manafort's apartmentment. >> somebody had to go to a judge. they're not just here on a fishing expedition. >> a significant turn by director mueller and this investigation. stay tuned. this is "new day" with chris cuomo and al sirn camerota. >> welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. it's thursday, august 10th, 6:00 here in new york. here is our starting line. north korea arguably crossing president trump's red line with a new threat outlining a specific plan to fire several ballistic missiles into the water near guam, a u.s. territory. the high stakes war of words intensifying. the general in charge of north korea yeah's missile programming slamming president trump as bereft of reason and dismissing his fire and fury warning as nonsense. >> meanwhile, the trump administration is sending mixed

messages in the past 24 hours. secretary of state tillerson was reassuring americans that we can sleep well at night while the defense secretary mattis warned of a scenario that could lead to, quote, the end of the north korean regime and the destruction of its people. so where are we today? our political reporters and a group of lawmakers will be here to tell us. we have the global resources of cnn covering this all for you. let's begin with cnn's will ripley, he's the western journalist who has spent the most time in north korea. he's live for us in beijing. >> reporter: alisyn, i can tell you i have never seen a statement like this from north korea, a detailed technical plan for what would be north korea's most provocative missile test ever if they actually go through with it and are able to pull it off. they're talking about launching four missiles simultaneously. the missile they tested in may, with a range of 3,100 miles which puts guam, 2,100 miles

from the korean peninsula within striking range. these missiles can reach guam in less than 20 minutes. north korea wants to flee these missiles over japan, toward this island, home to more than 160,000 american citizens, putting those missiles down in the waters less than 20 miles from itself. it would be highly provocative and certainly cross president trump's red line. this statement indicates they don't take president trump's warnings seriously. they called his fire and fury statement a load of nonsense, they made fun of the fact that he was speaking from a government course. i want to ring you the statement from the general. it says, quote, sound dialogue is not possible with such a guy be rest of reason and only absolute force can work on him. a major rally stage d in a larg

squael that north korea can fill with hundreds of thousands of people on very short notice. it is mandatory for citizens to participate in these major events. you saw massive crowds chanting anti u.s. slogans, denouncing the sanctions and denouncing the united states. perhaps the most chilling part of all of this is the last sentence of this warning from north korea. it says, quote, we keep closely watching the speech and behavior of the united states, indicating north korea won't back down despite the fiery rhetoric and threats from the u.s. president. in fact, they upped the ante with this statement, now we have to watch ait and what what the d states will do. >> north korea says the plans to launch missiles near guam's waters will be ready within days. south korea warning kim jong un's regime against firing missiles near guam, vowing they will retale late.

cnn's anna coren is live in south korea, just 35 miles in the border with the north. anna. >> reporter: chris, i think it's fair to say that south korea is used to the sabre rattling that comes out of its northern neighbor. the government at least in the past has tried to remain calm and measured. in the last couple days it's taking these threats out of north korea much more seriously. they described those threats of military action, the military strikes against guam as absurd, saying that any provocation will be met with a powerful response. now, south korean president moon jae-in has rapid up a meeting with his national security kwoun sell in which they're urging north korea to stop escalating tensions saying that war will not benefit either side. now, guam aside, chris, it's important to remember there are at least 1,000 artillery pieces

aimed at south korea. where we are here in seoul, it's some 35 miles from the border. those artillery pieces, if unleashed according to defense secretary jim mattis, would be the worst kind of fighting ever seen in most people's lifetime. certainly sobering words. it's fair to say that war here on the korean peninsula would be catastrophic. for the north korea regime, alisyn, it would be suicidal. >> anna, thank you for all that. in the last 24 hours the trump administration sent mixed messages on the escalating crisis in north korea. secretary of state tillerson has been trying to reassure the american people and u.s. allies that diplomacy will prevail. cnn's barbara starr is live at the pentagon with more. how do they see it there, barbara sf. >> whatever you call it, mixed messages, confusing messages, top official are using different language to describe what they

