thank you so much as we root for her and these next big steps she has coming. thank you. >> thank you. >> one remarkable story of so many coming from that night. thanks for joining us tonight, ac 360 starts right now. good evening it's about a hot week in the russian investigation. it's been two indictments in the russia probe. it doesn't look like the end. what does seem clear tonight as the amount of testimony documentary evidence grows it will get harder and harder for anyone involved to tell flat out falsehoods. here's the president back in february. >> can you say whether you are aware whether anyone who advised your campaign had contacts with russia during the course of the

election? >> well i told you general flynn was dealing. >> during the election? >> no nobody that i know of. >> since then we've learned jeff sessions had, paul manafort had, also george papadopoulos, that's at least those that we know about so far. papadopoulos is the men of then candidate advisely panel who pled guilty of course. here he is in last year's meeting with mr. trump. we also know papadopoulos pitched the idea setting is up with putin and mr. trump heard him out. today leaving on the asia trip mr. trump said he didn't remember. >> i don't remember much about that meeting. it was an unimportant meeting. >> this is the president who just recently said his memory could never fail him, that's how good it is. >> there's no hesitation, one f the great memories of all time.

>> as we said though, it is not just the president's statements that are coming into question it's those of his attorney general and others. jim sciutto joins us with the lat latest on that. >> reporter: the president just arrived in hawaii. first, he and his associates saying no meetings with russia as you noted, that turned out to be false. then they said there was no discussion of anything untoured. that we know is false. at least some of the advisers have discussed the question of zirt on hillary clinton to be supplied by the russians. we know this is of very much special interest to the counsel. >> tonight, new revelations darken the cloud of the russian investigation. >> you don't leave that surrogates from the trump

campaign had communications with the russians, is that what you're saying? >> i did not and i'm not aware of anyone else that did. and i don't believe it happened. >> in fact court filings undersealed this week shows george papadopoulos who pleaded guilty to making false statements to investigators, suggested in a march 15 meeting that trump meet vladimir putin. then later reads a trump surrogate adviser rejected the idea. sessions informed he was traveling to russia during a presidential campaign. papadopoulos's account is placing another trump adviser under scrutiny. sam clovis who served his deputy

campaign chairman. the supervisor responded encouraging papadopoulos to make the trip. papadopoulos's account was unsealed the same day as indictment so former campaign chairman paul manafort and his deputy rick gates in religious to their lobbying work for the campaign. to hide the income laundered the company through quote, united states, cooperations, partnerships and bank accounts. manafort and gates pled not to charges. >> jim, i understand you're learning more about paul manafort and rick gates and when a trial might be. >> that's right there's a proposed date for may 7.

the estimate will take at least three weeks for trial. keep in mind that'll take it into the summer of 2018, which is of course before the very important midterm elections. we know the president has wanted the investigation to end this cloud hanging over him to disappear. but for manafort andgates it will continue into the next year. >> thank you jim. david, it's hard to believe that four days ago manafort turned himself in the week with found out about papadopoulos. >> yes, i think the papadopoulos element was the one that jarred everyone around the president, because where as they were expecting the manafort indictment and perhaps gates, they were comfortable that that was about other matters, at least on the surface it was about something that had nothing to do with the campaign. then papadopoulos came along and as part of his proffer and his

plea, mentioned others in the campaign who he talked to or at least referred to other campaign officials. and that promises trouble down the line. this is how prosecutions work. you start at the corners of this and you work toward the center of the puzzle. i'm sure that that is one of the reasons why the president has been so outspoken this week about other matters and pointing in other directions. there is a great deal of anxiety around that white house right now. >> we also get the sense that we have only seen a tiny portion of what special counsel mueller already has, the proverbial tip of the iceberg. >> yeah, this is the way these things work. they take time. everyone is impatient to know how the thing ends. whether you look at all the major investigations they tend not to unfold that way. oftentimes one thing leads to

another. as you work your way up. now, we don't know where it will lead but clearly it's not going to stop with george papadopoulos or with manafort or gates. there's going to be more. i think there seems to be broad agreement on that. >> and the president necessarily turned up the volume there week on his calls for secretary clinton. would you imagine the calls are only going to increase if. >> absolutely. one over the habits of donald trump is when there's an inconvenience blaze over here he starts one over here. all week long he's been hammering on the justice system itself relative to the events in new york and the terrorist attack, they're calling our justice system a laughing stalk. starting last night till this morning demanding that the justice department open up investigations on hillary clinton and others.

