weinstein after this? >> not that i am aware of. >> after he made the joke was there blowback against him? >> blowback from harvey himself? >> yeah, or from the city? >> i know he is that getting blowback now. >> we appreciate you being here with us. thanks for sharing your story. >> thank you very much. let's go to chris. >> the president is up and tweeting and he just said some things about puerto rico that may make that situation worse. let's get after it. >> it's frankly disgusting the way the press is able to write what they want to write. >> he is increasingly angry at the coverage of the white house in crisis. >> a new "vanity fair" report claims sources in the white

house is unstable and unraveling. >> you look back and there was not this kind of very early questioning of the president's own abilities. >> over 170,000 acres have burned in these 22 large fires. >> there were pieces of ember everywhere, and it looked like we were at war. >> this is now considered the most destructive wildfire in california history. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning and welcome to your "new day." it's thursday, october 12th. 8:00 in the east. donald trump escalating his attempts against the free press, and he might use the federal government to shut down those networks he doesn't agree with. >> a report says top advisers and leading republicans are growing increasingly concerned

with the president's mental state. meanwhile, president trump's response to hurricane-ravaged puerto rico, we have it all covered for you. let's begin with joe johns. he's live at the white house. what is the latest at this hour? >> the president gets irritated by news coverage, news coverage that is critical of him or his administration. he's taking issue with stories and issue with news organizations, but he's never gone as far as he has gone now, essentially suggesting he's up for punishing a news organization for its reporting. >> it's frankly disgusting the press can write whatever it wants to write. >> after saying he does not favor limitations on the media

earlier in the day. >> no, the press should speak more honestly. >> republican senator a freak trump critic firing back and asking, mr. president, are you recanting the oath you took on january 20th to preserve and protect and defend the first amendment. >> the one thing with the democrats, they stay together like glue. we have great policies but the republicans tend not to be as unified. >> the president is growing increasely frustrated by stalled agenda. the report cites two senior republican officials that say chief of staff, john kelly, is miserable, but remaining in his post to keep from trump from making a disastrous decision. speculation about kelly's future

growing, and one white house source telling cnn they don't see kelly remaining on the job long without her and he may have been giving her somewhere to land before he ultimately leaves. according to one of "vanity fair"'s sources, steve bannon has said he thinks the president only has a 30% chance of making it through his full term. bannon reportedly telling the president that the main risk to his tenure is the 25th amendment to the constitution which allows the cabinet to vote to remove him. the white house is disputing these accounts as the president denies any rift with secretary of state, rex tillerson. >> we have a very good relationship. >> making it clear that his own strategic opinion matters most when it comes to north korea. >> i think i have a little bit different attitude on north korea than other people might have. and i listen to everybody.

ultimately my attitude is the one that matters, isn't it? >> this as cnn learns a tense and difficult meeting at the pentagon prompted tillerson to call the president a moron back in july, and an official cnn, trump had a lack of nuanced world view. a well known fact here in washington, the president has not been able to get a health insurance bill through the congress, so today he is expected to sign an executive action instructing the agencies to allow the sale of cheaper, less comprehensive insurance, and it will be a big help for healthier people, but it will cause sicker people to pay more according to the experts. >> thank you. joining us now is cnn political director, david chalian, and josh green, he's the author of "devil's bargains".

steve bannon just reportedly saying the president has a 30% chance of finishing the term. we will get to that. david, does any of this matter, what the president says about the free press and what he says about the secretary of state? do you hear that? that's the sound of paul ryan, and mitch mcconnell, and all other republicans too not saying anything about the president. >> john mccain says i will not comment on what the president says or tweets, i will comment on what the president does. this whole notion we learn through the campaign, don't take him literally but take him seriously. i sort of grapple with this when these kinds of moments occur. chris, this is a fundamentally important issue. even though i know every supporter of the president who is watching right now is going to think we're nuts for getting out there and saying it's fu

fundamentally wrong to attack a free press, and that's wrong for the united states president to do, and they will say it's whining. this is different than what you think is unfair coverage, which every president in history has done. this is taking the levers of power, and threatening to do away with a constitutionally free press. >> if it's a hollow threat, people do have animosity against the press. >> we can see that in public attitudes toward the press and we see that in the way the public treats reporters. certainly more prominent television journalists get attacked left and right because trump calls them out at rallies. if you look at the threat he

