nfection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. -ahh. -the new guy. -whoa, he looks -- -he looks exactly like me. -no. -separated at birth much? we should switch name tags, and no one would know who was who. jamie, you seriously think you look like him? uh, i'm pretty good with comparisons. like how progressive helps people save money by comparing rates, even if we're not the lowest. even if we're not the lowest. whoa! wow. i mean, the outfit helps, but pretty great. look at us. wow. i mean, the outfit helps, but pretty great. i enjoy the fresher things in life.o. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest... ...prices. so if you're anything like me...

...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices... ...from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home... ...with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. neulasta helps reduce infection risk by boosting your white blood cell count, which strengthens your immune system. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain,

trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. why is my son having trouble i[beep]ol? finding lowest airfare to istanbul. no. i'm tired of fighting with my son over his homework. [beep] home wok restaurant. need a review? no! he's smart but his mind wanders. [beep] seven wonders of the world. why don't you understand me? [beep] i do. i was trying to show how connor feels every day. redirecting to understood.org narrator: join parents and experts at understood.org. a free online resource about learning and attention issues to help your child thrive. we begin the hour with yet more breaking news on the russia investigation, on a day that's been pretty much wall to wall with it. this latest item, like most of the others today, involve what various members of the trump campaign and current members of the trump administration have

been saying about russia connections and how much of it is now undergoing suspicion. cnn's jim acosta has the latest breaking news. he joins us now. what have you learned, jim? >> reporter: well, anderson, we were talking about this yesterday that then candidate trump had this meeting with the national security advisory board, the picture's been on our screen over the last 24 hours repeatedly, it's been up there for a while now, that george papadopoulos, the former advisor to the campaign, made this pitch to then candidate trump at the meeting that he could set up this meeting between trump and russian president vladimir putin. also in the room was then senator, and now attorney general, jeff sessions. we told you a couple days ago that, yes, this was brought up in the meeting and that sessions shut it down. but the man in between sessions and papadopoulos in the picture there, j.d. gordon, a former national security official for the trump campaign, he is now confirming to cnn that at that

meeting then candidate trump heard out george papadopoulos. in the words of j.d. gordon, he heard him out. that is very important, because that is not what the white house is telling us. i asked the white house press secretary sarah sanders about this yesterday, whether the president recalls that kind of conversation going on at that meeting. here's what happened. >> getting back to george papadopoulos, does the president recall at that march 31, 2016 meeting of his national security advisory board, mr. papadopoulos suggesting the meeting between then candidate trump and vladimir putin? does he recall that? >> no, i don't believe he does. >> reporter: so there you have sarah sanders saying she doesn't believe that the president remembers having that conversation, being involved in that conversation, hearing out george papadopoulos. but anderson, look at what the president said at his first full news conference while in office, this was on february 16th earlier this year, really the only full news conference -- full official news conference that he's had as president.

he was asked this critical question about whether or not he was aware of people inside the campaign having contacts with the russians, and here's how that played out. >> can you say whether you are aware that anyone who advised your campaign had contacts with russia during the course of the election? >> well, i told you, general flynn obviously was dealing. so that's one person. but he was dealing -- as he should have been. >> during the election? >> no, nobody that i know of. >> so you're not aware of any contact during the course of the election? >> how many times do i have to answer this question? >> can you just say yes or no? >> russia is a ruse. >> reporter: so there you go, anderson. the president there saying at that news conference that he was not aware of any contacts. anderson, we now have an official with the trump campaign, j.d. gordon, saying that then candidate trump was in the room with the now attorney general jeff sessions hearing out george papadopoulos proposing this meeting between then candidate trump and russian president vladimir putin. and, anderson, this is a critical question.

remember, january 11th that infamous press conference during the transition at trump tower, that was the question i was trying to ask when he called me and the rest of us fake news. i was trying to ask that question, did any of your associates with the campaign have contacts with the russians, and he would just not answer that question at that press conference. but as you saw at that february 16th press conference, he did go on to say, no, he did not believe or he was aware of any contacts with russians. clearly we do know, officially now, on the record from one person in the room at the meeting that attempts were made and that then candidate trump heard him out. >> appreciate that. now, attorney general jeff sessions, his account under oath of campaign contacts with russia and how former campaign aide carter page's congressional testimony today may have cast fresh doubt on it. cnn's manu raju has that and joins us now from the capitol. so explain what carter page said today regarding his interactions with jeff sessions. >> reporter: for more than 6 1/2 hours carter page did testify behind closed doors on the

