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 that isis can't come

back? that i have much less confidence in than i do this victory. >> obviously the work is continuing. gentlemen, thank you. so sorry to cut you short. we've had a lot of news this morning. we want to thank our international viewers for watching. for you, cnn "newsroom" is next. for our u.s. viewers, "new day" continues right now. >> it was a nothing meeting. >> donald trump, junior, met a russian lawyer who claims she had damaging information on hillary clinton. >> the woman in question wasn't anybody off the street. she was closely tied to the kremlin. >> everybody knows that russia meddled in our election. >> the idea we can work in a cyber security group is a dangerously naive view to take. >> i'm sure vladimir putin could be of enormous assistance in that effort since he's doing the hacking. >> we want to make sure that we coordinate with russia -- >> this ask like any other strategic alliance. >> it's not the dumbest idea i've ever heard, but it's pretty

close. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> up first, president trump's eldest son, donald trump, junior, changing his story about his meeting last june with a kremlin-linked russian lawyer. he started out saying i never met with anybody like that, then he said he met with somebody but it had nothing to do with the campaign, but now admits he met with someone who offered information to hurt hillary clinton? what does this say about the trump campaign's willingness to accept help from the russians? those are the questions. >> meanwhile, president trump backtracking for a cyber security unit with russia after facing pierce bipartisan criticism for proposing both countries cooperate. all this coming after the president tweeted it is time to move forward on russia. we have it all covered for you. let's begin with cnn's suzanne malveaux live at the white

house. >> good morning, alisyn. news of a potential meeting, this meeting between donald trump, junior and a russian national as first reported by "the new york times" raising new questions now about trump associates, the trump campaign and its link to russian officials going to the heart of the question behind those federal investigations, whether or not there was collusion, also a focus this morning on the changing explanation that donald trump, junior, gave about why that meeting took place in the first place. >> "the new york times" reporting that donald trump, junior, was promised 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. >> in donald junior's initial statement released sat, 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 that was at that meeting about what was discussed. >> this has president trump is facing scrutiny over his response to russian's election hacks after meeting with 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. >> reporter: facing backlash, president trump reversing course 12 hours later tweeting, the fact that president putin 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 meading, 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. >> this after the russian foreign minister said friday that president trump heard and accepts putin's denial, a claim

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 declaring yesterday now is the time to move forward to work constructively with russia. that might be difficult. lawmakers and congress are discussing a bill to slad add dings sanctions on russia. administration officials are frustrate $because they feel president trump needs more flexibility to negotiate with president putin. >> suzanne, thank you for that reporting. let's bring in our panel, cnn political analyst ron brownstein, counterterrorism ability lift philip mudd and associate es tore for real clear politics a.b. stoddard.

first things first, if a known russian lawyer with kremlin and putin ties were coming to the u.s. to meet with a campaign, is that something the fbi and cia would know about, would catch wind of or can these things sort of happen secretly? >> i don't think they would necessarily know about that. that would defend in part on whether that person has a direct relationship with the russian government. i think looking in retrospect, this starts to get more and more interesting if you're a federal investigator a year after the event. let's collate a few items. we have breaking news. we have the new reporting that jeff sessions story about how many times he met with russians changed. we had general flynn in january so embarrassed with his relationship with russians that his story changed. we're seeing less than 5% of this. the fbi is gathering massive quantities of e-mail and phone

information, if you match that with what we've seen, the 5% we're cleekting, you can start to get a picture of why this meeting starts to look more and more interesting. someone is not telling the truth and i suspect they'll figure it out. >> a.b., you hear that? that's the silence of people saying there's nothing to any of these questions that the investigators are looking at this more because this is exactly one of their major concerns. not that the trump campaign was seeking out, was working with russians, but russians were looking for opportunities. the big question comes around donald trump junior's changing statements. months ago when he was asked, did you ever meet with anybody, any that came to you? no, no, no. then he said, yes, i had a meeting but about adoptions, nothing to do with the campaign. then he says he willingly sat down with someone who offered up information about the russians and hillary clinton.