see going on. let's start again with president trump's remarks and the secretary of state rex tillerson responding to that. >> north korea best not make anymore threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. >> i think americans should sleep well at night. i have no concerns over this particular rhetoric over the last few days. >> reporter: if you were thinking about sleeping well at night, you might want to first consider the statement from the defense secretary jams mattis, putting out a written statement that says in part, and let me read it to you, the dprk must choose to stop isolating itself and stand down its pursuit of nuclear weapons. the dprk should cease any any

consideration of actions that would lead to the end of the regime and the destruction of its people. maybe singing from the same hik, the white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders did indicate the president's fire and fury words were his own words. that was not preplanned, pre written out for him. that is what he chose to say somewhat off-the-cuff. keep in mind it's the secondary of state and secretary of defense with differing messages responding essentially to what the president said. >> barbara, appreciate it. that's right. the pentagon spokesperson saying they're all singing from the same hymnal. let's get the facts of how real this threat is. we have david gregory, author of "nuclear showdown, north korea

takes on the world, and daily beast columnist gordon chang, and will ripley is in north korea and has been monitoring the situation. he got this very lengthy statement from the north korea government. gordon chang, help us understand the precise nature of this threat, what makes it different, what stands out to you coming from north korea? >> what stands out to me is they're firing multiple missiles and very close to american territory. >> threatening to. >> threatening to. they're saying, for instance, 30 kilometers off the guam shore, that's only miles away. they fired four missiles in march. i think what they were trying to say then is we can overwhelm your missile defense system. i think it's going to be again a question of whether we are able

and willing to try and use our missile defense system to shoot them down if they come close to guam territory. >> gordon, are they just baiting the president? if these missiles, if they do this and if these go into the waters off guam, don't hit guam, isn't there another provocation and missile test. does it have to be responded to with force? >> no, it certainly doesn't have to be responded with force. i think there are non-kinetic options we have which could be the north koreans and chinese on the back foot. >> meaning what? >> the one thing we should be doing is enforcing u.s. law against money laundering. big chinese banks have been doing that. if we were to declare a large chinese financial institution a primary money laundering concern and unplug it from the global banking system, it wouldn't be the use of force, it would show political will and say to the north koreans that we can separate china from pyongyang

and tlfr isolate them, really isolate them. the one thing that's important about this threat, essentially what we're going from is from words, and if they carry forward, they're doing something. the one thing we haven't seen, and this is important, we haven't seen a realignment of forces along the demilemilitari zone r. one caveat. in august we always have these large scale exercises with the south koreans, and the north koreans and the chinese are going to hate that and that's when this crisis could get very real. >> david gregory, even though it's just words, you can't be casual about it right now, because if they were to do this, those missiles would go over japan. so they are now injected into this situation in a very real way while these missiles may, as gordon is outlining for us, strike in the waters close to the territorial boundary of the united states. they are threatening the north

koreans to send them over japan which would, of course, make this a very specific threat to them. in terms of the political fallout, how it's being handled, this criticism about double speak, what do you see as relevant? >> well, i think there's a couple of things. first of all, just how unpredictable all of this is. i think the administration is being deliberately unpredictable. i think it's being deliberately confusing in terms of what the president is saying versus the se fence secretary, versus the secretary of state, to let the north koreans and chinese know there are various levels in which this is operating within the united states government. i think you have to be afraid of miscalculation on both sides. we have an untested president who does not have experience, who seems to be reacting impulsively to all this. we certainly have an unstable

leader in korea. i think there's more to the trump strategy than meets the eye. if you look at the many months of how they've approached north korea, there's thoughtful consideration and strategic thinking going on about how to pressure the chinese and pyongyang. i think we also have to remember that, as tense as the situation could become with our allies in south korea and in japan, there's a lot of options with regard to missile defenses and, of course, sabotage which we don't know for certain, but there's certainly been a lot of reporting on this over the many months about u.s. efforts to sabotage the missile system of the north to make sure these missiles don't go off as planned. so all of that could be meant to suggest to the north, you can't even pull off what you're trying to and that still falls short of whether the u.s. would try some kind of limited strike short of saying to the north that we're

engaging in preventative war or starting an actual war. >> will, you are in beijing for us this morning. as you said, you're the western journalist who has been to north korea the most. you've spoken to north korean officials, where do you put this in context? have you seen it get to this pitch level before? >> certainly there have been times over the course of history where the peninsula has come close to the printing of war. think back to near the end of the clinton administration -- actually in the '93-'94, during the clinton years, they were concerned about north korea starting a nuclear program. there were meetings in the white house happening where they were going over war strategies. it wasn't until president carter announced on cnn that he bartered a peace deal. then you have madeleine albright meeting with kim jong-il and there was talk it came close to president clinton visiting but then his term ended.

