community has corroborated parts of the dossier, specifically meetings between trump associates and russian officials known to u.s. intelligence, some of them connected it's believed to the russian government. two, you'll remember cnn was first to report that the intelligence community considered the dossier material enough to at least make both then-president obama and president-elect trump aware of the existence of the dossier and furnish president-elect trump with a summary of the dossier in a briefing in january of this year before the inauguration. and three, in addition to the fact that he briefed him on that since then we know robert mueller, the special counsel turnover summer, interviewed christopher steele, the former mi6 officer of the dossier. cnn's reporting earlier this month that, in fact, the intelligence community took the dossier seriously enough to not

include it in a public summary a public assessment of russian interference of the election in january, and they did not include the dossier in that because they did not want to make public information in there that had corroborated that informs. the intelligence community from a very early date took it seriously. again, to be clear, it's often equated with the more salacious side of what's alleged to be in the dossier, but it goes beyond that. it was really a documenting of these meetings that took place between trump associates and russians during and prior to the campaign. >> adam, if the dnc and the clinton campaign knew about this, they could have come forward a long time ago? >> right. >> because they denied this for a long time, didn't they? >> i'm not sure. i might be wrong about this, but i'm not aware of them publicly denying they were a source of funding. again, the way this was structured, it's the lawyer representing them that actually pro-cured, assigned the contract, if you will. they were the ones who were engaging with the fusion gps team. and then again, chris steel was

being hired as a subcontractor by fusion gps. so the degree to which members of the clinton campaign knew during the campaign that this was going on, that remains unclear to me. obviously later on when we get to november and december, it's pretty clear that they were aware of the work of chris steel because as some of his reports were beginning to circuit more widely. it's not clear to me to what extent the clint campaign people had visibility into that video many of the people we talked to today said they had never seen anything like what they saw on capitol hill. the deep divide during the president's administration simply erupted in the hall of the senate office building. the message from two lawmakers, members of the president's own party. it was clear this president is dangerous.

he has troubling telling the truth and world leaders know it. and he's debasing the country with his behavior. stunning rebukes from senator bob corker and jeff flake today. sara murray joins us with the latest on that. what can you tell us? >> anderson, this was remarkable from senator cochlear, the chair of the senate floor relations committee, someone the president spoke to seriously about being his secretary of state during the transition, now in an interview with manu raju saying, look, i wouldn't support him again. he has not risen to the level of the oval office. the white house downplayed all that today saying they were petty comments, distancing themselves from the senator saying this is someone who's upset because the president wouldn't back him in re-election. the president said he would already be on board but with a stunning rebuke from a top republican who feels unencouple berd that he's not running for

re-election in 2018. >> do we know what the president's reaction was to senator flake's statement? >> senator flake's statement is similarly blistering today, but the president was actually pleased with the fact flake decided not to run for re-election. no love lost between these two men, and trump feels it's another critic who's getting out of washington. the caveat is flake's not getting out of washington until 2018. when trump moves forward, he now has bob corker as well as senator flake who can speak freely about their concerns. >> the president made a witt to republicans on capitol hill. what did the white house say about that? >> the white house has been quick to point out while there may be critics of the president, that is certainly not his relationship with everyone on capitol hill. they talked about how things went smoothly and the president

is trying to move forward with tax reform. this is obviously the biggest legislative priorities on his agenda. he needs republicans to work with in 2018 and it's tox reforms, he went to make his pitch on that. remember, appeared, when you want to move some your nominees forward, it helps to have the chairman of those committees on board. just a reminder, bob corker, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. >> thanks very much. a lot to talk about with the panel tonight. first, this extraordinary day on capitol hill. kirsten powers, scott jennings, christine quinn, matt lewis. it's been said many times, but have you seen a day like this? >> not at all. this is extremely unusual. one of the things i'm struck by with jeff flake in particular is this is somebody who's very conservative and he's not somebody who's necessarily caused problems in terms of a legislative agenda or anything like that. he's somebody who really never got on the trump train.

he never supported him and it was out of that lack of support he's watched his numbers go down and they they went more down when he wrote a book that was critical of trump and the general trumpism. he said in an interview with jake tapper today that it's not enough to be conservative, that you have to be angry that the voters want you to be angry was the it's not about ideas or policies. it's the fact that he's not angry enough and he's not engaging in the kind of behavior as donald trump is or supporting the kind of behavior donald trump is engaging in. >> what does this mean for the republican party? >> politics and policy. the political implications may be good. flake was a dead man walking. he was not going to win his primary. now if the republicans "k" unemployment someone, not kelly ward, someone who can hold the seat in november, that's ultimately a good thing for the republican party.