the impact of the changing stories? >> well, i think you're talking exactly about what's of consequence here. the fact is the trump campaign associates including the son-in-law and a son all thad these meetings with russians, never a bunch of greeks, but then they forget them, forget to put them on government forms, forget what happened at the meeting, how many times they had meetings and in the case of don junior really has gone from -- it's just beyond questionable he goes from denial to it was about the magnin ski act and adoption, really important issue to paul manafort and jared kushner who came along for the meeting and then it becomes -- he reveals he was enticed into the meeting because there would be damaging information about hillary clinton. also of consequence is the president's statement,

distancing himself, that the president didn't know about it, never attended the meeting. this is becoming more than smoke and obviously is something that we don't know what the fbi and special counsel mueller knows beyond this, but obviously his investigation seems to be growing, not shrinking. he's hiring more personnel. and this is the kind of thing that really calls into question the question of collusion, whether or not there was a direct sort of active collusion is really not what people suspected all along. people like lieutenant general michael flynn and others in the campaign might have become unwitting, sort of dupes to the russians. >> which made no sense until the evolution of the understanding of this meeting. that's something people questioned, how would you not know? it is still a legitimate question, what's the chance you would sit down and take a meeting with somebody and have no idea who they are, except they have this loaded suggestion

for you? >> that's more likely, i think, if you think somebody has good oppo research, you might sit down and talk to them, but why would you bring the campaign chairman and jared kushner and the president's son in lou, why bring that if this is a fishing expedition and don't know what's coming. >> eventually everyone involved is going to have to answer questions under oath about what happened and what they knew and what they discussed. whatever we have now, as phil said, is just the beginning of the story. there are several thresholds here. the first, as everyone has said, we have a repeated pattern of meetings with russians that are conveniently forgotten by a wide array of people associated with the campaign and the administration, from the attorney general to the first national security adviser to the

president's son and son-in-law. the second -- the second threshold is you sit down with someone in a meet whog is a lawyer from russia who promises you information that's disadvantage ous to the other campaign and you don't get up and go out of the room, you don't tell anybody. then you go on and as a candidate, president trump basically asking the russians to find in a public setting, hillary clinton's e-mails. what all of this says to me, i agree very much that this is an investigation getting bigger, not smaller. now these questions are not going away and there will be -- people are going to have to answer questions about all of this under oath, and that may look very different than a statement he released on saturday and sunday to "the new york times." the idea that everyone shows up for a meeting and no one knows who they're meeting with, the top echelon of the campaign,

we'll see if that explanation sustains itself through an extended investigation. >> do we have the excerpt from don junior about what meetings he said he had and didn't have? no, this is about this particular meeting which is where donald trump, junior says it was a short meeting, it was about adoption. then he amended the statement and said, i sat down with this person because they were supposed to have dirt on hillary clinton, but that wound up to not really be the case. i'm saying earlier, in an interview with "the times" in march, he denied participating in any campaign meetings with russian nationals. did i meet with people that were russian? i'm sure i did. but none that were set up. he proved thab b to be untrue. none that i can think of at the moment and certainly not representing the campaign in any way. he also said, did i i meet with

russians about anything? no, never. phil mudd, what are your questions, if you sit down with your fbi hat on in light of the no, i never did it, okay, i did it but it was about adoptions, nothing to do with the campaign to, yeah, i sat down because she supposedly had dirt on hillary clinton? >> first of all, i have to stop laughing when i go into the conversation. here is my question, this is why the investigation is so complicated. i'm sure people will ask why is this going to take months or even years. if you multiply these statements changing over time by dozens of 'em pooh, that's one aspect of the investigation. you go into the initial conversation and get one story. you realize after dozens more interviews that story changes, different people say different things about the same meeting. you go re-entinterview that per six months later, they start to say something different, the story evolves. match that with the information you're collecting on financial

transfers. i'm going to assume people are telling different stories about why they got money. you match that with phone and e-mail information. if we're getting smoke changing over time from just a couple of interviews with newspapers from these people, think of what the nib is dealing with when they're looking at mounds of data and dozens of interviews. >> a.b., i know it's hard for lots of people to follow the different russian threads. there are many. to be honest, there is not sort of one tie that binds everything yet. obviously that's what robert mueller is looking into. we'll see if that ever happens, the so-called smoking gun. but there is also policy connected to this. congress is wrestling with russian sanctions right now. so at the same time that president trump is making nice with putin or hatching some

cyber security deal with him, the same time -- >> or not. >> or not. at the same time his advisers are saying we never met with anybody, it was nothing of significance, congress is trying to impose sanctions on russia. >> this is why senator lindsey graham said yesterday his whole posture towards russia, trump's and putin's, the threatening the success of his presidency because of all this other policy. we've seen the sanctions bill go through the senate. it was about 97-2. now it's stuck in the house and there are different versions of why. there's going to be a lot of pressure on congressional republicans to push through that despite the objections from the white house. you see a bipartisan group of senators pressuring the white house to change their decision, to give those two compounds back in new york and maryland to the russians that were forced to be evacuated in response to russian interference in the election by president obama before he left.