when the second bush administration came in, the relationship toxified. it has been bad before. the difference is north korea warns about strikes in colorful, flowery language, turn wash-into a sea of fire, annihilate the united states. it seems north korea is quite confident they could pull something like this off, or they're really bluffing here. the fact they would specify the missile, the trajectory, how many kilometers it would travel, how far it would come to guam, it seems they either feel they can do this and can pull it off or they're bluffing, hoping the united states will dial back the rhetoric because there does come a point where everybody is drawing all the red lines and what happens when they're crossed or when they're not? this is a credibility issue for the north koreans just as much as it is for the trump administration. now north korea essentially could be put into position where they have to back this up in their view to save face.

that's really where this gets so dangerous. what if these missiles aren't as accurate as the north koreans say they are. 20 miles is not a long distance. it could go 20 miles overshot and you have a north korea missile landing on u.s. territory, even if it doesn't have an active warhead in it. still, can you imagine what would happen after that. again, an accidental war. that's the big fear. not that either side wants a war but all these provocative acts could lead this region down a path from which there's no return. >> they have been imprecise. they haven't had the capacity that's been rumored in the past. that's why them flying over japan -- hold on one second, david. in terms of this threat as articulated, will saying there's a lot of detail we're not used to getting, is guam as a target just about proximity or are there a list of reasons why the north koreans would want to target that tear snore. >> i think there are certainly

specific reasons why. every time we try to reassure the south korean and japanese, we fly b-1 bombers. that's a very important facility for the united states. it backs up american forces in the region. when you think about guam, it is really the forward base of the united states. yes, we have bases in japan and elsewhere, but those are not an american soil. guam is the most forward defense perimeter on american soil for us. with regard to something that will said which i think is really important, and that is, when you try to target an area which is very dloes to american water, you're saying your guidance systems are very good. one of the things that american missile experts say, and they're correct, with their long range missiles their guidance isn't good, they'll miss by miles. here they're being very specific about where they plan to put this missile. >> very quickly, david, did you have a point?

>> i think we can't forget the importance of china. without the testing of missiles, the response from the american administration has been what is china going to do about it. as this escalates, this is not juchlt t just the u.s. grens north korea, the important player here is china. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. meanwhile, this news back here at home, a pre dawn raid on the home of former trump campaign manager paul manafort. it raises questions about how much he is cooperating with the russia investigation and investigators. should other members of the trump administration be concerned? we tell you all you need to know on this next. choose from the is turbo, es 350 or nx turbo for $299 a month for 36 months if you lease now. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. 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. we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10 to 25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare

professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait. as the president unwinds at his golf course in bedminster, the russia investigation continues. sources say the trump administration is rattled by the news that the fbi raided former campaign chairman paul manafort's home. let's bring in cnn political director david chalian, cnn political analyst karoun demirjian and david gregory is back with us. david, we thought paul manafort was cooperating, and the news they raided his home looking for things now. >> look, this is an aggressive

sign that's coming to light about who they're interested in and perhaps what they're interested in. we know who paul manafort is in this story, someone who had a financial relationship with russia because of the nature of the political work he was doing. so, if you're investigating financial contacts, potential collusion between the trump campaign and russia, you're going to be looking at paul manafort, looking at documents that may prove that relationship, and it may be an indication that these were documents that were not forthcoming, that he was not cooperating on some aspects of this. it always gets difficult to try to piece together these investigative elements and put it into a larger frame, but that's all we have to go on at the moment, that provides a strong indication of the financial nature of the investigation. >> and also remember, to get a warrant, you have to go do a judge and make a case. so that implies a standard of

show by the special counsel that we haven't heard of before. it goes to the seriousness of this probe, the legitimacy of the issues. therefore, david chalian, questions about whether or not the american people understand the significance and importance of these questions beyond what is often dismissed as pure politics by the president. what do you see in the cnn poll on russia and its significance? >> we have a bunch of new polling numbers. take a look at the overall approval rating, how trump is handling the russia investigation, 31% of the country approves, 59% disapprove. we see partisan division. among republicans, 56% of republicans approve of his handling of the investigation, but that's far lower than his overall republican approval. take a look at what you're saying, is this seen as a serious matter or effort to discredit trump. 60% as a serious matter, 38 as an effort to discredit trump.