he was in a different spot than corker. corker would have won in tennessee. flake chose to write a book slamming donald trump. the policy implications here are limited when you consider flake and corker are largely voting with the trump agenda in the senate. unless those two guys join with mccain and they decide to block everything for the remainder of this term, then there may not be policy implications. i'll think that the three will vote for tax cuts on the agenda. there's a lot of discussion about this today, but the net return for the republicans could still be we pass a tax cut and tax reform, maybe we hold a senate seat in arizona. so i think what flake said today bears debate and discussion in the party but the net result may not be what all the rhetoric is cracked up to be today. >> i think the net result is on a different level. that will come down and be relevant to the republicans and democrats.

one of the things we've seen growing and growing and growing, in the second term of president obama and his first year of president trump is just a lack of any civility, a lack of any reason for people in other parties, a lack of any belief in the kind of bipartisanship that ted kennedy brought to the senate, no one could have called him anything but an aggressive progressive. now we're seeing that screaming and yelling and inability to work together ripping the party publicly. parties always have fights behind closed doors. but this is publicly on the floor. i just think this is bad. the democrats too and the government as a whole. i'm worried about the erosion of bipartisan government and what that means across the country and how that may render government at every level kind of frozen and stuck in squabble.

that's bad for cities, counties, and the capital. >> so much for not speaking ill of a fellow republican. that's gone out the window. talk about how the president's not truthful and a demise of america on the world stage, ignitions to flake's comments that we saw this afternoon, his critical indictment of president trump months ago, that being said the two of them no longer bound by the niceties of a re-election campaign and kiss up to the president to win votes. they're going to continue this rhetoric in my view. but the problem is if they really want to get things done and they want to be strong advocates for the republican party in their principles, they're going to have to come together on a lot of these issues that they campaigned on, repealing and replacing

obamacare, strong on immigration, flake said i can still work with the president on some of these issues, like tax reform and daca, but they have to put aside their grievances about the way the president does business to get things done. we have two votes to swing things in the senate and they really have to work together. >> there's a story about a guy going up to adelaide stevenson and says every sensible person is voting for you, and he says, yes, but i need the majority. i think that's the problem with the republican party and the conservative movement right now. it's not that you have bad politicians or donald trump, it's the public. this is what the republican base wants. there was a quote from congressman massey where he said when i ran for office and i was saying all these libertarian things and i thought that the public wanted a hard-core libertarian, but what i learned

is they were just voting for the craziest s.o.b. in the race. that is the fundamental problem. donald trump was a symptom. what we're seeing right now is that you basically get what you deserve and you get the politicians that represent you. >> we'll continue this discussion. i have to take a quick break. we'll get reaction from capitol hill to the senator's comments. bill o'reilly isn't just blaming "the new york times" for the latest revelation in his sexual harassment scandal. he's blaming god. people would stare. psoriasis does that. it was tough getting out there on stage. i wanted to be clear. i wanted it to last. so i kept on fighting. i found something that worked. and keeps on working. now?

they see me. see me. see if cosentyx could make a difference for you- cosentyx is proven to help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx, you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease, tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. never give up. see me. see me. clear skin can last. don't hold back... ...ask your dermatologist if cosentyx can help you find clear skin that lasts. you're more than just a bathroom disease.. you're a life of unpredictable symptoms. crohn's, you've tried to own us. but now it's our turn to take control with stelara® stelara® works differently for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks.

stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion, and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. we're fed up with your unpredictability. remission can start with stelara®. talk to your doctor today. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for stelara®.

bob corker says the president has great difficulty with the truth. senator flake says he can't keep quiet anymore. more now what their colleagues think about it. phil mattingly is at capitol hill. let's start with senator flake. what exactly is he saying as far as why he decided to retire? >> the party left him behind. there really wasn't much more than that. this visceral commentary on the president and the way the republican party has gone. but mostly that the republican party as it currently stands, the republican party led by a republican in the white house, is no longer the republican party that jeff flake feels like he's a part of. take a listen. >> the impulse to scapegoat turns us into a fearful, backward looking people. they threaten to turn us into a fearful minority party.

