crowd leaving a mosque in the early hours of north london at the end of ramadan. that's when witnesses say they saw the van swerve into the crowd and plow into people. we've spoken to people who got involved and stopped it from escalating further. take a listen. >> suddenly it turned right to the mosque. i was shocked and we were scr m screaming. first a woman, 60 and another guy. he hit another three, four, five, six seven. suddenly the car stopped. we ran after him. managed to get him out of the car. >> so we got exclusive video of the man that they say they wrestled out of that vehicle. ma man you heard from there, some others, pulled him out of the car. they say he put up a real fight. he was punching, scratching,

biting and all the time saying things like you deserve this. you guys deserve this. they managed to hold him on the ground for about ten minutes until place arrived also keeping a very large, increasingly angry and emotional crowd away from him in what was sure i will a very tense situation. the police are treating this -- keeping an open mind. they're still trying to get to the bottom of that. the muslim community in this part of london, they believe this was an attack against them, and they say it is simply the latest example of the sort of hatred and islamophobia they have been experiencing, an escalation of what they've been experiencing since those other recent attacks in london this year. >> we'll check back in through out the program. we have cnn counterterrorism analyst phil mudd, juliette

kayyem and. james, authorities have yet to classify this as a terror attack. also considering it a hate crime. so i guess the difference is one is politically motivated and one is personal? >> yes, in a certain sense, alisyn. the terrorism piece is an event where you have violence or intimidation or the threat of the same in pursuit of political or social ends or aims. the hate crime piece, i looked it up this morning. i don't know if the uk have a hate crime statute. they have crimes against hate speech. what we know now -- authorities have been very guarded with what they're releasing, it appears to be a case of morrellivism. it appears someone decided if he was going to get back at someone because of what happened on london bridge. >> what makes you think that? >> number one, the eyewitness accounts and what was said.

do i think he was targeting that mosque because of its past -- it had some ex-trialist past but had become a model mosque as far as keeping extremists away. or was he looking for certain people. >> if it was an intentional act directed at this particular group, he's going to wind up in the same place. authorities are calling it a terrorist activity. phil mudd, let's deal with the reality of what this means. other than the legalities of it, we see this time and again, innocent muslims are caught, getting it two ways, isis kills them most of all, and many non-muslims blame the entire community or either not stopping extremism or in some level owning it. what do you believe the reality is when something like this happens where, you know what the reaction is going to be.

there will be people who are sympathetic to the muslim community who are being victimized because of actions of extremists in their ranks, or there are others who say their community is the problem and that's why they're so mad and this man just went too far is. >> if you look at the ideology of isis, they say muslims can't live in the west and mouse lius the west should be attacking people in britain and america, et cetera, to force countries like britain and the united states to leave iraq and afghanistan. they want this to happen because they want to accelerate the division between muslims and what they see as the christian west. this is pretty simple. i would suggest there's a good chance we'll see isis come out and say this is exactly the reason we want you to attack because people in the west are prejudice against you and they won't allow you to live and grow in these communities. this fits an isis propaganda

line they've been talking about for years. >> julia, this is the fourth attack in as many months. i think we have a map that can remind us of the other heinous at tangs we've seen, the westminster bridge, also a vehicle attack. of course, we remember the ariana grande concert that was so horrible. is something particular happening in london and the surrounding areas? >> obviously this is an intensity and frequency of terrorist attacks that britain has not seen in ages, and part of this is a cyclical nature of it. you have the attack and potential copycats and something that looks like it's an attack against a community viewed as responsible for the original attacks, so that's the challenge right now happening in britain. you have over 1200 mosques in great britain. you're not going to be able to

protect them all. the equivalent of being attacked during ramadan is like south korea ame church. the second issue is to be able to stop the cyclical nature of these. if isis comes out and says this is the problem with diversity, what you don't want is a copycat on the isis side to say that's exactly right, let's do the next attack and then you'll have attack after attack. it's a challenge in a diverse city with multiple soft targets. you're not going to be able to fortify them all. and this use of force and cars and vehicles as weapons is almost impossible to stop. i will say, one last thing, this is an example in which it looks like the population and civilians were able to stop a terrorist attack. there might be something to learn from this.

