>> welcome to inside politics. thank you for sharing your day with us. democrats call it political meddling. president trump intervenes to help republicans secure testimony for an fbi source with information about an obama era iranian deal with russia. >> what's so striking about the president intervening in the department of justice is it's part of a pattern of plititization of the department of justice. >> a street level look at america's opioid crisis and the big question now that it has the president's attention. will there be new money to match the promises of help? >> this is the medical crisis of our time. the aids epidemic of our generation, but worse. another thing i don't understand is why aren't people marching.

i'm old enough to remember the marches by aids patients and the people who cared about that issue. >> and for democratic mega donor, tom steyer. his ad was watched by the man who said he should be impeached. >> he brought us to the brink of nuclear war, obstructed justice at the fbi and in direct violation of the constitution and threatened to shut down news organizations that report the truth. >> a busy hour ahead. an unusual push from the president the democrats call a nixonian use of power and they call it good government transparency. it involves russia, hillary clinton and the house committee chairman who had to step aside because he was too cozy with the trump white house. we know from the get go sorting the facts from the politics is not going to be easy. the president personally directing the senior staff to push the justice department to

lift a gag order on an under cover fbi informant. two sources saying that informant made a critical in an investigation into a uranium deal with russia in the obama administration when hillary clinton was secretary of state. absent any connect the dot facts calls it a modern day watergate. it will go back and look at the deal. to do so it needed testimony from that informant which is where the presidential nudge comes in. it is within the president's rights, but there are quite lines urging caution before presidential meddling in justice department business. no big deal says team trump. >> it is not unusual for a president to weigh in. this president as you saw from the jfk files to this particular ongoing investigation is for transparency. he believes as many others do that the fbi informant should be free to say what he knows.

this was made, let me repeat, the judiciary chairman in the senate chuck grassley made this request last week. >> the president's role is political meddling and not transparency. >> what is so striking about the president again intervening in the department of justice is it's part of a pattern of plititization of the department of justice. he fired jim comey and he is interviewing u.s. attorney candidates in the district of new york where he has property and where there are investigations into money launders by his associates. this kind of interference in the department of justice is deeply troubling to me. >> with us to share the reporting and insights today from "the washington post" and politico. eliana johnson also with politico and cnn's sarah martin. let me start with the question. it is unusual for a president to get involved. this testimony is critical.

if the house is to conduct a fair and thorough investigation of what happened. there are some people saying why is the house intelligence committee going back to 2010. the republicans have been in the majority since 2011 and why didn't they do it sooner if it was a big deal? the president getting involved in this saying his goal is simply to free up testimony to help. fair within the lines? outside the lines? >> i guess fair except for this is not happening in a vacuum. the characters here have been -- there was a preliminary act to all of this. which was that you had allegations that there was coordination between devin nunez the chairman who announced this probe in the house. and the white house when we were talking about the unmasking. the last time democrats were pointing a finger and saying you were distracting from the russia investigation. they are both coming in again saying this is nothing like the time before. we are not talking to each other about strategizing. we were working on this and we

wanted to set the record straight and be transparent. they are saying the right things, but the questions about the real motivations are there because we witnessed this same cast in a different, but similar scenario not that long ago. >> that's one of the challenges for the president. let's assume for the sake of argument that the president is doing this because chuck grassley does want to talk about the informant. let's assume for the sake of the investigation now that i know the democrats will say that's impossible, but assume he is trying to do the right thing and i hope all witnesses have a different view should testify fully too. the president has to know that among political journalists and democrats and a lot of his republican colleagues, devin nunez came across and his credibility will be questioned from day one. >> let's assume that everyone's mote vagsz are impure.