lobbied and the tools available to him, it's not clear that he can do he says what he is going to do. nbc is not licensed by the fcc, so trump would have to go after individual local nbc affiliates and it's not clear if he could do that until 2019. even leaving aside the bigger constitutional issues, the first amendment issues, he doesn't seem to have any idea what he's talking about when it comes to trying to shut down and silence the press. >> josh, let's say with you a second in terms of if any of this is having any significant a rosive state. bann bannon is supposedly concerned that the cabinet would turn on

him. what do you make of that? >> i talked to a source familiar with bannon's thinking last night who described the "vanity fair" piece as fake news. i know from my own talks with bannon, he has two concerns about trump might not finish his term. one is he might side with do the democratic bidding and then the republicans would turn on him and impeach him. and the other scenario, the special counsel, robert mueller, might find grounds to indict donald trump, and i have not heard a lot of concern, at least from bannon's world with the 25th amendment, but the dark moods that "vanity fair" reported trump es expressing, i think we could see that by his

attacks on twitter, and his attacks on the press, and i think it's an expression of trump's frustration with the inability to move his agenda and an anger he is being criticized and humiliated by fairly prominent republicans. >> it goes to the heart of what the whole corker battle was about. when corker talked about an adult daycare center and somebody missed their shift, and corker talked about mattis and tillerson and kelly being a line of protection from the country from chaos, and this is what he is talking about. the people around the president who have to determine whether or not the president is fit to serve, and that's at the core of what that battle was all about. >> let's talk about how we all have talked about how twitter is a window into the president's mind and thinking, and this morning he's thinking about puerto rico. he has just tweeted we cannot keep fema and the military first responders, who have been

amazing, in puerto rico forever. he is talking about how puerto rico had their whole economic crisis and that's a drain on the u.s., and sort of like that's on them. you know, they are on the hook for that. so it's hard to know because he went to puerto rico and he seemed to be affected by what he saw down there, or at least he said he was, and what message does this send to the people of puerto rico? >> can you imagine being in puerto rico and hearing this coming from the president, and the trip did not impact him at all because if you go back two weeks ago, he was leaving, and forget where he was headed on september 29th, he was on the south lawn and he talks to reporters, and the president previews these tweets already. he said we will have big decisions to make, and we will have a conversation to make with congress about whether or not the investment in puerto rico made sense. he already previewed this notion in rebuilding and fully investing is up for debate, not

a given. i am not surprised to see these tweets this morning, except for he went there and saw it and still in the position that not sure it's worth going forward. >> there are people struggling to survive on that island right now and they are american citizens. there's absolutely no end in sight to the need. who is going to step up and correct the notion of the president that, you know, it's going -- you have to start thinking about getting out. we do have a tweet from senate dem leader chuck schumer, and he said why do you continue to treat puerto ricans differently than other americans when it comes to natural disasters. never saw a tweet like this about florida or texas. what do you make of this? is it really about the president not wanting to be blamed for the disaster in puerto rico? >> it's a big part of it. any percent of puerto rico

doesn't have power still, and when they are dealing with a fallout from what is a humanitarian crisis, it's puzzling on its face, and we know by now trump's tendency when criticized and attacked is to hit back and he's come under quite a bit of criticism for his lack of response to the puerto rico crisis. he did go down and paper towels at puerto ricans waiting for aid, and there has not been any other action there, and the threat he would full out fema and emergency services at a time when people are dying and most of the island doesn't have power, it's really bizarre. it false on congress now to step up and pass some sort of an aid package to hasten the recovery there. >> thank you very much for all of the political insight. we do need to get to breaking news right now for everybody.

the pakistani army says an american and her canadian husband for free five years after being taken hostage by the taliban in afghanistan. let's get to pentagon's barbara starr. >> u.s. officials indeed confirming this extraordinary news, this american woman, her name is caitlyn coleman and her canadian husband, joshua boyle, along with her three small children, five in all, have been rescued by the pakistani army. inside pakistan, we believe, this couple, this american woman and her canadian husband have been held for five years. there has been a couple of sightings of them through video, but their case has not been really in the public consciousness. what we do know is that the u.s.