will mueller will able to do a thorough investigation, look into his finances, is that fair game? yes, 70% of the country says looking into trump's finances is a huge gain. 25% say no. >> we hear the trump white house saying this is a matter of distraction, they're trying to impede our agenda. these public opinion polls show now a majority of people think this is valid, think this is a serious matter. they think they're happy that investigators are looking into this. so you're obviously the congressional reporter. where does that leave republicans on capitol hill for how much emphasis to put here? >> in a way it's good, they have reenforcement from the public because republicans have been in the same sort of bind where they certainly don't want to completely discredit the president because in a way he holds the keys to the republican agenda, assuming you can first get that agenda through congress

which has been not necessarily the situation that we've seen over the first six months of trump's presidency. they also think this investigation is a serious matter. even the people that support him think he should let it go ahead because they think the probe will exonerate him in the end. there's very few members of congress that would actually say yes, we agree this is a witch hunt. this is something they think they have to go through. it's a serious matter, and they want to follow the course and dot all the i's, cross all the t's even if they think trump isn't at fault. in that sense they have reenforcement from the public every time the president tweets this is a witch hunt or not a legitimate investigation, people think, yeah, it is. that's good for them as they face their potential re-election races in 2018 and 2020 and are clearly in disagreement with the president about whether they're spending their time wisely in looking into this. >> david, the next issue we'll file under the heading of no one is immune. the senate leader mitch

mcconnell was giving some comments about expectations coming out of the white house. the president responding in signature fashion, meaning nasty. so here is what mcconnell said. >> our new president -- of course, i've been in this line of work before, and i think had excessive expectations about how quickly things happen in the democratic process. and so part of the reason i think people feel like we're underperforming is because too many kind of artificial deadlines unrelated to the reality and the complexity of legislating. >> not the most scathing attack we've ever heard in politics, but it was enough to prompt a sharp response from the president. here is his tweet. senator mcconnell said i had excessive expectations. i don't think so. after seven years of hearing

repeal and replace, why not done? we've heard him use much more edgy language than that. but just saying anything at all created this 'em broegt i don't that there's division at the top levels of the party. what do you make of it? hype, or is this something that's worth looking at? >> i actually think trump is making a fair point here, but there's more to that. the fair point is, hey, wait a minute, republicans. you guys have been campaigning and promising for seven years to repeal and replace. i'm the one who gets the presidency. you have a republican senate and house on my coattails and you can't get it do because republicans can't agree about health care. that's the reality. the former speaker of the house said so. it came to be true. so i think the president is making a fair criticism here of the fact that a republican congress has not been very effective. now, where it's on him is the fact that he's not the leader of the republican party, only he is and he should be.

what he's been doing is outsourcing this, not providing the backup ultimately they would need and hasn't been campaigning on it. as soon as things looked a little squirrely, he began blaming them. that's not great leadership for the party and it will undermine what's happening on the hill. you have the specter of the president taking all party, he'll fight anybody, republicans or democrats, who make mhim loo back. the president has put it there by his actions and his focus on it. i think he'd be happy to run on this. he wants to fight this to the death, whether they find something or don't find something, he's going to make the referendum in the midterms and potential re-election campaign. >> david chalian, how does it help president trump to have a feud with mitch mcconnell when they're looking attacks reform,

the debt ceiling issue will come up this fall. >> it doesn't, alisyn. i agree with david, there's lots of blame for republicans on capitol hill. the tactic he's using has proven not to help him. he took to twitter to go after lisa murkowski before the vote to try to get her on board and scare her to vote for the bill. that did not work. i think going after mcconnell on twitter like this, when you need him to corral that's 50 to 52 votes on any given matter, whether it's tax reform, infrastructure or trying to get health care done, this is not going to help the president's cause. >> that's the difference, when you attack people, that's fine, that's his style. some people like it. when you attack the people you need, now it becomes a different calculation. >> panel, thank you very much for all of that. there's this bizarre mystery unfolding in cuba. the state department claims diplomatic staffers at the u.s.

