are saying it's doubtful. >> what happens when it's about whether or not telling people tax relief, next week. you want these tactics. matt schlapp, you matter, my brother. that's why i have you on the show. your opinion matters. thank you, as always. thanks to you, our international viewers. thank you for watching us. for you "cnn newsroom" is next. for cnn viewers, the president is tweeting, making news. guess what, we're doing to get after it. >> you have to start asking what is the president so desperate to hide from the american people. >> he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. he's weighing that option. >> what the hell are we investigating? >> this seems more like an evident to prosecute donald trump. >> we're not doing to let the president choose to conduct this investigation. >> do you believe he should invoke executive privilege? >> depends on the scope of the question.

>> i think it important to establish why he was involved in the dismissal of director comey since he had recused himself. >> the whole thing is sour grapes. >> did sessions meet with a russian ambassador? >> we shouldn't get carried away with things. >> announcer: this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to "new day." special counsel in russia investigation is under fire. a longtime friend of president trump said the president is considering firing robert mueller. the white house denies that the president ever discussed this issue with his friend. >> all right. in just a few hours attorney general jeff sessions is going to face tough questions at a senate hearing mainly about his contacts with russia and his involvement in the firing of james comey. what did the attorney general know about what his intentions were with james comey. will he answer those questions? cnn ryan nobles live on capitol

hill. ryan. >> reporter: good morning. attorney general jeff sessions expected to be grilled today by members of the senate intelligence committee. but just how forthcoming the attorney general will be remains to be seen. his testimony comes at a time where president trump an his associates appear to be interfering with the work of the special counsel, bob mueller. >> i think he's considering, perhaps, terminating the special counsel. >> just hours after leaving the white house, president trump's longtime friend, christopher ruddy, claims the president is considering firing special counsel robert mueller, the man in charge of investigating possible collusion between the trump campaign and russia. >> i think he's weighing that option. i think it's pretty clear by what one of his lawyers said on television recently. i personally think it would be a very significant mistake. >> white house press secretary sean spicer insisting mr. ruddy never spoke to the president regarding this issue. but ours earlier spicer's deputy

said ruddy, quote, speaks for himself. self trump allies now attacking mueller's credibility despite initially praising his appointment. former trump campaign adviser newt gingrich tweeting monday, republicans are delusional if they think special counsel is doing to be fair. but only last month gingrich praised mueller as a, quote, superb choice. one of the reasons for the revolt, who mueller has hired for his legal team. cnn analysis reveals three of the five lawyers on mueller's team have donated almost exclusively to democrats, with two giving the maximum donation to hillary clinton's 2016 campaign. still, white house sources tell cnn trump's advisers are urging him not to fire mueller, a move lawmakers feel could backfire. >> it would be astonishing were he to entertain this. the echos of watergate are getting louder and louder.

>> all this comes ahead of public testimony by embattled attorney jeff sessions. sessions is expected to face a grilling about russia and the firing of james comey. >> he was very close to and inevitably going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons. we also were aware of facts i can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a russia investigation problematic. >> sources tell cnn comey told senators behind closed doors that sessions may have had a third meeting with russian ambassador with sergey kislyak which the justice department denies. it will likely be brought up today along with comey's account that sessions was booted from an oval office meeting back in february before comey said the president asked him to drop the mike flynn investigation. >> my sense was the attorney general knew he shouldn't be leaving, which is why he was lippingering. >> it's unclear whether sessions will invoke executive privilege to avoidancing questions.

>> do you believe he should invoke executive privilege on conversations with the president? >> i think it depends on the scope of the questions. >> and the idea that president trump may attempt to fire the special counsel robert mueller who is roundly condemned by republicans and democrats, and among them the house speaker paul ryan appearing this morning on radio show ryan told guest host guy benton, quote, i think we should let bob mueller do his work. chris and alisyn. >> thank you very much. let's discuss with panel, chris cillizza, a.b. stoddard, cnn senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor jeffrey toobin. chris cillizza, the possibility that robert mueller could be fired. obviously you hear people saying that would be a very bad idea. had they known james comey was going to be fired, they would say that before then also. what are you hearing? >> well, look, anyone that you