provided some intelligence to the pakistanis within recent days about the location of the couple and their three children. the pakistanis acknowledging they got the intelligence from the u.s. and then moving on it and getting these people. at this hour, the five are still, we believe, instaoeide pakistan. it's not clear or how soon they will be returned to. we are talking about an american woman and her canadian husband. we are hearing it's possible they could be returned to the u.s., and the husband may decide he wants to go back to canada directly. those arrangements are all under way. these three small children born in captivity. they have been held hostage every since. >> this is unqualified good

news, barbara. do we know anything about u.s. involvement in this? >> what we do know is that the u.s. had been trying -- as it does with all hostages, trying to track them, you know, all along the way. the huh conies have held hostages throughout the years. they tend to move their hostages around so it's tough to track them. but what we are told by u.s. officials that in recent days intelligence began to point in the direction of a location where these people were being held, and the pakistanis moved in on it. the big hint of this came last night from president trump when he made that speech, and he spoke about the fact there would be good news in the coming day from a country in his words that had been disrespecting the u.s., and the u.s. officials i am talking to this morning say this is nothing but good news for

this family of five. >> absolutely. what incredible breaking news, barbara. thank you very much. come back when you have more details for us. speaking of the president he is promoting his tax plan, calling it a middle class bill, but who really benefits? still light on details but there's enough to make a couple judgment calls, and we'll take a look next.

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

the pakistani army says an

american, caitlyn coleman, and her husband and family have been set free. let's talk with this about the congressman from pennsylvania. coleman is one of his constituents. what do you know about it? >> i have been working on it for five years and met with the coleman family within the last month, two days ago on the house floor talked about the coleman's plate, the family, their children, born in captivity, and our urgent need to get them out of there. we are gratified. even though we don't have them home yet knowing she's out of the network's hands is really inspiring and invigorating. it's good news all around for us. >> and caitlyn coleman and her

husband, josh boyle. this is great news. do you know about the release? >> we worked with it and the obama administration and now the trump administration. i think there have been different levels of interests from the administrations. each administration has been well aware advised on the situation, and doing something to secure their freedom, secure their release. >> has there been any recent change or development within the negotiation that triggered this? >> we don't, as members of congress we don't get to know exactly how that is going. the trump administration seemed to take a more vigorous stance and seemed to be more interested in the issue working directly with the family back here in pennsylvania and with me. that's just my perception.

that's all i know washington, d.c. to the tribal areas of pakistan and east afghanistan. >> it's good news no matter how it came about, and hopefully we can learn more about the process and let people know what the government did. let's go from one situation, where the government is paying attention to a lot of people in need and where that's not happening enough. puerto rico, trump suggested you can't keep fema and first responders there forever. that seems insensitive. how do you explain that tweet? >> the bigger picture is puerto rico has been in a financial crisis for quite sometime and we dealt with it with a bill a few years ago, but it's not nearly out of the woods. i would argue that that financial crisis and the corruption, the lack of attention on critical

infrastructure, and those types of things have contributed or been contributing to some of the horrific problems puerto rico has had in the wake of the storm. i think the point the president is making is that fema has a finite mission and a finite amount of time to be there to get people back into power and get back into some kind of civilized living condition, and at some point it's up to puerto rico to get themselves out of this situation and help their people. fema was never meant to be on the ground for a place in a state or community forever. >> nobody is suggesting they would be there forever. it just seems odd to talk about not having them there forever when the place is in the throws of a crisis. this is not something we have heard about florida or texas or other places that are in a state of distress. we get that they have infrastructure issues and they have a financial infrastructure problem as well.

what does that have to do with helping them right now? >> it doesn't. there's no doubt the president is completely committed to helping those folks, having fema there. if you look at the response between florida, between texas and puerto rico, overwhelmingly puerto rico has had a huge amount of attention because they need it, and they are in a different circumstance than everybody else, and at the same time all of us americans have to acknowledge there's a huge financial crisis we have to deal with here in washington. >> it seems like it's not the time to be talking about it. there are people starving on the island. it's not a time to talk about their debt structure. yeah, it's part of what we have to deal with, but you say there's no question that the president is fully committed. there's every reason to question the nature of the -- >> no, chris. >> you are saying it's a success story and they are in dire need. >> it is a success story. you are not on the ground there.

