we begin the hour with breaks news. the role president trump played in getting a restraining and gag order lifted. >> reporter: i'm learning from sources it was president trump himself who wanted this gag order lifted and the president then directed his senior staff to, what one source said to me, facilitate the full cooperation with congress to lift the order. and then white house counsel don

mcgahn relayed the message to the justice department and the gag order was lifted. now the justice department insists that the decision was made independently, but now we know that the president of the united states wanted it done. >> why is the president so interested in the uranium deal? >> well, he's interested in it, as he called it one of the biggest stories since watergate the other day. he's interested in it because it's -- his staff says because he wants to be transparent. but we all know that there's a political backdrop to all of this. that there has been a story that's been going around for a long time that -- that the russians paid what amounted to bribes in the eyes of some to the clinton foundation to garner some goodwill from hillary clinton to get this uranium deal. clinton, of course, said she had nothing to do with the decision, she knows nothing about this.

but this is a story, as you know, that the president keeps talking about. now his staff, as i was saying before, they're doing this in the matter of transparency, that the president believes that grassley, who wants to hear from the fbi informant is right that this person ought to be able to testify publically and tell the story. >> how unusual is this? >> it is unusual for the president to inject themselves or the white house to inject themselves into a decision that is a criminal law enforcement matter that the justice is doing. this is something that there are rules at the justice department that are specifically designed to prohibit any interference from the white house in a criminal law enforcement matter. and what don mcgahn and people at the white house counsel should have done is they should have said mr. president we can't play any role in this, and it appears that did not happen.

now as gloria mentioned the justice department insists this is somewhere they were going all along and deputy attorney general rod rosenstein was going to do with or without any phone call from anyone. but the problem remain it is white house should have never injected itself into the decision and it's improper for the president to play any role in something that is specifically a criminal law enforcement matter. >> stick around. i want to bring up the panel as well. jeff, from a legal standpoint, is it okay for the president to do this? >> it's not against the law as far as i know, but it is against justice department policy. this is the classic example of why, you know, a president should not get involved in these sorts of details. let's be clear, this case is a fox news obsession. it's constantly on fox news, the president watches fox news all the time. he wants to stir the pot on this

case. that is exactly not how the system is supposed to work. it's not a crime, it's not illegal, but it is not appropriate under any circumstances. >> ed, you see it differently? >> i think, jeffrey, you might know this better but the rule from the justice department is if there's contact from the white house to the justice department it must go through the white house counsel's office. that's the step they took. you said it, it's not illegal, it's also playing by the rules that are set. and one thing i wonder we doentd know, the justice department is a branch of the executive. it is run by the president, and if he says my judgment of more transparency -- >> after richard nixon sicked the irs on individuals, they're also part of the executive branch, but we put systems in place -- >> he obeyed the system. >> here's the problem for the

nation, the president. the fbi has to be credible and nonpolitical. if it looks political, that's terrible for law enforcement -- >> comey ruined that. >> yes, he did. i'm glad we agree. this happens a lot. there's a terrible case for the local political director, they don't trust the political director, the feds come in and people say thank god, these are credible, nonpolitical people. if they're seen as donald trump's henchmen, that's terrible for the fbi, for the people, for donald trump. >> dana? >> it's very terrible. if you take a step back politically, i think even somebody who hasn't studied politics more than five minutes would understand that this has been, as you said, maybe a fox news obsession. it is certainly a conservative

obsession. but more than that you're seeing republicans trying to get their sea legs on these investigations that have been coming at them on russian and other things and saying, wait a second. how can we push back or more importantly, kind of reach back in time, because that's what this is, to talk about things that they believe were unresolved during the obama administration and when it has to do with hillary clinton and bill clinton, that's even more of a kicker. having said that i was talking to a democrat who was on the judiciary committee saying regardless of how this informant wuds released to talk, they do want to talk -- >> if there is -- >> exactly. >> >> transparency is good. >> if the goal here is transparency, let's put it all out there. we have to remember, this is back during the time we were working on the russian reset.