and, you know i think this is his reaction to the growing intensity of the mueller investigation. but the thing, anderson, that gets me is here's a president whose so willfully and so enthusiastically kploits passions around the flag, passions around the national anthem. but doesn't apparently appreciate what those symbols stand for. one over the first important things that separates us from autocracies is the fact that presidents of the united states can't order the justice system to go after -- he said they ought to go after hillary clinton -- to go after his political opponents. there's been for time in memorial a separation between presidents and their justice departments and the fbi. when i was in the warehouse i couldn't contact the justice

department, the fbi nor did i try. if i had an issue it was plain, you go to the white house counsel, he would be the repository of your request, he'd follow up on things. president was very cautious when i was in the white house about commenting on matters that were under investigation. so this is a complete departure from tradition and it's a dangerous one. as this thing intensifies god knows where it's going to lead. >> appreciate it. next hillary clinton's campaign speaking out for the first time about the primary was rigged. and revelations about martin luther king jr. kept secretly. we'll talk about the facts, why they were kept secret, why the fbi was correcting all this information and why j edgar hoover was still focused on dr. martin luther king.

♪ eras. they're defined by accomplishments. by victories. by those with the resourcefulness, the ingenuity, and the grit to help ensure the next energy to power our dreams, will be american energy.

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.

a silicon valley server farm. the vault to man's greatest wonders... selfies, cat videos and winking emojis. speaking of tech wonders, with the geico app you can get roadside assistance, digital id cards... or even file a claim. do that.. yeah, yeah that should work. it's not happening... just try again. uh, i think i found your problem. thanks. hmm... the award-winning geico app.

download it today. not only top democrats but president weighed in. here's his comments from today. >> you ought to look at hillary clinton and look at the new book that was just put out by donna brazil where she basically forced the dnc and stole the election from bernie. that's what you ought to take a look at. >> hillary clinton's former campaign manager speaks out. he'll join me in a bit. but first a new book that takes like. what is donna brazil claiming that prompted this reaction from donald trump? >> in new experts of her book --

who the party hired, how they spent money even before winning the nomination. we have read the documents, there is the key one here. what she's talking about isn't backed up really by what we read in these documents, we do know the dnc was broke following the obama years. the -- so they were as is allowed joint fund raising were the party. they eventually raised almost $50 million for it and they did have this agreement that they'd get for instance, input on communications director higher during the primary. in the end the dnc didn't speak to that. but this idea that there had be input on how much money will be raised and spent for general election expenses, that actually didn't happen. this document further empathizes the committee's natural yalt when it came to making debates. >> but the party was pro hillary

right even though they made this former agreement? >> absolutely. the flask rally was pro-hillary. and that's why there was an opening only for a candidate like bernie sanders who was not a established democratic candidate. it is not the key on how the field was cleared for hillary clinton. the key was on people like don fa brazil and other people. that's the strange part about this. donna was caught in wikileaks e-mail trying to help clinton out. now she issi promoting her book. this is the side of politics that grosses everyone out. >> appreciate it thanks. joining me is robby brooks.

so you heard the report, members say your party got to weigh in before the general election, was that fair? >> first of all i want to underscore some things briana said. when the dnc approached both campaigns about the agreement they were broke, they weren't going to make payroll and transfer that money to the state parties to keep them operational. they were in a really bad place. both the sanders and clinton campaign signed joint agreements. the only difference was sanders didn't raise any money and we did. >> sanders was raising money -- you guys had big money donors, sanders was getting donations from vjs and smaller donations. >> well and that would have been great. it would have been great for dnc to join with him. hillary turned over her list to dnc after the campaign was over.