>> we are on the ground and reporting every day. >> we are getting reports ever day that people are getting food and water and their needs are being serviced and it's been devastated, and these things don't happen overnight and it really doesn't happen overnight when it's been neglected for years. >> nobody is saying the first responders are not working so hard. we see it every day. >> every day, you folks on cnn -- what is enough? >> when they are not starving in the hills -- >> they are not starving. they are not starving. >> you are wrong. >> do you want them to set up tents and feed -- >> do whatever they can. >> there's a limit, including the united states government,

and they are doing what they can and more. >> one after another of people of experts -- >> you have ever done recovery operations, mr. cuomo. you have been around it, but you have done it? >> it's your job to make sure these things happen and it's my job to check your efforts. >> that's exactly right. i have done those things and we are doing everything we can. the president will never be doing enough for you. that's the point. >> it's not about the president. it's not about whether he's doing enough for me, it's about the people of puerto rico. i don't get where your head is on this. people are in dire need. >> the united states is there. it is a success. we are there working diligently every single day, and you are trying to make it looks like nobody do that. that's what you are trying to say. let me ask you, what does a

success look like to you? every single person has to have power the next day? >> crisis abated. the people who need food and water having it. not 100% restored back to power. we get this is -- >> if the water gets there five minutes late, is that a crisis? >> it's not five minutes late. >> they are not even close to that. >> quantify your claim? can you quantify any of it? you can't make the claims and put metric to it? how many people? who are they? >> you have less than half the country without fresh water, power, food, places to live. >> mr. cuomo you are simply making this stuff up. >> how am i making this up? >> if have the country didn't have food or water, those people would be dying, and they are not. >> first of all, congressman,

when you look at the numbers that are being put out by fema, you do know that overwhelmingly they still don't have people with power restored and many don't have access to water. you do have dozens of people -- >> when you say access to water, mr. cuomo, do you mean running water or meaning water delivered, drinking water delivered by the u.s. army or fema? >> both. >> what do you mean? >> both. getting hard pressure of water through the pipes is not happening. >> yeah, we are delivering water to these people. >> it's not enough. i am not saying the efforts are not in earnest? >> what is enough that would satisfy your network. >> it's not about my network. >> it is about your network because nobody else reports these things. >> how can you get angry about the fact that people in puerto rico are suffering? >> i am not angry, i am sad

about the people suffering -- >> why would you fight over the need? the need is real. >> you have to do more and sustain the efforts and the idea of not talking about being there not forever seems insensitive and if not reckless -- >> insensitive and reckless, those are inflammatory terms used by you but they don't depict the true sentiment of the president. >> why would you talk about ending your commitment when you are in the middle of a crisis? that's what i am asking you. it goes to sensitivity. truth is not the only measure of sensitivity. you can tell me i have a big nose, and it's true but it's not sensitive. >> i never said you have a big nose. i would never say that to you because i think i have a big nose. it's hyperballic to use that

terminology when the u.s. is doing everything it can, and more, and you are saying that we are insensitive because we are recognizing there's a greater circumstance. >> it's not an us and them situation. here's what i am saying. i have to believe given what your history is, i am well researched on, you know how to address people in need and you know the crisis is real in puerto rico. >> without a doubt. >> you are a little bit like you want to fight the state of the need, and i don't think you want to do that. >> no, i don't. >> nobody is saying the u.s. is not there in earnest and not trying hard on the ground. i saw it with my own eyes. what i am saying is whatever we are doing, it's not enough. the idea of what will make you happy, cuomo, is a misplaced question. this is about addressing what is on the ground. the idea, the inference it's going to end at some point doesn't seem like the right discussion to have. >> maybe it doesn't seem like it

to you, but i would then again say, what is the right amount to satisfy whoever says that we are not doing enough when we are doing a huge amount. >> it's not to be better than what is there now, right? you wouldn't say it's acceptable? >> it's not good and it's regrettable and sad for those people, and there's only so much you can do in the wake of devastation, and your ports are destroyed and things have to be airlifted in and you can only get so many people on the ground and when your infrastructure is destroyed, not only your electricity network but water and road networks -- >> the challenges are great. we have people on the ground dealing with them every day. i am just saying we need to do more and we have to be there for a long time. it's just the reality if you care about the nature of the human life on the ground. >> is a long time forever, sir?