they're saying, if you give these compounds back and invite these russian officials back in, you're really giving in. there's a lot of pressure from the congress. since the executive branch refuses to deal with the issue of interference and refuses to it gait the threat we face as they face the next election, there will be a lot of pressure on sanctions, compounds, et cetera, from congressional republicans because they know the administration refuses to act. >> also, important to note here, ron brownstein, two things, all brought in self-inflicted. you have don, junior, he took the meeting. he's the one running around with his fake news campaign all the time, and now it looks like dogt protest too much giving obviously changed statements and a huge credibility issue for him. on the other front, you have what happened with the putin-trump meeting. the day before the president once again questions the reality

about whether or not russia hacked. then he goes in and coming out saying, he was really death, he asked him once, twice, maybe three times about this, and he was really strong. he comes out of the meeting and proposes working with russia on cyber security and says it is time to move on, and then tweets something that is almost impossible to understand which is, yeah, we talked about it, but i know it's not possible. i know it can never happen. what is that all about? again, self imposed, but what's going on there? >> there's erratic quality to the policy making and decision making of the administration where words that mean something on tuesday don't mean anything on wednesday. i always felt that there was -- all weekend i have felt there was less to the difference and the asks o of the putin-trump meeting than met the eye. the russians say president putin offered his denial and the president accepted the u.s. version is that they agreed to disagree. they both lead you to the same

place which is both president putin and president trump saying we need to move past this, move it behind us as opposed to the president saying to president putin, look, we know what you did, i don't care what you said, we know what you did, there are going to be consequences for it and here are the further consequences if you ever do it again. they're ending unin the same place saying whatever happened, we have to get past it. i think most people agree if you have any hope of changing the few touche behavior of someone like putin, it's imposing consequences for what they did in the past. that's clearly not the direction president trump wants to move. >> ron, a.b., phil, thank you very much. let's talk about something else the president has talked about this morning which actually matters to all of you, which is health care. we have republican congressman mo brooks joining us from alabama. sir, it is good to see you. people on this show remember you very well from your poise and your profound emotion on the

morning of that horrible shooting in alexandria. as you know, we've been following how the whip scalise is doing. we know he was back in the hospital. we know he's fighting. i know that "how are you doing" has become a loaded question for you. give our viewers some peace of mind. how are you doing? >> i'm doing fairly well, considering the circumstances we all went through. it's good to be on your show, chris and alisyn. thank you for the invitation. i look forward to focusing on public policy issues. our prayers are with steve scalise and his family. >> strong then, strong now and equally committed to the people. i can't imagine congress would dare leave washington without a beautiful new health care bill fully approved and ready to go. do you think that's possible? >> it's possible that the senate will do its job, do something on health care and send it to the house of representatives where

we would either reject it and move to a conference committee or accept it. but the indications are right now that the senate is mightily struggling to come up with a plan to properly deal with the health care issue in front of us. >> if the cbo score comes out and once again shows that what's being seen as tax savings will wind up leaving millions of people off the medicaid roles at some point, whether it's now, five years or seven years, do you think that is a death sentence for this bill? >> well, it is with some senators and not with others. we always have to keep in mind our financial ability to pay for things. there are a lot of struggling american families out there working for a living who are otherwise self-sufficient, right on the edge of having to go on welfare because of all the tax burdens that they're facing. i'm like everybody else. i would love for every american to have a perfect health care system where we can deliver perfect care every time someone is ill, but we don't have enough money.

