is really heating up for online shopping -- especially for walmart. walmart's digital sales skyrocketed 63% in the first three months of the year. there's a war going on in ret l retail. traditional stores having trouble. amazon and walmart food fight for your digital dollar. i think it's good overall for consumers. then you don't spend, you know, more than you have. you win because they're fighting for your dollars. >> good for us, we'll be asleep when amazon prime day happens at 9:00. >> thanks. i'm christine romans. >> i'm dave briggs. "new day" starts right now. see you tomorrow. nchts zrm, junior met with a russian lawyer after being promised damaging 2346gs on hillary clinton. >> this wasn't just anyone, this was an advocate and voice for vladimir putin. >> we're going to want to question everyone that was at that meeting. >> when it comes to rusch yeah, i am dumfounded, i'm

disappointed. at the end of the day he's hurting his presidency. >> the president absolutely did not believe the denial of president putin. >> from a cyber standpoint, we need to get together with russia, we need to tell them what we think should happen and shouldn't happen. >> might as well mail our ballot boxes to moscow. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. this is "new day," july 10, 2017. donald trump junior changing his tune about his meeting with the kremlin linked with a russian lawyer last june. e's saying the woman told him she had dirt on hillary clinton. what does this en courter say about the willingness for the campaign's accepting information

about hillary clinton. adding to the president's russia troubles, why did mr. trump say it is time to move forward on russia despite the conclusions of the u.s. intelligence that putin ordered the hacks on the 2016 election? did president trump buy putin's denial last week. the battle over health care heating up again. congress is back in d.c., what will they get done? that question starts in the senate. can the gop, the senators from the republican party get on the same page? we have it all covered for you. there is news to discuss. let's begin with cnn's suzanne malveaux live at the white house. >> reporter: good morning, chris. news of the meeting between donald trump, junior and a russian national first reported by "the new york times" raising new questions about the connectiontion between the trump campaign and russian officials going to the heart of the question over the federal investigation, whether or not there was collusion. there's also a focus as well.

donald trump junior's changing explanation about why this meeting happened in the first place. "the new york times" reporting that donald trump, junior, was plom missed damaging information about hillary clinton before agreeing to meet with a russian lawyer with ties to the kremlin at trump tower on june 9th, two weeks before his father became the republican nominee. trump, junior, admitting in a statement that potentially helpful information was a pretext for the meeting but insisting that nothing meaningful was provided, noting the woman stated she had information that individuals connected to russia were funding the democratic national committee and supporting ms. clinton. her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. the president's son insisting that his father knew nothing about the meeting, a statement reiterated by trump's legal team. >> it was a nothing meeting. >> reporter: in donald, junior's

initial statement saturday he gave a different explanation for the meeting explaining they primarily discussed a program about the adoption of russian children and making no mention of hillary clinton. both statements noting that the president's son-in-law, jared kushner and then campaign chairman paul manafort were also in attendance. >> i think we're going to want to question everyone at that meeting about what was discussed. >> this as president trump is facing scrutiny over his response to russia's election hacks after meeting with russian president vladimir putin. trump walking back a tweet about forming an impenetrable cyber security unit with russia to guard against the threat. >> i'm sure vladimir putin could be of enormous assistance in that effort since he's doing the hacking. >> facing backlash, president trump reversing course 12 hours later tweeting, the fact that president purt tin and i discussed a cyber security unit doesn't mean i think it can

happen. it can't. but a cease-fire can and did. >> it's not the dumbest idea i've ever heard but it's pretty close. >> reporter: president trump also insisting sunday that he strongly pressed president putin about russian meddling during friday's meeting, but not indicating if he accepted putin's vehement denial saying only, i've already given my opinion. >> i think it was russia, but i think it was probably other people and/or countries and i see nothing wrong with that statement. nobody really knows. >> reporter: this after the russian foreign minister said friday that trz heard and accepts putin's denial, a claim that the president's aides denied on sunday after initially declining to answer questions about the matter during a gaggle aboard air force one. >> the president absolutely did not believe the denial of president putin. >> reporter: president trump yesterday ze clairing that now is the time to move forward, to work constructively with russia,