they were not made great as a country by indulging or in our worst impulses, turning against ourselves, glorifying things that divide us and calling fake things true and true things fake. >> this wasn't an issue of policy. senator flake votes with the president more than 90% of the time. he's a reliable republican vote. he's a well-known conservative, well-respected lawmaker. this is about the ideology that's prevailed in the republican party that leads the republican party. and senator flake made it clear. while his prospects home were dire, this was more of an issue with him no longer recognizing the party he calls his own. >> senator flake and corker, how are they are colleagues reacting? >> the interesting thing is you talked about republicans and democrats very somber, they thought these were two members of the senate that were productive. they could work with on a bipartisan basis. even when they didn't agree they could sit down with them and

have discussions. the broader question that everybody wants to know here on capitol hill across the board is is this some kind of tipping point? are we seeing a shift in the republican party from their top lawmakers away from the president? here's the short answer according to lawmakers and senior aides i've been talking about to all day. the answer is no. take a listen to this exchange i had with mitch mcconnell. >> this morning senator corker said the president had difficulty with the truth. do you agree with that assessment? >> i don't have any observation about that. we're here to accomplish things for the american people. front and center is comprehensive tax reform with my colleagues have described. trying to get the country going again and growing again. that's what we're going to work on. >> anderson, let me take you behind the scenes here from what i've been hearing for weeks, months even about the tension that exists, tension you've seen

blown into the open over the course of the last couple weeks. reps quietly voice a lot of the concerns you heard from senator corker and flake and mccain, but they also recognize in controlling the house, in controlling the senate and in controlling the white house from from a policy perspective they are in a place they haven't been in a long time, certainly turnover course of the last eight years. so when you see senate majority leader or speaker paul ryan talk about these are distractions, that they need to look past the fact that these are historic moments that are institution rattling, it's because they recognize as it currently stands they have a conservative agenda they've been trying to put into law nowhere years and that opportunity still exists so long as it still exists, don't expect others, at least at least the majority to follow suit. >> bill mattingly, thanks very much. back with the panel. scott was talking about the republican agenda. what does it mean for the presidency of donald trump? the criticisms being leveled by senator flake, by corker are devastating if you believe them. >> a lot of republicans today

have been saying we'll continue to agree with the president on substance, maybe not his style, but we're going to have to stick with him on substance to get things done. the gop base has more faith in president trump to get things s done than congress, so they can have this back and forth and call names, but the gop voters have more confidence in the president to get things done and that should serve as a big wake up call. the problem is they need to really expand the base. with regard to what happens next, two people taking a large credit for flake stepping aside, president trump and steve bannon. he's made it clear there's more scouts to come. incumbent republicans who are up for re-election in 2018, they need to fall in line or they will be next. >> we're all thinking what's an

accomplishment? repealing and replacing obamacare is an accomplishment. passing tax reforms, putting points on the board. for donald trump supporters, jeff flake retiring is an accomplishment: for most grassroots conservatives right now, it's not about public policy, passing bills or legislation, it's about a culture war. when he goes after the nfl, that's a victory. that's tantamount to passing legislation. when he gets bob corker to not run for re-election, that's actually a win. >> what would steve bannon say jeff flake did, though, other than not sort of kowtow to trump, but worshipful to him? >> he supports mitch mcconnell and doesn't want to get rid of the legislative filibuster. >> the problem is the book, so vocally opposing the president

and the way he goes about -- >> he was already in trouble before the book came out. >> he was already in trouble because he didn't support trump. >> it's not just that. you're partially right. go back to what i just said. it's about the culture war. it's not about legislation. it's irrelevant that flake votes with donald trump 90% of the time. he's not with him on the nfl. he's not with him on charlottesville. >> basically what we're saying now in the rule of donald trump, really the rule of bannon, let's be clear, i think you're right about bannon. but when you make a deal with the devil, the devil always wins in the end.

whether it's a year or a year or two with bannon and trump, we'll see it. bannon being the devil in that scenario. but the issue isn't what your policy view is. it's not even if you support the president. it's whether you're willing to be as bombastic and nasty as he is and whether you're willing to dislike the people, mitch mcconnell, that he likes with the same voracity that he dislikes. >> that's bizarre and ridiculous. >> and also if you're a member of the establishment and you're part of the swamp, you're on the chopping block as well. >> as defined by however steve bannon, who may better be described as a swamp monster. >> i'm not sure the president and bannon right now are necessarily on the same page when it comes to mcconnell. mcconnell and trump appeared in the rose garden together, they sounded like they were on the same page today on tax reform.