would talk to, and i've talked to about this will say it's a terrible idea. it would be politically disastrous. but that doesn't mean donald trump -- you can rule donald trump out from doing it. my read on the chris ruddy thing is the time line seemed pretty clear. he goes to the white house. we now know he does not meet with the president. he comes out, gives an interview to pbs in which he says they are thinking about doing this. i think it would be a really bad idea. seems to me someone at the staff level he meets with at the white house says this is in the mix. this is a possibility. ruddy thinks it's a really pad idea and knows that the best way to communicate that it's a bad idea to his friend, the president of the united states, is to say something on television immediately. now, all of that said, does it rule out the possible that donald trump still does it? remember the times ivanka trump, she knows, she'll steer him,

she'll do what he says, not paris accords, reince priebus, kellyanne conway, all have his ears. everybody has his ear until he does what does he anyway. he's an island unto himself even at the white house. that makes predicting what he will do virtually impossible. >> al b., what's your read on this? i was joking in the last hour, with friends like this, who needs enema. supposed to be his pudy, goes out and puts him in this box. not a good, active friendship there. do you believe there's any suggestion that the president might make a move on mueller? >> well, i think, chris ruddy, chris cillizza is right that ruddy might have been trying to telegraph that it would be a mistake. i think when we look at the dprich comments an other criticism of mueller, it's not entirely out of the realm of the possible that that would be something trump would consider,

that he wants us to end. he acts on impulse. it's not entirely impossible to imagine a scenario where he does it. >> an agreement from ryan an probably mcconnell to block any move pi congress afterward? >> well, as i understand it, he actually has to have deputy attorney general -- >> i'm saying, i'm jumping ahead. he can't fire them directly, has to be rosenstein. he goes to rosenstein and says do what i say. he folds. i'm saying this is what has to happen. gets rid of him. then congress makes a move. he'd have to know in advance ryan and mcconnell will protect me, won't do anything. >> i think they will protect him. the republicans who are in control of congress basically are very supportive of trump. you'd need two-third of the house and senate. >> veto proof. >> you're not going to get that for an anti-trump initiative of any kind. i do think when we talk about

the firing, it's not so simple as, you're fired, like on "the apprentice." he would have to get a justice department official rod rosenstein. rod rosenstein might refuse and quit, then go to associate attorney general then she might quit. that would be exactly what happened in the saturday night massacre in 1973 when they eventually did fire archibald cox. so the political cost is even greater because he would have to involve other people. >> chris cillizza, let's talk about what we definitely know this afternoon. that is attorney general jeff sessions is going to testify in open session in front of senate intel. what do we think he's going to say? >> i'm doing to downplay expectations and say not all that much. here are the things we know will be asked. he has to come up with some sort of answer. certainly he has to talk about the rumored third meeting. we don't know -- james comey

said in private session with senators following his testimony he may have met a third time with sergey kislyak. remember, did not disclose the first two meetings with kislyak during his confirmation hearing. then the comey interaction. the first one being the february 14th meeting in which sessions as well as everybody else is asked to leave the room so trump can have a one-on-one with comey. comey says sessions lippingered, knew he shouldn't do it. the other one was when comey asked sessions, you need to stop the president from calling me and asking me these direct questions, to comey's recollection sessions says nothing and sort of shrugs his shoulders, what can i do, it's this guy. he'll have a different recollection. this is under oath comey recollection and

counter-narrative under oath jeff sessions narrative that will run directly into one another. >> we are expecting, jeffreys saying it didn't go this way. i didn't sit there passively. you'll have he said, he said. but he's in the pox on what did you know questions when it comes to trump. because if he says, well, yeah, i knew he was going to move on comey. if he's says anything like that, he's got one set of issues. what if he said i didn't know. i didn't get any of it. afterwards when the president asked you to leave, you didn't ask any questions? no, i didn't. when comey said i don't want to be alone with him anymore, did you ask him why? no, i didn't ask him. those hurt him also. >> if he gives any of those answers. my understanding is he will not answer any questions about his interactions with the president. >> what's his basis? >> that's the interesting question of what he will say. we talk about him citing