but that might be difficult. congress is in the process of finalizing a bill to slap additional sungss for its meddling in the election. the officials quite frustrated saying that president trump needs more flexibility to negotiate with president putin. alisyn? >> suzanne, thank you very much for that. the russian lawyer who met with donald trump, junior, is speaking about about their meeting. she has a different take on what happened. cnn's matthew chance is live in moscow with more. what are you learning, matthew? >> reporter: that's right. we've reached out to natalia, the name of the lawyer, i'm caded in this who had the meeting in trump tower with donald trump, junior and paul manafort and jared kushner. we're hoping to get the report to you later today. she told "the new york times" that whatever was discussed, it was nothing to do with the presidential campaign. she said she's not a

representative of the russian government, in fact, never represented the russian government in court and she's never even discussed the issues that she was talking to those three members of the trump campaign about with the russian government. so she's sort of categorically denying any suggestion that this is an example of the trump team, as they prepare to go into that election campaign in the united states, with ear kol colluding with the russian government in any way. that tallies very well with what the russian government themselves say. they categorically deny any allegations of collusion or interference in the u.s. presidential election. >> matthew, appreciate it. let's bring in the panel. a lot to talk about. cnn political analystion maggie haberman and john avlon and counterterrorism analyst philip mudd. thank you for be with us this morning. maggie, what does it mean? what are the highlights for you?

>> the highlights are a couple different things. you have don junior, the president's oldest son, meeting with this russian lawyer at the request of an intermediary. she invited jared kushner and paul manafort to join, june 9, a pivotal moment. he had security the primary but facing a del got slog going into the convention. they were very focused on that. what donald said this meeting was strictly to talk about russian adoptions. the story changed. there was also a discussion initially about opposition research against hillary clinton. don junior's disclosure requirements are not the same as jared kushner who had joined the government. the main problem for everyone is

the story changed. if they had said initially, look, this is what the meeting is about and it did include this issue about hillary clinton initially and this woman changed which is what the story said yesterday, i think that would have been mosh understandable. the optics are problematic. >> john, obviously all campaigns do opposition research on their rivals. >> yep. >> what makes this one different? >> they're usually not outsourced to a hostile foreign power. you can't say that ud loly enough. i've participated in campaigns. it's perfectly normal to do opposition research. totally abnormal to have foreign governments, particularly russia at a time when they're not only trying to hack our election we find out subsequently on this campaign's behalf, have so many connections with this campaign, the extended family, so to speak, and to have them be denied. look at this, never met with russians in the context of this campaign. earlier this weekend it was

clearly about adoption, to maybe we were shopping information -- negative information about hillary clinton. that's a big deal. it also just one more example of a stories of the trump senior staff not lining up with reality. >> want to read the first statement? >> also, the timing here is important. this was in june. this was before the e-mail dump. this was before all of the russian collusion hit the papers. that's important for people to remember. this may not have been on their radar. donald trump, junior said earlier he had never met with m anybody. he said it on the record, was loud and dealer. when he said, are you sure nobody was trying to shop information, maybe they were trying to reach out, solicit you? never, never, no, nothing. all along he must have known about this meeting.

his first statement, just to clear the record, about what this meeting was. it was a short introductory meeting. i asked jared and paul to stop by. we primarily discussed a program about the adoption of russian children that was active and popular with american comes. there was no follow up. i was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance. i was not told the name of the person i would be meeting beforehand. >> can we stop right there? you don't know the name of the person you're supposed to be meeting, but you bring paul manafort, the campaign manager, and jared kushner? >> it was at a moment in the campaign. they were preparing to fire cory l lewandowski. it lends less creigh sense to the idea that this is a casual

meeting about adoption. >> in the campaign context, if you get a random tip about possible opposition research, you send a loyal, trusted, third tier staffer. you don't get the troika who is about the takeover the campaign and tooting the brother-in-law and the son. and detailed dealings with the russians via the ukraine. this is all a terrible story because it lines up with the narrative, reenforces the narrative, rooted in reality that this campaign had inappropriate contact repeatedly with the russians. >> the real problem is the change in the story, not just because it points to potential lying about what happened, it's the implication of what it was about. >> after ples san tris were exchanged, the won indicated she -- her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no

sense. no details or supporting information was provided or offered. it quickly became clear he had no meaningful information. that's the second statement after "the new york times" confronted with him what they learned. that changed from being about adoption to opposition research. phil mudd, your take? >> you're talking about the substance of what happened. having been at the fbi there's another piece i find fascinating, lying to a federal officer. the collusion piece i think will be difficult. i think it's going to be tough. here is where it gets really interesting and why this investigation is so complicated. let's assume federal investigators are looking at phone, e-mail contacts among these people. the more significant piece, let's assume they'rer interviewing dozens of people. if you're a federal investigation, you're collating stories and seeing now a year