they pear to have a plan. more judges and tackling the opioid crisis if. they were to get those three things done together, that's a pretty good argument for re-election. trump and mcconnell will be on the ballot together in 2020. so their agenda, if they win together, will be what they run on together. it's in both of their best interests to work together. i'm not entirely sure they're on the same page with mcconnell. >> those are points. saying you're going to solve the opioid crisis when you're cutting into obamacare isn't a care. it's three words. we discussed tonight this white house has had a hard time admitting when they're wrong. we'll get into the latest example next. who knew that phones would start doing everything?

entertaining us, getting us back on track,

and finding us dates. phones really have changed. so why hasn't the way we pay for them? introducing xfinity mobile. you only pay for data and can easily switch between pay per gig and unlimited. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit or go to xfinitymobile.com. the dust-up of white house chief of staff, general john kelly and his allegations

against frederica wilson came up again today. the white house made claims about it they can't back up. to review how it began, here's what general kelly said on the podium in that speech last thursday. >> congresswoman stood up and in the long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there and all of that and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building. how she took care of her constituents because she got the money and she called up president obama on that phone call and gave the $20 million to build the building. and sat down. and we were stunned. stunned that she had done it. even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned. >> there's video to show what actually happened. we want to show you that video. it did not happen the way general kelly said. you can see for yourself.

>> everyone said that's impossible. it takes at least eight months to a year to complete the process through the house, the senate, and to the president's office. i said, i'm a school principal, and i said it, excuse my french, oh, hell no. we're going to get this done. [ applause ] immediately i went into attack mode. i went to the speaker, speaker boehner, and i said, mr. speaker, i need your hope. the fai needs your help and our country needs your help and we have no time to waste. he went into attack mode and in two days pulled it out out of committee, brought it to the floor for a vote.

i put our senators on notice, put it on your radar, senator nelson and senator rubio who i believe have representatives here today. they hot-lined it to the senate floor in just two days. guess what the president signed it into law, april 7th, 2015, with a bang, bang, bang. [ applause ] >> sarah sanders later said that kelly was referring to other comments made off video, but there's no proof of that. so, back to today after talking about the president's mistruths about senator corker a reporter asked about the comments. here's what she said. >> i don't believe that general kelly mischaracterized. he gave his account of what took place. general kelly and his family have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. i think he's led with honor and

integrity. he's doing a great job as chief of staff and i don't think he has anything to correct or apologize for. >> let's bring back the panel. what do you make of this? >> this idea that he sacrificed, he's a general so let's not question him. yes, he's done wonderful things for the country. there's no question. but that doesn't mean he gets a pass about making up something about someone. if you look at the video, that was pretty standard politicking. she didn't just take credit herself. she gave credit to a lot of people. and he works for probably perhaps the most self-aggrandizing politician literally in the history of the world, donald trump. that doesn't offend him in any way. and yet he was offended by what we just watched and didn't tell the truth about what happened. it seems pretty obvious she should apologize, but people don't do that anymore.

>> it's interesting the kind of way she brushes aside -- i don't want to misquote her. but saying general kelly gave his characterization and that's it. >> for me as a former elected official, what's striking is if i misstated something, which happened, people would rush into my office, the policy staff. you said it's 10%. it's 15%. and then the press people would run in and say he misstated the percentage of whatever it was. if i said something bigger, there would be a written statement delivered. that was the new york city council on a percentage of carbon reduction. i freakishly remember having the wrong number. so that mattered. if we had said something and didn't realize it, they would come back to us. if that matters at the new york city council. and the policy people themselves took honor and credit in getting

the right facts out there. how does it not matter in the white house of the united states? setting aside the significance of what we're talking about here. she's very clear in other statements that the money was brought in before she was a congress member of the she was talking about renaming the building. if you listen to the press secretary, she said he relayed his account. i have memories of things that i warped to make myself look better but they may have not been the truth. your account is not the truth. i just don't understand how somebody who is in a press office -- >> it's more a relativism. >> it's lying. >> the truth is what it feels like to me. >> not in catholic school. the nuns were clear about what was the truth. >> but i think -- this is also sloppiness. hopefully general kelly didn't intend to misstate this.

he talked for a long time about a very sensitive and important topic, but if you made that one mistake, it totally negates everything else. >> this was his recollection of what this congresswoman said clearly was a little bit off. there was some facts that needed to be corrected. if they had just corrected the facts right off the bat, we wouldn't be talking about it again today. we would be talking about these four fallen soldiers and what happened to them and how we cannot let this happen again. coming from a president, who i support his policies, who believes rafael cruz was involved in the jfk assassination and continues to hold true to that, they need to accept when they are factually challenged on something, clean it up, correct it, and move on. >> there's a difference between when you were just talking about, getting a number wrong, and actually making a vicious personal attack on somebody. and maligning them and engaging in character assassination against somebody. it turns out it wasn't true and you still won't cricket. there's a alaska decency there.