it's important for those low donors to be part of the process. the -- we created the management moe of understanding what was there. it wasn't about the primary election. as briana said we were very frustrated with the dnc. the idea we had nicol over there was laughable. >> my understanding the communication position had to be field even before the primary races. >> well that's correct. this is a perfect -- >> so that wasn't just about the general election right? >> well no, it absolutely is. the purpose of the dnc while the primary's going on is to hold republicans accountable. and nobody filling that post. it was a big problem. it's something any democrat would have been worried about.

we had to fill that date, they had to hire somebody. >> but was the sanders campaign also offered the chance to enter into an agreement or they too could have a say in what the dnc was hiring? >> we were. if you look at the memo it said we as the clinton campaign acknowledge that other campaigns were welcome to in turn an agreement with the dnc of their own. we would have beyond welcomed that. more resources come into the dnc, we would have loved to partner with the sanders campaign. we had a very good working relationship with the sanders campaign particularly as the primary came to a close. they worked very closely are jeff weaver. >> clearly jeff weaver and the sanders campaign believe things were rigged against them. >> well, here's what i'll say about this. you know, politics is politics.

people have to go out and say what they need to say. i think it's dangerous to say this contest was rigged for the following reason -- >> because elizabeth mirror tan is also saying that now. >> well elizabeth and bernie sanders is an important part of our politics. we can't make the case working people in this country. we're going to stand up and fight for them, if we're fighting each other we can't do that. hillary clinton won this primary with almost 4 million votes. that's a bigger league that barack obama won over here in 2008. the idea the rank can rig a contest is laughable. here's the la thing i'll say, the caucus cost in the primary is the primary only the party. the primary parties are run by secretary of state. the caucuses won by the party bernd won overwhelmingly. if we look at what the party

managed bernie sanders won those contests, i think we won three of them and we barely won iowa. i understand, but there's no evidence to back that up. people want to be angry. >> isn't this just about donna pra cillia trying to peddle a boo book? as april yan that mentioned she gave a town hall telxt and attempted to give it to someone in the hillary clinton company. she lost her job, i view it as a betrayal of everybody that work at cnn, the fact that she did that, i don't see her in any e-mail attempting to give information to the sanders company. it seems she's cozying up to the clinton campaign.

>> i feel like this is water under the bridge. donna has served our party for many years. it was my honor to work with her -- >> do you think it was appropriate for her to do that about a town hall questions? >> i don't know the specifics of it, it sound like cnn looked into it and sought action as they saw fit. again i'm not interesting in this thing in the past. we got to move beyond 2016. we got critical midterm elections and i can't say it enough the this tax plan republicans are proposing is outrageous. that's the fight. >> i do want to ask you about the dossier because we haven't had you on the record on that. were you aware that the clinton campaign was at least funding in in part with the dnc.

john pa john pa test that says he had no idea, no one in the clinton campaign stood up and said yes, we know about this. >> i didn't sign off on the agreement, i tell you what we did know. when we started to look into donald trump's business it's this massive tree of llc's and which he will companies. we were overwhelmed and out of our league on it. i asked our lawyer and gave him a budget allocation to investigate this, particular the financial aspect. my understanding the dossier was the process funded by our campaign and republican donors and they put that together and gave it to the press. >> right. john steel was hired. after the thing was started he dropped out. were you and other people or who in the campaign was seeing the memos that john steel was

putting out? you guys are paying for opposition research, you would have been seeing the fruits of that throughout the campaign. >> well, we were getting briefings put together by the law firms with information and they wouldn't say, we've hired this guy jonathan steele. he's got sources in russia and there is information and tricks and traps -- >> christopher steele. >> yeah. what i known in the past i think it was $120,000 or some fraction of that went to this steele company. so, i don't know who else contributed to these reports -- >> but you would have been seeing -- you're saying getting briefings from the lawyer, you must have been seeing -- was it memo form z-- this interview an the person is saying this about the business dealings in

