explanation of why he was fired. >> by saying that the organization was in disarray, that it was poorly led, that the workforce had lost confidence in its leader, those were lies, plain and simple. >> and when explaining why he decided to start taking ma ti tickulous notes about their interactions. >> i was concerned about our meeting. >> i can say the president has been a liar. i think it is frankly insulting

that question would be asked. >> during three hours of testimony, comey recounted the events that ultimately led to his abrupt dismissal. >> it is my judgment that i was fired because of the russia investigation. i was fired in some way to change or the endeavor was to change the way the russia investigation was being conducted. >> confirming for the first time that his memos are now in the hands of special counsel robert mueller, raising the possibility that obstruction of justice may be part of mueller's investigation. >> i don't think it's for me to say whether the conversation i had with the president was an effort to obstruct. i took it as a disturbing thing, very concerning, but that's something the social counsel will work towards. >> comey did lay out a number of interactions that concerned him, including the president clearing the room for allegedly telling comey he hoped he could let the flynn investigation go. >> so why did he kick everybody out of the oval office? why would you kick the attorney general, the president, chief of

staff out to talk to me if it was about something else? and, so, that -- that to me is -- as an investigator is a very significant fact. >> but was it an order? >> i took it as a direction. >> right. >> this is the president of the united states with me alone saying i hope this. i took it as this is what he wants me to do. i didn't oh bbey that, but that how i took it. >> the president denying this interaction took place. >> the president never in form or in substance directed or suggested that mr. comey stop investigating anyone. >> while simultaneously celebrating other parts of comey's testimony. >> mr. comey has now finally confirmed publically what he repeatedly told president trump privately, that is that the president was not under investigation as part of any probe into russian interference. >> still unclear whether the

president actually recorded their conversations as he suggested on twitter after firing comey. >> i've seen the tweet about tapes. i hope there are tapes. >> the president's lawyer also sharply criticizing this admission. >> i ask a friend of mine to share the content with a reporter. didn't do it myself for a variety of reasons but i asked him to because i thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. >> comey raised concerns about a discussion with former attorney general loretta lynch about down playing the significance of the fbi's investigation into hillary clinton's private e-mail server. >> at one point the attorney general directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me. >> comey also said this tarmac meeting with former president bill clinton led him to announce the outcome of the initial clinton e-mail investigation.

>> now today in the rose garden the president is expected to attend a news conference with the president of romania, an opportunity to get at least a couple questions to him to try to gauge his reaction in person to the comey testimony. this will be the first news conference the president has done in about three weeks. >> all right, joe. that will be an anticipated event today. let's bring in the panel, chris cillizza, phil mud and jeffrey tubin. this is great. we've got the intel, the politics and the law. let's start with the politics. chris cillizza, what do we believe now that everybody has time to marinate and spin? what is the state of play post comey? >> he said, he said with a giant question mark about a taping system at the white house. and then obviously several ongoing investigations in congress and the one bob mueller

is overseeing. >> do you think there are tapes? >> to me when you go the next step here, chris, is the tapes. do they exist? sarah huckabee sanders joked about it yesterday and said, i'll look behind the couches. we, the media, didn't bring this up. donald trump tweeted on may the 12th, three days after he fired james comey that the tapes, quote, unquote, i'm not sure why that means. >> he said you better hope there are no tapes. >> you better hope there are no tapes. since that time, trump has no comment in an interview with fox saying i can't talk about it. sean spicer has said the president has nothing to add and sarah huckabee sanders said she had no idea if there was a taping system. there is one person who definitely knows there is a taping system, i presume, which is donald trump. i think that recording if they exist is even more important now than it was before and if it doesn't exist, we need to know that, too. >> let's pretend it doesn't.