executive privilege. he doesn't have an executive privilege. donald trump has an executive privilege. so if he says i cite executive privilege, the senators will be very much within their rights saying did the president instruct you to do that. if he says no, he has no legal basis. >> if he still won't answer them, what can they do. >> nothing. >> can they cite him for contempt? >> they could eventually. in fact, he's in control of what he said tomorrow. the senate has very few options in a practical sense to make him talk. yes, they could cite him for contempt and have litigation for months. in terms of what we learned today, it's really going to be very much up to sessions. >> a.b., we need to talk about this amazing cabinet meeting that the president held for the first time, his full cabinet meeting around the table. and they each went individually and engaged in a sycophantic be

palooza that we will now show you and the viewers. >> thank you, mr. president. just the greatest privilege of my life to serve as vice president to a president who is keeping his word to the american people. >> mr. president, i am privileged to be here, deeply honored, and i want to thank you for keeping your commitment to the american workers. >> mr. president, what an incredible honor it is to lead the department of health and human services at this pivotal time under your leadership. i can't thank you enough for the privilege you've given me and leadership you've shown. >> mr. president, thank you for the honor to serve and the country. it's a great privilege you've given me. >> on behalf of entire senior staff surrounding the president, we thank you for the opportunity and blessing you've given us to serve your agenda and the american people. >> amen. a.b., you've been in washington a long time. have you seen a cabinet meeting like that?

>> no, of course not. you could maybe see as maggie pointed out last year, wasn't exactly trump's idea but someone on the staff thought it would be great if people got together for the first time in this week, couple of weeks of mayhem and chaos and make it seem like everything is on track and making progress and say some positive things about the agenda, but it really came off like an order. that was what was so disturbing, to only see general mattis be the sole person to sort of focus on being proud to represent his department and men and women in uniform and the sacrifice they were making. it wasn't about the american people. it was about this boss. the presidency is not about one man. it's about us. it was really extraordinary. because it came off like an order, i think it blue up in their faces and became something that "saturday night live" wouldn't even know what to do with, it's so surreal.

>> that becomes the new trend. general mattis saying he was grateful for the opportunity to serve with the men and women. he made it much more about the we instead of the me. >> looked the president right in the eye when he was saying it. >> he did. chris cillizza, there is something to give thanks in all this, the opportunity to discuss what is the role of the media here. you hear from trump supporters, the president himself. the media thinks because they are not nice to me, they are too mean. what is your response to the idea of balance of naughty and nice. >> by the way, chris, just to add, the president up and tweeting this morning, bashing the phony media, i think. >> might as well be calling you by name. >> i know, which would be fine, probably help my twitter following. the fake news media, has never been so wrong or dirty. purposely incorrect stories and phony sources to meet their

agenda of hate. sad. that's my reading. this is tremendously corrosive to democracy. i can't say it any other way. undermining an institution aimed at trying to be fair, trying to get the facts for the people who represent us. a.b. makes the right point. we pay the president's salary. not we the media, we the people. we pay the president's salary. he is ultimately responsible to report back to us, the people. donald trump's conception of what is good and what is bad in media, which means -- is all based on who is nice to me and who is not nice to me. it is not fundamentally the job of the media. good and fair. nice to him and fair are not synonymous. our job is when there is something like that white house cabinet meeting to say, for me, i've been doing this for 20 years. i've not seen something like

that, this praisefest, in which the president sits and just sort of soaks it all in. thank you. i appreciate. that's not a normal thing we have seen. that is the media's job. the media's job is not to say, hey, mr. president, great job. love that cabinet meeting. really solid. >> i do think it is important to acknowledge that criticism of the news media is perfectly appropriate and often justified and so there's nothing inherently wrong with the president saying that we do a bad job at this or that. his rhetoric, talking about our hate and we're enemies of the american people, that i think -- i don't think that's helpful. >> we're doing soul searching obviously at the moment. >> damning our existence. >> cnn's special coverage of the sessions hearing begins at 2:00 p.m. eastern. please stay with cnn for that. >> panel, thank you very much. meanwhile health care, of course, on the minds of

americans as well as republican senators who have been crafting a bill behind closed doors. so what's in it? what can the democrats tell us about it? we ask up next. there's nothing more important to me than my vacation. so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your vacation is very important. that's why booking.com makes finding the right hotel for the right price easy. visit booking.com now to find out why we're booking.yeah!

♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. visit your volvo dealer to take advantage of our midsommar sales event offer. visit your volvo dealer to take advantage everything i did circled smaround that cigarette when i started taking the chantix that urge just slowly diminished and it was a great and empowering feeling. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. when you try to quit smoking, with or without

chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i don't even think about cigarettes anymore. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. many insurance plans cover chantix for a low or $0 copay.

when deputy attorney general rod rosenstein named bob mueller special counsel, we saw something, nonpartisan about his credentials. now the president is actually considering firing mueller. >> i think he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. i think he's weighing that option. i think it's pretty clear by what one of his lawyers said on tv recently. i personally think it would be a very significant mistake. >> joining us now democratic senator from oregon. good morning, senator. >> good morning, how are you doing? >> i'm doing well. the white house refutes that. they say chris ruddy, who you just heard there, did not meet with the president. have you heard anything about

the president considering firing bob mueller? >> well, certainly what we've heard is ann coulter and newt gingrich jumping into the public space and saying he should be fired. something is going on behind the scenes. seems like a coordinated effort by president's allies to raise concerns that mueller isn't the right person, someone who everyone respects. i think the president is very concerned about having such a competent, seasoned, respected investigator on the case. >> one of the things we've heard, the criticism of bob mueller, is that there are three attorneys on the team that donated to democrats over the past more than 20 years. here are the -- this is from the s.e.c. records. so as you can see, there's one, james quarles who donated to republicans but mostly democrats. we don't know about the other

two attorneys, whether or not they donated to republicans. should who you donate to disqualify you? >> no, it certainly shouldn't. what he's doing is drawing on seasoned folks who have been at the department of justice or served in the law firm that he knows and respects. this is just a partial pick of the team. i suspect the full team will look more balanced in that respect. this shouldn't be the qualifying factor. are you bringing the skills necessary. do you have a reputation for good investigation and balanced investigation and i think that's the type of team mueller is assembling. >> these attorneys go back to watergate, enron, their credential vs never been questioned before now. do republicans have a point that if you only donate to democrats, that fundamentally shows your biased in some way. >> i don't think so, no. you could look at folks who probably served just republican presidents, is that a bias?

if they served in professional capacity, behaved in a professional fashion, have the right skills to bring to the effort, that's what should be considered. >> let's talk about what's going on with the senate. is there a plan in the senate, we know your republican colleagues have been working on their plan to repeal and/or replace obamacare. do you expect to see that plan this week? >> we sure hope to see it. the rumor is they want to hide it to the last second. 16 days from now, two weeks from this thursday, the republican plan is to bring it to the floor, be able to do it as an amendment to the house bill, and there by provide as little notice as public scrutiny as possible. for committee hearing. this is really a completely outrage situation that involves heat index of millions and millions of americans. i'm hoping grassroots will pay attention even though it's summertime, deep into the russia investigation. they really need to pay attention because a lot is at stake for peace of mind and quality of life of millions of

americans. >> let's talk about this. usa know the cbo rated the original house plan. they said under that plan 23 million fewer americans would have health insurance in the space of probably eight to ten years. has that been fixed in the senate plan? >> what we're hearing is we're going to throw in nice things like more money to take on opiates, lock down the cost sharing the government is supposed to give that trump has not been willing to commit to. they will throw in some special features, make this a little softer, phase it in more slowly over time, the elimination of expansion of medicaid. but i can tell you in oregon you're talking just with the expansion of medicaid, which in our state is the oregon health plan, you're talking about 400,000 people losing health care. whether it's done over six years or a couple of years, it's still a devastatingly diabolical plan to damage the lives of americ s