russia investigation. and one of the questions that the house members asked him was about this july 2016 trip he took to russia. now, page said that had nothing to do with the campaign. it was a speech he delivered overseas. but he was asked about that trip and whether or not he informed anybody about traveling to russia, and he did disclose to members of the committee that he told jeff sessions, then the senator from alabama and a top campaign surrogate -- he told sessions that he was, in fact, going to go travel to russia the following month. now, this is significant because sessions has said repeatedly under oath in his testimony before capitol hill he was not aware of any interactions between russians and anyone associated with the trump campaign. he even flatly denied communications that occurred. he was asked directly in a june hearing by senator joe manchin of the senate intelligence committee whether or not carter page himself had met with any

russian officials during the campaign season, and at that time jeff sessions said, i don't know. so he was informed of this meeting by carter page. now page told me that he mentioned this in passing. it happened at a dinner with the capitol hill club near the capitol with members of the national security team -- the trump national security team. and mike conway, the top republican who's investigating the russia issue, said he didn't see anything nefarious in jeff sessions' actions here. he says it's understandable why he may not remember it. but still a lot of questions today, anderson, about why jeff sessions had not disclosed this and other contacts with russian officials given questions that persisted. >> it comes on the heels of the questions regarding sessions meetings with george papadopoulos, of course. >> reporter: yeah, that's right. and as jim mentioned, jeff sessions was at the meeting when papadopoulos floated the idea of a putin/trump meeting and we're told by a person in the room

that sessions rejected that meeting from actually taking place. so the question is, again from democrats and republicans that i spoke to today, why didn't jeff sessions disclose this? democrats calling on him to testify again before congress and explain what happened, to amend his testimony. but even some top republicans today telling me today perhaps they'd want to look into this further. senator chuck grassley, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, said, quote, he's looking into it. and john cornyn, the number two republican in the senate who sits on two of the key committees, also told me this is something that's a legitimate question to explore and they want to get more information about that. so the question is not going away, anderson. >> manu, appreciate that. now the jared kushner story. what his latest actions concerning special counsel mueller may reveal. evan perez joins us with that. so he handed over documents. can you explain what the documents? >> reporter: well, anderson, sources tell us that jared kushner voluntarily turned over documents that he had in his possession from the campaign and the transition, and these

related to any contacts with russia. these documents that are similar to the ones that kushner had given to congressional investigators. now, this all comes as investigators have begun asking witnesses about kushner's role -- possible role in the firing of fbi director james comey. we also know that even before the special counsel mueller was appointed in may, the fbi had begun looking at kushner's failure to disclose russia contacts when he submitted his security clearance application, what's known as an sf-86 form. those are all documents the fbi had in their possession long before mueller got there. >> why is the special counsel interested in his role in the comey firing? >> reporter: well, we're told that investigators have asked witnesses about kushner's role in the firing, and we've heard different accounts from sources about why that was. some say kushner was the driver of the president's decision. others say that he simply didn't oppose it, and it was something the president had already made his mind up about. sources close to the white house say based on what they know at this point, anderson, kushner is not a target of this investigation.

>> how significant is this? >> reporter: well, you know, the fact that mueller's team is asking questions about kushner is a sign that the investigators have now reached into the inner circle of the president. and then extending beyond the 2016 campaign to actions actually taken by the white house officials is significant. a white house official says that mueller's team's questions about kushner is not a surprise. they say that kushner would be on a long list of people they'd be asking about. a lawyer for kushner did not comment for the story and the white house declined to comment. >> evan perez, appreciate that. a lot to discuss. i want to bring in the panel, molly ball, ana navarro, ed martin, asher negapa, brian lanza, and michael zeldin. michael, let's start with you. there's a lot of moving parts on this. given your experience with mueller, what stands out to you today based on all that's happened? >> well, what stands out most is the president of the united states cannot go under oath. that his disconnected stories over the course of these months that we've been following this

create for him the possibility of a perjury trap if he goes under oath. and i think that ty cobb and john dowd know this. i think that's his personal greatest liability -- >> can he avoid going under oath at some point? >> no, probably not. but they'll try to stretch it out as long as they possibly can so they know as much as they possibly can so they can create a narrative that hopefully he can stick to as a witness. >> are you saying he can't go under oath because he's not being truthful or he can't go under oath because he may not recall or he doesn't have the ability to recall all of these moving parts? >> i think he can't tell the truth. that's what i'm saying. i think that he can't go under oath from a legal jeopardy standpoint because he doesn't tell the truth with respect to what he knows. and that is a problem. and if you're ty cobb or john dowd, you have to make sure that the president is protected. and the way you protect him is to keep him from testifying

under oath, if possible, or at least have him testify under oath at the very end so you know as much as you can about people -- what people have said and you can create a narrative that you can stick to that's truthful. >> what do you think of that? >> i think the fact they're getting kushner's take on what happened with the comey firing makes it pretty clear that mueller has an obstruction case on the president and he intends to build it. remember, obstruction is when you take an action which may in itself actually be legal but you do it for corrupt reasons. you do it for reasons that you know are wrong. and that's difficult to prove. it's hard to get into somebody's mind. mueller is many things, but he's not a mind reader. so he's going to go to things that were said and done and written before and after. this is an administration that has very loose fingers. we know just from these russian e-mails or whatever, that they are not careful about --