>> bystanders, you see this on planes, here at home, it comes down to bystanders sometimes having to intercede. >> often they are the first responders because they're involved in the event. james, first of all, you have to distinguish these different events. the other three were terrorist attacks against non-muslim population, mostly within london. this was some type of manifestation of rye shows or unrighteous retaliation based on your political point of view. the idea of using a car, part of the explanation, it's easy to get. it's not as easy to get semi-automatic weapons in the uk as it is here. isn't that part of the explanation of why they're using the car. >> statistically in the uk about 4% of the populous have weapons and i believe 90% of police are unarmed. a van probably ways 4,000, 5,000

pounds, 2 1/2 tons. i think what we'll have to move to -- the united states and great britain have terror threat levels. i think there was a paradigm called coopers colors which said for citizens when they're walking around, you can no longer be in condition white, that wheens you're not aware, oblivious to your surroundings. you have to be at the next level which is condition yellow. >> panel, thank you very much. we'll monitor this. >> as we learn mores information about why this guy did i, we'll bring to you. other other top story, the russia investigation. confusion, double speak, also known as monday. a member of president trump's legal team says the president is not under investigation. the problem is, the president tweeted that he is. this is the latest in the president's wrestling match with the reality of this russia probe.

cnn's joe johns live at the white house with more. what's the reaction down there? >> good morning, chris. a familiar form of damage control that started with a presidential tweet. the president's legal team seenging to clear up any confusion over whether he believes he's the subject or target of the investigation. though the special counsel does appear to be looking into whether there is enough evidence to launch an obstruction of justice investigation. >> the president is not under investigation. >> the president is not under investigation. >> the president is not and has not been under investigation. >> reporter: president trump's personal legal team denying he's the pargt of a probe despite the president's own tweet, acknowledging he is being valted for firing james comey, taking a swipe at deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, characterizing

the investigation as a witch hunt. >> trump has a compulsion to counterattack and is very pug nauseous. i don't think it serves him well. i don't think the tweet helped him. >> reporter: the president's attorney, jay sekulow offering this explanation. >> that tweet was in response to a washington post story that ran with five unnamed sources, without identifying the agencies they represented, saying the special counsel had broadened out his investigation to include the president. >> reporter: before appearing to blame social media for the misunderstanding. >> it's 141 characters. the president is a very effective use of social media. >> reporter: sekulow conceding he cannot know for sure. >> i can tell you this, we have not been notified that there's a president of the united states. >> it is in the best interest of the president and the country to have a full investigation. >> reporter: despite the confusion prompted by friday's

tweet, the president continues to attack the special counsel's investigation. >> what's happening here is the president wants to take down bob mueller. they're essentially engaging in a store ched earth litigation strategy that begins with trying to discredit the top prosecutor. >> the top democrat insisting sunday that the russia investigation is just beginning. >> i think there is evidence. >> i'm not prepared to say there's proof you can take to a jury, but i can say there is enough that we ought to be investigating. >> reporter: another interesting comment from jay sekulow on the shows yesterday, he said the president might in the week ahead address whether there are any recordings of mr. trump's conversations with former fbi director james comey. chris and alisyn, back to you. >> more to come this morning. no doubt. thank you very much. how is president trump fighting the cloud of rush i don't over his investigation. our panel discusses the latest threats next.

fothere's a seriousy boomers virus out there that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. one in 30 boomers has hep c, yet most don't even know it. because it can hide in your body for years without symptoms, and it's not tested for in routine blood work. the cdc recommends all baby boomers get tested. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us it's time to get tested.

ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. it's the only way to know for sure. with the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides. right now save on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed.

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. with all the things you'll never learn from a book. expedia. everything in one place, so you can travel the world better. here rego again. a tweet takes us down a road when the president is upset about being looked at by the investigation by bob mueller. his lawyer says forget about what he tweeted. he's not under any investigation with strange belief and logic. let's bring in our political panel to figure out what this

all by ginns. let's bring in david drucker and david gregory. david, help us make sense of this. i want this to be something that's irrelevant. this seems to be like word play and sekulow trying to clear something up without wanting to say what he must feel as counsel which is, man, i wish my client weren't saying anything about this, but he's got a unique client here, doesn't he? >> that's the point. it's monday and here we go again. that's the real issue. you have in donald trump someone who is a street brawler who, whether this is a legal or political fight, and it's both, wants to fight it himself and wants his lawyers to kind of catch up to what he's done, and try to explain it. jay sekulow knows better. this word play over twitter is really ridiculous. i think he knows that, but he's