there was different times with us on how we were communicating and dealing with russia. this would not raise any red flags except the fact of the donations to the clinton foundation. that's where the red flags come up. hillary clinton says any allegation that there was ill intention was bah low any, but if that's the case, she wants to clear the name, let's get it out there. >> so i joined the clinton campaign in april of 2015. right after hillary clinton drove out to iowa that month we were greet td by the publication of a new book, "clinton cash" it was funded by the mercer family, and this was one of the big chapte chapters, one of the big smoking guns they thought they were going to nail hillary clinton with, and it was debunked because the main neck susthey tried to cite, there was a

canadian businessman who did make millions of dollars in contributions to the clinton foundation, he did have a stake in the company known as uranium one, so the theory was he was going to profit from the sale and so hillary clinton might have greased the skids. but he had divested his stake three years prior to this. hillary clinton had never been briefed, instructions on taking a position one way or the other. and the state department was one of nine agencies on a panel and it was unanimously approved. so the idea there's some i got you is silly. >> the idea that the russians have this uranium from the united states, they don't have an export license. >> right. what i read, that company had holdings in kazakhstan, they

can't take the uranium out of the country. >> out of the united states. >> yes. i think that's been under played by people playing politics with this. >> but the big picture, kind of got you that many republicans think they have is what brian was talking about, at the end of the day, the clintons were trying to do pay for play with the donor -- >> that's what they say. >> that's what i'm saying. >> that's been examined be debunked. >> i think the point is politically they're bringing this back up -- >> so how is devin nunes now involved? >> as i said before, republicans are propping themselves back up and with the very intense encouragement of the white house and other trump supporters saying wait a minute, you guys have been run over on this

russia investigation by democrats you have a lot of frustrated republicans in the white house and in the trump or bit thinking that the democrats have kind of -- are in the driver's seat both in the senate and the house and the intelligence investigations on russia. and why don't you focus on things that we care about politically. that's the bottom line. but i do think it's interesting that they're going to -- that this whistle blower/informant is going to talk to investigators. because you have chuck grassley who's been obsessed with whistle blowers for years and years. so i'm sure that's part of it. just allowing somebody who's saying he's a whistle blower to tell the story. >> what's next, jeff? >> this guy will talk and fox will continue to cover this extensively. i'm not sure if many people are

aware of this. hillary is a private citizen in new york -- >> unfortunately. >> why are they investigating private citizens in new york? this is just totally -- >> they say it's the obama administration. something that happened -- >> he's a private citizen in washington d.c. >> during his time in government. >> during his time in government, the republicans controlled the congress then and had an obligation and opportunity to investigate, but there was no there there. >> to finish the thought for jeff, what he can't say, but i will, the republicans control everything now. they're failing left and right, not enacting any part of their agenda, donald trump's popularity is sinking even with his own base, so they're making hillary clinton a shadow president. a lot more to talk about. including what we're learning about the kennedy assassination. including the decision to hold so many of them at the last minute. two stories a one-two bunch

in the ongoing battle over the last election. a-day couples pac gives you both nutritional support you may need. for her to prepare for a healthy baby and for him to support healthy sperm. be in it together. my friend susie cracks and hello sensitive bladder. ring a bell? then you have to try always discreet. i didn't think protection this thin could work. but the super absorbent core turns liquid to gel. for incredible protection... ...that's surprisingly thin. so it's out of sight... ...and out of mind. always discreet. for bladder leaks. also in liners.

so find a venus smooth that contours to curves, the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. flexes for comfort, and has a disposable made for you. skin smoothing venus razors. more breaking news tonight. top scooter documents about john f. kennedy assassination the now public. so instead of one story about answers to questions 54 years in the making, the second story is president trump's decision to hold some of those papers back.