let's move ahead as though it doesn't and jeffrey we're just going to have to take the word of the president and the word of james comey and figure out how to reconcile those. >> that's true. but it is important to remember, investigators investigate and there is a lot more to look into. let me give you one example. the day before comey's testimony, there was testimony from dan coats, the director of national intelligence and the head of the national security agency about their contacts with donald trump regarding the russia investigation and the same issues that comey was testifying about. they refused to answer effectively. they are going to be called back. they may be subpoenaed. and if they were approached by the president in a similar way to try to shut down the russia investigation, then that will be an important piece of the puzzle about what went on here. so it just shows you how, you know, investigations proceed and we focus on these big super bowl

moments, understandably, like comey's testimony. but between special counsel mueller and the congressional committees, there is just a lot more to look at here and they are going to continue looking. >> so, phil, what do you see through your lens in this? we did hear comey say yesterday he told the president the dossier, we're not looking at you for that. a couple of other times he was careful about his answer. he said to the president there is no counter intelligence investigation you were involved in. but then he said this special counsel is probably looking at trump for obstruction. what do you think we learned yesterday about anything that really matters? >> we learned a couple of things. number one, we learned that everything, almost everything the media was reporting was accurate. and all comey did was to confirm what the president of the united states had told us. we're talking about he said, he

said. we don't need to do that, chris. the president of the united states told us that he fired the fbi director for conducting a counter intelligence investigation. that's a fact. we learned one interesting thing as well, though, and i think this is critically important and nobody is talking about it. comey keeps throwing grenades right at the foot of the attorney general jeff sessions. jeff sessions when he recused himself from the investigation said this is sort of a technicality. i had a couple passing meetings with the russian ambassador, but i'll step back. what does comey do? he tosses a grenade and says i thought the attorney general would recuse himself, but if you want me to explain why, i have to do it in a closed session. you know what that's saying? it wasn't a technicality and you should ask me more. sessions has a lot to answer for. and i think comey twice in two days threw grenades at him.

>> let's play the sound and then jeffr jeffrey, you can weigh in on the legalitie legalities. >> he was very close to and evidentbly going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons. we also were aware of facts that i can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a russia related investigation problematic. >> yeah. that begs some questions, jeffrey. >> well, and in the closed session, according to our cnn reporting, comey talked about the fact that there may have been a third meeting between jeff sessions and russian officials that he didn't report in his sworn statements about his contacts with russian officials, which makes sessions' position very problematic and potentially another figure to be investigated by the special counsel. the attorney general of the united states. so between the clear tension

between the president and jeff sessions and sessions being investigated in several places, sessions' current status seems very preprecarious. >> am i being cynical to say that -- >> yes. >> other than i think you're the best that we've had on. >> that's just pure honesty. >> bob mueller has his investigation, right? and whatever potential criminality he sees, that's one thing. but didn't we hear all we needed to in the gop response tomorrow? if anything political is going to be done about this inappropriateness that people refer to, it is going to come down to a vote. the gop has the numbers, assuming something violent doesn't happen in the midterm to change the balance of power. they clearly don't want to move against the president. they clearly stood behind him and dismissed this, pointing at loretta lynch as being more interesting than everything they

heard about the president of the united states donald trump. doesn't that tell you everything you need to know? >> i think it tells you a lot. what you have to do is bifurcate it. there is the legal piece of it and the investigative piece of it and that's congress. that's mueller, obviously. and then there is the political piece of it. and those things obviously, they're concentric circles, not overlapping circles. on the political front, any time you see a president face deep distress politically speaking, it's not because the opposition party turns on them. it is because their party turns on them, right? george w. bush, richard nixon, you know, these people, bill clinton when he was in the polling, the reason that happens is because your party abandons you. trump is, you know, mid to high 30s in approval rating. but what that -- the numbers underneath those numbers are important. democrats hugely opposed to

donald trump and the job he's doing. independents about two-thirds opposed to the job he's doing. not split. but republicans still broadly speaking, two-thirds, 70% supportive of this president. as long as that's true, a republican member of congress, let's say in a safe congressional district looks at it and says there is zero to gain from me breaking with the president. all i'm asking for at that point is a primary challenge some time next year. so unless and until they make that collective decision, that politically for survivability they cannot tas idly or otherwise support this president, i don't see a broad scale running away from him. >> still, put your fbi hat on quickly for us. you heard criticism from people saying james comey just seemed

stunned often by what the president was saying, rather than doing whatever protocol he was supposed to do. he did say that he considered telling jeff sessions that he knew that sessions was going to be recusing. he went to the acting deputy, but never got a response. is there something else he should have done to alert somebody else? >> i have heard that conversation. i heard it again this morning. i would have been stunned had i been the fbi director. i think it is hard for people outside this city to understand how weird this is. we talk about it every day, and it seems like it is becoming normal. it is not. so i can see comey walking away saying, wow, what am i supposed to do. but the piece that's missing is going back to sessions. comey shouldn't have to go to sessions to say please stop this from happening. any attorney general should have said, why did they take me out of that meeting? what was said and immediately called the white house and said thanks, jim. hey, mr. president, never do that again.