americans. so i think they will put a softer version out but i think it's going to hurt a lot of people. >> do you know about the provision for pre-existing conditions? will that still be in there? >> the rumor is they will drop the waiver for pre-existing conditions. these are all rumors because we haven't seen the bill. we should absolutely be having the press stop senators in the hallway and say are you willing to vote on something that will eliminate health care for your constituents without holding a town hall of a you've seen the text and the public has seen the text? are you willing to vote on this without going to committee where certainly its predecessor had dozens of days and meetings and hundreds of amendments adopted from republicans. a lot of bipartisan input. are you willing to do this with no committee meeting? do people have to be held accountable for this process of secret 13 producing the last minute, have a few hours of debate and trying to pass this thing. >> isn't that an awfully dangerous gamble that republicans are making? in other words, if they do push

it through, without any of the things we're talking about, we've already seen the anger at town halls around the country. they would be held responsible. it seems inconceivable given what they have confronted at town halls that they would try to do the scenario you're describing. >> that's why we hear about the sweeteners, delays, so people won't see big impact on the 2018 election or maybe even by the 2020 election. but the republicans say, well, they passed something that repeals the expansion of medicaid and trims back in general stages. i hope they will be held accountable. phasing in something slowly is like boiling a frog in the pot. as you gradually raise the heat, you still kill the frog. >> we can just end it on that topic right there. senator jeff merkley, thank you, very much for that analogy and for being here with us on "new day." >> very welcome.

good to be with you. >> chris. >> so this story has just grown in proportion and importance. we started with president trump's friend, chris ruddy, with news max, saying he believes the president is considering firing bob mueller. the white house comes out saying ruddy speaks for him, the president speaks for himself. they never talked about this. now chris ruddy is attacking the white house. it's true, the friend of the president, what he's saying next. x) it's not just a car, it's your daily retreat. the es and es hybrid. lease the 2017 es 350 for $329 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. looking for a hotel that fits... ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over 200 sites to find you the hotel you want at the lowest price. grazie, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.

we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10 to 25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b.

our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait.

all right. so a friend of president trump actually goes to the west wing, doesn't meet with the president, comes out and says he thinks the president is considering firing special counsel bob mueller. the media goes to the white house, is this true? sean spicer says ruddy speaks for himself. hours do by, because that's not an answer. the president speaks for himself. he says he doesn't think he spoke with the president about this. chris ruddy, friend of the

president, attacks sean spicer. spicer issued bizarre late night press release that, a, doesn't deny my claim the president is considering firing mueller. and b, said i never spoke to the president. i didn't do so. flimflam, deceptive nonsense. russian aelgs againllegations a potus. don't waste time undermine few allies which is what chris ruddy is doing, undermining press secretary of the man who claims to be his friend. chris collins of new york, it's a laugh or cry moment. what is going on? >> let's talk about the yankees. there's something we can agree on. >> i'll tell you what, the yaepgs have a little way to go. we're always pro new york, you know that we're not doing to dwell on this too much but i

don't get it. how do you make sense of this? is a guy a friend of the president or not? >> i capital make sense of it. the important thing to note, it would be a disaster, true disaster if that occurred. from what i've heard rosenstein say, attorney general, mueller couldn't be fired even if someone wanted to. we'll put this into kind of a bizarre category. ruddy is saying he didn't meet with the president. i don't know why he would have made those statements then. what we've got to say, i don't think it would happen to anybody. >> it would be complex, rosenstein would have to do it, the president would order him to. >> it would be a disaster. >> you've heard nothing to suggest the president is considering this. >> no. it would be a political disaster. that's obvious. i think we'll leave it that rosenstein has said it can't happen anyway. so i don't understand the back

and forth. we'll leave it at that. >> it could happen but leave it to decide, you haven't heard any reason to believe the president said that. do you believe he should refuse to answer any questions before the senate today, jeff sessions? >> no, i do not. jeff sessions is a friend of mine, a man of integrity. i'm confident he has nothing to hide. at this point everyone should speak clearly, directly with giving answers to questions, because america needs that. it has to run its course. at this point in time we adopt need more questions. comey left more questions than he answered. i think jeff sessions can fill in the blank very directly. i'm assuming there's going to be disagreement both under oath, disagree, my guess some of what the conversation was when comey supposedly said don't ever leave