later that the stories don't line up. when the stories don't line up, you have a simple question, did they tell the truth during the ent initial interviews? if not, that's a federal violation, a 1001 charge. these guys are vulnerable to a charge from the special counsel robert mueller if they didn't tell the truth. >> you'd have to have them on the record with the fbi telling the first story. it wouldn't be a public account. >> you can lie to "the new york times" and not be in trouble. >> that's true. my point is we've just seen stories by a couple of people. i'm going to assume they're interviewing and reviewing documents related to dozens of people. it's going to be impossible for all those people to coordinate their statements. if we see just in this sliver that people's stories aren't lining up, i'll guarantee when you start interviewing dozens of stories, someone is lying. >> that's an important point. i don't want to say someone is

lying and they're lying to federal investigators, because, to be clear, we don't know that. >> these statements were not to the fbi. these were public statements. >> i think as this goes along, the more you're seeing various pieces of the puzzle, over the weekend you had the spokesman for the president's own legal team that lined up with more of what the second statement was from don, junior about what this meeting was. >> why do you think don junior added the second part which is what all this stink is about? all this is goes away if this was just another meeting with another person. why was jared and manafort there? they're a tight knit group. until he changed and said, by the way, the reason i went is they supposedly had dirt working with the russians. why do you think he added that?

>> because "the times" learned additional information and this wasn't simply about adoption. >> jared kushner had to disclose the meeting, i don't know that he had to disclose the nature of the meeting. >> give us the context, john, in your mind, how big of a development is this? >> i think it's a significant development because for the first time it shows the campaign is dealing with russians peddling opposition information about the election, but also the lawyer they met with is somebody who has lobbied on behalf of the appeal of the meg anyone ski act who had had assets frozen in many different countries. the sort of thicket of relationships surrounding the russian community, big investors with shady legal backgrounds and this lawyer in particular, there's no way it's not troubling. >> except she actually helps don junior. she said i didn't say anything

about the campaign, i never worked with the kremlin. >> but he says they did. >> that's the interesting part. this is the first time we see why investigators would be looking at whether or not the russians were trying to get involved with the campaign. it doesn't mean that the campaign was dirty or wanted to kol collude, but that the russians were looking for opportunities. >> looking for opportunities i think is the key point. you are dealing with a group of people with the exception of paul manafort who have never been involved in politics before, never done a campaign before. they do particularly don junior have a mehistory of meeting wit practically anybody. >> mark twain said basically always tell the truth because i don't have the memory to be a good liar. the reason these stories aren't lining up and keep falling apart and people contradict each other is because there are a lot of people not telling the truth. >> panel, thank you very much for all this developing story.

meanwhile, president trump pushing for a cyber security unit with russia to stop election meddling then did an about-face. why the reversal? we discuss that with our panel we discuss that with our panel next. we discuwith safe driver panel next.and paperless billing. but the prize at the top is worth every last breath. here we go. [ grunts ] got 'em. ahh. wait a minute. whole wheat waffles? [ crying ] why! theso when i need to book tant to mea hotel room,tion. i want someone that makes it easy. booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. visit booking.com. booking.yeah!

on his proposal to create a cyber security unit with russia. the president faced major backlash from lawmakers on both sides sunday for tweeting this, putin and i discussed forming an impenetrable cyber security unit so that election hacking and many other negative things would be guarded. hours later changing his tune, the fact that president putin and i discussed the cyber security unit doesn't mean i think it can happen. it cannot. but a cease-fire can and did. >> what happened between these two tweets? >> there was backlash. >> yes, there was. >> let's bring back maggie haberman, john avlon and phil mudd. what is this about, maggie? >> as the president is fond of saying, you're never going the really know. what seems to have happened is there was an enormous amount of bipartisan criticism you would be pairing with the people who

according to the leading national intelligence agencies of this countries were involved in hacking e-mail accounts and trying to meddle in the election. what also happened was the fresh reporting from "the times" about this meeting, that trump's son, son-in-law and campaign chairman had with a russian lawyer possibly about clearly some offer made about opposition research. i think all of those factors combined made the president realize he had to walk this back. once again, you had his own aides sort of walk the plank defending it. in the meantime, steve mnuchin, one of his cabinet appointees go out and say this is a significant achievement that the president should be tweeted for. the president hours later, j.k., just kidding, i'm not serious about this. this is another example of creating his own mess it's not really clear to what end. >> it's a transparently bad idea. in the wake of russians trying