>> i think people misstate and misremember things that happened long ago all the time. that's not uncommon in politics or any other business. what makes me more uncomfortable about this is the concept someone serving in a civilian position in our government is beyond questioning. these are people that i s. i support general kelly and the president's agenda. but they're all due to be questions by the press and the citizens. i don't think we should be going down this road of saying this person is beyond questioning because of their resume. that's dangerous. i would also say this. most presidents and white houses are loathe to admit mistakes. this is not a condition that is new.

the obama white house didn't apologize about obamacare. the bush 43 white house, famously couldn't remember anything. he had done wrong in the one presidential debate. the clintons, of course, did not want to admit any mistakes or they lied to the american people. this is not a new condition. sometimes we treat it likes it is, but it's a condition that playground the last several administrations and we should strive to get you have to it. >> i agree with everything you just said. it's playground this administration more. it's also shocking to see, even though he's a civilian, a four-star general a marine, people you in your mind they

never lie. they're of the highest moral caliber. they have a misrecollection and not correct it. but. >> this is how politics is played now. what they're doing is actually identity politics. if i'm a woman, then i have the moral high ground when it comes to harvey weinstein. they're saying let's turn about and be fair play. let's use what they have, send out the guy who gra question. he's a gold star father, he's a general, in a sense they're playing identity politics the way the left has done it. >> i don't agree with the left part. >> we have to take a quick break. >> it's sad to see a general fall for that. the clinton campaign and the democratic national committee funded research that led to a dossier. what clinton's campaign press secretary is saying, as well as the white house.

♪ the sun'll come out for people with heart failure, tomorrow is not a given. but entresto is a medicine that helps make more tomorrows possible. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ i love ya, tomorrow in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto helped more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema,

low blood pressure... ...kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow i love ya, tomorrow ♪ ask your heart doctor about entresto. and help make tomorrow possible. ♪ you're only a day away.

breaking news tonight, a

source confirms the hillary clinton campaign and the democratic national committee helped fund research that led to the infamous russia dossier. "the washington post" first broke this story. the dossier was written by christopher steele a british intelligence officer who was hired by fusion gps. the memos detailed allegations of the president's ties to russia and how the kremlin tried to use the information to influence u.s. elections. the national press secretary tweeted this response. i don't know that fusion were steel were paid, but even a shred of that dossier ends up helping mueller, it will prove money well spent. when he went to the clinton campaign lawyer who was the one going to fusion gps to report the story, he denied any involvement saying the reporting was wrong. >> why did they spend a year lying about this covering it up? it's not unusual for campaigns to engage in opposition

research. but it seems based on the reporting tonight that the clinton campaign and the democrats tried to keep everyone from believing that they did this. so it complicates the narrative. they want russia to be bad for trump. they've sullied themselves by covering up their involvement in this dossier. i'm stunned what they're willing to cover up for apparently no reason. >> you said everyone does research and that's true. but if you look at this from a lot of americans perspective, the democrats hired a foreign agent to dig up dirt on donald trump. look, that happens all the time in politics, but it seems really seedy. >> it's an ex-foreign agent. >> that's correct. >> and they technically hired a lawyer, but you get my point. >> that's an important fact. he was a british citizen. >> he's not an american. >> again, why cover it up? >> i don't think the reporting is clear on that. the author of the article said that he had not heard that there

was denials of it. we have other reporting now, so i don't think what they admitted or didn't admit it admit at any time is completely clear. also, as the "washington post" author mentioned, this lawyer outside and how opposition research is done by both parties, new stuff, it doesn't mean the people they spoke with at the campaign knew. but i think the bigger question here, whether it was sleazy research or topic research is things keep leading back to donald trump and russia. so that to me is the big question. and now there are more facts that need to be firmly answered, but that's bigger thing. we can sully the democrats as much as we can. it is unpleasant and ugly, but it's a part of the facts of how things are run now. and this may likely bring more facts to the unpleasant reality of russia's involvement. >> this happens all the time. campaigns pay people to dig up dirt on other people and vulnerability studies on themselves to find out the dirt on them. there's reporting in the article that this attorney was paid almost $5.5 million.