me in the room with the president alone again. we'll see how that goes. i think sessions will be forthright. i know he's a man of integrity. i look forward to his testimony. >> what do you think was the right thing to do if, in fact, the president asked him to leave the room so he could speak privately with the fbi director? >> well, the president of the united states, if he asks someone to do something in that regard, i don't know anyone who would say, i'm sorry, mr. president, i'm going to say right here. that doesn't work that way. i think you know that. i'm assuming the president did direct him. i'm not thinking that happened. but if it did, i'm sure jeff sessions left the room. >> that would be some development if the attorney general said that never happened, that will certainly be a twist in this tale. let me ask you about a couple of things we know did happen, one political, one policy. the political one, the cabinet

meeting that turned spoke this profession of faith and love of the president is getting a lot of heat. what did you make of this. >> i'm not sure which one you're talking about. >> there's only one to discuss. there was a cabinet meeting. let me play a little taste of it. >> sir, the vice president to the president that's keeping their word to the american people. >> deeply privileged to be here and honored. i want to thank you for keeping your commitment to the american workers. >> mr. president, what an incredible honor it is to lead health and human services at this pivotal time you said your leadership. i can't thank you enough for the privilege you've given me and leadership you've shown. >> mr. president, thank you for the honor to serve the country. it's a great privilege you've given me. >> on behalf of the senior staff, mr. president, we thank you for the opportunity and blessing you've given us to serve your agenda and the american people. >> so that's how it went. they went around the room all complimenting the president. it seemed to be a reflection of

the feeling that people aren't nice enough to him. what's your take? >> i do know he's assembled the best cabinet that's ever been assembled bar none. i think it is important with all the turmoil in the country today to reassure the president, quite frankly. he's being attacked at every front. much of it inappropriately. like any human being, i'm assuming the cabinet would say, you know, we know things are going well. the accomplishments are real. we've got a great team. mr. president, i'm honored to be here. so not surprising. i did not know about that until you played the tape. i know most of the folks in the cabinet. i would find it quite appropriate for them to reassure the president all is good, because i mean the attacks are coming left and right, unrelenting. so good for them. >> why is the criticism of the president inappropriate. >> it is based on a lot of fake

news. there are distortions and exaggerations left and right. i've been in the middle of it myself. >> how so? >> i've been attacked by senator schumer, elizabeth warren. i've been attacked by louise slaughter. i had to retract a story. it happens about once every 100 years. the story wasn't an exaggeration. it was not a distortion. it was outright fabrication. >> all right. but all i'm saying is, congressman, you've got one story from the buffalo news that someone had to retract. i'll look into why it was. that certainly can't serve as proof of all media coverage inappropriate, wildly wrong, based on fake news. you've got one little example of that. -- appropriate because it stems from what the president says and does. >> we know the press tends to lean in a particular direction. when things are reported, whether it's true or not or here say or not it gets reported as

though it is true. so if, you know, we could agree to disagree, but i believe, and i know many of the trump supporters in my district would agree that the press has certainly exaggerated the negative and has not talked about some of the positive. what's a same we're not talking about our rollback for dodd/frank. >> we should. that's something we really want to talk about because rolling back some of the only protections put in after that huge fiasco after it happened done under the cover of the comey moment seemed like a sneaky move, to be honest. >> we wanted to talk about this. 25% of community banks in america shut down because of the onerous regulations they couldn't afford. >> those put in place because you guys in congress allowed wild speculation and bailed out the same people who wound up bankrupting thousands of americans. >> it went way too far.

if we're going to get this economy moving with small businesses, they tend to borrow from these community banks doing down every day because of the regulatory burden. the fact they have to set aside reserves for mortgages. >> what you rolled back is going to help a lot more than just community banks. isn't that true, congressman? >> what we're rolling back. by the way, we are keeping durbin amendment on debit card fees, acknowledgeme menment -- >> big banks are going to get freedom to speculate because of what you rolled back. isn't that true, congressman? >> we are removing -- >> not just about community banks and little girl and who the little guy borrows from and main street versus wall street, you freed up wall street guys that wildly speculated and caused problems. isn't that true? >> lessons learned, chris. some of that speculation clearly