to influence the election, you'll dough a cyber security and get in bed with them, administration surrogates come out including nak nikki haley, steve mnuchin trying to say it's an accomplishment of our president and the president undercuts it. part of the question is how did such a transparently bad idea get elevated to the g20 in the first place? >> that's assuming that it did. i think this came from the president. this was a tweet from him. there wasn't anybody from the nsa recording it. no objective take on it. the russians didn't say this was in the offing. this is something the president may have decided to tweet to show some kind of progress and ran away from it. >> you think the president made that up? >> all i know is he unmade it really fast. >> i don't blame chris -- >> nobody else would have come up with this idea. marco rubio's tweet, from him to

lindsey graham, to john mccain, everyone thinks this is what you think it is, an odd idea. >> they spoke in such colorful terms. marco rubio's tweet, partnering with putin is akin to partnering with assad on a chemical weapons unit. >> an insensitive way to put the joke. >> listen to mccain and adam schiff who both also criticized it. listen to this. >> wait for it. >> i am sure that vladimir putin could be of enormous assistance in that effort since he's doing the hacking. >> we might as well just mail our ballot boxes to moscow. i don't think that's an answer at all. >> they put a finer point on it as well. >> phil mudd, what are your thoughts on why this reversal and why the president thought it would be a good idea to partner with vladimir putin on cyber

security? >> boy, if you can figure that out, alisyn, you're a better man than i am. >> which i tell you all the time. >> you have the president walk out of mar-a-lago, speaking with the chinese premier saying after ten minutes i realized north korea is really complicated. he said the same thing about health care, about resolving the palestinian issue, now he walks out with the russians and says, well, maybe it's not a great idea to talk to a spy service about coordinating against spying in america. if he had come back to washington and told the national security agency, the fbi and the cia, people who hold the positions i once held, hey, we're going to develop a cooperative relationship with the russians on psycher security, they would have looked at him and said that's great, we'll try that and nothing would have happened. i can't figure out how this idea came up in the first place. don't be o under any illusion,

that people would have done anything. people like me would have slow-rolled him. >> let's go back for one second because i think we missed a big point. the thing that changed this whole dynamic about the don junior meeting wasn't don junior having some bout of recollection or crisis of conscious, this was the white house, advisers to the president who went to "the new york times" and added details about a meeting that had been had that changed the narrative. >> i don't want to get into the details of -- >> this is the story. i went and had a meeting. jared didn't report it, did report it. manafort has never said anything about this. don junior says it comes out that there was a meeting. i don't want to know your sources. when advisers talked about this, it gave legs to the suggestion that, yeah, there's more to this. there has to be -- there's more

to this than we know right now. that in and of it self-is a very unusual dynamic. >> i'm going to dispute your characterization of how the events unfolded, without getting into sourcing or specific methods. one thing that was very notable was i think shortly after our story came out, there was a statement from mark kur ril low who represents the president's lawyer and that statement made a reference to offers of possibly this was a setup, or maybe that was an add-on. that was i think part of what tipped the idea that there was nor here and there was additional information that "the times" got and approached people with and then that was how this additional statement came out. tfs not a crisis of conscience. what you are seeing, as i mentioned, the mark kur ril low who represents the president, you have someone representing jared kushner, you have somebody representing don junior and then

you have somebody representing the president. this goes back to something we were discussing earlier which is different statements from different people and that is where you start to have a problem. >> that's my point. you put it much better, thank you. that's why you'reality the table, maggie. you have this failure of coordination that leads to new information. you have the same thing on the meddling. you have the president who for obvious political purposes and we've told you this before and you know it yourself instinctively. when he hears russian meddling, no matter how remote it is, he says that is bod for me. now he went into the meeting with the russian president. he had to own the reality from the tlengs community, stick it in putin's face which all his people want to say he did, but he can't have done it that way because he just questioned it the day before. now that has come home to roost, also. which is where you have people

saying do things at once. he looked at putin and said, i know you meddled, buddy. >> that's not how it happened. >> that's what they want to say. he went at it first, went a it multiple trieimes. he wanted to look in his eye. how does that square with maybe the day before. >> i think what he said was did you do it? >> it doesn't square because it doesn't square. the president's statements to date in public, even the day before he's sort of blowing it off. then a narrative about a strong leader looking after the national interest but deciding we're going to agree to disagree. the problem is what you just said, the president -- the standard seems to be is it good for me. the standard should be is it good for america. that's where we keep falling apart. >> panel, thank you very much.