but first, what we do know from documents that have been released. what have you found so far? >> we're digging through this with a whole team and we're finding a lot of interesting stuff. for example, there was a conversation intercepted between two cuban intelligence officers discussing oswald and the assassination. one of them refers to oswald saying he must have been a good shot and the other officer says yes, he was, i know him or i knew minimum so that's one thing many conspiracy theorists will be worked up about. there was a report in these files about the cia attempting to assassinate fidel castro in cuba by slipping him some poison pills into his drinks. and in this there is a report saying robert kennedy said you have to be careful about this because it's doin with the help

of the ma fee ya and if do you that it's hard to prosecute them later and gerald ford saying no under no circumstances should the u.s. government be involved in assassinating people. there were also evidence of the agents following around an attorney early on named mark lane, who was an early conspiracy theorist, right in the wake of the killing out there saying he believed oswald couldn't have done it alone, he would have been acquitted there had to be other people involved. and one other thing that was interesting, notes from the cia director under johnson who took over after the assassination of president kennedy. and he thought lbj was assassinated for the pay back for the assassination of the president of vietnam.

tons of tidbits like this. >> are these documents likely to produce any evidence of the conspiracy theories that have been floating around for years? >> think about what i said, it's how you read them. if you're a conspiracy theorist, sure, you're seeing stuff, another clue that fits into it. if you're someone look for hard, fast facts that proves there was a conspiracy, no. so it's unlikely after millions of documents have been out and scrutinized now for many years that these last ones will suddenly tip the scales, but we'll find out. especially when we get the final documents. >> the president's decision not to release the files. so explain the change of course in the 11th hour tonight. >> apparently some of these national security agencies that had some oversight of these files were raising objections

with the white house as late as today. so the president, receiving those objections, decided to punt this off for another six months, there were 2,800 some odd documents that were released through the national archives this evening but many more were being kept hid enas of tonight. that was a decision by the white house, despite the president saying he was going to get all the files out there. we do know that the president was not happy about this. apparently he was pretty irritated that all of this came up at the last second in terms of these objections and so forth, but that is the decision that this white house has made to go ahead and allow this process to take place over the next six months where these agencies like the cia, fbi and so on will go through the records and sort out just what can be released. so 50 years -- more than 50 years after the assassination of john f. kennedy, the public is still being kept in the dark and

the president put out a statement this evening saying he's lifted the vail on all this, it has not been lifted at all. it's still in place courtesy of the federal government. >> the reasoning behind releasing some of the documents this wasn't something president trump came up with on his own, this was something that had been determined for years, correct? >> reporter: that's right. going back to 1992. this was going to be required essentially by law that these documents -- there was a deadline in place. but the president -- president trump, as you know, has engaged in conspiracy theories on his own. there's a part of his base, people like roger stone, for example, a friend of the president who talks to him from time to time, was delighted that the president was going to take this action. remember, it was during the campaign the president speculated at the time -- then candidate-trump speculated 245 ted cruz's father was somehow

involved in the assassination here. earlier today, i asked on the conference call and the files being released so far, is there any evidence of a conspiracy of a assassination behind john f. kennedy, is there any evidence that ted cruz's father was involved in that conspiracy? their answer was they couldn't answer, they were not going to comment on the files being released. so the mystery in some of this continues, but when it comes to ted cruz's father, that was an unfounded claim that came from then candidate donald trump, and the white house, i suppose, is thinking that over the next six month that is some of these questions will be answered by these various national security agencies that have a say in this. but this is becoming a promise made by the president. if all of those files are not released by the end of april 2018, the president will have a promise he didn't keep with the

american people. >> joining with us his take is cnn presidential historian, tim naftali. i know you're interested to see these documents. how much do you think the vail will be lifted? >> well, i'm waiting to see if national security agency materials are open. the review board, in its final report said they looked at national code breaking materials, decided they were not relevant to the lee harvey oswald case. one interesting document that i noticed, i haven't looked at all of them, is a document from two days after the assassination. 23 you want to see examples of federal bungling, this is a document that the house assassination committee found from j. ed guard hoover where

hoover was explaining why he does not want an independent investigation of ruby's killing of oswald and oswald's killing of the president. he says, we were intercepting oswald's conversation in mexico city and we intercepted a male going to the soviet embassy in washington, both of them had information relating to oswald's state of mind and that didn't go to the secretary service. that's j. edgar hoover. it shows you the level of bungling and they were already thinking of a coverup, not because it killed kennedy but because it hadn't done what it should have done to protect the