was not -- clearly after the fact not the best interest of america. >> now you can speculate more because of what you just rolled back. >> they can run this business the way they see fit for their shareholders. we're not doing to bail them out. if they make a mistake, they make a mistake. >> you cannot guarantee you will not bail them out right now. that's nowhere codified in law. it happened the last time. now you made it easier to speculate again, true or false? >> i can assure you i would never support bailing them out. the shareholders bear the risk. the shareholders ultimately elect the board who picks the officers. if some bank does stupid things and overspeculate and something happens, they can go down. >> we'll see what happens. certainly it's more possible now than it was before. congressman, always a pleasure to have you on the show. >> good to be with you, chris. >> always. >> chris a heat wave in the

east, video to show you next. there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. they offer free cancellation if my plans change. visit booking.com. booking.yeah. a mihappy birthday, sweetie! oh, millies. trick or treat! we're so glad to have you here. ♪ what if we treated great female scientists like they were stars? ♪ yasss queen! what if millie dresselhaus, the first woman to win the national medal of science in engineering, were as famous as any celebrity?

[millie dresselhaus was seen having lunch today...] ♪ [...rumors of the new discovery...] what if we lived in a world like that? (crowd applauding) ♪ we know a place that's already working on it. ♪

the future isn't silver suits anit's right now.s, think about it. we can push buttons and make cars appear out of thin air. find love anywhere. he's cute. and buy things from, well, everywhere. how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. okay. so a heat wave is breaking records in the northeast. severe weather through the nation's midsection as well. watch this as that apparent tornado in nebraska ripped apart an entire barn. cnn meteorologist chad myers has our forecast. >> thirty tornadoes alisyn

across the country. really the high plains where the farms and ranches are. more to the east today where more people live. this weather brought to you by purina, your pet, our passion. the cold and heat to the east will clash and cause more severe weather, more record highs. 27 record highs set across the country yesterday. air quality alerts for new york city. don't be doing your first marathon at 2:00 this afternoon. it's that simple. the high will be 95 in new york today. cooler tomorrow but not for chicago or st. louis. your normal highs in chicago will be 79. tomorrow 92. 13 degrees warmer than you should be at this time of year. we'll watch the severe weather for you this afternoon, chris. >> all right, my friend. thank you very much. keep an eye on it. check back with you in a little bit. a jury is now deliberating bill cosby's fate. what are the big questions for that jury? what seems likely based on the evidence? we've got top legal minds for you next. (dog) mmm. this new

beneful grain free is so healthy... oh! farm-raised chicken! mmm...that's some really good chicken. i don't think i've ever tasted chicken like this. what!? here come the accents. blueberries and pumpkin. wow. that was my favorite bite so far. not even kidding. i mean that was... ...oh! spinach! mmm. that's like three super foods. pretty, uh, well...super. now i got kind of a pumpkin, chicken thing going on... ...whoop! time to wrestle. (avo) new beneful grain free. out with the grain, in with the farm-raised chicken. healthful. flavorful. beneful.

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 $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today.

liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. this i can do, easily. i try hard to get a great shape. benefiber® healthy shape is a clear, taste-free, 100% natural daily fiber... that's clinically proven to help me feel fuller longer. benefiber® healthy shape. this i can do!

all right. we are at the moment of truth in a pennsylvania trial. the jury deliberating the aggravated assault case against bill cosby. the defense team calling one witness before both sides traded fiery closing arguments. jean covered this case from the beginning. she's outside the courthouse. jean? >> reporter: good morning. you know, the stakes are so high because this is all about bill cosby's liberty and to the prosecution it is all about justice and the truth. the jury is going to reconvene here at 9:00 this morning and they have already requested to be read back testimony. not from this trial, but from bill cosby's deposition back in 2005. according to my notes because we just got exhibit no.s but it is going to be an education he

wanted to establish for andrea when he called her mother and apologized. that is something the prosecution tried to drive home as consciousness of guilt. the prosecution talked about the pills he gave andrea. andrea said, are they herbal. he later says they are benadryl. when her mother asked, can we know exactly what they are, he says i'll get back to you. the defense is saying that it is absolutely a consensual romantic relationship and that andrea is lying. >> thank you very much for all of that background. we'll watch. let's discuss with our legal team. we have our panel. danny, is bill cosby going to jail? >> he should be acquitted and