>> isn't it striking that that's normally where we go? >> let's assume he is trying to give back to democrat who is tried to slap him with the russia solution and devin nunez is acting in a partisan manner. does this issue seem like something we should want to get to the bottom of and does it seem like a big deal or not and assume that everybody is acting in a political manner. i think it does seem like a big issue and the fact that it happened in 2010 makes it somewhat less relevant, but not irreleva irrelevant. it's something that we should want to know the facts about and are willing to concede that motivations are purely partisan. >> if there is information no matter how far back it goes, if there is information that sheds light on the deal, favorable or unfavorable or raises or resolves questions, great. let's get it. the question is can this cast of characters get us there? >> i think it's why the president decided he upons to

put a finger on the scale in this case and what does it mean about other issues that the justice department is going to be facing. we know that the president has a fraught relationship with the notion that you don't necessarily meddle in what's going on with the justice department. he fired james comby and set off a firestorm over that. it's interesting to see how meticulously careful white house aides are. i'm thinking about sarah sanders at the podium and the number of times the president sent a tweet suggesting the justice department should do this or that and sarah said we are not going to weigh in on this. it is not our job at the white house to tell the justice department what to do. we are not going to put a finger on the scale. he may be within his right to do so, but it's a fraught relationship. you have to be careful. >> sarah sanders, if you are jeff sessions, you have to listen to president trump more than sarah sanders even though you wish you could listen more. here's another issue. let's again -- you corrected me

on how washington's reflection is. that's sad. we are laughing about it, but it's sad. most people's intentions are partisan. whichever party is the white house, that would be a good thing. one problem with the president, he pushes the justice department to make clear this informant should be allowed to testify. is the president seeking new facts. it sounds like he has a confirmed view of how he wishes to send it up. >> i think the uranium sale to russia and the way it was done so underhanded with tremendous money being passed, i actually think that is watergate modern age. >> the judge and jury have already decided before the witness gets to testify. that complicates things. >> that are does complicate things. again, everybody really loves using the term watergate. it is almost getting overused and making the comparison

because it's the most sensationalistic thing possible. i will leave it out there. the president is not good at refraining from getting into the ring with all of these matters especially when it gets into things that he cared about during the campaign or the russia probe. this seems like another thing to get back to the point, there is an issue that is a real issue. it's so completely taken over by the situation. can you say the same thing about the russia probe and meddling and the security levels of our infrastructure systems and election systems. people get obsessed about the finger-pointing and we lose the other part. >> we ask the question about russia, but look at the uranium deal. that's the real problem. that's the notion of this is a president who is trying to do the right thing and make sure it comes to light rather than this is a president who wants to you look at anything. >> would they be so transparent?

>> i'm confident enough in the system. the comey firing is a great example. the president was within his rights to do it, but he paid a huge price for it. the president is within his rights to push the justice department and he is airing his views in an unusual way. that doesn't mean that congress is going to find that this was the modern day watergate. >> on the broader investigation, the president weighs in on a tweet this morning. it is now commonly agreed after many months of costly, all caps, there was no solution between russia and clump. was solution with hc about funning the dossier. they conceded they picked up the funding about trump that was originally by one of his opponents and entity. is it now commonly agreed? >> it is not.

>> the investigations are still ongoing. that's the other thing we saw with the informant and the fbi deal. you can correct me if i'm wrong, but this is a week where we started to see the probes start to splinter and you saw not only did house republicans launch a probe into the uranium deal, but a separate probe into the handling of the clinton e-mail investigation. they said look, hillary clinton is not the president of the united states. she is a private citizen and we want to focus on the current pressure probe. you are having a signal that they might be winding down even though the major question of solution still remains unanswered. >> the chairman said that a couple of weeks ago. still an open question. he's a republican.

who knows what's next. >> they are looking into the home stretch of the russia probes. the primaries are coming and they want to say we have a responsibility so it hopefully doesn't happen again in 2018. this whole common agreement thing is a little bit disturbing because at the center of all of this has been this ic report that came out in january with a public draft that every single one of trump's nominees for a national security position that had to go before congress said yes, we agree. everyone except the president. you start to see erosion of that. you see mike pompio who said there is no collusion between russia and trump. what is that? is it a replacement for the intelligence community? if it is, you are almost eroding

the credibility of the ic which has been a problem for the debate. >> we will see where the substance takes us. much more important to not diminish. they have more credibility than the house side. the politics of this is even assume this investigation is necessary. it confusions people. what's going on about russia and now you see this pressure to wrap it up. that's what the president is trying to say. quick break. strong growth numbers from the government. the economy is picking up steam. the way to keep it going? accepted send me a tax cut bill. it's complicated. (avo) when you have type 2 diabetes, you manage your a1c,

but you also have a higher risk of heart attack or stroke. non-insulin victoza® lowers a1c, and now reduces cardiovascular risk. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill. (avo) and for people with type 2 diabetes treating cardiovascular disease, victoza® is now approved to lower the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (avo) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash,

swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so, stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. ask your doctor about victoza®.