trying to make an argument. others have to make arguments. again, let's look at what's going on. there is a legal process that's under way. we don't know the extent to what the mueller team is doing in terms of what they're looking at. we know how much is in the public domain now for them to investigate that would make sense, and we know about the reporting that's out there that's not really being continue dilkted given the president is verifying it himself. at the same time the president i think views this as a political process, a fight to be won in the court of public opinion to try to denigrate the reputation of bob mueller and suggests this is all part of an effort to get him, to use the media to get him. anonymous sources to conspire the get the president and undermine his presidency. i think he'll use that. >> carona, it's not just the tweet, but jay sekulow's own

words of the sunday show. let me play for you how he seemed to be saying two diametrically opposed things. >> should we take that tweet from the president as confirmation that the president is under investigation. >> let me be clear. the president is not under investigation. >> now he's being investigated by the justice department because they still report to the department of justice. he's being investigated for taking the action that the attorney general and deputy attorney general recommended to take by the agency who recommended the termination. >> glad he cleared that up. he's not -- he's being investigated, but not under investigation. make sense of that? >> trying to talk your way out of a jam is a tricky task. really what's critical is terminology matters. one of the things sekulow was saying, he kept repeating he's not the subject of the investigation, not the target of

his investigation. that seems like how he defines investigation. that means he's investigating the president for wrongdoing. that's not what we reported. what we reported was that mueller's seem is looking into these conversations to see if there is reason to think that obstruction of justice occurred. he's talking to various cleanse chiefs at this point. this is expanding the probe, taking a look at this, making it a focus of the general investigation that they're doing, not identifying trump as the central target and trying to prove a case around him at this point. it's examining whether there is a case to be made around this issue of obstruction which is not where this probe started. it started as was there collusion with the russiantion and has it expanded. this is why trump's lawyer is trying to speak in ways that make it sems like there's absolutely nothing there, but he's not fully identifying there that the probe is getting into and saying just because he hasn't been alerted to it

doesn't mean they're not at these preliminary initial stages of looking into these allegations. >> jay sekulow is coming on the show. what karoun says is accurate. there's a distinction without a difference here. stripping away all the nonsense, if they want to know whether or not mueller is looking at them, all they have to do is pick up the phone. the idea they wouldn't pick up the phone, david, because they don't want to meddle is absurd. also, james comey cleared this up. he said twice during his testimony that he was sure that the special counsel would figure out whether or not what happened between him and the president constituted obstruction. there is no secret here that mueller is looking at and there is no secret that the president doesn't like that. he has yet another one of his surrogates out there twisting in the wind trying to make him have as much distance from this as possible. >> if you're a surrogate for the

president, you always end up in this situation at one time or another because instead of your communication strategy and your information strategy, being driven by facts on the ground and where you want to take things, you're reactive and responding to things the president said and trying to clean up the things the president said. i know people that are close to the president in terms of his outer circle of friends and his supporters believe that when he tweets like this -- this is what got him elected. he fights back against liberal mainstream media and they think this is effective. as president, that may have been true in a campaign sense, but as president he has done nothing but get himself into trouble when he does this. the only reason we're even having this conversation today and over the last couple days is because of that tweet regardless of what the president meant. when i spoke to allies of the president on capitol hill and around washington on friday after that tweet, this is one of those rare times they told me, yeah, that tweet okay, that tweet okay. i wish he didn't do it. but this tweet, bad.

one republican member of congress said that isn't smart and these are people that support him and want him to succeed. >> let's move on to the business of congress and what they're trying to do. we don't know what's in it, but the jop -- the senate health care bill. we heard senator bernie sanders say that from what they though, they think it's dangerous and that they plan to be obstructionist, the democrats, to try to block it. >> they're going to get help from republicans, by the way. >> there are a lot of republicans who don't want 20-plus million people on their tab when it comes to a next election cycle and explaining why they let those people become uncovered. the secrecy here is the problem, isn't it, david? >> it is the problem. it's one republicans complained about when obama care was originally debate. that's where republicans find

themselves. they would make the argument, as mitch mcconnell has, that they're doing work behind is scenes in order to achieve consensus which is not easy to come by because of the various constituencies among republicans they have to cater to, conservatives and moderates alike, the fight over general coverage, medicaid expansion. these become big issues and there are ones democrats will run on next week. i think democrats are going to fight this hard, both because they recognize they've got to fight to get it above the fold here in terms of the russia investigation, but because this is an issue they're going to want to run on, the best thing they can do is try to stop it in its tracks. >> there's a special election in georgia tomorrow. the outcome could really drive this debate. >> panel, thank you very much. coming up on the show, we have the president's attorney on, jay sekulow, in the 8:00 hour. we're going to ask him about these different things that are in the wind what matters, what

doesn't and why. at least one man is dead, eight others injured after another, what authorities are calling a terror attack in london with a vehicle. we have all the latest for you on "new day."