the toughest attorney general i worked for never would have let that happen ever. >> okay. that's great perspective. thank you all, gentlemen, very much. all right. so based on what james comey said under oath, do president trump's actions amount to obstruction of justice? we discuss with the key players of the watergate scandal. what parallels do they see next. , so they can protect their teammates and the surrounding wetlands, too. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.

i needed something more to help control my type 2 diabetes. my a1c wasn't were it needed to be. so i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's suppose to do, release its own insulin. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2,

or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck, severe pain in your stomach, or symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin, increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. once-weekly trulicity may help me reach my blood sugar goals. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

okay. it is a central question that lingers after james comey's

sworn testimony on capitol hill. do president trump's actions amount to obstruction of justice? joining us now two men who know, a former u.s. deputy attorney general who served as counsel to watergate special prosecutors and cnn contributor and former nixon white house counsel. great to have your experience with us. you say that the details you heard yesterday are red meat to prosecutors, such as? >> such as bob mueller. >> what details did you hear that you consider particularly juicy? >> i think it was -- what's most significant is that the president himself out of his own mouth provided the essential motive for a criminal prosecution or obstruction of justice. that is his admission in his tweet and in his rather remarkable assertions to the russian foreign minister and ambassador that the reason he

had fired comey was to relieve the pressure that the president felt on him arising from the russia investigation. that is precisely within the confines of the federal obstruction of justice statute, which prohibits any person from endeavoring to interfere with or to influence a federal criminal investigation. in my view, there is not much of a line of defense other than the diversion, don't look here, look there, that the president or his people can mount. >> john dean, do you agree? what did you hear? >> i would agree. in fact, i would add to what phillip said. trump's own words again when he was speaking with lester holt who said, well, i got rid of the director because that fbi investigation thing, it was a phony story, fake news and what have you. he just displayed in a remarkable fashion the kind of criminal intents you need and

the obstruction statute is broad, so he has been playing with a very, very dangerous bit of law. >> we've been talking all morning and yesterday morning about how there is a difference between sort of the political fall-out and the legal fall-out of all of this. do you think what you heard does rise to the level of becoming a criminal case? >> i think the answer to that question is yes and as jeff mentioned a little earlier, there is still more fact gathering to be done. anyone who saw director coats and admiral rogers testifying or avoiding acknowledging during their testimony the other day had to conclude that the president had also intervened with them to ask them to try to influence the direction of the russia investigation, which is another identity direct parallel with watergate where president

nixon had his aids who ultimately went to prison intervene with the intelligence committee to try to waive off the fbi from continuing the watergate investigation. in this case, you don't even have the insulation that president nixon had, which was the intervention of his aids in doing this. president trump himself directly apparently was placing these calls. >> play this out for us, john dean. if in fact you are both right and this does rise to that level of some sort of criminal action, does special counsel robert mueller have the power to indict president trump if he agreed with you? >> that is a fascinating question. phil and i have talked about that. as it stands right now, the department of justice has a set of regulations that came out of 1973 when spir row ago knew got himself in trouble with the law

and the department of justice legal council issued an opinion that the vice president could be indicted but the president of the united states could not be indicted. that memo was updated in 2000. the reason that phillip is particularly interested in it, he prepared a very thorough memo on the other side of the issue. it is not a settle ed legal question. it has not been resolved by the supreme court. so unless mr. mueller is starting down the route that phillip found he could go, it's the policy of the department of justice that presidents can't be indicted. but this doesn't mean that he's not making a dandy case that could be referred up to the house of representatives where they do make impeachments. >> but we're back into the political calculus of this and as you know republicans control congress. if it is anything based on what their feed back has been today,

they are totery disinclined -- >> it will not happen during this congress. it will happen after 2018 should the democrats take control of the house. >> okay. so very quickly, what do you think is next? >> well, i think bob mueller is going to continue the investigation. i think he's going to see whether, as john says, the house has any interest in conducting its own parallel investigation. and then ultimately i think he's going to have a very tough choice to make, which is whether to test the proposition, whether the president, the sitting president can be indicted, as i mentioned earlier. i think the law and policy is that even a sitting president is not above the law. president trump famously said during the campaign that he could shoot somebody on fifth avenue and wouldn't lose a vote. i think by the same token, he would think that he's immune from the federal criminal law.