>> welcome back. a strong economic report that has good political news for president trump. the economy grew at 3% despite the hurricanes. he likes to say the economy

never grew like that under president obama. the president can brag that these are two best quarters back to back since 2014. it is based on the republican promise of a tax cut plan this year. there is momentum there too after the house vote yesterday. both chambers of congress passed a budget that allows a big tax cut, but the real work is just beginning. they are working to turn the vague frame in the detailed proposa proposal. will there be a higher tax bracket and will republicans keep high tax states. the 401(k) plan and how much will it increase the deficit. it is unmistakable that they have momentum. at other time or will i be going too far? >> it's not a bad assessment.

remember the deals that they reached a couple of weeks ago where the house decided to take up the senate budget instead of going to a formal conference. that saved them a lot of times. upwards of three or four weeks so republicans do feel a little bit better on capitol hill and do feel that momentum. the devil is in the details and looking at the narrow vote yesterday, 216 to 212 in the house shows concerns about the blue statehouse republicans and for speaker paul ryan and leadership, you don't want to start that many votes down from new york and new jersey voted against the budget because of that. >> who voted for it. you voted against it because they thought of it as their last line of leverage. here's someone who voted for it from the high tax states. the argument to them is we know this is hard and we will work this out in negotiations. we need your vote today.

these did. that's a tough sell. some of these you are talking about $6,000 or $12,000 that people deduct every year on their taxes and vote to take that away. can they put it together? this is the obamacare debate all over again. you have regional and ideological differences and concerns about the deficit. what happens? >> it's a bit of a free-for-all. if they can get the standard deduction big enough that it covers the concerns for each of these representatives, maybe they will be willing to play ball. they come up when the representatives not all get what they want in the bill. you will have all kinds of other inviting happening and this will slow down. the question will be does party loyalty win out over the actual bottom line best case scenario interest of the representative from that state.

that's the preserve in exchanges for that. >> there is broad agreement with cutting tax rates, but many disputes when it comes to how to make up the money loss or added to the deficit, there is huge disagreements about how to make that up. >> whether it's through deductions or what you can put away in your 401(k), you will never get agreement about that or whether you add to the deficit. it's not allowed when you are dealing with the lines of reconciliation. >> and 10 years and then the questions of this is obamacare deja vu for republicans and the leadership. will the president help them or will he act in a way that undermines them? that's why they were nervous about the 401(k) tweet.

the obamacare debate, he said things that were contrary. >> on the one hand the president was not out there for much of the time talking about the health care plan and selling it. they couldn't convince americans that this was a plan that would benefit their lives. they want the president to talk about tax cuts saying this is good for the economy and the bottom line. what they don't necessarily want or tweet is him weighing specifically in on what to do and how to treat 401(k)s and the provisions they don't want him inviting or calling members of the white house and say we are willing to give you this this exchange for this. and the staff of other senators, republican or democrat can find the details out later. that is the risk of this president. he believes he is the ultimate deal maker. >> assume the house can pass a plan, it will be great and mean as the senate debates it a few days later. paul ryan said he was joking, but he had happy the president

will be in asia next week when they get into the details. >> this is good economics for the president. people say you are normalizing trump. they grew back at 3%. the job growth is behind the same months last year. the basic trajectory is going that way. it's good for any president that is good for the president. you couldn't repeal and replace obamacare and couldn't touch the promise. if you mess up tax reform, you go what you promised would be the big in the first year. all of republican and washington. that's why nancy pelosi is baiting the numbers. 35 house republicans from the high tax districts who are worried about the state and local taxes. nancy pelosi said walk the