we ears risking insolvency and bankruptcy of our nation. we have to take into account our financial limitations and do the best we can. with medicaid, we're already forcefully taking $350 billion a year, more than that, from hard working american families to help those who are not able to or for whatever reason don't pay for their health care. the we is, what are our limitations? how much more can we do without having a tragic adverse effect on, say, the goose the lays the golden egg. >> congressman, so that policy argument that you're making winds up being put into conflict with the reality of where this money that's being saved will go. people will say, look, you're so concerned about how much you can afford, that's one thing. but you're going to give it in a tax cut to the wealthy. if you legally care about those middle class families struggling and the poor who need made kad, you shouldn't give a tax break to the wealthy. >> i understand the argument you

make but at the same time understand the folks that had the money are the ones that create the jobs that employ us. we can take money from the people who have been successful, but every time we do so they have less money to invest. in a free enterprise economy it's the wealth that creates the businesses that creates the jobs for our blue collar and middle class workforce. it's all interrelated and a tough balance to achieve as evidenced by the senate having such a difficult time. >> where you are in alabama, big medicaid need down there. in no way do i presume to tell you about your own constituency. you are famed for your understanding of it. you know people need the medicaid money, without expansion and more money, less people will be covered. what do you say to them? >> you're right. there are those people in that category, but there's also another set of people who have sen their health insurance rates triple, up 223% over the last four years on the individual markets and exchanges. and the people having to pay

those bills, they're screaming to high heaven because they can't afford it. it means they don't have the money by way of example to send their kids to college, or they don't have the money by way of example to put food on the table or pay for the housing they need for their families. all this is interrelated. there are limitations on how much we can afford. i'm hopefully can help the struggling families doing it the right way that have those jobs which right now they see the premiums skyrocketing and at a loss of what to do. there is no easy solution. there needs to be a proper balance and that's what we're all trying to focus on and work towards. >> another problem with the bill is, according to the cbo score and experts we've had on to analyze its implications, you have this group within the individual marketplace which you could argue on a raw human level are much fewer than the millions of people affected by the medicaid cuts. this bill, even if that is the group you want to target, doesn't make it better for them

any time soon, and the reductions in rates even over time aren't that impressive. if you want to help that group, you're not doing enough. >> well, that's the argument you can make. on the other hand, to extend that argument to where you wanted where premiums go back to say 2009, obamacare years, you have to dramatically cut the quality of health care benefits for those people who in the past were unable to pay their own way. again, you've got that balance. but let's be clear about the senate bill you're talking about. i would be extraordinarily surprised based on what i'm reading, comments from various senators, if that's the bill that comes out of the senate. really we're talking about a health care bill we don't know about yet because the senate has not yet drafted it. we'll see whether mitch mcconnell and the senate can do their job, so far they have not been able to, they've had seven months. six months later we still don't have that legislation. i'm puzzled about the impasse

and why they weren't working for the two or three or four months, for example, when we were working in the house and finally got a bill out. they could have been doing the same thing in the senate at the very same time. >> let's take a quick break, but i want you to handicap it for me. what do you think the chances are that something gets done this summer? >> based on the reports i'm seeing recently, i don't think that the chances are very good, but at the same time mitch mcconnell has been able to pull a rabbit out of a hat on occasion. perhaps he can force a compromise in the united states senate on this particular health care bill. time will tell. i think the big issue is what comes out of the senate, is that good for america or bad for america, short-term or long-term. >> let's take a quick break. congressman, can i indulge you to stay with us for another block? >> if you wish. >> we'll have congressman m o brooks staying with us to talk about the work of the american people.

will it get done in light of what is breaking news about the russia revelations? is this just a distraction or should it be the focus on capitol hill? ♪ taking care of business. finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor. when you switch to progressive. as easy as saving $600 winds stirring. too treacherous for a selfie. [ camera shutter clicks ] sure, i've taken discounts to new heights with safe driver 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! there's nothing more important so when i need to book a hotel, i want someone who 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!

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.

back with us is one of the true fair brokers of political realities in washington, republican congressman mo brooks of alabama. sir, pleasure to have you on the show. thank you for staying for another block. alisyn is with me now to incentivize you to stay. >> he's letting me share you, congressman. >> mo is look that's enough cuomo for me. i was like, wait, here is alisyn. >> i understand, congressman. i have three hours of it. let's talk about what happened when the president went to the g20 and russia. what do you think about president trump trying to hatch some sort of cyber security plan with vladimir putin which, as you know, some of your politics called the fox guarding the hen house, and now him saying, no, sort of just kidding, i don't think that can happen? >> i'm a little different in that regard than perhaps most people. i think it's always good to try to reach out to other countries,

both our allies and our potential geopolitical foes. to the extent the president of the united states and vladimir putin can reach some kind of accord, familiarity, knowledge of each other, i think that's a good thing. i think that's the same with all of our world leaders. should a crisis erupt, it's better to have some knowledge of your adversary or friend. >> sure. but on cyber security in particular, do you think russia is an honest and fair partner? >> that is yet to be seen with respect to cyber skufrt. i don't have a problem reaching out to reach an accord with russia on cyber security issues, but at the same time we must do so in a very, very, very wary way because it's clear that over time a lot of the cyberattacks that have occurred around the globe originated in russia.