russia -- >> well when you're on a campaign you have a team and you come together and go over all this information. so our internal team ft presenting information, our lawyer was presenting information, you know and we -- we sort of learned things in pieces. i just can't attribute to what piece of information, you know came to us at one time or where it came from frankly. this campaign manager, there's a lot going on and so i just wanted to know what was important to find out. >> is there somebody at the dnc, you were the campaign manager, is there someone at the dnc at a lower level who knew about christopher steele? who didn't just know, okay we're paying this lawyer and magically this information is coming back to us who knew the nuts and bolts of gathering the information and how it's being gathered? >> i don't know the information to that. it's possible someone at the dnc knew about this. we had dozen of resources on the

campaign. one of reasons we were trying to get resources into the dnc is because we had a lot of resources working, i don't know to answer to that -- >> and for those who say this could have been some sort of collusion. if christopher steele had information from somebody from the russian government your campaign paid for -- >> they close to put what they did in the dossier, i can't speak to that. i'm happy we were able to assemble some of this information. i went on television in the weeks my colleagues went on television saying there's something wrong with russia. russia hack it had dnc. when john po december that was hacked something happened with russia. i can't speak to what fusion was doing but i'm glad we're paying

attention to it now and i wishwy could have paid more attention. news on jfk and on the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. we'll explain. and drizzled with sweet amber honey. plus the delicious classics you love, like garlic shrimp scampi. try all the shrimp you want, however you want 'em. but hurry, it ends soon. we make sure you're in the loop at every step from the moment you decide to move your money to the instant your new retirement account is funded. because when you know where you stand, things are just clearer. -♪ a little bit o' soul, yeah

breaking news coming from the archives includes a dossier on martin luther king jr. areflects then, j edgar hoover

and his suspects with dr. martin luther king. the dossier released today shows documents -- >> among 600 documents released today by the ar chives is this one, a never before seen file titled martin luther king jr., a current analysis. in 1968, includes explosives analysis about the leader who was exposed 23 days. martin luther king jr. was involved in extramarital affairs and other sexual activities that if true publicly would have been devastated to him and his moment. there are pages and pages details him and his organization. with alleged ties to kmun insist and finally details about

proprieties of dr. martin luther king. i want to stress the fbi under j edgar hoover at the time had been investigating him for years at this point in the hopes of finding damaging information and we have no way of corroborating this investigation. >> what does this have to do with the assassination of jfk? >> that's one of many questions we have tonight, anderson. considering the document has no mention of john f. kennedy or his assassination. the only clue we have is its stamped, reviewed by the fbi task force and sedated may 8, 1984. it was reviewed 23 years ago but kept secret until today. >> there are still thousands of jfk assassination documents that have not been released right? >> right. and that's unclear with what's going on with that. we know last week president trump sent out this tweet, that after strict consultation with

general kelly i will be released all jfk files owner the names and addresses of any person who was still living. they are being released on a rolling basis by the national ar clives, thousands of pages to be released so much more to come. there's a lot more ahead to cover throughout this hour and the next two hours. i want to bring in brikly and also claiborne carson. . dr. carson, what do you make of this being released, the information? and is any of it new toda you? i feel like a lot of its been out there before. >> i think the allegings that king has aired during hi life time were certainly out there.

j edgar hoover had a vendetta against king. and it started with the idea that he had ties to common kmun insist. that investigation did not produce anything of great merit. king fired the one person he felt was still involved with the organization. hi continued to have a tact with stanley who had been a contact of the kmunist party. the result of that hoover then got organization from robert kennedy to tap the phones and bug the rooms of martin luther king and that led to information about his sexual activity which hoover tried to peddle to news

media. he was pretty unsuccessful during his life time. i think what's striking about this is that this was a file that would have been -- that could have been released in 1968. and in that climate, it probably -- can hardly guess how people would have been responded to it. because it's simply an allegation but an unnamed person, an informat. and it's striking that i've gone through some of the jfk documents that were released. the fbi and other federal agencies go to great lengths to keep out the names of informants and their own activities. but, in this case it seems like what they're really doing is invading the privacy of a -- of

a person assuming that this is true, they're definitely invading the privacy of the off spring of this relationship. then again, the relationship itself, it's not -- you would -- the person that we should be asking is the informant. deficien >> yeah, doug -- >> who gave this information. >> dough brinkley one thing is interesting about this is how the public of martin luther king has changed over time. you think back to this time and what a revolutionary figure he was. we think of him through a particular lens but he was focusing on the vietnam war, poverty in america in addition to the request for social justice and civil rights. you get a sentence of the fear and concern the fbi had about him because he was such a trans formational figure.