>> this is like loose lips. >> loose lips. we know the president himself tweets. half of the obstruction case has been created by the president himself against himself. so this tells me -- >> so kushner is of interest because not only his entire role in the campaign and financial dealings of his own that may be an issue, but in terms of the comey firing and also on the flight where they're crafting the letter for donald trump jr. he's involved. >> that's right. so here's where the russia ties come in. if there are connections between kushner and russia and don junior and all of these things, that creates a motive for trump to want to make this go away. so, again, those contacts will help bolster mueller's case of obstruction against the president. as will any financial shenanigans that may have been happening in the past. but all of these give a vested interest on the part of the

president to want this investigation to go away, which will help mueller in his obstruction case. >> just to follow-up on that. to my point that the president is having trouble telling the truth. the air force one story that was put forth initially about the june 9th meeting was just not true. and if he said that under oath to mueller, the initial story that i had nothing to do with it, i don't know anything about it, that would be a lie. that would be an actionable false statement for which papadopoulos tells us you can go to jail for several years. that's the greatest risk for the president. >> ed? >> i'm almost stunned to listen to this. i mean, we're speculating about things that didn't happen, might happen. you have him on perjury charges. today's news is we have a junior staffer, who says in a meeting that he was big timing, trying to say, i'll set up a meeting with putin, and everyone said don't bother.

i don't know if anyone here's been on a campaign -- ana has. especially a big campaign. she's been on bigger ones. there's lots of people in the room trying to big time and say, i'll do this, i'll do that, i've got donors, or whatever. so we're taking that and we're going all the way forward -- >> how do you know he's big timing? because he actually did have contact with the professor. >> well, you can see it. and they've all said that no one did anything with it. the fact it's not remembered by anybody is an indication that this was a guy who was trying to -- my argument is -- >> it seems like it's remembered by this guy j.d. gordon who was sitting there. >> right. but my argument -- okay. he's another junior staffer, but i mean the fact that trump and sessions don't believe it is as likely as this idea that they sat there and said, let's go to russia. oh, no, we won't tell anyone about it. i mean, they don't remember that conversation of some staffer and now we're all the way back to some kind of convoluted theory of perjury. i've never heard anyone talk about that -- >> the president does not tell the truth and under oath has a history of under oath not telling the truth. in his lawsuit against tim o'brien, he was demonstrably

lying dozens of times. >> whatever we have in the past that we want to point to that says now, therefore, that what's true is a russia conspiracy, there's no evidence of russia impact in the election. there's now kind of a hunt on by mueller to think that jared kushner -- look, they were interviewed before, i think it was important, anderson, on the show with schwartz, he said mueller will get him. not on anything to do with russia, but he'll get him on something from his past, financial. if that's the goal stated by mueller or anyone else, that's a problem. this is a coup of the american people's election. >> ana? >> well, first of all, mueller has not stated that, right. so when we're talking about speculation, that is speculation on your part. i have been on big campaigns. i've never seen coffee boys be able to have direct communication with campaign managers or sit around the table with the top executives of the campaign. i think what this tells us, as we sit here trying to read tea leaves, is just how thorough,

focussed, concentrated bob mueller is. he's not paying attention to the noise around him. he has amassed an impressive entourage, an impressive team of the best prosecutors and investigators in this country. he is peeling away the layers of this onion and somebody is going to end up crying. >> as a nonlegal expert, right, not a prosecutor, not a lawyer, i have no idea what, if any, case mueller might be trying to build. but from the standpoint of a political observer, and a trump observer, it's very clear that some of trump's most sensitive areas are under the microscope right now. and that's part of what a prosecutor does, is put pressure on areas that he knows are sensitive, right. so the fact that he's looking into old financial dealings, things from long before the campaign, and the white house will tell you, look, all of this stuff that manafort and gates are being indicted for are way before they ever took up with trump, that's true. but what trump may be hearing from that is, they're looking at old tax returns -- >> it was also allegedly going

on during the campaign. there was outreach to russian oligarchs about briefings on the campaign and things like that. >> the activities in the indictment, for the most part -- the stuff they're looking at with the activities in ukraine had nothing to do with the trump campaign itself -- >> except for the part about the republican convention, that manafort managed, where the republican platform, specifically on ukraine was changed to benefit the benefactors of paul manafort. so there's a connection there. >> we've got to take a quick break. we'll get brian in on this as well. the president made remarks to a radio station. tonight we'll play you those. and later, new remarks from the president on immigrants after this week's attack here and the controversy that he may be causing ahead. we'll talk about that. ibut they never loved me back., it was one complicated relationship. so i came up with o, that's good! a new line of comfort sides with a nutritious twist, we snuck some yummy cauliflower into our mashed potatoes.