president. >> he thought ruby was gay? >> yeah it's in the document. >> i didn't know the guy personally, but from what i read -- >> no. no. it's a throw away line for him. if he doesn't like someone that person is a known homosexual. when you're looking for cover ups, sometimes there's big and small. small is to protect a reputation, big a murder. what i'm seeing is fbi bungling. that's what i'm seeing on the oswald case. there's a lot of day tay, though. >> you're talking about cia covert operations in central africa, con go, dominican republic? >> that's a big deal. i'm telling you, i've seen references to the use of biological and chemical weapons as part of the mon goose program

to undermine the regime. i haven't seen every document, but i don't remember those being in the documents i've seep. also sabotaging airplane parts purchased by canada from cuba, i don't remember reading that before. so there's a level of detail -- really dark detail about covert action which we're getting now that we didn't have before. but that's a different issue from whether lee harvey oswald killed the president. coming up, more on the trump campaign and the data collection effort. more ahead. when it's time to move to underwear

toddlers see things a bit differently thanks to pampers easy ups while they see their first underwear you see an easy way to potty train pampers easy ups our first and only training underwear with an all around stretchy waistband and pampers superior protection so you'll see fewer leaks and they'll see their first underwear pampers easy ups, an easy way to underwear pampers

or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet.

you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. 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. new developments tonight in the story cnn and the "daily beast" first reported yesterday, more between the trump campaign and wikileaks, cambridge analytica reached out to wikileaks founder julian assange to get thousands of hillary clinton's e-mails. sue, can you take us through the time line of what we know how this came about. >> reporter: i will because the time line is important understanding the relationship between the trump campaign and cambridge analytica.

it seemed to begin june 2016. that was two days before the campaign made its first payment to the firm. trump was on the stump as you may recall, anderson, asking the russians to hack hillary clinton's missing e-mails. and now we're learning in that same time frame another infamous moment occurred. the head of the firm reached out to wikileaks founder julian assange asking if he needed help with hillary clinton e-mails. a request that julian assange said he rejected. it was founded by republican donors, the mercer family, who started supporting trump. that's also when jared kushner took the reigns of all data operations for the campaigns. he said they used both cambridge analytica and rnc data. here's what the head of digital at cambridge analytica said at a conference in germany about the relationship with the trump campaign.

>> we started working with the trump campaign in about june of 2016. when it became obvious that a sophisticated data apparatus would be needed by ensuring that every campaign stop was driven by data and reflecting what was currently being seen in the field he was able to use his travel time most effectively. >> reporter: despite what we just heard in the time line, the campaign released a statement yesterday distancing itself from cambridge analytica saying it relied on the rnc information. >> do we know what t connection? >> we know on the hill investigators will use the information to see if there was any kofrd nation, whether anyone from the trump campaign knew to -- or to figure out the mindset content, or whether there was a conspiracy theory. this goes beyond the campaign tactics of the data firm

reaching out to wikileaks. so this will be part of a puzzle with other pieces, such as roger stone telling the hill he had an intermediary who connected him with julian assange, and according to the p wall street journal, there was a reach out to the dark web. to be clear, the idea that the data firm reached out to wikileaks alone, does not meet a crime at face value and we should note there have been no criminal accusations. >> josh green joins the panel. you wrote an article where you were embedded, with 12 days to go in the data operation of the trump campaign. and you saw that -- cambridge analytica people there. >> yeah and i talked to some campaign officials with direct knowledge of cambridge analytica and confirmed the report that we

did back in october. there were 13 people there as part of the cambridge team, they all reported to the campaign's digital director. they did three things, polling, ran hundreds of thousands of surveys, helped id potential donors and persuadable voters. but the big takeaway from what i learned today was the role was much bigger than the $5.9 million they were paid by the trump campaign because they also managed a digital ad budget of more than $20 million, that was managed by molly swietert. so their role was bigger than the public records indicated and bigger than the trump officials came out and said yesterday as they tried to distance themselves from the charges. >> the statement from the trump campaign yesterday said -- well, they made no mention of cambridge analytica.