i don't think that's the system the founders established here. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. it is great to be able to call upon both of your experience. thank you for being here. chris. >> coming up, a big guest for you, a senator whose questions led to the comey leak revelation. what does republican suzanne collins believe? what should be done? the answer is next. would you like to overcome sluggishness?

trubiotics can help you feel lighter, more energetic, by naturally supporting your digestive and immune health. trubiotics, a daily probiotic that helps restore the balance of good bacteria. trubiotics, from one a day.

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. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

one of the more impressive exchanging, let's say, during james comey's senate testimony was when he revealed he asked a friend to leak his memos. take a listen. >> did you show copies of your memos to anyone outside of the department of justice? >> yes. >> and to whom did you show copies? >> i asked -- the president tweeted on friday after i got fired that i better hope there is not tapes. i woke up in the middle of the night on monday night because it didn't dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our

conversation, there might be a tape and my judgment was i needed to get that out in the public square. so i asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. >> joining us now is the senator you just saw there, suzanne collins of maine. thank you for joining us after that big day. what was your big take-away from the comey testimony? >> well, there were several. one was that it was clear that the president asked mr. comey to do an inappropriate action, and that was to drop the investigation of general michael flynn. that was clearly inappropriate. it crossed a boundary that the president should not have crossed. second, i'm still perplexed as to why mr. comey did not say to the president at the time, mr. president, you can't ask me to do that. that's not the way our system

works. or at least in hindsight have a call made from the justice department to the white house counsel talking about what had happened. and third mr. comey's testimony established that he was deeply troubled by his interactions with the president, but that the president was not under investigation as of may 9th when mr. comey was fired. >> why is that relevant to you, the last part? >> it's relevant to me in two ways. one is that our investigation before the senate intelligence committee, it is a broad investigation into russian interference in our election last fall about which we have considerable evidence and whether or not either president trump and/or members of his

campaign staff had direct contacts with the russians that led to collusion or collaboration in this effort. so the fact that the president was not under investigation by no means exonerates his aids. it by no means ends the issue because the special counsel will be continuing the investigation. >> on the matters that involve dialogue between the president and the former fbi director, whom are you inclined to believe at this point? >> i found mr. comey's testimony to be credible, candid and thorough. that doesn't mean that he's right in every detail that he's remembering. it doesn't necessarily mean his interpretations are accurate. but he testified under oath, and i do believe that he's an individual of integrity who

would not deliberately lie under oath. >> that would mean that the president is lying to the american people about his efforts to meddle in the flynn probe. >> well, i'm not sure that we can reach definitive conclusions, but i tend to place more credence in testimony that's given under oath. >> what about your level of concern about what comey said about jeff sessions, his concerns about the legitimacy of the recusal, his concerns about trust in sessions when he was confronted by the president and what he could do about it to go up the chain as you guys were talking about and his need to talk to you in a private session about why he thought sessions would have to recuse himself? >> first of all, let me say that jeff sessions clearly made the right decision to recuse himself and he did so promptly. but there remain a number of questions about his own interactions with the russians.

we on the intelligence committee want to know the answers to those questions and we have begun to request information from the attorney general to allow us to get to the bottom of that and i'm sure the special counsel in his investigation will want to know as well. >> two other quick things. go ahead, senator, unless you have something to add. >> i will note that the attorney general this morning put out a press release disputing what happened, and that's why it is so important that we get to the bottom of it. >> the word inappropriate keeps being used, and i keep asking whether or not that's a word that will ever carry any accountability. it seems like a word that's used when nothing will really be done about that action. if it was inappropriate but not illegal, does the president have anything to be concerned about? >> well, he does.