in fairness, it's not just russia, there are probably a half dozen other countries that we're briefed on in congress on a regular basis that are making cyber security attacks either as a nation or individuals in those nations trying to penetrate our infrastructure capabilities. you name it. if they can get to it, they try it. >> one of the problems we're seeing is one of simple politics. the president doesn't like the implications of russian hacking on the election in 2016. he thinks it delegitimizes him so he's pushed it to the side as recently as the day before the putin meeting he was saying what you're saying now, but to a different degree. he was saying, okay, maybe it was russia, maybe it wasn't, nobody knows for sure he was tasked with looking at a meeting, looking at the leader of russia? the eye saying we know what you

did, don't do it again. what do you make of it? >> i'm one of those, i'm a prosecutor, having done so in tuscaloosa, madison county, hudson, alabama, i want to see the evidence. i'm anxious to see the reports where you and don't have to speculate so much. we can have it in front of us and know what transpired. the fbi has been working on this almost a year. by golly, this is a major issue. the public wants to know the answer. i urge the fbi to get it done and get it done fast. if you need more help from congress, maybe financing so you have enough fbi agents to get this done quickly, come to us and say that and we'll do what we can. this issue needs to get resolved. the phish is in the position to get it done. it's holding us up on other issues in a lot of different ways. >> is there any doubt in your mind that the outcome will be that russia definitively meddled in our election?

>> i think it's clear from the evidence i've seen, and i don't have the fbi report, that russia, either the government or individuals within russia tried to meddle in the american election. you get to the next question. how successful were they? i've yet to hear of a single voter who says, oh, i was misled by what the russians did into voting for a different person. i want the evidence on both. >> their effectiveness is a secondary issue. like you, we haven't had any proof of -- in fact, we hear the opposite from the intelligence community, that the russians were unsuccessful in actually altering any of the actual voting. >> although, i have to say, in terms of the propaganda campaign that we've heard there were so many putting out fake news, i did hear during the election voters quoting that not knowing that was fake news. >> actual tabulation of votes, getting into software, we don't

have proof of that. you know what we're dealing with this morning that the meeting the president's son had, changed his story now at least twice. what does that part of the investigation mean to you? how important do you think it is that investigators get to the bottom of russian efforts to work with members of the trump campaign to try to get in there and how those efforts were received? >> well, you kind of tag teamed me on a bunch of different things. >> go ahead. speak to what you think matters. >> first, did russia meddle? that's the thing we have to emphasize and resolve and get the fbi report on. that's one thing where it's the united states versus russia type of issue. the second thing is did they change votes? by changing people's minds and how they cast that ballot, that gets to the legitimacy of donald trump being president of the united states. so they're separate but related issues. i have yet to hear anything that delegitimizes how americans

chose to vote. although you have a valid point flkts it's hard to calculate the impact of the information disseminated. we need to know was the information disseminated true or false. if some of it was false, what was false? we need all that resolved. then you add into it the trump campaign allegedly may have melt with someone who may have had information on hillary clinton in opposition research. i'm familiar with opposition research. one of my opponents sent a team into my hometown trying to dig up whatever they could. we'll find out about it over the next five weeks. >> were you were contacted and somebody said, i know someone who is connected to russian authorities and have information for you about your opinion point, would you take the meeting? >> it would depend on the time limitations i have. by and large, if you're talking about at a presidential level, i would recommend someone talk to everybody who says they have

information that makes a particular candidate, an opponent unworthy of serving in the office. having said that, in my campaign, i'm not doing any opposition research. >> we understand. but doesn't the source of the information matter if they say this person has -- this is a russian-connected person? not ethnically russian, but kremlin-connected person, wouldn't that be a red flag to you? >> absolutely that's a red flag. if any opposition research you have to make sure of one thing, and that is that the information is accurate. and so if you're getting information from someone who may be leading you astray or a motive to lead you astray, that has to be taken into account when you garner what information they have that would purportedly render a candidate unsuitable. you have to consider all these different things as you're trying to evaluate how best to put forward your campaign. >> congressman, we'll let you