plank. >> what these members walk the plank for is something they are going to have to answer for back home and hopefully i think that the ability to have leverage would have been to defeat this and then go to their speaker and say, we want something different. in fact, they have enhanced. they have given leverage to the exploiters. >> this reminds me, some of you call it obstruction and democrats call it worse than that. mitch mcconnell set a goal early in the obama administration to block everything he can. can the democrats message and work the halls and work the possible and work constituencies. they have a couple of things here as the republicans have the bigger test. they put together the bill and pass it with narrow majorities. this is a giant test for the democratic party. >> it definitely is a lot on the messaging front too. i'm glad that you mentioned

mitch connell. the house members can take votes if they were on them alone. they know there are not the votes in the senate. the senate's weird math does provide interesting protection and makes it a not true test of things. sometimes in the house that puts the own us on the democrats to get them between a rock and a hard place if they want to pin it on a situation like tax reform. the difficulty for democrats is they can argue why you voted a certain way. this is not the one off. this is a really massive complicated bill. can you say i took this vote because on balance, here's all the things that i didn't like stomaching this aspect that you try to pip me on. >> from a policy standpoint, an interesting couple of weeks ahead. that will be fascinating.

we shift gears and president trump vowing to end the opioid epidemic. the people he is vowing to save. >> i didn't grow up thinking i was going to be a heroin addict. this is not what i want to be. >> what are your hopes and dreams? >> to get sober and have a family. at one point i thought i was going to and i lost the love of my life who overdosed. when i woke up, he was dead. wit. filed a claim, but... you know how they send you money to cover repairs and... they took forever to pay you, right? no, i got paid right away, but... at the very end of it all, my agent... wouldn't even call you back, right? no, she called to see if i was happy. but if i wasn't happy with my claim experience for any reason, they'd give me my money back, no questions asked. can you believe that? no. the claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it. only from allstate. accused of obstructing justice to theat the fbinuclear war, and of violating the constitution by taking money from foreign governments

and threatening to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer, and like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet today people in congress and his own administration know that this president is a clear and present danger who's mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons. and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it.

is it possible for you to stop shooting heroin while we talk? >> for me it would be, but. >> that's what i'm wondering. do you feel such a strong urge that you can't stop while we talk? >> yeah. yeah. nothing would stop me. that's how bad it gets. >> you afraid you are going to die from this?

>> i know i'm going to die from this. >> interviewing billy who is 31 years old. has a 5-year-old son. last night he slept on the streets of boston. billy is one voice of an american em demmic. stories like this are critical. they track abilities to do more. opioid abuse is a public emergency. chris christie leads the commission on drug addiction. he talks on cnn trying to put the epidemic into context. >> we have 175 people a day dying. a 911 every 2.5 weeks. if a terrorist organization was killing 175 americans a day on our soil, what would we spend? >> that's a fair question. what should we spend? the president's declaration does not call for extra funding. it punts that to congress. it's an important debate. all of the lawmakers say it's an

urgent priority. now they will have to decide a funding level initially out of the box and a lot of people say why did it take 10 months, mr. president? for all the members of congress too. when they are trying to do tax cuts, deal with hurricane and disaster relief. will this get the attention it deserves? >> it's starting to get the attention particularly after the declaration yesterday, but the big question is money. you need resources and funding to put teeth behind the declaration. you have a democrat throwing numbers out there and marky said he wants $45 billion as part of the declaration. as if you look at the congressional legislation on funding bills on the house and senate bills, we have funding flat. the hhs fund deals with the public health emergency. that's nothing at this point. there is a need for funding, but

if you are going to spend money, you have to save moan somewhere else with the republican congress. you are starting to see the outlines of an offset with the disaster aid and more conservatives saying cut spending to pay for a recovery in the hurricanes and taxes and florida and puerto rico. if this gets added on top of everything else, this creates another battle and a tough for congress. >> the thing the president has shown an ability to do is to highlight issues that lawmakers and republicans weren't talking about. the democrats weren't talking about. he did it on immigration and trade and could do it on the epidemic if he chose, but he would need a sustained messaging campaign and put pressure on parties in congress and he has

talked about opioids, but they are in the one off statements or declarations. we haven't seen a sustained public pressure campaign from him. i don't necessarily think he would need to set a level of funding or anything like that, but he does need to put the pressure on congress to act. i haven't seen that from the administration. >> it's a great point. as he does so and the first lady said she will take this on now. i hope she does. the funding is one question and the conversation is another. the police say they need something different than the governor or the police chief. the needs are different depending where you are. attention is what everyone needs. the president doesn't talk about himself and his life, but talks about himself a lot. he doesn't talk intro expectatively a lot. i don't know a family who doesn't know somebody who is dealing with this. either their own family or family close by. one of the things the president said was talk about his brother's addiction to alcohol.