when did you see the sign? when i needed to create a better visitor experience. improve our workflow. attract new customers. that's when fastsigns recommended fleet graphics. yeah! now business is rolling in. get started at fastsigns.com. yeah! now business is rolling in. where are mom and dad? 'saved money on motorcycle insurance with geico! goin' up the country. love mom and dad' i'm takin' a nap. dude, you just woke up! ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ geico motorcycle, great rates for great rides.

hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing.

find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote. breaking news from london. at least one person dead, eight others dead after a van plows into muslim worshippers in north london. police are treating this as a terror attack, it would be the third vehicle attack in the first four months, the first targeting muslims specifically. the alleged attacker is in police custody, held on attempted murder charges. so far there's no word of a motive as police await the opportunity to question the suspect. we're learning bystanders detained the driver until police arrived. mean while police are increasing security around places of

worship. the muslim community is observing the month-long holiday of ramadan. prime minister theresa may expected to speak any moment. also out of london, a different story. a moment of silence for the victims of the horrific high-rise fire in london last week. [ bell tolls ]. >> the numbers here are staggering. authorities say the number of people dead or missing is now 79. only five of the dead have been formally identified. officials say it's complicated because many of the victims are from different countries. investigators still do not know what sparked this inferno. >> there's a little bit of false intrigue here about why can't they figure it out. here is what we know, and unfortunately we learned it the worst way possible during 911. times the temperature of a fire inside the building because the materials and dynamic of the fire can be so hot that two

things happen. one, anybody on the inside almost has disappeared. second, it's too dangerous to go from floor to floor and section to section. you don't want to risk loss to identify lost life. >> just the notion that 79 people are missing. >> i can't believe there aren't more, the time of day it happened, when everyone is asleep, 24 stories. the real question, legal question, important question for people following the russia probe vis-a-vis the president, do any of his actions amount to obstruction of justice, not investigated versus probed and what's tweeted verses known. we have two brilliant attorneys that are going to argue the obstruction point and help you understand what is and what is not next.

at whole foods market, we believe in food that's naturally beautiful, fresh and nutritious. so there are no artificial colors, no artificial flavors, no artificial preservatives in any of the food we sell. we believe in real food. whole foods market. mmmm. mmmm. mmmm... ugh. nothing spoils a moment like heartburn. try new alka-seltzer ultra strength heartburn relief chews. it's fast, powerful relief with no chalky taste. [ sings high note ] ultra strength, new from alka-seltzer. enjoy the relief. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. i love how usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless,

that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs. i feel it every day. but at night, it's the last thing on my mind. for 10 years my tempur-pedic has adapted to my weight and shape, relieving pressure points from head to toe. so i sleep deeply but feel light. and wake up ready to perform. even with the weight of history on my shoulders. find your exclusive retailr at tempur-pedic.com "america" by simon and garfun [ snoring ]ental)

[ deep sleep snoring ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. seats seven, sleeps six. life's as big as you make it.

all right. so the latest wrinkle in the investigation with russia and the probe is the president's legal team insisting the president is not under investigation for obstruction of justice. the president tweeted otherwise on friday, that he was upset and wrote, quote, i'm being investigated for firing the fbi director. so forget about that back and forth. forget about the semantics. what about the actual issue? is there any potential obstruction of justice by the president here? is it even possible. there are certainly two sides to this. we have brilliant minds, cnn senior legal analyst, former federal prosecutor jeffrey toobin will be arguing the position yes, there is. and harvard law school professor emeritus alan dershowitz who says no, there's not. i will play the role of silent judge on this, but i do have an