>> he just said he can't be there forever. there seems to be another reflection of the president's desire to mitigate the crisis that's on the ground there, and i don't think you can. i have never seen one as bad that involves americans as i have seen in puerto rico. while i may not be the person that is unloading and loading the boxes all the time, i have seen a lot of despair, congressman. i have good judgment on that and it's bad there in unprecedented fashion. >> fair enough. i lived through it myself, a victim of floods on numerous occasions, and nobody came to help us. we handled it ourselves and our family. >> congressman, we have to keep doing everything we can. >> i agree with you. >> there's massive real loss on that island. you don't want to have it come down to the conversation of did we do enough? you want to do everything we

can. i am questioning the reality. congressman, scott perry, republican from pennsylvania, you are always welcome on the show to talk about what matters. >> thank you, sir. appreciate it. >> alisyn. >> joining us now is cnn political and national security analyst, a national security correspondent for "the new york times" to talk about everything about national security. good to have you here. >> thank you. >> do you think the president's response to puerto rico versus florida or texas has been more punitive somehow for the people who are suffering there? >> it sounded if not more punitive, more limited. you know when the president wants to drive an agenda, because they are out there discussing it every day. president bush when katrina happened, a slow response, but when it recovered he was out

discussing what you need to go and bureaucracy. when the president is out there, he's tweeting what a fabulous job i have done. that's a different message. >> or how puerto rico has caused this some of themselves. they had a big economic mess, true, and therefore we are not going to be on the hook for all of that is what he's suggesting. they will have to take care of some of this. you heard him, we can't be there forever, our first responders will have to leave at some point. >> that's right. there's a time and a place to discuss puerto rico's big economic problems. some of which were self inflicted. but i am not sure you do that while people's power is off. >> let's move on to iran. the president will give a speech about iran and sources tell us he will decertify the iran deal. what does that mean? >> the president will say to congress i can no longer tell

you iran is in compliance with the agreement, even while his aides say they are in technical compliance, and that is to say they are doing everything they promised the agency they would do. they are off to a second argument, and one that is a bit confusing not only to us but to the allies. which is they are not complying with the spirit of the agreement. what do you mean by the spirit of the agreement? this was supposed to improve relations between the united states and iran, and limit their support of terrorism and so forth, and i covered this deal day by day for 2 1/2 years, and the deal was also from keeping iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and now they have been on the phone to theresa may and the french and to others, and saying by decertifying we are not leaving the deal, we are just telling congress they are not in compliance. >> what does congress do?

>> they have 60 days on an accelerated basis to decide whether to reimpose sanctions on iran, if it imposes sanctions the united states will have violated the terms within the four corners of the deal. the kwraoeuropeans made clear tf the u.s. leaves this agreement, they are not leaving as well. so the u.s. would be the only one saying that iran is not in compliance. >> if the u.s. leaves and the europeans stay, does iran still have to comply? >> iran would have to make a decision. they would probably still have to comply, but i think the iranians have calculated at this point, alisyn, much better to have it looks like the united states is violating the deal than they are. not only that, all during the negotiations, what were the iranians trying to do? thrp trying to separate the united states from the european allies that wanted to have

trade, and if in fact the europeans stay in the deal and the united states decides to leave 60 days from now or further on, the u.s. will have done what the iranians were trying to accomplish for years on end. >> if the u.s. leaves and iran says, well, the u.s. violated the agreement that we had so it's null and void, then they go back immediately to building weapons and creating their stock? >> they decide to do that, but it's less likely they would. they would continue to see the opportunity to sell their oil to europe, and if they began to create weapons again or weapons-grade material they would push the europeans back to the u.s., and if they stayed within the deal they will continue to do their trade and the president would have to make the decision on whether to sanction european banks to deal with iran. i don't think he will do that. >> it's complicated, and i am

glad you are reading in on it so the rest of us get the benefit. thank you. >> thank looking well. donald trump claims the stock market gains for his time in office is offsetting the national debt. that's not true. we have that next. first, eating fresh fruit can break the bank. nutritionist tells us which are best to buy. >> even after being washed, the environmental working group put out the dirty dozen list of the most contaminated produce. strawberries top the 2017 rankings, followed by nectarines, apples, paeaches, pears, cherries and grapes.