go. do you have an update on congressman steve scalise, how is he doing? >> his office contacted my office. they prefer that kind of information be consistent and come from either the steve scalise family or from the steve scalise office. i'm going to respect that. all i have right now are what you've already seen on the media. steve is still in the hospital. i think our prayers need to be with him and his family. again, let's pray for a speedy recovery. >> and they are. congressman mo brooks, thank you for spending so much time with us. >> appreciate your dedication to the people, you're soldiering on. you're always welcome here. >> you all have a good day. >> you, too. a major victory in the fight against isis as people dance in the streets of mosul. the city set to be liberated, but there are many challenges ahead. we have the only western journalist there. that live report next. 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. going somewhere? whoooo. here's some advice. tripadvisor now searches more than 200 booking sites to find the hotel you want and save you up to 30%. trust this bird's words.

tripadvisor. ♪ i noticed it as soon as we moved into the new house. a lot of people have vertical blinds. well, if a lot of people jumped off a bridge, would you? you hungry? i'm okay right -- i'm... i'm becoming my, uh, mother. it's been hard, but some of the stuff he says is actually pretty helpful. pumpkin, bundling our home and auto insurance is a good deal! like buying in bulk! that's fun, right? progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents, but we can protect your home and auto.

how if guests book direct ater, choicehotels.com and stay twice they'll get a $50 gift card? summertime. badda book. badda boom. got you a shirt! ...i kept the receipt... book now at choicehotels.com

iraq's prime minister proclaiming mosul liberated from isis. crowds cheering him as he walked

the streets. yet, he says pockets of isis are still putting up a fight. cnn's senior international correspondent nick paton walsh is the only western journalist in mosul. here he is with more. >> reporter: maybe a hundred yards until they hit the symbolic river that runs through the heart of mosul. what was once the capital in iraq of isis' caliphate now reduced to a tiny number of buildings and snipers picking off the tiny remnants of eye sichlts many emerging from the rubble wanting to give themselves up. these forces led by the brigadier general from the iraqi special forces, american trained and american equipment. we've seen ourselves with a vast amount of air strikes that have come through here to support this advance. startling to see the rubble around us here, the devastation of the city. but they are so close to their final goal here, talk of political announcements being made possibly from this

particular area. minute by minute isis appears to be running out of ammunition, handing themselves over. the occasional sniper round fired him. but the territory small until they hit the river. that is the point in which they declare their victory. nick paton walsh about a hundred yards from the old tigress river, iraq. >> our thanks to nick paton walsh for his bravery on the ground there. what comes next matters just as much. we'll stay on that story. the president's family is creating controversy. are there roles in the government appropriate? that's next. office depot/office max. this week, get this ream of paper for just one cent after rewards. ♪ taking care of business. you...smells fine, but yourin your passengers smell this bell dinging new febreze car with odorclear technology cleans away odors... ...for up to 30 days

smells nice... breathe happy, with new febreze. 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! finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor.

[ sighs ] hey, i was using that. what, you think we own stock in the electric company? i will turn this car around right now! there's nobody back there. i was becoming my father. [ clears throat ] it's...been an adjustment, but we're making it work. you know, progressive.com makes it easy for us to get the right home insurance. [ snoring ] progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents, but we can protect your home and auto. [ chuckles ] all right.

what should i watch? show me sports. it's so fluffy! look at that fluffy unicorn! he's so fluffy i'm gonna die! your voice is awesome. the x1 voice remote. xfinity. the future of awesome.