>> yes, i've been doing some reporting on this as well today, trying to figure out why and how they could claim that. and the answer is, it's a little bit complicated, but if you think about it, it does make sense. and that is what the trump campaign wanted to do was hire the talent from cambridge analytica. that there was one guy in particular that you probably worked with, he was the head of the data operation during the scott walker presidential campaign, which didn't last very long, and they really liked him, they wanted to hire him, he was under contract with cambridge analytica. so they did a deal where they could get this particular individual and several others to work within the operation. sort of what they're differing on is the day a. and that really is key. cambridge analytica had a database that i know the cruz campaign, your campaign alice worked and used, where they would go through this psychological profiles of voters. what the trump campaign says is

they didn't use that. they didn't use any of the data. they used the rnc data, which they built up for four years about the voter files and then they used the personnel to kind of utilize that where they would make -- >> bu they used -- >> they used graphics to go -- >> they used the rnc's database no doubt about that. but cambridge provided the brain power, they ran that data through algorithms and modeling script, and came up for talking points to where trump should travel. >> paul, to you, why does this matter? >> why? i understand you have to hire all these heads for campaigns, that's what they do, they crunch numbers. >> aren't you one of those people? >> used to be. my question is what are they doing reaching out to julian assange and wikileaks. >> that's a different question. >> that's the question they're going to answer under oath in a

grand jury. >> but the trump campaign claims that the ceo who did that was the ceo of cambridge analytica but not directly working with the trump campaign at the time. that's what they claim. >> wikileaks has been described by our own donald trump selection to run the cia as a nonstate hostile foreign intelligence agency, why is the donald trump thiem team reaching out to them. >> they also e refer to -- here's the thing, cambridge analytica did a lot of the data work for the cruz campaign. once we got out they went to ru campaign. they did a lot of surveys, ad placement, analyzing the data where to campaign, put your money. here's the thing that's important to note, why did they reach out to julian assange, that's the big question. you have to remember the mercers were not just the head of cambridge analytica, steve bannon was as well.

he was a chief strategist with the trump campaign at the time. they asked assange for these, he said no -- >> i want to get your perspective on this. do you believe this matters? >> not at all. i think wikileaks, when president trump ran when he talked like he talked on the campaign trail what he was saying to people, wikileaks, i think he was joking about go find her e-mails, he was underscoring that the e-mails were missing -- >> he said he loved wikileaks. >> 137 times. >> you campaign in governor nance and pros. there's no there, there. >> we're going to take a quick break. upnext lingering questions for the clinton team. denying to pay for information that led to the dossier about president trump. breaking news on that in a moment. thanks for loading, sweetie.

...oh, burnt-on gravy? ...gotta rinse that. nope. no way. nada. really? dish issues? throw it all in. cascade platinum powers through even burnt-on gravy. nice. cascade.

we have breaking news right now in the campaign story that president trump and his supporters consider evidence that the clinton team clap rated with russia. it involves fusion firm, and dnc

chairwoman both told congressional investigators they did not know about payments to the company. back with the panel. we're joined by anna navar row. >> ed, to you does that pass the smell test that the head of the campaign would not have known? >> in every campaign, i mentioned this before, one of the most important things was to be a candidate and lose. she lost elections as did i. opposition research is something that the top guys know about. you know you're spending for something and getting updates. and steele, the spy, was briefing reporters on it, you're not briefing reporters, so somebody knew. >> brian, obviously you were a spokesman for the campaign. >> i bet you that there are e

numerable firms and venders we had that john podesta didn't know we were paying. >> somebody knew -- >> yes, you were asking if it passed the smell test that john podesta didn't know. absolutely it does. >> why didn't we know sooner? >> i don't know. there was no shame in it. i would have admitted to the fact we were behind it. i'm glad we did it. my only regret is more of it wasn't published. i'd like to trust my own skills as an operative if i got my hands on it, i would have gotten it published. >> the similar theties between the two stories is striking, right? on the one hand clinton campaign bipaid fusion gps millions of dollars and no one new anything, and on the other hand, trump campaign paid millions and knew nothing. it's like the monkeys, see no