but you'll only taste the love. see what i mean? oh yeah! comfort food that loves ya back. o, that's good! ♪o, that's good! o, that's good! ♪ well, lik-oh!st of you, i j-very nice.a house. now i'm turning into my dad. i text in full sentences. i refer to every child as chief. this hat was free. what am i supposed to do, not wear it? next thing you know, i'm telling strangers defense wins championships. -well, it does. -right?

why is the door open? are we trying to air condition the whole neighborhood? at least i bundled home and auto on an internet website, progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto. i mean, why would i replace this? it's not broken. the president's weighing in tonight on the type of russia investigation he would like to see. speaking on washington's, wmal radio, when asked about leaks and hillary clinton, he lamented his limited options. >> the saddest thing is that

because i'm the president of the united states i am not supposed to be involved with the justice department, i'm not supposed to be involved with the fbi. i'm not supposed to be doing the kinds of things that i would love to be doing, and i am very frustrated by that. >> back now with the panel. brian, we didn't get to hear from you. what do you make of the day's developments today? >> i guess there's three. we'll go one by one. what we learned about jared is he's fully cooperating, he volunteered the information, same information he volunteered to all the congressional committees looking into this russia stuff, he's been transparent, and i think that's what you want. that's not certainly somebody who's hiding anything. that's somebody who is focussed on the president's agenda. >> although a number of his declaration forms did have to be amended multiple times. >> sure. and others will be amended as they go forward with other people. the fact is he amended them. he didn't stick to whatever was there. he clearly acknowledged that a mistake was made and he amended them. he didn't say anything different from that. and i think that's what we have to look at. as for whether the president

should go on -- you know, whether he should be put through -- asked questions by the investigator, i think the president knows what the stakes are and i think he's going to the answer all of those questions honestly. as somebody who worked on the campaign, there was -- you know, i sort of sit here and i get -- it's rather obnoxious to hear everybody talk about this russia collusion when you know the facts just don't bear out. when we know the fact that there's only campaign that hired a foreign national, that coordinated with the russians to get involved in this campaign, and that was the clinton campaign. you can't deny those facts. now you have papadopoulos -- >> but were you involved with cambridge analytica and their -- you don't know what went on there? >> you're right, i don't know what went on there. >> and on air force one when they wrote that later -- >> hired a foreign national to coordinate with the russians, that's what we do know -- >> but again, on air force one, you were not on air force one -- >> correct. >> -- when that conversation about coming up with a reason for donald trump jr. so there's a lot going on -- >> but neither was anyone on the panel. >> i'm talking about my campaign experience and i'm talking about the facts that exist right now. the facts are what they are.

you have a lot of sort of conjecture of what the trump campaign did or what the trump campaign didn't. you have a vendor who reached out to assange, who not -- we didn't know anything about it. reached out and assange turned them down. but when you look at it compared to what else exists, is we have one campaign -- >> were you aware, during the campaign, if papadopoulos had this conversation with the russian professor and had been in contact with paul manafort about it? >> no. >> so there was stuff going on in the campaign that other people would not be aware of. >> yes. but let's look at what the facts are. we know that papadopoulos, george papadopoulos, he's now a convicted felon. he's a convicted liar. he lied to the fbi. it's not like nobody knows not to lie to the fbi. there's been enough information out there that this investigation is going on that everybody is going to say, the way that mueller is going to get you is by lying to the fbi, and he still chose to lie. >> you have a good point. why would george papadopoulos lie to the fbi? michael, you worked with mueller. anybody who's watched a cop show and knows that -- >> they haven't been watching "matlock".

>> i think that he thought -- i'm reading into his mind, which i'm not very good at. but i think he thought he could either, one, get away with it, or, two, thought that he was protective of the institution he worked for and may want to work for because it makes no sense objectively, why would you lie when the fbi asks you a question. he had to have some rationale for it. usually i think it's because they think they'll get away with it. >> might be because he thought he was a small fish, you know, in this big pond where there's so many people with much bigger names and much bigger roles that are being taken a look at. one of the interesting aspects about the jared kushner angle is they cannot deny jared kushner. they denied practically everybody else. papadopoulos because his name just rolls off the tongue, oh, no, we don't know who he is. he was a coffee boy. manafort, he had a minor role, he was just around for a few months. rick? who's that one? rick who?