obviously we'll be covering this all morning long. another major issue unfolding right now you've got to keep your eye on. celebrations in iraq. why? liberation of mosul. but you still have pockets of isis fighters remaining. what is the situation on the ground? is the war over? and, if so, what is the next chapter inside mosul next.

this could be a huge deal in the future of iraq. the prime minister declaring mosul finally liberated from isis. crowds cheering him, yet he acknowledges pockets of the terror group are still putting up a fight. cnn's nick paton walsh, the only western journalist in the city joining us.

set the scene of what the reality is and what your concerns are going forward. >> reporter: chris, this is the edge of mosul where the most intense fighting against isis has been and where we've seen this morning a tiny pocket of isis fighters are still holding out. that appears to have delayed the prime minister from getting on the stage and declaring finally the fight for mosul over. he's been touring the streets we've seen, meeting with christians today to make them feel more relaxed. he's appealing for them to go back to their jobs. the fighting is still going on. if you travel about a mile and a half down that way, you will see the river that runs through the heart of mosul that is the back end of isis territory. there are about a dozen houses we saw today where isis are still holding out. we saw isis fighters we thought coming out of the rubble s surrendering themselves. we saw an air strike delivered

by the united states. they're pounding the remaining positions that isis have in there because it's literally a matter of hours until they can declare that area fully cleared. booby traps are still around. i have to say, chris, the devastation behind me here is absolutely staggering, pretty much every street you go down has a car, a vehicle, flipped, pancaked, torn to shreds. they bulldoze everything to the side. we saw a zbrup of people visiting the al nuri mosque that was so sacred to isis but actually they destroyed themselves. it will be a simple job of trying to rebuild. abadi has a massive task ahead of bridging the bridge between the sunnis and the shia. it's been a sectarian war to some degree. fighting will still continue against isis, but this is pretty

much their symbolic death blow to some degree there. the city they held that was always the biggest and now literally down to a matter of houses. a momentous day for iraq, chris, and for the world. back to you, alisyn. >> nick, so grateful to have you on scene describing it to us. getting rid of isis while a herculean task is just the beginning for rebuilding it for the citizens. we'll check back with you. back here in the u.s., the senate returns from a break to tackle the fate of health care reform. there's a deep divide among republicans that had to moch forward, a cbo score is expected z early as today. cnn national politics reporter m.j. lee joins us with more. what's happening today? >> mitch mcconnell getting bad news over the july 4th recess, there's growing opposition to the senate health care bill.

remember mitch mcconnell wanted to have a vote soon after the july fourth recess. over the recess, senator john hoeb ban of north dakota saying he is a no on the bill as it currently stands. mitch mcconnell's own colleagues are coming out to say this bill might be dead. here is what john mccain had to say over the weekend. >> if you shut out the adversary or the opposite party, you're going to end up the same way obamacare did when they rammed it through with 60 votes. guess what? we don't have 60 votes. my view is it's probably going to be dead. >> 23450edleneedless to say, th week will be critical. we are expecting updated scores from the congressional budget office including on an amendment from senator ted cruz that would allow insurance companies to offer health insurance plans not regulated under obamacare and also in the big picture

mcconnell will get in the next couple of days, a better sense of whether it is realistic to move most of the folks from the no column to the yes column or whether this entire exercise has become increasingly hopeless. where is president trump on all this? he tweeted about it yesterday. he said for years even as a civilian as i listened as republicans pushed the repeal and replace of obamacare, now they finally have their chance. the message is clear from president trump, he is saying it's now or never. >> big headline today, donald trump, junior, acknowledging he told different stories about a meeting with a russian lawyer who has close ties to the kremlin. we'll ge reaction from two people who worked on the trump and clinton campaigns. this is the first sign -- your insurance company won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan.

no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. i'm karen, i'm a teacher.olfer.

my psoriatic arthritis caused joint pain. just like my moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. and i was worried about joint damage. my doctor said joint pain from ra can be a sign of existing joint damage that could only get worse. he prescribed enbrel to help relieve pain and help stop further damage. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal, events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common, or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. joint pain and damage... can go side by side. ask how enbrel can help relieve joint pain and help stop joint damage. enbrel, fda approved for 18 years.