>> i had a brother, fred. great guy. best looking guy. best personality. much better than mine. but he had a problem. he had a problem with alcohol. he would tell me, don't drink. don't drink. he was substantially older and i listened to him and i respected him. he would constantly tell me, don't drink. he would also add don't smoke. but he would say it over and over and over again. >> we pi nata the president for the things he says and tweets. we should give him credit. one of the ways you connect to people is to make these things personal. when you see the other heroin addicts, we have to show the faces of people. who are your brothers and sisters and neighbors. if it weren't for their addiction, they would be around

this table. but the president deserves credit for making the personal connection. now we need to great him as to whether they deliver. it's a fair criticism that 10 months was a long time to wait. now that we are here, what next? >> he will bring it up along the way, but in the haphazard way the president broad it up in the past. this is not something he has been thinking about his whole life. separate and apart from the story about his brother, he learned this campaigning in new hampshire and when he got pulled aside time and time again, he said this is a real problem. at this time us tell you about the opioid crisis. this is a lesson he learned with the families struggling and it was a potent message for him to carry to other states. there are a lot of people who put their trust in him and voted for him along the way. they thought he would do something immediately. what they were voting for was

more than a declaration. they were voting for money and a sustained campaign. in that sense, it is on the president in a more personal way than someone who votes for tax reform. for instance, a lot of people who met the president and heard that promise. >> i want to also say a lot of the advocates say it's fine. they are worried that the tone will be more on the law enforcement and less on the treatment compassion side from what they heard from the attorney general. it's a combination of things. >> that's the open question. part is the funding. part is also who do they want to point the finger at and where do they want to regulate? is it the companies and people who represent states for the elderly people and terminal situation where is they don't have to worry about the side of it. is it the corporate side? we ran a massive piece that shows you how the congress dropped the ball on that. is it going to be on getting the

looks on municipalities. the president has the pulpit now. he established that he deserves it, but it's a question of how he uses it to call for specific things that are probably going to be uncomfortable for both parties to get behind. he has to because there is not a single figure of the stature of the president that can emerge out of congress that commit a similar lime light. it has to be specific. >> starting with the funding and the president's attention. not just the president, but the administration's attention as we go into the months and weeks ahead. the president pulled for transparancy in releasing jfk files. dads don't take sick days... dads take dayquil severe. the non-drowsy, coughing, aching, fever, sore throat... ...stuffy head, no sick days medicine.

there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan,

these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now.

remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. to find smarter solutions. to offer more precise and less invasive treatment options than before. like advanced genomic testing and immunotherapy. see how we're fighting to outsmart cancer at cancercenter.com/outsmart

welcome back. the secret documents are out. most of them anyway. the national archives posted 2800 records related to the assassination of the 35th president. 300 more remain classified. no bombshells, but a few entering nuggets. j edgar hoover saying there is nothing further on the oswald case except that he is dead. there is this from a 1975 deposition. he asked is there any information involved with the assassination of president kennedy that shows lee harvey oswald was a cia agent or an agent -- the document suddenly ends right there.

they requested the redactionses and asked that some be with held at the last minute. they said they are unhappy about it. with known experience theorist, that's why you had it. the president's decision to tweet last week subject to the receipt of further information, i will be allowing them to be open. he had to pull back some. one shows the president is listening. they're hyper cautious about this. they had 25 years to prepare for this. they are protecting sources and methods. >> it's government. i'm convinced we will find out

in six months and the documents will be released in april. i'm pretty convinced we will find out ted cruz's dad was involved. that was redacted, but it's going to come out. >> having fun with the raphael cruz campaign. >> that was a joke, everybody. >> for those of you who have through therapy or other means forgotten the 2016 campaign, the president of the united states did at one point start talking about a story that ted cruz's father was -- you know. >> this is another -- it's a great bipartisan thing where everybody wants to see this. it's one of the things where the president could have pleased everybody, but whatever the restrictions are in the intelligence community asking him to slow walk it, i don't know what 180 days buys that won't be continue and continued.