with jared kushner, you can't deny jared kushner. >> can i make a comment on what we heard the president say in that interview? i think it's important and i think it's a setup for what we may see, i know schwartz said it. we're coming towards a crisis, i suspect, at least a crisis of understanding. if the president of the united states is not in charge of the justice department, if he's not in charge of the attorney general, if he's not in charge of that, then no one is. then we're going to have j. edgar hoover on steroids going forward. and my point is this -- >> do you want the president of the united states to be able to thwart the court of justice? >> no. it's not the courts of justice. i want him to be the president of the executive branch. it's a little bit like today when we get to the next subject. >> so you don't want the fbi to be independent? >> they're not independent. >> ed, you might be able to get exiled in cuba, maybe venezuela, even the philippines, if you want that kind of dictatorship -- >> it's not a dictatorship. it's exactly the opposite. >> of course, it is. >> it's exactly the opposite. >> what you're saying, you want

the president of the united states to be in charge of the fbi in terms of getting involved with the investigations in the doj? >> that is the constitution. i want the constitution. >> i will tell you, that is very scary. particularly when you have a president that goes on vendettas. >> but wait -- may i, anderson, very quickly? the irs -- there was a big question the irs targeted people when obama was in that were in conservative groups. that was shown to be somewhat true. that is obama -- somewhat true. >> mostly false. >> okay. so one infringement on people's rights is okay with you -- let me finish. let me finish. but either we have a constitution that allows an election to be meaningful, or we have a country run by bureaucrats, we have a country run by the deep state. i don't think we do. i think we have a -- >> so anybody -- so you want any administration that comes in to be able to determine who should get investigated? you don't want there to be a permanent class of professionals who work for the fbi, who work for the department of justice? >> ultimately, when the fbi does something wrong and when the justice department does something wrong, who's responsible for that? who is accountable for that?

these are appointed officials. so you go to the elected official who's accounted for that. >> right. that's the process. that's the constitution. >> so the president is in charge of the executive branch, and with respect to policy he sets policy for the justice department and for the fbi. with respect -- >> that's not the constitution. >> yes. >> no, it's not. >> let him finish. >> that is the manner in which, by policy for 50 years, the president interfaces with the bureau and with the justice department and all other branches of the executive with respect to defining the policy of the executive branch. what he cannot do, by policy, is interfere with specific criminal cases. and what the president's mal interview seemed to lament was that he couldn't do that. no one prevents him from running the executive branch as a policy matter. but policy and good judgment and good government prevents him

from interfering in particular criminal matters, especially when he and his family are members of the interrogated. >> let's continue this discussion. it's an important one. we'll pick it up right after the break.

fothere's a seriousy boomers virus out there that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. one in 30 boomers has hep c, yet most don't even know it. because it can hide in your body for years without symptoms, and it's not tested for in routine blood work. the cdc recommends all baby boomers get tested. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us it's time to get tested. ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. it's the only way to know for sure. ...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy.

throughout history, the one meal when we come together, break bread, share our day and connect as a family. [ bloop, clicking ] and connect, as a family. just, uh one second voice guy. [ bloop ] huh? hey? i paused it. bam, family time. so how is everyone? find your awesome with xfinity xfi and change the way you wifi.

at the top of the hour, jim acosta reported that then candidate trump heard out of his foreign policy advisor george papadopoulos pitch a meeting with vladimir putin. now, this is what the president said when asked about campaign contact with russia back in february. >> can you say whether you are aware that anyone who advised your campaign had contacts with russia during the course of the election? >> well, i told you, general flynn, obviously, was dealing. so that's one person. but he was dealing as he should have been. >> during the election? >> no. no. nobody that i'm know of. >> you're not aware of any contacts durgtd course during the the course of the election? >> how many times do i have to answer this question? >> can you just say yes or no?

>> back now with the panel. is there a contradiction there? >> maybe. i don't think we know, right. i think there's a lot we don't know. there is a lot we're trying to read tea leaves on and speculate about. it is clear that the president is extremely sensitive about this. he's very obsessed with this investigation. we know that from what he's said, from his tweets and the way he tends to react to this. i think that's what the people around him who are trying to sort of keep him under control and not do anything rash, what they fear is he may act on impulse. that he may get so annoyed by something he sees as a nothing investigation, whether it is or not, that he will sort of fly off the handle because he's an unpredictable personality and because this does strike at one of his deepest fears, the idea ta his election win could be seen as illegitimate. >> do you think he should fire mueller? >> i don't think he should fire

mueller. i think he should watch mueller and ask rod rosenstein or jeff sessions, whoever is the ones who work for him, if mueller is far afield. if what schwartz said in your last segment, he's going far afield, then we have a rogue prosecutor, i'm not saying he is. but the idea we're going to let this guy continue to tie up the white house and look backwards, instead of the question. the narrow question is did the russians influence the election, the answer is foris no, didn't change votes, and then what happened, let's goed forward. i don't think, by the way, there's any reason he couldn't fire comey so i don't think that's a proper area to be digging into either. i think the president has a right to do that. again we're in a constitutional question. but this is a problem. i mean, again, i don't know why we think it's okay to have the government -- he won the election. he gets to be president. >> was ken starr a rogue prosecutor? >> i think why the independent