here's why. this was a case that the prosecution had no interest in for over a decade. there are multiple inconsistencies and real problems with this case. but ultimately sometimes a jury, if they find a single complaining witness credible enough will disregard all of those inconsistencies and the problem here is there are a lot of convenient memory losses from over a decade ago for this complaining witness. >> okay. joey, is he going to jail? >> you know, i do share his opinion in this regard. to be clear t prosecution has much to argue in this case, right? consciousness of guilt. in the event you have no relationship, why are you calling her, offering to fly her to florida. >> he said it was consensual. >> exactly. when i say no relationship in terms of -- you know, remember what happened here. it is all about consent. but when she is approached by the police and she is talked to by them, what she says is i had

minimal contact with him. i was never alone in the home with him. fine, she was there it happened three times. >> those are the inconsistencies. >> but the prosecution has made a great case of what they have, including calling a psychiatr t psychiatrist. >> when you say it is all about consent, if he gave her drugs and he's admitted to it that made her groggy or passed out, how could she give consent? he admitted he gave her sedatives of some kind. >> that's why if cosby's convicted it won't be on the strength of the prosecution's case. it will be under the ease with which you can convict somebody. there is one for lack of consent but there is one that doesn't deal with consent. it deals with intoxication or being drugged or unconscious. so it is an easy statute to get a conviction.

but in these cases, if the prosecution's case was that strong from the beginning, they wouldn't have called the 404b witness, they wouldn't have needed an expert to explain why it took so long for this complain innocent to report the crime. >> they only called one witness. i have interviewed a dozen of cosby's alleged victims. why weren't more called? >> they wanted to introduce 13. the court said no. you can have one. >> why? >> because they lacked the reliability. now think about that. the prosecution in their zeal to convict wanted to introduce over a dozen of these witnesses. the court said no. you get one because all of these other prior bad acts are so dissimilar, they're not alike or close in time enough to be probative or fair. >> one of the things that marks this case is there is an m.o. is that is simple. >> the judge disagreed with that. >> it is not so much that. you cannot introduce -- cases

are about what they're about. in other words, we can't introduce evidence to establish that you did something today to show what you did yesterday, the week before, the week before that. what happens is that it's about being -- you know, you are entitled to a fair trial. when it gets too prejudicial against you and it goes too far field, this case isn't about what what mr. cosbys did to 16 women. >> why? >> because it is about even if you could establish a pattern, if it's so prejudicial, a jury now says, wait, this is not about mrs. constand, this is what he did 13 other times. evidence brought in to establish that you did something at some other time and place and therefore you did this, it's improper. it is prejudicial and appealable. and i also think even allowing that one witness, mrs. johnson, with her mother to corroborate to say, yes, what she said, presented an appealable issue. but i also think the prosecution

in bringing in -- remember, there were a couple questions here. the big question was also about, you know what, what about the fact that she didn't report it for a year later? >> yes. i didn't know that so often happens. >> but they brought in a psychologist to explain that. >> that's also admissible evidence. the delay in reporting is admissible evidence on the issue of credible. >> you say, no, he will not be convicted. you say yes? >> i think it is likely he will not be convicted. i hate handicapping things. >> pick a side already. >> i say that it's likely he will not be convicted. but if he is, it will likely go back on appeal. there are so many appealable issues in this case. >> a lot of news, so let's get right back to it. >> he's considering terminating the special council. >> the echoes of watergate are getting louder and louder. >> the president is clear. he wants this to be investigated

as soon as possible and be done with it. >> it's been an honor to be able to serve you. >> the attorney general ral's involvement is questionable. >> it's up to the american public to decide whether they think that sessions is telling the truth. >> he's going to testify. we're aware of it. >> this is "new day" with kwis k chris cuomo and alisyn camera ta. >> a long-time friend of donald trump standing by his claims that donald trump is considering firing bob mueller. rudi says the white house isn't denying the president's thinking. >> and in just hours, attorney general jeff sessions will be in the hot seat facing questions about his