. president trump's eldest son, donald junior, changing his story about a meeting with a kremlin-linked russian lawyer last june. initially it was that this was just about non-campaign-related issues. now he says that the woman had promised dirt on hillary clinton. let's discuss the implications of this with cnn political commentators robby mook, hillary clinton's former campaign manager, and jason miller, former communications adviser

for the trump campaign. functionally you two are the case for and against this morning. robby, when you hear this story and the change of story, what does this mean to you? >> well, i think this is just another part of a pattern, chris, of revelations that are coming forwardment what's disturbing is at each and every juncture, the trump campaign gets closer and closer to russia and the connections become more direct. the person that they were meeting with was not just anybody. this was an operative of the kremlin, someone who was advocating not just there to talk about the op o on hillary, but advocating to repeal sanctions and other measures put in place against russian business people who were implicated in killing a journalist. this was a very serious conversation beyond the involvement in the campaign and what's disturbing to me right now is that we're seeing so much

behavior from the white house that is cozy and friendly to russia. this has policy implications right now, and i think the congress needs to step up immediately and take measures to make sure there is no one in the white house, i would highlight jared kushner, for example, who is acting in a friendly manner towards russia because of undue influence from meetings like this one. >> the pushback from you is this is before the e-mail dump and the notoriety about russian collusion was happening in terms of how high it should be been on the radar. two, there's nothing wrong with meeting with people from other countries, it happens all the time. the third aspect of pushback is that it wound up being a non-event, there was no information and the woman was dismissed, this female lawyer. that's why nothing was really made of the meeting originally. your take on those? >> that's what they're telling us. again, the problem here is nobody in the trump

administration at this point is credible. the president's story is constantly changing. don junior's story on this particular meeting changed repeatedly. as you mentioned, the timing of this meeting is very interesting because only a few days later, the first dump of e-mails came from the gus fer two website against the dnc. i think there remain an enormous number of questions here. congress has got to step in. our national security is at stake right now. we cannot trust the administration to stand up for our interests anymore. >> jason, you're shaking your head in the negative. the problem here is don junior changed his story. he said ult times, i never met with anybody, this is all fake news. this is silly. that can't be true and we know that from his own mouth. he admitted to this meeting in two different ways. the first time it was about

adoption. the second time he acknowledged himself that this was about meeting with somebody with russian connections who said she had dirt on hillary clinton. >> chris, i think there are a couple important things to point out here. number one, the identity or background of this person who sat down with don junior wasn't put forward before the meeting. they didn't know exactly who they were sitting down with. i think the media reports and the way this is being presented by people on the other side of the aisle is this is made very clear this is one who had ties with foreign entities and didn't know exactly what they were doing. >> but you're stating that as a fact, jason. you're stating the fact that don junior didn't know who he was meeting with as a fact. we don't know that as a fact. he's will changed his story about what the meeting was about. credibility is an issue. >> chris, no one has said anything contrary to this. every campaign that anyone has ever been around since back when

they campaigned and road around on horses and wore wigs, there have been -- >> absolutely. but not usually if they come from a foreign state, hostile state actor like russia. why did he change his story? >> chris, that was not made clear beforehand before they sat down. >> that's speculation. we don't know that as fact. >> if it's true, it's really troubling. >> but we don't know that that is the case. again, the information they were given, they weren't given the person's identity. it wasn't clear who exactly they were sitting down with. when they do sit down -- let's get to the substance of this for a moment. this is very important. this person sat down and started talking nonsense about how the russians were supposedly funding the dnc and hillary clinton's campaign. that's probably one of the most absurd things i've ever heard. >> why did don junior change his story? >> his first answer on this, he gave a more detailed explanation about what more of the substance of the first meeting was. >> his first answer was i never

met with anybody. russians? never. those were his first answers. then it was, yes, i met with one, but it was about adoption. and then it was, oh, she had dirt on hillary clinton. why so many different stories? >> i don't think it is a whole bunch of different stories. don junior has never sat with down with someone who is a representative of the russian government, presented themselves as i'm here from another government and trying to interfere in the elections. that's never been the case. don junior is being completely forthright in that. in his first answer, when you talk about the main substance, the lawyer went into the russian adoptions. i agree they could have presented that more cleanly. the fact that someone is coming forward with information about an opposing campaign, it would be insane to not at least go and send someone to sit down with them to figure out what they were talking about. robby, i'm sure his campaign was deluged on a daily basis with

people saying, i have information to attack president trump. to say there's scurrilous or untoward activity because you sit down and listen to what someone might have to say about your opponent is silly. i think it's a double standard and people need to cover the whole picture. >> robby mook, final word. >> chris, if they weren't vetting who they were meeting with on a topic this sensitive, our national security is at stake. congress has to step up and say there's nobody up to this in the white house right now. >> appreciate both of your takes on this situation. jason, robby, thank you. alisyn? >> on to sports. eight of baseball's best sug gers face off in the home run derby tonight. a preview next in "the bleacher report." 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.