statute was allow today expire by both parties, was different -- see, he was constitutionally an independent counsel. that was passed by the congress. this is a special counsel in the justice department. if the president goes to far, then the way it's addressed is through the courts. you go to the courts and say hey you went too far you're breaking the law on this, how you're handling this, or there's a political solution, the election in three years or impeachment. those are the way the constitution is set up. >> can i give you my impression of what i think is the difference between what you said and what the law sets out. the regulations that govern mueller, which are presidential regulations, that the president can change if he wants to change them. provide that mueller can be fired only for cause. rod rosenstein gave him a mandate, he has to operate in that mandate or he has to go back to rosenstein to get that

expanded or rosenstein can take over the investigation himself. so the system is working just fine. >> i just said that. >> nobody is rogue. the independent counsel statute doesn't provide any more protection than the current regulations do. i was an independent counsel just before starr. i have no doubt but that this regulatory structure works just as well -- >> you have to be clear to the viewers. the independent counsel was a law passed by and signed by the president. so the president couldn't disregard that under the constitution. he can, as you pointed out, all the authority of all the special counsel and rosenstein comes from the president. it comes from the executive. >> i have to get another quick break in. brian you didn't have a chance. >> i would say, you know, everybody says should the president be aggressive against mueller, i say it's important to remember at the end of the day this is a political trial, the information is going to be sent back to congress and congress will decide what to do. so you have to deal with it politically and not criminally. i'm not going to tell the president's lawyers they're

doing anything wrong but there's an important component that you can't forget the political part of this. and if we're going to play politics with it, we should more aggressive in highlighting the aggression behind it. such as the dream team of lawyers, i would call it the dream team of democratic donors. but maybe it's mueller's approach saying if these guys look through everything and can't find anything, that's proof nothing exists. >> more ahead with the panel. the president calls on congress to end the program that brought the new york terror suspect to this country. he says the program is unsafe. we'll take a look at that ahead. so this one says ...

... dealership has great customer service ... (muffled voice) ... and has great deals! ... and has ... ... complimentary donuts. ... that's the one! cars.com. over 5 million expert and user reviews. man: for every social occasion.ntial so the the broom said, "sorry i'm late. i over-swept." [ laughter ] yes, even the awkward among us deserve some laughter. and while it's okay to nibble in public, a lady only dines in private. try the name your price tool from progressive. it gives you options based on your budget. uh-oh. discussing finances is a big no-no. what, i'm helping her save money! shh! men are talking. that's it, i'm out. taking the meatballs. if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view,

it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

today the president said, in the wake of the terror attack in new york that killed eight people -- he's calling on congress to end the diversity immigrant visa program calling it, quote, a disaster for our country. >> this program grants visas not on a basis of merit but because applicants are randomly selected in an annual lottery. and the people put in that lottery are not that country's finest. we know that the program presents significant vulnerabilities to our national security. it's a very unsafe program for our country and we're not going to allow it to happen. >> back with the panel. i just want to point out yesterday sarah huckabee-sanders said there was no vetting of the

people in the program, which is not actually the case. they're vetted as much as anyone else is vetted who comes to the country. you can argue it's not strong enough or we shouldn't have the program at all. that's to be discussed. what do you think of the program? >> it was a bipartisan program when it was developed. >> a lot of people have been trying to get rid of it. >> absolutely. let's just make sure -- i take umbrage as a new york er that it got blamed of chuck schumer. i think we need to be sure of the facts of the evolution. i don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to have a debate, an appropriate policy debate, about different programs in immigration. but this isn't that. this is immediately, in the wake of a terrorist attack in the city that suffered the worst terrorist attack in history, moving immediately to kind of rock em sock em to blame each

other politics, a. b it's drawing conclusions based on the program that this killer got in through. none of that is helpful, none of that is thoughtful, and none of that, i believe, will address the problems as it relates to terrorists coming into new york. but what it also really did, and i want to be clear. democrats can be criticized of this just as much as republicans. in the wake of a tragedy, the president and other elected have done it too didn't take on the job of uniting us, bringing us together. he took on the mode of splitting us apart. look we're new york. we will always take care of ourselves and we will always push on. but that's not right for america. and it clouds this whole conversation, which is an important one. >> bryan, what do you think of this program? >> both sides do it all the time, take advantage of the dynamics to push a public policy. the democrats are guilty of it, i guess the republicans are guilty of it. but what's wrong with reviewing our immigration laws that