impressive gavel. jeffrey toobin, you start. why do you believe you could see obstruction? >> no one is above the law. that's the message of watergate and american history at its best. the principle here is that obstruction of justice is just a law like any other and the president is bound to follow it. in 1974 the house judiciary committee voted articles of impeachment against richard nixon on the grounds he obstructed justice by using the fbi improperly. i don't know if donald trump is guilty of obstruction of justice, but i do know the facts that are public now suggest that an investigation is entirely appropriate. think about the context here. the fbi was looking at michael flynn, a grand jury was impanelled and donald trump went on a mission to stop that investigation. he approached the fbi director, james comey, repeatedly and

including in the famous valentine's meeting he said let it go, let it go. and he knew, one could argue, that he was doing the wrong thing because he told everyone else to leave the room when he approached comey. and when comey didn't stop the investigation, he fired him. that to me suggests an investigation for obstruction of justice is entirely appropriate. >> professor dershowitz, what is your response? >> i come not to praise president trump nor to defend his policies, but to defend the constitution. the president of the united states should not be subject to criminal prosecution for merely exercising his constitutional authority in the absence of any specific statute to the contrary, the president has the right to fire the director of the fbi and the president has the power to tell the director of the fbi who to investigate, who not to investigate. my source for that, director comey who testified to that as

well. so this is not the nixon case. this is the bush case. bush pardoned weinberger at a time when weinberger might have been pointing a finger directly at bush. nobody suggested obstruction of justice. some years ago a great lawyer stood up and opposed expansion of espionage statutes to cover what hillary clinton did. he talked about the dangers of expanding statutes. that great lawyer was jeffrey toobin. he should be saying the same today about not expanding obstruction of justice to cover constitutionally authoritied presidential actions. >> respond. >> that is not what the constitution says. there is no right to obstruct justice. it is true the president can fire the director of the fbi, but that act can be evidence of a broader obstruction of justice. for example, my favorite law professor that loves

hypotheticals, what if donald trump said to james comey, i am going to fire you unless you give me $100,000? is that constitutionally protected? >> are you citing one of the exceptions to it which is corrupt intent, bribery as one of the witness tampering, do you believe those are -- >> that's precisely what this investigation is about, is whether there was corrupt intent. can the fbi -- can the president go to james comey and say i am going to fire you because you're a catholic? that power is not unreviewable. >> jeffrey's point is, can he fire, yes. can he fire for bad reason and still have the protection of the executive? your answer? >> yes, the president's motive should not be probe if the president about properly. when president bush pardoned casper wweinberger, nobody lookd into his mind. walsh, the special prosecutor,

said he did it to end the investigation. that's part of his power. >> is pardoning -- he could pardon himself. >> of course. not only that, but he could fire anybody. >> even for the bad reason. >> what's the reason between pardoning for a bad reason and firing for a bad reason? once we start looking at bad reasons, we're in to stalin and barea, when the head of the kgb said show me the man and i'll find you the crime. what we see here is an attempt understandably bipartisan democrats to find a crime against donald trump. >> is that what's going on? >> that's what the republicans did against hillary clinton. lock him up was the same -- >> it's simply not the case. a pardon is the absolute power. the motive is irrelevant. >> you're defeating your own case. if the motive is irrelevant for a pardon, why is it relevant for

firing? >> obstruction of justice as part of a pattern which includes trying to stop investigations, trying to stop the nsa director, trying to get the nsa director rogers and the head of national intelligence, coats, all of that is part of a larger pattern. it's not just the firing. alan, you're focusing exclusively on the firing. it is part of a larger pattern of activity that includes the firing. >> i don't disagree with that, but remember the president had the power to simply say to the director of the fbi, do not investigate my friend flynn. that's a terrible law. the constitution should be changed, but under the current constitution and under the absence of a special prosecutor statute, the president has the unlimited authority to do that. just like you can't prove the president's motive for pardon, you can't probe his motive for

firing. >> now you're back to the watergate problem. >> here is the watergate issue. what nixon did was hush money which is bribery, destroying tapes and telling his underlings to lie. any president should be indicted for that. but you cannot indict and should not insight a president simply for exercising his constitutional authority. >> you seem to be having it both ways. you can indict for a crime but can't indict them for anything. >> you can't indict him for simply exercising his constitutional authority. if he goes beyond that, bribes, destroys evidence, of course he's subject to prosecution. >> how can you say you can't go after him for exercising authority, but you can if exercising his authority -- >> no, no, no. it's unqualified. it's not part of his authority to bribe. the very act of taking money is independently a crime. the very act of lying to the fbi