this may be one of the national security waivers that are indefinite. that will be frustrating and everyone is on the president's side that is an aication. we have the whole semester that is really the deadline? >> that only fuels further experience theories. >> and that was a cia agent in and of itself. >> unlike anyone at the table, this was always a conversation at the table. the documents are nothing great. one of the things that come up, do people trust the government. this was an opportunity to be here at the transparency.

look at the new poll. the reason is it goes back to 2014. 43% said great deal. 56% said not much. fast forward three years, down to 35%. not very much in and it stayed conitant. the majority of the american people, one of the reasons donald trump is president. they are looking outside of the system. >> the release to trump, but it's a trend since the watergate era. i think trump was able to capitalize in the campaign on people's distrust in government. in the police and really in institutions in the media that trump capitalizes on and now i think the holding back of the documents, it's small, but it

does feed and it's ironic that trump is playing into it. >> whether you are on the outside or elected, how do you keep the title from effecting you. >> those numbers are higher than that of congress. >> congress comes out worse than any test. >> democratic donor versus the republicaned with. it's a battle playing out on and of course on twitter. he's brought us to the brink of nuclear war.

obstructed justice at the fbi. and in direct violation of the constitution, he's taken money from foreign governments and threatened to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer and, like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet, today, people in congress and his own administration know this president is a clear and present danger who is mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons.

and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it.

>> across the country on cable, including cnn. >> he brought us to the brink of nuclear war and obstructed justice in the fbi and in direct violation of the constitution and taking money from foreign governments and threatened to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that is not the case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, what has our government become? >> this is america. if you have money, you can spend it. tom stiyer will be happy because he was attacked by the president on twitter. in terms of actually advancing impeachment debate, if is on the beginning and 10 is the finish line, where are we?

zero? >>.0003. maybe. because of the president's tweet, impeachment is definitely a rallying cry for a certain section of the democratic party, but that doesn't trickle up to the leadership. they don't want to create it. >> let alone little america. >> they have to get the votes of the people who are not die-hard democrats. this is a good way to get people to run away. >> if we get the e-mails and the liberal groups saying we are going to impeach president trump and conservative groups saying send us money because they are trying to impeach president trump, these are the articles of impeachment filed by one member of the house. al green and brad sherman. tom steyer replied to the tweet. he is liking the attention of the president. you are right about one thing.

america deserved much better. americans across the board know you are a danger to the people of the country. here's where it matters. it's time to take a stand. the leadership of the party does not want to touch this right now. because in part of your point. you have to win in places where there are not trump republicans. >> i don't know where to start. the many voters in new york and california. or he might as well light his den million on fire here. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer actually want to defeat the president on the arguments, not merely argue that he should be removed from office which is not really -- it's not a winning argument. i think they want to debate the issues and do that on the congressional battlefield in 2018. >> when are al green tried to force a vote on the articles of

impeachment. >> it's a lod easier to win than to impeach a president. >> see you back here monday. 8:00 a.m. eastern. wolf blitzer is up after a quick break. do what i did. ask your doctor about humira. it's proven to help relieve pain and protect joints from further irreversible damage in many adults. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb.

tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ready for a new chapter? talk to your rheumatologist about humira. this is humira at work.

i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs.

to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel - and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay.

and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now - and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. >> i'm wolf blitzer and it's 1:00 in washington. 1:30 a.m. saturday morning in pyongyang, north korea. wherever you are watching, thanks very much for joining us. under fire, president trump asking the u.s. justice department to lift a gag order on under cover fbi informant. now one top democrat said the president may have gone too far and he is vowing an investigation. speaking out, cnn getting answers directly from an eyewitness about what happened during the ambush of