donald trump, junior, now admitting he did meet with a russian attorney during the 2016 campaign. "the new york times" reporting that attorney said she had damaging information about hillary clinton. to be clear, this isn't about just being a russian by ethnicity, it's about being connected to the kremlin. now, it also matters because earlier donald trump, junior, said he had not met with any russian, called those types of suggestions fake news. now he's changing his story. joining us executive ed thor of bloomberg view and author of "trump nation" tim o'brien and author of "the truth about trump" michael dantonio. this raises the questions about what role the kids should have. tim o'brien, what do you believe the issues are? >> i think first and foremost it

gets back to the whole collusion issue. the argument has been raised that when donald junior met with a lawyer who was connected to the kremlin, that it was simply oppo research, any kpaent would have taken this meeting if that operative or any foreign national is being paid or using money to influence the u.s. election, if a u.s. national meets with that individual in the course of events, it's collusion and a criminal act, not merely research. >> it would get complicated legally. you're right. there are issues that are raised. mr. dantonio, having you here, your knowledge of don jr. is he the of person that would take a meeting with somebody either, a, that he knows nothing about, which is the initial suggestion from donald jr. i had no idea who i was meeting with. it was on a recommendation of a friend or, b, he would take this type of opo research meeting even if this person had connections to the kremlin? >> i think i would choose both

of the above. he is a guy who readily meets with almost anybody who calls him. he also has this huge sense of self confidence based on the fact that i am donald trump jr. he imagines that whatever encounter he has, he's going to come out of it doing well and having performed well. the thing that people may be getting wrong is the idea that his father, now the president, but then the candidate, would have been unaware of this. donald trump's stock in trade is gossip. he loves information. he lives for this inside baseball stuff. so, i actually think that the president would have known before the meeting, probably, and i think he definitely would have heard of what happened at this meeting. >> all right but let's go -- we go with what we know. the word from the white house. the word from the son is the

president wasn't informed. the president did not know. that doesn't remove all of the issues and, for the record, donald jr., if he wants to meet with anybody who asks him, allows this to be an invitation. we would much rather talk to him about this than about him. it raises the issue, tim, about the role of the children within the administration. donald jr. is not part of the administration. his sister is part of the administration, but she is not in a role that would have suggested she would take the seat of the president of the united states, representing the american people at a g20 summit. but she did do that. the president tweet this had morning i was just -- when i left the conference room for short meetings with japan, i asked ivanka to hold seat. very standard. angela m agrees. i didn't know that you had to save your seat at the g20 like a movie theater. maybe someone would have sat in it. what do you make of this? >> it gets back to this sort of

lack of boundaries in the trump family between their business roles, public service roles, the president's own facility with moving his children in and out of meetings or settings that are appropriate or inappropriate. i don't think they care. i think their view of this as a family is they're all suited to play any role their father wants them to play. and i think the g20 summit was an example of that. >> this is one of those -- i'm not a big fan of what about-ism. you have to deal with each case as it stands. politically, if you had had a clinton in the white house and chelsea clinton popped into the seat, just for a little while, just to hold it, imagine what the implications would have been. yet right now, silence from anybody around the president or any elected leader within his party. what do you make of that, mi michael? >> i would have turned to the president, were i in her

situation and said, are you sure? this is the kind of duty i'm confident there were officials right on hand and ready to occupy that seat. it has happened before. even just the image of the president's daughter sitting down there seems provocative to me. but, again, as tim said, there's an assumption within the family that any trump can be slotted into any role and by virtue of their trumpiness, they can handle it. and i think there has to be an eye toward the american public, toward the interests of the united states beyond just service to the president. >> and that's why i wanted to do this segment. this isn't simply about -- nobody has more sensitivity to family members of an elected than i do. and i understand that loyalty to family and i believe in family and i get why the president leans on his kids, especially ivanka. she is known to be -- the son-in-law is known to be competent, smart and he trusts

him. the reason we bring it up is we have moved away from the potential problems of conflicts. the hotel there in d.c. has become like a salon effect for the president. it is a meeting center of influentials in a way it never was before. and it's not a coincidence. the golf courses, the hotel, people want to do business with the president. >> and the family is profiting from these relationships and ongoing businesses and have done nothing to create a real firewall that should make people think twice about whether their decisions are coming from a public policy standpoint or financial interest. >> those issues are real. we'll stay on them. tim, michael, thank you. allison? how big are all these new russia rell invasievati. ns for the trump white house? will be how to drink this monstrosity. get help with hotels, free twenty-four-hour flight changes, and our price match guarantee.

travelocity.® wander wisely.™

this is "new day" with allison carmarata and chris cuomo. >> up first, president trump's son changing his story about the meeting with a lawyer who supposedly had dirt on hillary clinton. the kremlin says they're not aware of this meeting. why would they want help from the russians? >> after facing huge criticism for proposing working with russia on cyber security. we have white house counselor kellyanne