is a crime. that's not constitutionally prote protected. pardoning is, firing is and directing the fbi not to investigate is. >> do you accept that premise that, while you could check the president's authority, you're not in the right category of behavior to do so right now? >> alan is running into -- you're describing watergate differently than what watergate was. the smoking gun tape of june 23rd, 1982 -- >> lied to the fbi, commit a crime. >> no, no. it was using the fbi to stop the watergate investigation -- >> by lying to them. that was the crime. >> what difference does it make? it's still corrupt intent. it's misuse of the fbi. >> if president nixon said, tell the fbi to stop this investigation, there would have been no crime. maybe impeachment, but no crime it's the lying that made it a crime. >> no, it's not that. it's the misuse of the fbi.

>> final question before we have our closings. do you think it's wrong for the special prosecutor to look into this matter? >> absolutely not. it would be perfectly okay. it would be better for congress to look into it. we need new laws. we need laws to prevent the president from firing the director of the fbi. we need statutes that specifically prevent the president from doing that. all lawyers and civil libertarians fight against expansion of those statutes except when donald trump is in the eyes of the target. >> when the watergate committee voted to impeach president nixon, it was on precisely these grounds, misuse of the fbi can be a corrupt obstruction of justice. that's what this case is all about. the pardon power, the power to fire the fbi director is not unlimited. it is subject to the laws of

obstruction of justice, and that's what mueller is trying to determine, whether there was a corrupt intent to stop an fbi investigation. he's investigating appropriately. i don't know if the president is guilty or not, but mueller is on the right track and we should all let him do his work. >> if you allow corrupt intent to be the basis for firing a president who engaged in constitutionally protected act, today will be directed against donald trump. yesterday it was directed against hillary clinton. tomorrow it will be directed against other people. we don't want that kind of a vague open-ended, accordion-like criteria to be used. the difference between watergate and this, in watergate there were three specific categories of criminal conduct, lying to the fbi, destroying evidence, paying hush money. here we have no criminal conduct alleged against the president. everything alleged against him is constitutionally protected.

we do not want to live in a country where one party can go after the elected official of the other party by using vague terms like corrupt intent. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. well argued by both. i didn't have to use my heavy -- >> i can't lose, because if my student does better than me, i get the credit. >> you can't lose. the people will decide. >> you're a wimp, como. >> i'm the judge, not the jury. you're right, i am a wimp. >> that was excellent. i popped the popcorn and watched with rapid intention. >> military investigators are preparing to tackle very tough questions about the seven navy sailors were killed at sea. how did a navy destroyer and a freighter collide? what went wrong here. we have all of the latest from the scene. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do.

which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. listen up, heart disease.) you too, unnecessary er visits. and hey, unmanaged depression, don't get too comfortable. we're talking to you, cost inefficiencies and data without insights. and fragmented care- stop getting in the way of patient recovery and pay attention. every single one of you is on our list. for those who won't rest until the world is healthier, neither will we. optum. how well gets done. dearthere's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced.

our senses awake. our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say...if you love something set it free. see you around, giulia the only bed smart enough to change sleep as we know it. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides to keep you comfortable. and snoring ? ... does your bed do that? right now save on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed.

guard investigating a deadly collision that killed seven navy sailors. we have alexandra field at the home base in japan.

>> these are seven sailors who were sent here to serve two or three-year tours of duty. they won't be seeing their ways home. they come from across the country all the way to california. the youngest just 19 years old. the oldest 37 years old. all of them dying in what would have otherwise been a routine operation for the navy aboard a guided missile destroyer which collided in the early morning hours of saturday morning locally in japan with the container ship some three times its size. we're now told by the commander of the seventh fleet that the bodies of those seven sailors were found in the blooded sleeping compartments below deck when divers were sent down to search for them. listen to this. >> you can't see most of the damage. the damage is mostly underneath the waterline and it's a large gash near the keel of the ship. so the water flow was

tremendous. so there wasn't a lot of time. >> reporter: the rest of the ship's crew is being credited with keeping the ship from sinking. originally this was a search and rescue mission. those seven sailors were reported missing. it then turned out that their bodies were later found inside the ship. in the early hours president trump tweeted that his thoughts were with the families of the sailed lors. hope was being held out that the sailors would be found alive. no public word from the president or the white house since the navy confirmed the deaths of those seven sailors and their identities. an investigation will be conducted by the navy. the coast guard also looking into this. alisyn? >> alexandra, thank you. we have cnn pentagon correspondent barbara starr and cnn military and diplomatic analyst rear admiral john kirby. barbara, what's the sense from