embassy in havana were victims of something called an acoustic attack. what is that? what happened? who did it? reporting next. i found the perfect come in this afternoon. oh. no. no! when the unexpected strikes... don't worry we've got you covered. the hartford strikes back.

if you could book a flight, then add a hotel, or car, or activity in one place and save, where would you go? ♪ expedia. 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!

yogig-speed internet.me? you know what's not awesome? when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids. and these guys. him. ah. oh hello- that lady. these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh. sure. still yes! you can get it too. welcome to the party. introducing gig-speed internet from xfinity. finally, gig for your neighborhood too.

several state department employees at the u.s. embassy in havana have been targeted perhaps by a covert sonic device that caused them to suffer hearing loss and concussion-like symptoms. the fbi is looking into the possible acoustic attack. that's going to be a new phrase for us. we haven't heard it before. the white house is going to react by expelling two cuban diplomats from their embassy in washington in may. the cuban foreign ministry says it's taking the matter seriously, but there's still very little detail on what this was about or who perpetrated it. >> strange. another strange story, why is an

unarmed russian air force jet conducting low-altitude flyovers of d.c. landmarks like the capitol, the pentagon. you're looking at video, this was part of a long-standing treaty allowing the u.s. and russia to observe each other's military sites. a second flew over bedminster, new jersey. hurricane franklin weakening to a tropical storm and making landfall over eastern mexico. flash floods and med slides certainly a concern. jennifer gray las the forecast. what are you seeing? >> i think the biggest concern with this storm is the rain. yes, we have rains of 70 miles per hour, gusts of 85. the rain poses the biggest danger. because of this mountainous terrain you'll have flash flooding and also the possibility of mudslides. this storm isn't going to last much longer, possibly daying out later today or tomorrow, but the threat still remains for the

flooding across mexico. it's moving to the west at about 15 miles per hour. you can see some of these isolated rainfall amounts could be as much as six to ten inches. and some even more. we're including places like mexico city. we have a threat across the plains today, damaging winds, the possibility of isolated tornadoes. >> jennifer, thank you very much for keeping an eye on all that for us. we have new details about don trump junior's meeting with the russian attorney. did the kremlin want the mayor kwan people to find out about this? we'll hear from a former cia station chief based in moscow about his theory on this meeting next. day 13. if only this were as easy as saving $600 when you switch to progressive. 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! wait a minute. whole wheat waffles? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

a former cia station chief

who spent five years in moscow is speaking out about russia's efforts to undermine the u.s. election. he's now detailing a possible motive behind the meeting of donald trump jr. and the russian lawyer. he writes the clearest evidence that this was a russian influence operation is the trail of bread crumbs. the kremlin seems to have deliberately left leading from troum tower to the kremlin. this operation was meant to be discovered. that former cia station chief, daniel hoffman joins us. we should mention you have retired which is why we can blow your cover and say you were in the cia for many decades. >> correct. >> what do you mean that meeting between the russian lawyer and don junior and others was meant to be discovered, it was planted basically with a trail of bread crumbs by the kremlin? >> i think the evidence from that meeting points to an effort by the kremlin to influence

rather than some sort of a covert back channel for collusion. vladimir putin wants to soil our dem mattic institutions, i think he found the best way to do that would be to tie us to the kremlin. >> it seems you're suggesting in your op ed that the trump team were serving as dupes, basically, they were unwitting pawns, they didn't know what they were walking into. so it wasn't active collusion, though don junior said i love it when offered the dirt on hillary clinton that may or may not have ever been produced, but this is what the kremlin does, they try to find unwitting pawns. >> i think what vladimir putin did, remember, his former experience was serving as a kgb offer and director of the ssb. it's not just about recruiting sources, but also about running these operations. i think what he felt was this would be the sort of bait that