where is the summer going? can you believe it's already all-star time for major league baseball? festivities kick off tonight with the home run derby. you know who the favorite is? a yankee, of course. the rookie giant aaron judge. coy wire has more in "the bleacher report," one of the few men who might make you look b small. >> 6'7", 282, bigger than rob gronkowski. his batting practices are a spectacle in and of themselves. leading the major leagues with 30 home runs, to think about how he is bigger than most nfl players is mind-boggling. judge on his way to becoming the new face of baseball, playing on the biggest stage and under the brightest lights, looking to

take down defending champion giancarlo stanton tonight. you will likely tear up after this story. steve win free is a big baseball fan fighting kidney disease for 14 years. he loves collecting baseball cards with his wife heather. heather secretly made a special baseball card with his fats on it, slipped it in a pack and captured the moment steve learned a kidney donor match had been found. >> she said i had to go to bat for him. he'll be a rookie recipient. >> i found out today. you can be getting a kidney by the end of this month. >> alisyn, may have been difficult to hear, but heather was the donor match for steve. she found out earlier that day. the transplant could happen as

soon as the end of this month. >> thank you for the tissue warning. that is so beautiful and such a great moment captured on tape. >> the allergies are bad for me. >> talk about true partnership and being meant to be together when she is actually a match for him. do you know how rare it is to be a match for somebody? sometimes it's not just a coincidence. >> you know i would give an internal organ for me. >> my heart, it would be too small and not enough to power a hamster. >> it wouldn't work. >> i would give it to you because obviously i don't need it. >> thank you very much for that. back to one of our top stories, iraq's prime minister declaring victory over isis in mosul. what's next for the terror group? our expert here next. 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.

there is a huge development in the year-long battle to retake iraq's major city. iraq's prime minister is in mosul this morning declaring that the city's been liberated from isis. let's talk about this and what's next. here with us is cnn military analyst major general james "spider" marks and michaelwise

co-author of "isis, inside the army of terror." spider, let me start with you. this is a huge development. what does it mean? we heard from nick paton walsh, the only western journalist, our reporter ob the scene that there may be a handful of isis fighters they're trying to eradica eradicate, but for the most part, mosul has been liberated. tell us the significance? >> let's be frank. this is what i would say is the first third of a larger campaign that needs to be in place. i don't want to diminish the accomplishments in place. the united states has been in iraq for 14 years, and over that decade and a half there has been a concerted effort not only to eliminate bad guys but to build up a military and help establish and create a foundation for governance. now the real test begins. you've liberated mosul. you now have the requirement to hold what has been accomplished and build on that. if you remember the strategy for many years has been clear, hold

and build. let's keep it in those terms and focus in on these next steps. that's when the real heavy lifting takes place. clearly we can celebrate the fact there's been a great military victory, but what do you do with it next? that's the key thing. isis is not going to disappear. it might have physically departed from mosul, it will go under ground and stay online, recruiting will continue, inspiration will continue, to isis has not gone away, but it's a good opportunity for the government of iraq to shore up what they've been able to accomplish, move forward from here. this is really great news. >> michael, how do you see it? >> i agree. i'm old enough to remember when mosul under u.s. occupation was considered a pacified city under a little known general called david petraeus. then mosul fell to isis. we're looking at a conflict that

has already been over a decade. >> a million civilians have left. >> the old city lies in ruins, the site of some of the most historic architecture in iraq. the key point is this, where where do we find ourselves now? we're back to where isis was a jv team, to quote the immortal words of barack obama which is to say they're still stronger than they were when they left in 2009, 2010, 2011 when they were strategically defeated. they have a large group in euphrates river, but also in the desert bad lands of anbar province. this is the place to which they repair when they're looking to recalibrate and regroup and plot their grand return. now the question is, will iraqi politics cohere to such an extent