the pentagon? any sense for how this happened? >> a lot of bewilderment. this doesn't happen. the navy doesn't have these kinds of catastrophic collisions at sea. what we're learning is how catastrophic it really was. think of what this crew was facing. it was dark. they had been in a collision. water is pouring into the ship, both beneath the waterline. they have damage above ground. the container ship and the navy ship hit exactly where the berthing compartment was and where communications were. the ship lost communications on board, dark, trying to struggle to survive, to save the ship and can't even communicate properly with each other. it was a catastrophe that befuddled everyone now, how it happened, but it will be fully investigated. >> john, help the rest of us to understand. aren't there radar systems on

board, collision avoidance equipment that should have been sounding alarms or doing something? >> there are a fabric of sensors that a sur sfas ship will use in order to naf vaet in open water to preserve and protect the safety of the ship. yes, there are radar systems on board. the investigators will make sure they were operating properly. there's also the human eyeball. you'll have lookouts posted fore and aft on the ship also looking out. it's nighttime. things don't always look the same at night as they do during the day. there's a whole suite of sensors and capabilities. >> so then what went wrong in your mind? >> i don't know. i don't know. we ought to be very careful not to get ahead of this investigation or speculate. obviously something went wrong. i suspect a lot of things went wrong. i suspect they will find that there were decisions that were made minutes before the collision and probably decisions that should have been made that

weren't that they'll be taking a look at. they'll look at every relevant witness, every piece of quip ement and do a complete forensic analysis. >> both of you are underscoring that despite this tragedy, there was a herculean effort on board after this happened to save more lives and, in fact, you've also pointed out that the japanese allies rushed to help us. so there are all sorts of stories of bravery and heroism around this, but again, it's just haunting to think of the lives that were lost, those young people, 20 years old there in their berthing compartments. barbara, that leads us to this past week. it was a bad week for the u.s. military. >> alisyn, there are no words to describe. it was terrible. that's the word that comes to mind. i don't think you can really faith thom. first, the loss of these seven lives on board the uss fitzgerald. that was towards the end of the

week. earlier in the week in afghanistan, two insider attacks on u.s. personnel there, three u.s. military killed, seven wounded. plus the seven lost at sea on the fitzgerald, others on board that ship injured. 20 military families plus facing a week that no family should have to face in their loved one's service and sacrifice to the nation. as alisyn pointed out, we did see a tweet about the fitzgerald, but a lot of silence, many people feel i can tell you, from political leadership here at the pentagon. the u.s. military mourns as a family. they mourn publicly. they mourn as a family. there are private condolences to the families, but not a lot of publishing word. >> john, what about that? does the president need to say more? >> i think it's important for all our political and military leadership to offer thoughts and prayers and condolences when

things like this happen. it's important for the rest of the force to hear from their leaders that they understand the sacrifices that are being made and the grief that is being endured. i do think it's important. i groo e with barbara on that score. i also agree with barbara that it was a tough week. i would also offer this, though, as tough a week as it was, and we've got families grieving, the military is going to strap it on this week. they have a lot of hard work to do in a lot of difficult places and they're going to get after it. >> understood. john and barbara, thank you very much. british prime minister theresa may is confirming that that van attack in london is a terror attack. we have the latest from the scene next. where are we?

about to see progressive's new home quote explorer.

where you can compare multiple quote options online and choose what's right for you. woah. flo and jamie here to see hqx. flo and jamie request entry. slovakia. triceratops. tapioca. racquetball. staccato. me llamo jamie. pumpernickel. pudding. employee: hey, guys! home quote explorer. it's home insurance made easy. password was "hey guys." it's home insurance made easy. fothere's a seriousy boomers virus out there that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. one in 30 boomers has hep c, yet most don't even know it. because it can hide in your body for years without symptoms, and it's not tested for in routine blood work. the cdc recommends all baby boomers get tested. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us it's time to get tested. ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. it's the only way to know for sure.

. good morning everyone and welcome to your "new day." at least one man is dead, eight others hurt after a van plows into muslim worshippers near a mosque in north london. police are treating this as a terror attack. >> an interesting aspect here is that the victims became the first responders and held