>> absolutely. and i agree with everything that dr. carson just said. but let me add, what makes this a bombshell document is the date, march 12, 1968. knowing weeks later martin luther king jr. would be dead. did the fbi hound king to his fate. this the not a good document of the fbi. but the lead of the document is the fear the fbi has that stokely kerr, michael, and black nationalist have teamed up with dr. king in the first right christian book and -- they quote mr. king saying apparently this with this document jail's going to be the only place this spring

because there's so much violence in america. there's this fear that this summer may be a very very violent one. and their following king around in this document right up till march. i mean there's stories about sex parties in miami in 1968, some of this was almost x-rated stuff in these 23 pages of smearing of dr. king. >> when i first heard about this there was a concern something like this could harm dr. king's legacy. but when you start to look at it, it really just reflects -- seems to reflect terribly on j edgar hoover and the fbi at the time. >> well, i think again if this has been released in 1968 the fir thing anybody would have done would have been to question the source. these are anonymous informants

who are spreading dirt about martin luther king. obviously some of them are black informants who probably disagreed with king's position on the war and other things at that time. so the motivates of these people need to be questioned as well as what they're alleging about martin luther conditioning. and i think that when we look closely at this, what we see is that there is a person who is trying his best to damage martin luther king's reputation. and i wish in some ways that -- well, i wish obviously that that person had been named sod that then we can go to that person and say, well, what was the basis of this. >> cleburne carson i appreciate you being on. as we seen in months the

white house is troubled in time with the truth. press secretary sanders taking it -- we'll talk to him next. 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. 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. . to see someone in government not tell the truth isn't knew. have we now entered a new age of misinformation? the trouble with the truth goes back long before this week. everything you're about to hear in this sound bite is actually not true. >> i don't think it's appropriate to lie from the podium or any other place. so, the process has people

calling us a joke and a laughing stalk. >> he specifically said he received a phone call from the president of mexico. >> they were direct conversations not phone calls. >> so he lied he didn't receive -- >> i wouldn't say it's a lie. the conversations took place they just didn't take place over a found call he had them in person. >> and i have heard from a large number of individuals that work at the fbi that said they're very happy with the president's decision. >> the president keeps repeating this claim with the highest tax nation -- >> we are the highest tax corporate nation. >> that's not what he said, he said he was the highest tax nation. >> the highest corporate tax nation seems the sound to me. >> frank, you write that you

watched sander's statements in awe. and you miss sean spicer. >> when i watched sean spicer he'd get these looks and appear to me flustered. sarah huk l by sanders seems at piece with the depictions she peddles. and i find it disturbing. i don't see her tracking the ridicule that spicer did. we're so acustomed to being lied to and villain portrayed as victim, bad portrayed as good. and i worry, bigger than her the trump administration is lowering our standards for government. >> you think this has became normalized? >> absolutely. and it's not normal. every press secretary that we've

watched over the decades has tried to make his or her boss look as heroic as possible, portray them in the best light. she's goes the extra mile. >> scott, i'm wondering what you make of what frank is saying and the job sanders is doing. >> well, two things, number one if what you're wishing for is a white house press secretary to walk out to the podium and trash or correct their boss or sort of line up with the press corp on donald trump that's not going to happen in this white house or any white house. i appreciate what frank said as press secretaries but she's describing spicer and sanders and ones before her has taken it to a level we haven't seen. i remember watching lies about president nixon victories and i