maybe someone might not want to refuse. i think they took a gamble and won out and the meeting took place and that was all they needed. >> one of the things i thought so interesting in your op ed is you say one of the favorite russian tactics, kremlin tactics, spy tactics, is to dangle something that looks to be of great value for free, and that that should be an instant red flag. so in other words, i'm going to just hand overall this great opposition research, this dirt on hillary clinton for free, and that that really in real life rarely happens and that should have set off some alarm bells. >> i think it would have set off alarm bells for russians who grew up in russia and understand what this is all about, but it might not for us in the united states. the other formative experience in vladimir putin's life is hes a black belt in jude dough. one of the key principles is to

use your opponent's strength against them. in the united states we have freedom of the press and we don't necessarily think the way a russian might about this idea that someone was baiting you with something. >> just help me to understand one more time, the point of all this. if it wasn't active collusion and they wanted it to be discovered, if the kremlin wanted us to follow this trail of bread yums, why? >> vladimir putin has his sites set on march 2018 when he will stand for election. he knows many of his opponents, many will risk their lives by protesting on the streets of russia as they have before, derive much of their ideological inspiration from the united states. i think that's why vladimir putin wants to soil our electoral process and democratic institution. >> president trump has said, basically, i'm paraphrasing, yeah, maybe russia tried to meddle, but so do other countries. is russia in a different category? >> i think russia is in a pretty special category when it comes to their sophisticated

capability for intruding into our cyberspace. we've seen that, we've seen that in our efforts to target our infrastructure and news sites. they're very good at what they do. >> you spent 30 years in the cia, is that right, focused on russia? >> i spent the bulk of my career focused on russia, yes. >> from where you sit, in your expertise, since russia will always try to launch disinformation campaigns and try to upset our democracy, what's the best way to stop them? >> i think one of the best ways to stop them is to be transparent about what they're doing so our citizens are armed with the knowledge that this is a russian tactic and this is what they're trying to achieve. i think it starts there, frankly. >> but meaning that the more we talk about it openly, the more people will understand when they're receiving disinformation? what do you mean by transparency? >> i think being transparent and honest about what the russian tactics are, the full -- all of their intelligence efforts to target us in this country,

whether those are human intelligence efforts, they've got lots of russian intelligence officers in this country, ruthlessly targeting our people here and their efforts to target us through cyberspace as well. i think we need to educate our people about that threat. i think that's the first step. then we need to counter them and counter their themes. >> do you think the white house has done a good job of being transparent and presenting that evidence to the american people? >> i'll leave it to others to grade the white house on how well or not so well they've done. it's certainly a major challenge. >> if you're calling for transparency and you think there needs to be an education program for americans so we know what we're up against, do you think the white house has done that? >> i think from my perspective, what i might like to see is, for example, when ronald reagan made the speech at brandenburg gate and told mr. gorbachev to tear

down the wall. >> daniel hoffman, thank you for that fascinating piece. mixed messages from the trump administration about the north korean nuclear threat. the president saying they will feel the fire and fury if they do anything. diplomats saying something much softer. is this the way it should go? let's debate it next. a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean

just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home... ...with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. neulasta helps reduce infection risk by boosting your white blood cell count, which strengthens your immune system. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro.

so the war of words is intensifying between president trump and north korea. we're seeing different rhetoric from the president and that from his top brass. the president clearly making the case to the american people. how do we feel about that? joining us cnn political commentators ana navarro and ben ferguson. ben, the president comes out and says the fire and the fury, the adaptation of the faulkner novel, a lot of odd parallels, you can google that for yourself. then we hear from tillerson and

others, you're fine, you can sleep at night. do you think it's tiered? >> i think it's tiered. you have to look at where we've been for the last 8 1/2 years. we said we'll let the international community lead on this, let other nations put pressure on them instead of us directly putting pressure on them. it hasn't worked. he's got missiles and weapons that work. did the rhetoric need to change? every time we did a sanction, every time we went to the international community, nay ear adding nuclear weapons. i didn't have as much of a problem with what the president said because i do think you have to make it clear what you're doing and how you're doing it is no longer acceptable. we're not going to let you get from 60 to 120 and think there's no repercussions. sanctions clearly are not enough to get him to stop his program or act responsibly in the world. >> ana, are you comfortable with the fire and fury rhetoric? >> no.