protect americans. >> nothing's wrong with it. but what's wrong with it is doing it moments after people were plowed down. a stone's throe -- >> when you hear the president say the people in this lottery are not the country's best -- >> look, there's a good argument to get rid of the lottery program. but the -- let's be clear about what trump's agenda is. donald trump, first of all, wants to cut immigration in half overall, regardless of how people come in. secondly, he wants fewer mexicans and muslims. it's obvious if you go back to the campaign, that's the agenda. that and he should be honest about that. if he wants the problem -- yeah absolutely because he proposed a muslim ban -- >> he doesn't want -- >> one at a time. >> i'll tell you why we're wrong. >> i'd like to hear why i'm wrong. >> can't hear anybody. >> nobody hears anybody. let peter finish. this then bryan go. >> the claim about chain migration is clearly aimed at the fact we have a large latino

population that is bringing in family members if you don't think that's a dog whittle to people that watch "breitbart." then you don't watch "breitbart" at all. >> no, i don't. it's the fact he was targeting mexicans i find offensive. i'm mexican, i don't feel targeted by that. >> when he attacked the judge, you didn't feel targeted by that? >> that made me very uneasy. you pointed out something. but to say blanket statements he doesn't want mexicans in here -- >> he called them rapists. >> criminals. >> he said we're going to build a wall, have a nice door that lets the people in through a proper vetting system what's wrong with that? >> ana. >> two things. first of all on the one point christine made earlier about his attack on chuck schumer was inappropriate. he attacked the mayor of san juan after the hurricane. he attacked the mayor of london

after the terrorist attack there. that's not the time to be making political points against a hometown elected official. now on the lottery visa, look i think this country, politicians have a right and a responsibility to take a look at what's best for the country. we should have a conversation about a modern immigration system. comprehensive immigration system that meets the requirements of the modern economy in america. we have the d.r.e.a.m. act that's being discussed. there's a deadline for it. we have the lottery program, that's being discussed. all of that was part of the gang of eight comprehensive immigration proposal a few years ago. it's time to have a comprehensive look at this, come up with a bipartisan proposal as that was and try to address all these issues. >> i think you're missing what's happening. americans -- you're right. that was on the table, comprehensive amnesty for illegals, rejected not only by the congress but then by the american people. the president ran -- donald trump ran on a message from the time he came down the

es kay lay or the, he said -- and the americans brought into it, we're sick of a system that allows these people to come in and kill us, we're sick of it. however the vetting system happened, we're sick of it. and when he says we're going to change the system, he's turning up the pressure on politicians that have shown that they're spineless and the people are sick of it. the hashness of it and all that, hey, eight people are dead because of a system that's broken. >> christine? i find it the greatest example of hypocrisy, eight people are dead, appears to be killed by a muslim, immediately attack the group of people. but when a white man -- should we not let people go from florida go to nevada because of what that man did at las vegas -- >> it's not the same. >> it is the same. the president picks out people -- i am talking. the president picks out people who he believes will easily be

hated, that other people will turn against and he rips us apart. he is a hypocrite. if he was going to be straight across the board, we would look at issues in the way ana said. all he wants to do is engender fear. he doesn't want to the find solutions. he said nothing about las vegas and the man who perpetrated that. we have to go. house republicans unveiling their tax plans. there's already push back. i'll speak with one republican congressman who says he's not on board. find out why in a moment. last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. at&t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques. remote moisture sensors use a reliable network to tell them when and where to water. so that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. china. oh ... he got there. that's the power of and.

[notification tone] ♪ i love your vest. your crocheted purses have wonderful eyes. ♪ in the modern world, an app can help you find your perfect match. and with esurance, coverage counselor® can help you find great coverage that's a perfect match too. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

house republicans released their new tax bill today. the headlines are it lowers the number of tax brackets from seven to four, increases the standard deduction and the child tax credit, reduces the corporate tax rate. it would also eliminate the state and local tax deduction and for that reason not every house republican is on board including congressman lee zeldin of new york who joins us now. congressman, thanks for being with us.

can you explain just why you oppose this bill and what you'd like to see changed? >> so i am an american but i'm also a new yorker repth a new york congressional district. i'm well aware that if i'm not representing my home state i can't expect some other member in some other state to represent my home state for me. i look at the proposal to eliminate the state and local tax deduction as a geographic redistribution of wealth. you're taking money from a state like new york in order to help finance deeper tax cuts in other places. there are many good things inside of the proposal, but on balance, while i'm pleased that there was some progress with bringing back the property tax deduction up to 10,000, that's good progress, but it's not enough. so we're going to keep fighting for my home state and fighting for my middle income, lower income constituents looking for the maximum relief. i want tax relief not just for americans everywhere else but also back home in new york. >> so is that something you

actually think you can get movement on? >> well, we've already seen movement, because the original proposal was to completely eliminate the state and local tax deduction. it was good progress to get to this -- keeping the property tax deduction up to 10,000, but you still have on the table a proposal to completely eliminate the state and local income tax. it's not lost on me that one of the reasons why our state and local tax deduction is as high as it is is because our state and local taxes are as high as they are. it is important for all levels of government to be working on tax relief. for those who say they're subsidizing new york city, new york is a net contributor. and if you look at tax policy and spending policy, new york sends more money to washington than we get back. and that's with the deduction. is. >> so passing a comprehensive tax reform bill is difficult to do even in the best of times. it hasn't been done for decades. do you think the republican party is united enough to get this done on the president's timeline, which is by christmas?