i think this reflects the fact that this is the first president in our history who has had neither a military nor a political background and i think he just does not fully understand or appreciate the boundaries and that it is totally wrong -- i'll go beyond inappropriate. it is wrong for the president of the united states to tell or imply to an fbi director that an investigation should not go forward. >> but how could he not know when he asked the a.g. and his son-in-law and others to leave and when they tried to re-enter told them to leave so he could talk to comey. doesn't that tell you everything you needed to know about whether or not the president was being -- acted in ignorance or with complete intentionality? >> not necessarily, and here's why. the first interaction that the president had with mr. comey in

early january at trump towers, it was the fbi director who cleared the room so that he could have a one-on-one discussion with the president about that sa lay shous dossier. and i wonder if perhaps that made the president think that whenever there is some conversation to be had with the fbi director that it should be one-on-one because he had two subsequent one-on-one meetings, as well as other phone calls with the fbi director. that doesn't make it right. but ironically perhaps the fbi's actions in that first meeting send a signal to the president that this is how their interactions should take place. but the point is, by now he certainly should know better. and over several month's time he

should know better. >> senator collins, appreciate your take on this situation and we enjoyed watching your questioning yesterday. it was helpful to the american people. >> thank you very much, chris. >> be well, senator. >> very interesting theory that she just said there. we hadn't heard that yet in the past two days. >> there is some facts to build into it, when the president said to people get out, i want to talk to comey, that's it. when comey was -- >> asked for privacy with the president, yeah. >> there was a group involved and it was comey designated to talk about the dossier. so it is a little different. >> maybe the president doesn't understand that nuance. we'll talk more about that. but there has been a stunning outcome in the u.k. theresa may's election gamble has backfired. what does this mean for her ability to lead through brexit? . i decided to see if there was a way for design to play a... ...positive role in what was going on in the world.

there's a jacket that's reflective for visibility... ...a sleeping bag jacket, jackets that turn into tents. i usually do my fashion sketches on the computer. i love drawing on the screen. there's no lag time at all. it feels just like my markers. with fashion, you can dress people and help people. it's really cool to see your work come to life. weli had to get myike sunscoffee, jane lynchion. well what can we do to fix this? wake up earlier? awe, that's cute. no. next time use masterpass. add value. order your coffee ahead. speed past the line. open the pool on time. ♪ winning the morning... ...priceless don't just buy it. masterpass it.

♪ to err is human. to anticipate is lexus. experience the lexus rx with advanced safety standard. experience amazing.

time for the five things to know for your new day. president trump breaking his twitter silence and calling out james comey's senate testimony saying his statements were lies and calling comey a, quote, leaker. comey told congress under oath repeated by that the president and his administration has lied about why comey was fired. >> after his public testimony, james comey briefed senators privately, telling them jeff sessions may have had an undisclosed third meeting with sergei kislyak. >> theresa may announcing she will form a minority moment after a conservative majority lost its seat. >> two americans accused of working as terrorists operatives. the men, one from new york, the other from michigan, are charged with providing material support to he has bow la. both recruits have military training in lebanon.

>> reality winner pleading not guilty to classified information. but in the criminal complaint, an fbi agent says she admitted to printing classified information and mailed it to a news outlet. >> you can go to newdaycnn.com for the latest. >> listen to this story. this week cnn hero used his entire life savings to open a gym where kids can get free tutoring and dinner and be active. >> i've been shot at multiple times. he shot 26 rounds at the car. it was a reason he didn't hit me. it is for me to be here for those kids. i've been there. so when they hear from me, they're like, okay, he's not sugar coating it. no mentors. no positive role models. you're putting them in a position to be in prison or the county morgue. i see a kid that hasn't been

heard yet. >> go to cnnher ro rows.com and nominate someone you think should be a hero. >> the fight is on. we have leaking details about what president trump's legal team plans to do next. that's the bottom line ahead. >> cnn heroes, every day changing the world is brought to you by subaru, love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. ♪ (vo) you can pass down a subaru forester. (dad) she's all yours. (vo) but you get to keep the memories. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

bp uses flir cameras - a new thermal imagining technology - to inspect difficult-to-reach pipelines, so we can detect leaks before humans can see them. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. so, if anyone has a reason that these two should not be wed, speak now. (coughs) so sorry. oh no... it's just that your friend daryl here is supposed to be live streaming the wedding and he's not getting any service. i missed, like, the whole thing. what? and i just got an unlimited plan. it's the right plan, wrong network. you see, verizon has the largest, most reliable 4g lte network in america. it's built to work better in cities.

tell you what, just use mine. thanks. no problem. all right, let's go live. say hi to everybody who wasn't invited! (vo) when it really, really matters, you need the best network and the best unlimited. plus, get our best smartphones for just $15 a month. afi sure had a lot on my mind. my 30-year marriage... ...my 3-month old business... plus...what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i made a point to talk to my doctor. he told me about eliquis.

eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. not only does eliquis treat dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis had both... ...and that turned around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis right for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you.

jim comey called president trump a liar during his testimony. this morning president trump is firing back in two ways. one twitter. despite so many false statements and lies, total and complete vindication. wow. comey is a leaker. and then the second way, cnn has just learned the president's legal team is planning to file a complaint against comey in connection with the former fbi head's memos he leaked to the media. let's get the bottom line. don't say you are not a lawyer because you have got to play one right now. what do you make of the president saying i'm going to sue you, basically? he's going to send a complaint to the inspector general. what could the outcome of that be? >> and this is all related to comey describing after he was fired, getting those memos to

his friend, asking them to give that context, describe that content to a reporter to get that in the public domain to launch a special prosecutor. he had a clear agenda. what i think this is, when you see this latest headline, add that to what we have heard this morning. this is some of the most aggressive coordinated pushback from team trump i would say since he's taken office. and obviously the president, the tweet you read joined in the fray today as well, pushing back, calling comey a liar and a leaker. you had the former campaign manager out over morning television trying to damage comey's credibility and now the outside legal team saying they are going to file this complaint. this is all in an attempt to knock comey down. that is clearly their strategy here and they're doing that in a more coordinated and aggressive fashion than they're doing today. >> what did comey doing that was wrong? that wasn't classified information he gave to a friend.

he was no longer in the government. he was a private citizen. what is the legal underpinning here? >> it's not clear he did anything wrong. you don't have to be right to file a complaint, as you know. donald trump is famous for that, right? so it is not clear that this would go the way that marc kasowitz team wants this to go. but there is a pr strategy. i know chris doesn't want me to say i'm not a lawyer, but i'm not. >> i am. don't worry about it. what's interesting is they picked an avenue is that it would probably -- i don't know what the rules are specific to the ig, but will probably insulate the president from being deposed. if he filed a defamation suit, i'll probably be deposed and i doubt president trump wants to go down that road. >> i doubt that, too. although, it seems to me, chris, i don't know how the president is going to be totally insulated from being deposed at the end of

the day when the mueller investigation is all said and done. >> well, talking to mueller is different. i'm saying like deposed in a way where we would find out about it. >> oh. well, it seems to me if mueller does do as jim comey suggested yesterday that he sort of expects him to do, which is to take up an obstruction of justice investigation here, it seems to me that at some point mueller is going to need to depose donald trump. >> so what is your big take-away from yesterday, david? >> well, this is one, seeing now an aggressive push back and perhaps this is the trump team trying to say mr. president you were off twitter that whole day. we've got your back. we can show you how aggressively we can push back on this. we'll hear from the president this afternoon and we'll see if he keeps up this discipline of just this one tweet right now. my other big take away is a sessions fall-out. there are lots of questions now for jeff sessions the attorney general to answer. was there a third kislyak meeting that never got reported?

and two, as comey described you lingering in the oval office, did you have in your mind that it was inappropriate for the fbi director and the president to have a one-on-one. we need to hear sessions side of that story, especially because the president and the white house still will not offer the president's competence in session specifically. they will only say the president has full confidence in the whole cabinet. sessions the included in that. but they will not say specifically that he has the president's confidence. >> thank you very much for the bottom line. >> good points. good points. thank you for being with us. cnn news room with poppy harlow and john berman is going to pick up right after this break. stay with cnn. >> have a great weekend. ♪

when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites. z282uz zwtz y282uy ywty

>> good morning everyone. i'm poppy harlow. >> and i'm john berman. did the president just accuse the former fbi director of a felony? and if so, is he willing to go under oath to prove it? a short while ago after one of the longest twitter doubts of his presidency, donald trump wrote despite so many false statements and lies, total and complete vindication and wow, comey is a leaker. >> false statements and lies. if that is referring directly to james comey and comey lied during his explosive testimony on capitol hill, that would be perjury. so what exactly is the president's version of events and one more question that should be really easy to answer, in fact, it should have already been answered, are there actual tapes of their conversations? we could find out today. why? because the president takes part in a news conference this afternoon, the first time he has answered questions in weeks. let's go to the white house. our joe johns is there. joe, good morning to you. you just got some