i don't think two boxers doing trash talk preparing for a fight in las vegas. i think this is very serious stuff. it affects the psyche of the country. i think this is yet again another example where president trump and his administration are not on the same page. the other person who had a big problem with it was john mccain, the chair of the armed services in the senate. it's uncoordinated, irresponsible -- >> is it possible they're good copying and bad copping, that they want to be unpredictable? >> testimony thing that's predictable about them is they're inconsistent and off message. there you can have credibility. i have a hard time thinking this was a strategic well thought out -- including, by the way, somebody else that i wonder thought about it who does have military experience and takes this very seriously is his new chief of staff. >> i think a lot of this is good

cop-bad cop. i think the president is smart and realizes that his message was not in an offensive way. it's in defense of what was coming out of north korea. it's not like he randomly said i'm going to pick a fight with north korea. >> but john kelly didn't know about the language -- >> i think the president has the ability and the right to clearly state a message and people are looking at two words and trying to make this actually that those words somehow only meant we had a nuclear option which i don't think is accurate. i think fire and fury means the united states of america is not going to be bullied by a guy with nuclear weapons that can reach half of the united states of america. if you live in hawaii, you have a 20-minute warning -- >> we get the urgency of what this fire and fury suggests that is non-mill tiristic? >> one, i would say ask iran. they saw the fire and fury

solely through cyberattacks. no one was talking about a red button. guess what? we screwed their program up, brought them back from what we think is literally years from the brink, that's fire and fury, yes, using cyber warfare. the president's point was not so much we're going to bomb the living you know what out of you if i don't feel like you're talking to us -- they made threats against the united states of america. they consistently -- >> how do you know he didn't mean military. >> he said the likes of which the world has never seen. >> i think if you look at what the people around him have said, and i go back to the part about the good cop bad cop, you have diplomacy. you always want diplomatic channels open. those have been a failure. the guy has 60 nuclear weapons and miniaturized warheads and he's an unstable individual. >> i'm amused by the idea that you say the president didn't wake up in the morning and randomly pick a fight. you realize this man wakes up every morning and picks a fight. he picks fights with department

stores and broadway shows. >> if you don't like him, that's fine. but not everything he does is necessarily bad -- >> it's not that i don't like him, which i don't. it's also i think he's irresponsible. after six months of being president, you need to understand when you're president of the united states, your words matter. >> i agree. >> he is willy-nilly attacking people, causing international incidents, whether it's london or korea and he does it without doing it in a coordinated fashion with his secretary of defense, with congress, it is irresponsible. >> no, it's irresponsible for a president to continue on a course that allows a guy to be able to reach half the united states of america with nuclear weapons when we literally tried diplomacy for eight years. >> if it was strategic, then why aren't they all speaking from the same book? >> people again are focused on two words because they love to look at the two words instead of the overall picture here. let's not forget, you have an individual that doesn't care about his own people.

you have an individual that's literally testing nuclear weapons and the whole world is condemning it. you have the most extreme sanctions you've seen in modern day in a country like this. >> you're saying the tough rhetoric you're saying will change something. >> i think the soft rhetoric for the last 8 1/2 years has been a failure. >> you have to distinguish the premise for saying something provocative, which is clear. nobody is saying that north korea hasn't staged a situation that demands response. it's how do you respond, how well thought out is it and how much follow through -- >> i rarely quote barack obama. but barack obama said, when the president said is there anything more we need to know about, he said north korea needs to be on your radar. he understood how advanced north korea is getting. >> the threat is real. >> when he's sitting back and

says don't -- i think that's a good point for him to make and it's presidential. >> we've gone from having to deal with the north korea dealing with one crazy man to dealing with two crazy men. >> on that note -- >> you look a year older than the last time i saw you, chris cuomo. >> thank you very much. meanwhile, north korea seemingly crossing president trump's red line with a new threat. what's next? we have live reports for you from beijing, guam and the pentagon.

we're talking about potential weapons being used against guam. >> north korea issuing another threat after mocking president trump's fire and fury warning. >> we have two school yard bullies trying to play i've got a bigger gun than you've got. >> sending a message in language that kim jong-un will understand. >> ego mania taking place on both sides. >> we've failed for 30 years. time to try something new. we learned the fbi raided paul manafort's home last