thick thin as it comes to skin, as pesticides can get through the skin. for you, it's always leap over look. now over later. and pause. not even in your vocabulary. so when a cold sore tingle strikes you act on it. only abreva can heal a cold sore in as little as two and a half days when used at the first sign. it starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. nothing heals a cold sore faster. and because abreva acts on it...

you can too. act on it, with abreva.

leavers. hrefers. what's real and what is fake, right? that's what we talk about all the time when it comes to the news. seconds into his latest interview last night the president gave an answer that appeared to tie stock market gains to a reduction in the national debt. listen for yourself. >> the country, we took it over at $20 trillion, and the last eight years they borrowed more than in the whole history of our country, so they borrowed more than $10 trillion, right? we picked up 5$5.2 trillion in

the possible market, and picked up possibly the whole thing in terms of value. in one sense we are increasing values and in a sense we are reducing debt. >> do equity values correspond to national debt? let's bring in christine romans. >> that's not how it works. that's not how the national debt works or the stock market. the national debt is $20 trillion. the president is right. the national debt did soar over the last eight years of the obama administration, that is correct, too. the stock market rally, that stock market rally doesn't reduce the national debt. the national debt is the money congress already spent. that money is spent to cut the national debt. you have to cut spending or raise taxes. does president trump want to raise taxes? no, he wants to cut taxes.

you have a president here that seems to be talking about two very different things, conflating two different things that don't go together. this is not how it works. >> do you think he is referring to the underlying values of treasuries? i know this may sound too in the weeds for people, but that's how we produce our debt, they will float more bonds and treasuries. do you think he's saying because the market went up the value in the treasuries went up? >> we have asked the white house for clarification on what this actually means and they told us they are getting back to us, and they are trying to figure out what is the chain of logic here. i think what the president is doing is he is taking a $5.2 trillion in value in the stock market, and he's weighing that against the debt and he is trying to show what he thinks is his success in the stock market has a broader meaning and bigger impact. that's just not how it works. if you get tax cuts, not tax reform, but corporate tax relief

not paid for, you will add to the debt. >> that's why he will have problems with parts of his own problem with the details of this bill. one thing is for sure, if he wants to help the working class, >> thank you for helping us understand what is true and what is not. let's talk sports. the new york yankees battle back from the brink of elimination to advance in the playoffs. coy has more in the "bleacher report." >> this presented by the new 2018 ford f-150. >> and needing somebody to step up. how about didi gregorius. a solely shot in the first inning. this is a guy who is 1 of 13 in the series come into the game.

he hits another home run in the third inning. start spreading the news. a 5-2 win. next up, the astros in houston tomorrow. nationals facing eliminations against the chicago cubs in chicago. ace pitcher, strasburg, taking the mound after being sick all week and his manager said he would not play in the game, and he dug deep and rallied and pitched seven scoreless innings. meantime, his teammates rallied, too. taylor hitting this grand slam. that's the first ever for washington in playoff action. and tying up the series with a 5-zip win, and now game five winner takes all series tonight at 8:08 eastern, and that's on our sister channel, tbs. who wants it? >> i may not watch it. too late for me.

thank you. the boy scouts making a big announcement and a historic decision to welcome girls. what does it mean for the boy scouts? what does it mean for the girl scouts? that's next. i want ycome on mom!t easy. go slow. ♪ let's go! ♪ mom! slow down! for the ones who keep pushing. always unstoppable. we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine,

but we know a lot about drama. from scandalous romance, to ridiculous plot twists. (gasping) son? dad! we also know you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so we're partnering with cigna to remind you to go see a real doctor. go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life. doctor poses! dad! cigna. together, all the way.