evil, hear no evil. >> in our case, in the case of cambridge analytica, you have potentially an instance of someone seeking to engage -- >> ed, the argument is if there are allegations that donald trump has -- if donald trump has business dealings in russia, as he said he did, the campaign is going to look for opposition research there and they hired this guy steele who has contacts in russia. >> fair enough. that's true. in this case the whole reason it's come up is it's covered up, if brian says be proud of it, the second thing is the allegation, the dossier some of it has been proven false, it sounds like, the russians were feeding information to the -- >> disinformation. >> disinformation. >> that's just nuts. the difference is this. apparently this firm was trying to investigate the russians. so, of course, you're going to talk to russians. on the other side, you have

russians trying to manipulate our campaign to try to elect donald trump. this is in the words of the intelligence community, james clapper who ran the intelligence community for years said it doesn't matter who paid for it. it doesn't pass the so what test. but now we know the law firm that represented the clinton campaign did this. we should focus on the findings, not the funding. there are important allegations that our president has been compromised by russians. >> it's put john podesta and the democrats in a very tough position. if you think about the fact that podesta went before investigators to talk about this, sitting net next to mark elias, his own attorney who happened to be the go between that helped pay for the dossier. he's sitting there knowing it but podesta is asked about it --

it's totally fair someone that high up in the campaign doesn't know about this. but the fact they're both sitting there is uncomfortable and auks wawkward. >> they could have said months ago we paid for it. it's opposition research. there's nothing wrong with it. >> there are empty managers. every campaign has dozens if not hundreds of venders and your campaign manager is not going to know about every one of them. that being said, this was not just a receipt for a bunch of pizzas, this is not an op research on trump getting dui's when he was 16 years old. this is russians and possibly connections with donald trump. of course, they're going to know about it and talk about it. and for them to say they didn't know about it then and months later, it defies reality. >> we have to get a break.

eroding of trump's con constituency, more on that when we come back. when it's time to move to underwear toddlers see things a bit differently thanks to pampers easy ups while they see their first underwear you see an easy way to potty train pampers easy ups our first and only training underwear with an all around stretchy waistband and pampers superior protection so you'll see fewer leaks and they'll see their first underwear pampers easy ups, an easy way to underwear pampers

the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom... let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong. i like it. promote that guy. get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed. when you book direct at choicehotels.com. book now.

it's been quite the night for breaking news we have more right now. the president's approval rating is on the decline in new polling from fox news. the president has now a 38% approval rating down for 42% last month. it declined more steeply in his key block, white men without a college degree he dropped 12 points from 68% in september to 56% this month. i want to bring back the panel. paul you spent time looking at poll numbers is that significant? >> it's early, obviously. but here's the worry i think team trump should have is why. it could be uneven handling of the storms, he did great in houston, but not puerto rico.

it could be hurting the feelings of a gold star will ddow. but it could be the republicans every time they don't pass health care. i think going after that, i don't think the tax bill is going to help him. they think it is. trump is going to go hard at social issues. i think the nfl fight helped him, screaming about confederate statues helped him. >> we're talking about september and october. if that nfl issue was going to work it would work now. the opioid crisis address maybe it changes it. i was here a year ago, in this studio and across new york. i think i sat with some of you all and the they said trump is going to lose trump's going to get killed.

the polls were wrong. i think there's still some of that in this polling. but i agree with this, if this is a tax plan that is typical for d.c., trump will lose more. because my wife said is he going to allow the high approval among 83% of republicans. >> and i think that's key. and the fact that he has more confidence from voters that he can get things done as opposed to congress, that gives him a little bit more fuel for the fire. i think this poll is troubling. anytime you're under 40 is not a good thing. real clear politics average trend, when he was first nominated, both his disapproval, approval around h44%. so i think a big factor in that is the inability to get

legislative accomplishments done. if he's able to pass a tax reform package that helps the middle class, i think that will help. i think if he's able to -- the economy stays strong, if he's able to do something with health care, i think that will help those numbers, but right now he needs to not only shore up his base -- >> that's the big if. go up to capitol hill i was there a few days this week talking to republicans and there is just this feeling of doomsday if they don't get tax reform done, they are done. they have proven that they cannot govern, they cannot deliver on their key promises. having said that, the trump coalition is not the traditional republican coalition when you're looking at kind of tax policy. >> right. >> so if they pass a tax reform plan and the trump voters don't feel better in their pocketbook, then they're going to say what's this about? >> and i think that that really is -- i mean, there's such a blessing for trump in that he has a different kind of