>> i do. even though i am opposed to this bill in its current form, i'll tell you looking at my colleagues today, they were nearly all unified with regards to this effort. it's going to the ways and means committee next week. it's supposedly going to the floor the week after. so we'll see as it goes through the process where all of the votes lie and how the whip count looks. i'm announced as a no. there are a few others who are announced as a no. i would love to be part of getting this bill as close to perfect and be able to vote yes. i'm certainly not there yet, though. >> i mean, during the effort to repeal obamacare, the house and senate gop were pursuing different strategies. no bill ended up passing. might that happen again with this effort because some republicans senators have said they're going to work on their own version. >> well, i think the house is going to be passing a tax reform bill. i just can't speak for the senate as it relates to just about anything this year. >> yeah. >> they have -- the senate has passed dozens of bills that have gotten to the president's desk, bills that have also passed the

house. i would say the house has passed well over 300 bills. many of which were bipartisan bills. many of those bills actually were very overwhelmingly bipartisan, but as far as this bill getting through the senate, i can't speak for them. >> congressman lee zeldin, i appreciate your time and i wish you best. thank you. >> thank you. >> up next, this year's top ten cnn heroes, incredible men and wem doing their part to make our world a better place. we're going into the deuce you to each of them and tell you how to vote for the hero of the year. we'll be right back. [ glass shatters ] property damage? that's what general liability's for. what?! -injured employee? -ow. workers' comp helps you pay for a replacement. what's happening? this is carla. how's it going? and if anything comes up, our experts are standing by. ♪

boo! fothere's a seriousy boomers virus out there that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. one in 30 boomers has hep c, yet most don't even know it. because it can hide in your body for years without symptoms, and it's not tested for in routine blood work. the cdc recommends all baby boomers get tested. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us it's time to get tested. ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. it's the only way to know for sure. he. tonight i have the honor of showcasing the 2017 top ten cnn heroes. they are men and women who

inspire us to reach out and help one another big and small. now it's up to you to help us decide who is going to win the top honor. cnn hero of the year. and $100,000 to continue their work. here are the top ten finalists. >> you guys need any meals? >> from missouri, pitmaster stan hays and his team of volunteers have responded to dozens of natural disasters providing nourishment and comfort to survivors and first responders. samir lakhani from pittsburgh recycles and distributes discarded bars of soap from hotels across cambodia, improving hygiene and creating jobs. amid violence in chicago police officer jennifer maddox gives young people on the south side a safe haven to learn, grow, and succeed. mama rosie mashale is raising a generation of abandoned and sick children in her impoverished south african community. many have lost parents to aids. iraq war veteran andrew manzi's free surf camps on south

carolina beaches bring therapy and healing to fellow vets and their families. in memory of her son leslie morrisette provides computers and robots to children battling serious illnesses keeping them connected to school and friends. >> she is walking. >> mona patel helps fellow amputees rebuild their lives through peer support, resources and transformative athletic activities. kha lichlt sweeney's books before boxing program provides mentorship and academic tutoring guiding kids from detroit's toughest neighborhoods toward a brighter future. in southern california aaron valencia teaches car restoration to young people in need, giving them trade skills, guidance and hope. and finally, amy wright through her non-profit coffee shop in north carolina, she's creating jobs and community for young people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. well, now it's time for you to decide who will be named 2017's hero of the year and receive

$100,000 to help continue their work. you can go to cnnheroes.com to vote for the hero that inspires you the most. i'll announce the winner with my friend and co-host kelly ripa on our live tribute show sunday december 17th. thanks for watching "360." time to hand things over to don lemon. "cnn tonight" starts right now. breaking news on russia. on about five different stories to do with russia. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. the white house would like you to believe the russia investigation is wrapping up, nothing to see here. but this is no nothingburger. let me tell you. this is a great big heaping serving of very uncomfortable questions for the president's inner circle. there's a lot here. sow may want to get a pen and a piece of paper and take some notes. remember way back in february when president trump said this? >> how many times do i have to answer this question? >> can you just answer -- >> russia is a ruse. i know you have to get up and ask a question. so important. russia is a ruse. i have nothing to do with russia. to the