don't remember anybody showing outrage about the white house press secretaries then. i think people are viewing they had press secretaries through the lens of their own personal hatred for the president and that is rubbing off on how they view the staff. >> frank? >> i especially disagree. if you watch sarah huckleby sanders' behavior there is such a contempt that she and the other staffers show for the media i know it is beyond what we've seen before. >> i guess the president's allies will say look, she's helping him clarify his remarks. >> well she is but she's also pretending that's exactly what he said. there's a moment this week where jim acosta said our justice system is a joke and laughing

stalk. she got into it with him, corrected him and gave him a different version that was far from his verbatim words than what was stated. >> i think frequently sarah is in a position of having to explain again and again and again what donald trump does so well. he absorbed people's emotions and reflect those emotions particularly of his base if a lot of his comments. i think that is frequently mischaracterized as her lying and trying to clean things up. she's explaining what donald trump is doing and it continues to baffle the media that that's what he does very well. so i think press secretaries over the years have evolve from public information officers into essential when i the chief white house punish dant. they are the core reflection of how the oval office sees the world. and we're holding sarah and we held sean to a standard i'm not sure we held previous press secretaries to. maybe we should have and that's

a debate we should have. you mentioned the word contempt. i think the media holds donald trump into contempt so the contempt flows both ways. this is not a one way street when it comes to contempt in the briefing room. >> it's not a one way street but to pretend we can evaluate spicer and sanders in the -- press secretaries is to assume that drup is a normal president. would you really say that scott? >> no, i agree with you. this is not a normal presidency as compared to what we've seen. i think what is normal is the white house press secretary essentially being a reflection of how that particular views the world. now how he view it is world may be different and abnormal as you put it but that doesn't make the press secretary abnormal? what they're doing and that is reflecting how their boss sees

things. >> when she was asked about the president's inappropriate tweet she went on about how heroic he was how he's strong and that's why america loves him. if that's what the president disneyland that's what the president demands, she is under no obligation to continue serving him. >> not only is that what the president demands in this case but what you just described to her is what donald trump does. you'll probably argue he goes too far and takes thing too far. again, i go back to that point the white house press secretary has become an extension of the thinking of their boss, it has been so with obama and clinton. it seems to get more pronounced as time goes on. it is not unique to this white house. even if the presidency is not normal it's not unique. trs frank and scott. thank you. up next what president trump says about a military judge's position to got give berg.gov

prison time. units canine was also killed. his take a berg call's sentence in a moment. who are these people?

the energy conscious people among us say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians

it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing. bother bergdahl is a free man tonight. a military judge sentenced bergdahl to a dishonorable discharge. in 2009 bergdahl walked away from his base in afghanistan and was captured by the taliban and was held for five years. he says he spent most of the time chained to a bed tortured. today on twitter the president slammed the judge's sentence writing the decision on sergeant

bergdahl is a disgrace to our country and military. several service memberships were wounded looking for him in afghanistan. their lives has been forever changed. gymny hatch was shot in the leg searching for bergdahl. also his unit's combat dog was killed in the search for bergdahl. jimmy hatch now runs a nonprofit group for vests for search dogs. what went through your mind when you heard what bergdahl's sentence was, they wouldn't serve time in prison? >> there's people in military briggs that are serving sentences and dishonorable damages that did less than go awol and get a lot of americans hurt and chanced a lot of americans with getting killed. >> for you, the most important thing i understand was that he

be dishonorably discharged? >> i guess i got my wish with regard to that. >> he cited his treatment in captive as a reason for him to video prison time. he was a taliban hostage. i heard you say that you don't really think he was -- he gets the right to call himself a hostage. >> he was a volunteer now, wasn't he? >> by walking off you're saying he volunteered to be a hostage? >> right exactly. >> he's actually now -- they're going to appeal the dishonorable discharge that he received as part of the sentence? >> it's absolutely insane that anybody could look at saturday night bergdahl's actions and objectively say he was not dishonorable in his conduct. he certainly was dishonorable in his conduct. >> i heard you say that in the

courtroom you got the sense that people in the courtroom didn't fully understand what it's like to make the kind of sacrifices that people in combat zones, that your team and you and others are making every day. >> in one particular instance there was a senior chief who is retired who is the handler of the dog that was killed saving my life and others that light. >> he alerted your team to the presence of the taliban who were right there? >> had the dog not alerted us, we'd probably all be deceased. there was a point where the senior chief brought the dog's vest to the room and the prosecution entered it as evidence. and i remember colonel nance saying what's the purpose of this. >> that's the judge?