it would be believed some of that money was put together for this dossier or report. the dnc and hillary clinton campaign had such sanctimonious denial about this for all this time, if it was leaked or known that they funded this report in any way, that would go against their entire narrative of saying trump colluded with the russians and that's how he won. >> why? >> it was research. for me the bigger question is if there was really good dirt in the dossier, why wasn't it a tv commercial? but it wasn't colluding, it was research. >> if somebody is working in another country, and you wanted to find out that donald trump

worked in france, and upped to find out what he did when he was in france. you might hire someone who was french, who speaks the language. what you wouldn't do is get someone from the french government to do it. you don't work with foreign governments to get information. there's nothing wrong here. >> donald trump would have owned it. >> we don't know about that. >> if they won't, in fact, lie, i would like to know, but there's nothing wrong with this. >> and the question is did they lie and why? if they did lie, why is a valid question. but the procedure here is typical. >> doesn't it allow president trump and republicans who support the president to say, look, this is all about nothing. been saying all along?ng we've >> donald trump's going to say whatever he wants and i it's

real or fake or made up. he doesn't need more permission to do that. but in the end this wasn't some report that brought up things that hillary clinton had done inappropriately with russia. it's about donald trump and russia. so i don't think this in any way -- it may add fuel to mueller's fire, not the opposite. bill o'reilly is now directing his anger over the sexual harassment allegations against him in a new direction. he says he's angry at god. we'll get the panel's take on that in a moment. whoooo. 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... ...hotelock it in. tripadvisor.

you're more than just a bathroom disease.. you're a life of unpredictable symptoms. crohn's, you've tried to own us. but now it's our turn to take control with stelara® stelara® works differently for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer,

or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion, and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. we're fed up with your unpredictability. remission can start with stelara®. talk to your doctor today. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for stelara®.

seems bill o'reilly is mad at a lot of people including god. the former fox news anchor made that confession last night on his new web series called "no spin news." he's angry at god for repeatedly being accused of sexual harassment. he's repeatedly made payouts to his alleged victims, including the latest one to come to light, a whopping $32 million to a former colleague. here's what o'reilly told his online viewers last night. >> you know, am i mad at god? yeah, i'm mad at him. i wish i had more protection. i wish this stuff didn't happen. i can't explain it to you. yeah, i'm mad at him. if i die tomorrow and i get an opportunity, i'll say, why did you work me over like that. my children will be punished and they're innocent.

>> back to our panel. joining us is cnn's senior media consultant brian stelter. it's interesting to see his agency dropped him, which is my agency as well. what else? does he have a chance to get back on television? >> slimmer and slimmer and slimmer. i'm also represented by them, full disclosure. the board of directors decided to drop him yesterday. they'll take that to the end of the year. that's a public disappointment for bill o'reilly. he has been represented for many years by the same person. he's been seeking a comeback in television. there's been talks under way in recent months. and you see a major hollywood talent agency saying, we can't be associated with you anymore. the charges against harvey weinstein are much more serious than charged by bill o'reilly. there's been rapes accused of

weinstein. not bill o'reilly. but the weinstein story, the o'reilly story, is take a moment for corporate america to rethink how it handles these situations. >> it's disappointing to see him go where he went in this interview saying he wished god gave him more protection. where was the protection for the women that were the victim of his predatory behavior? that's the question i have. in all of this, based on what's happened on fox news and other places it's shedding a light on a very, very dark problem in our society. >> it just makes you wonder are there second chances in this situation? harvey weinstein said he wanted a second chance. that seems laughable. bill o'reilly was recently looking for a tv job. he was hoping that sinclair would hire him. some believe it may try to rival fox news one day.