my abwill i have pain andating made daibloating today?ing game. my doctor recommended ibgard to manage my ibs. take control. ask your doctor about nonprescription ibgard. boy scouts. they will admit girls and allow them to earn eagle scout status. joining me now is the chief scout executive for boy scouts are america. thank you so much for being here. this announcement caused a little confusion yesterday. you heard people saying how can girls be boy scouts? >> it's great to be with you. scouting has served girls for over 40 years in a variety of programs. traditionally cub scouting and boy scouting has been boys over but we found a tremendous demand

from parents to offer the program to their daughters and we provided a way to have boys and girls together in activities and maintain the single gender aspects that have been powerful in our history. >> donald trump, jr., was one of the people confused yesterday. he tweeted, strange, i thought that's what the girl scouts were for? so what will this give girl scouts that girl scouts couldn't? >> that's a common reaction. it's understandable. the girl scouts is a great problem but not the same as boy scouts. we had camp fire girls for 65 years, and that partnership enabled us to serve the whole family. when their program went a different direction we were left without a partner and it became different for our families to participate and do things together in the same place. >> why isn't it the girl scouts? what will the boy scouts give

girls? more outdoors stuff? what is it that the girl scouts aren't doing? >> i think you are seeing parents that are always looking for more options. girls are different as boys are different. there's tremendous programs out there that provide services in a coed environment like four-h. girls, we know are interested in the types of programs we offer in cub scouting and boy scouting. >> one person that does not like this one bit is the president of the girl scouts of the usa. when you were just considering this about two months ago she issued a strongly-worded message. i formerly request that your organization stay focused on serving the 90% of the american boys not participating in the boy scouts and not expanding to recruit girls.

it sounds like she's kind of proe poaching girls? >> we know parents don't have enough options to get their children involved in things that build character, and that's what we think we do best. we had a long discussion with our membership, and it has gone on for years, and as the discussions went to families we saw overwhelmingly they were looking to have a program that was available to their daughters as well as sons. additionally, parents that are not involved in scouting or any other organization said the type of format was highly attractive to them. >> thank you for explaining. we will see how it works with girls in the boy scouts. >> thank you, and we are excited. appreciate it. cnn "newsroom" with poppy harlow and john berman will pick that after this quick break. see you tomorrow.

i'm all about my bed. this mattress is dangerously comfortable. when i get in, i literally say "ahhh." america loves the leesa mattress. we have more 5 star customer reviews than any other mattress of its kind. this bed hugs my body. i'm now a morning person. hello, bed of my dreams. discover how leesa's innovative design provides an extraordinary sleep experience. then place your order. we'll ship your leesa mattress right to your door, so you can enjoy a risk free trial at home. i love my leesa. today is gunna be great. sleep on it for up to 100 nights and love it, or you'll get a

full refund. returns are free and easy. now you can experience the leesa difference before you buy at any west elm. or go to buyleesa.com and get $100 off. and free shipping too. you need and free shipping too. you need this bed. my "business" was going nowhere... so i built this kickin' new website with godaddy. building a website in under an hour is easy! 68% of people... ...who have built their website using gocentral, did it in... ...under an hour, and you can too. type in your business or idea. pick your favourite design. personalize it with beautiful images. and...you're done! and now business is booming. harriet, it's a double stitch not a cross stitch! build a better website - in under an hour. free to try. no credit card required. gocentral from godaddy.

now what? well, after your first reaction, consider your choices. go it alone, against the irs and its massive resources. hire a law firm, where you're not a priority. call your cpa, who can be required to testify against you. or, call the tax law firm of moskowitz, llp. i went from being a cpa to a tax attorney because our clients needed more. call us, and let us put our 30 years of tax experience to work for you.

good morning. top of the hour. we begin with breaking news. an american woman, her canadian husband and their three children have been freed after five years in taliban custody, captivity. let's get to barbara starr who joins us from the pentagon. what are we learning from the family, barbara? >> this news breaking overnight. the pakistany army actually putting the first public word out they were able to rescue this family of five. an american woman, caitlan coleman, 31 years old, and her husband, joshua boyle, he's a canadian. those children there born in captivity. they were