coalition. it's more populist, but that's a potential big problem for him if it doesn't go his way. >> this is a snapshot of a moment in time, and if we look at it, he has had a tough, tough month of terrible headlines and terrible perception. i tell you, it's amazing he's not lower than this. you know, we've been talking about his secretary of state calling hm a moron. we've been talking about his terrible handling of the puerto rico hurricane. we've been talking of his terrible handling and insults towards a gold star family. that's what this last month has been like and he's only dropped, what, single digits with white male voters? well, you know, even white male voters have ears and eyes too. >> they remain loyal in terms of their support. i agree with anna that they've been pretty stubborn and sticky in terms of sticking with him. but they may not be motivated in turning out for mid terming. that's why this number may be troublesome. for our part on our democratic

side we need to make sure our people are enthusiastic. >> need to put up some electricityable people. >> i think this has been one of the best weeks in a long time for the president. isis is getting defeated. the chinese government is getting dieted for doing opioid stuff. the president is leading on a whole bunch of stuff. where i am -- >> and he's only offended the gold star family -- we're already on thursday. >> most people looked up and thought i'll stick with kelly and frum from the congresswoman from florida politicized this. for trump voters they're going to be more betrayed by a tax deal that -- >> they monkey around with the 401(k), that's the heart of the -- >> i agree. >> coming up s something to make you smile at the end of the day. the ridiculous is next. we'll be right back. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing.

i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. so find a venus smooth that contours to curves, the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. flexes for comfort, and has a disposable made for you. skin smoothing venus razors.

60% of women are wearing the wrong size pad and can experience leaks discover always my fit. find the number that's right for your flow and panty size on the top of any always pack. the better the fit, the better it protects. always.

time now for the ridiculous.

and toercht yet another corner of the competitive sports world has been rocked by a doepg scandal. alaska. that's right, a doepg scandal has hit the eye did it rod. some of the competitorsest itted positive for a banned substance and not the mushers. we're talking about the dogs. if you think any athletes would be pure as the drin snow, it would be these.

one of these competitors could be the lance paul strong of the sled race community. four dogs tested positive for high levels of tram adoll, which is a painkiller. now, he's a big name in the sport. he has won the race four times. >> i have done absolutely nothing wrong. i have spent the last ten years becoming the best musher i possible can. i have done nothing wrong. i have never knowingly broken any race rule. i have never given any banned substance to my dogs. >> the video is about 18 minutes long. let's just say that he makes a very convincing case. his theory can be summed up listen all you all, this is sabotage. >> i believe this was given to my dogs maliciously. that's one of the options. i think that's the most likely option. there are numerous ways that could have been done. >> he points out there are people who are anti-eye did it

to do and it would be easy for them to drug his dog's food supply. actually, that's my dog but could easily win any sleeping competition. she basically sleeps all day long. the mushing community which is a thing is standing by him. that community includes his father mitch who is all a musher and won the race this year just ahead of his son. >> first of all, i absolutely support dallas. he says he's never given a banned substance to his dogs. i absolutely believe him. and furthermore, it would make absolutely no sense to give a banned substance to your own dogs hours before a known drug test. that would be ridiculous. >> that would be indeed be ridiculous. he also points out that the drug in question doesn't make any sense. >> it might be time to just take a step back and everybody kind of take a rational look at what's going on here. tram adoll isn't really a performance enhancer. most likely was given after the

race was over anyway, so i wonder if we're all just spinning ourselves into a knot here and, you know, maybe there's no there there. >> maybe so. we may never know what really happened because the runners, they're not likely to testify. but usually father knows best. thanks for watching 360. time to hand things over to don lemon. cnn tonight starts right now. breaking news, thousands of secret files on the kennedy assassination released. this is cnn tonight. i am don lemon. it's the one conspiracy theory most americans can get behind. the one that says lee hab have i oswald did not act alone. tonight we're getting fascinating information about the kennedy assassination from 28,000 documents just released hours ago. what's in them and why is president trump going back on his promise to