that idea o'reilly would be on sinclair seems less likely today. news max is always a fox wanna be. they said america is a forgiving nation. if anybody could have a comeback, it is bill o'reilly. >> the thing about second chances, you have to earn them, you have to deserve them. they don't just get given out to everyone who asks for one. so is there anything that harvey weinstein has done in his life that has even put him on the path towards earning it? no. the same question for bill o'reilly, lesser offenses that we know of, and the answer is no. second chances have to be earned. >> second chances also have a lot to do with acknowledgement of wrong doing. >> exactly. >> he said he has all this evidence, never presented any of it. he says this is a grand conspiracy. >> and he's the victim. >> he blames the "new york

times" and the reporting. >> humility is a better look than anger. and since bill o'reilly invoked the good lord, the good book says anger lodges in the bosom of fools, which is what i think bill o'reilly looks like tonight. >> we talked about this yesterday, but is this really a sea change? do you think this actually heeds -- not just bill o'reilly, but there's a big chef i guess down in new orleans who has now stepped down from his food group. a photographer has had his contract -- the director tobak has been accused. >> i hope so. and these high profile individuals, there's two ways we'll know it's a sea change. one, does it sustain itself in these celebrity industries, right? or does this, after it gets spoken of at the academy awards,

disappear? that's question one. question two is, does it permeate to everyday american women's workplaces? because what we can't come away from this is this hollywood extended has this problem. no. every workplace in america has this problem. some addressing it and some letting it go unchecked. how far this goes down to come back up, that's how we define if he eve successful hi addressed this. >> i think what we've already seen is more women coming out and having the courage and the bravery to tell their story. that is an important component. we're also seeing more people coming out saying i'm not going to condone this anymore. men in hollywood have come out and said i should have said something, shame on me. and getting more people to tell their stories but not let this happen. if you see something, say something. >> i'm going to be interested to see if hollywood

portraying this behavior in a glamorous way. whenever there's a shooting, does hollywood -- someone is already sort of on sort of not thinking correctly. like the woody allen matt hnhat movies. >> you shouldn't work with woody allen in my opinion. >> let's see if there's criminal liability. there are three police departments looking into weinstein and this new york attorney general's office. >> let's take another break. coming up, the "ridicu-list" is next. what's critical thinking like? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter.

morgan stanley hi, i'm just looking at my account, and i've got all this extra cash back. yep. that's your cashback match. only discover will automatically match all the cash back new cardmembers earn at the end of their first year. you matched everything i earned this year? yeah. whoo! more money! more money! it's all very exciting. i'm going to spread the news! spread it wide! it's cashback match people! people! you know that. you all work here. new cardmembers get a dollar-for-dollar match at the end of their first year. only from discover.

does it look like i'm done?yet? shouldn't you be at work? [ mockingly ] "shouldn't you be at work?" todd. hold on. [ engine revs ] arcade game: fist pump! your real bike's all fixed. man, you guys are good! well, we are the number-one motorcycle insurer in the country. -wait. you have a real motorcycle? and real insurance, with 24-hour customer support. arcade game: wipeout! oh! well... i retire as champion. game hog! champion. time now for the "ridicu-list." tonight, there are literally

ain't no mountain high enough to keep president trump from undoing president obama's legacy. the president, in a meeting with alaska's two senators offered to reverse president obama's decision to change the name of mt. mckinley to denali. why make the offer? there's this tweet from candidate trump in 2015. >> how does ohio get offended in all this you may ask? yes, dpresident mckinley was elected president. now, it's entirely possible president trump did and still does consider changing the name of an alaskan mountain to be a

great insult to ohio, perhaps, just perhaps its 18 electoral votes. though "saturday night live" thought president trump had an affinity for sarah palin. >> a new poll says i'm up by 11%. this is really happening, people. >> guess what, america? i don't think this guy should be president. i'm just here because he promised me a spot in his cabinet, and i belong in a cabinet, because i'm full of spice and i got a great rack. >> of course, there are president trump's critics who will say renaming this mountain is like his approach to carries a whiff to president obama's cologne. this is just another signfield parody, that president trump is jerry and denali is a piece of outer wear. >> i would like to return this jacket. >> may i ask why? >> for spite. >> but look, i understand, when you get a new job, you want to erase reminders of shadows.

if president trump really wants to rename a mountain, it might be easier to rearrange the letters of denali. thanks for watching "360." time to turn it over to don lemon. breaking news tonight. this is "cnn tonight." we should not underestimate the significance of today. a stunning moment in our history. here's why. sitting republican lawmaker, standing up to the president and his own party, pleading with them not to pretend that president trump's behavior is normal or acceptable. well, today, not one, but two senators, republican senators, called the president of the united states reckless, a liar, and a threat to our democracy. >> we were not made great as a country by