>> right. and the major said, the government lost -- lost property. and i wanted to speak up really badly and i looked at the major and he shook his head like don't do it. it means a hell of a lot more than the government lost property. it means that dog saved your lives and then was taken out of the battle from my crew from there on out. >> you talk about your cell having a life sentence and others who were injured as well having a life sentence. >> yeah, for sure. think about master sergeant allen, you know. takes him an hour. it takes his wife an hour to get him out of his bed. essentially master sergeant allen has a life sentence. he can't speak or interact with his family. his wife has a will you identlid his children has a life sentence. a specialty who was hit by a

grenade can't use his hand. that's a life sentence. >> i was reading an article and you talked about shaking hands with the attorney for bergdahl? >> yeah. >> and you thanked him for what he was doing, the line you said was -- i found it really powerful. do you remember what you said to him? >> you know, i wanted those guys to know i was grateful for them representing him in spite of the fact i definitely dislike their client, they take the constitution seriously and they want to do their best for him. and i said thank you for that. it was mr. fidel, he put his arm around me at the hotel lobby and he said, your fly is undone.

hard to hate a guy like that. >> i don't know. i'm not sure i would have the strength of character that you have to go up to the person defending this person and thank him for doing something which is constitutionally mandated. >> i don't know that it's strength of character. i just feel like this is a crazy time we live in and there's twitter tackticians and comment section commandos. the legal system that we have, while flawed, it's important to recognize that even with sergeant bergdahl, somebody who obviously i don't have any great positive feelings for, he was represented. he's an american and he deserves his day in court, so to speak. i may not be happy with colonel nance's decision, but i didn't see all the evidence. and i don't know what's going on in his head. but i'm an american too and i

can say, i think it should have been a lot more severe. >> is there anything else you want to say, jimmy? >> i think that the cultural discussion around this type of thing is unfortunate, and i hope that we collectively -- there's very few americans out in gun fights on the regular, and a lot of people like to comment on what that means, but there should be a little respect for it. >> appreciate you being with us. thank you. >> thanks, anderson. >> jimmy has a book coming out about his 25 years in service called "touching the dragon and other techniques for surviving life's wars." if you would like to donate to funds, check out the website. president trump arriving in hawaii before asia. we'll get a live report from honolulu ahead.

when you're close to the people you love, does psoriasis ever get in the way of a touching moment? if you have moderate to severe psoriasis, you can embrace the chance of completely clear skin with taltz. taltz is proven to give you a chance at completely clear skin. with taltz, up to 90% of patients had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. in fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. do not use if you are allergic to taltz. before starting you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you are being treated for an infection or have symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz. including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. now's your chance at completely clear skin.

just ask your doctor about taltz. now's your chance at completely clear skin. advil liqui-gels minis. our first concentrated pill that rushes powerful relief. a small new size that's fast, cause it's liquid. woohoo! you'll ask, what pain? new advil liqui-gels minis. with a cala. late development in the

russian investigation. one of the president's closest former aides will be testified towards the house intelligence committee. comes at the end of a landmark week, a guilty plea to indictments. new insight into contact during the campaign and hints the strategy the sperls mueller may be following for the investigation. the president just landed in hawaii on the way to japan. before he left he again called for the justice department to investigate the rival he defeated. >> i'm really not involved with the justice department. i'd like to let it run itself, but they should be looking at the democrats, they should be looking at podesta and all that dishonesty and a lot of things. and a lot of people are disappointed in the justice department, including me. >> he also said he had no memory of the meeting last month in which george papadopoulos pitched a meeting with vladimir putin.