♪ i'm michael smerkonish in philadelphia. we welcome viewers in the united states and around the world. presidents trump and putin together again. and trump again saying he believes putin's claim that russia didn't meddle in the election. really? and in alabama, he says the encounter never happened. she offers a significant amount of detail. senatorial candidate roy moore denies making sexual overtures to a 14-year-old back when he was 32. i'll ask mark geragos how to parse the conflicting nature i have beens. video cameras record the shooting that killed 26 members of a texas church.

but should the video ever be released. plus this week we did get to see the damage to the brain of nfl player aaron hernandez, who committed suicide while serving a murder sentence. bob costas made headlines around the country for what he said about the future of football. and he's here. but first, president trump is again declaring that he believes vladimir putin's insistence that the russians did not meddle in the u.s. election. here's what he told reporters on air force one today. quote, he said he didn't meddle. he said he didn't meddle. i asked him again. you can only ask so many times, every time he sees me he says -- i didn't do that. and i believe i really believe that when he tells me that, he means it. well, if in fact the president is accepting putin's word, here is who he is not believing. he's not believing his own ambassador to russia, jon huntsman who said there's no

question russia meddled. he's not believing his secretary of state, rex tillerson, who says that the russian election meddling created serious mistrust. he's not believing former director of national intelligence, james clapper, who said there has never been a case of election interference more aggressive. he's not believing former c.i.a. director michael hayden, who says russia's election meddling was the most successful covert operation in history. nor is he believing former c.i.a. acting director michael morell. who called the russian med toll help trump, the political equivalent of 9/11. the u.s. senate voted 98.2 to impose sanctions, a punishment, that the president himself signed. but has yet to implement. and now, the latest evidence of our partisan divide. the reaction to allegations about roy moore. the current republican nominee for u.s. senate from alabama. on thursday the "washington

post" published this story. in which moore is accused of sexual abuse of then 14-year-old in 1979. lee korfman, alleges that moore, a 32-year-old assistant d.a. touched her through her bra and underwear and guided her hand to his underwear if true, this would constitute sexual assault, alabama's legal age of consent, then and now is 16. three other women interviewed by the "washington post" who at the time ranged in age from 16 to 18 say that moore pursued them and asked them out on dates. none say that moore forced them into any relationship or sexual contact. moore vehemently denies the allegations. on the left, moore is already being convicted of hypocrisy and much worse. on the right he's being defended and in some media quarters the story is largely being ignored. here's what i find missing.

an evidentiary analysis of what's being reported. given the passage of time there will be no criminal or civil determination. but allow me a few observations. first the source, the "washington post," steve bannon tried to dismiss the story by reminding that it was the "post" that first broke the "access hollywood" tape. well that's true. but it overlooks that the "post" got that story right. i also note that the story carried a three-person byline. representing a commitment of resources and investigation. and the "washington post" reports that none of the four women reached out to the reporters. to the contrary, a "post" reporter heard that moore had sought relationships with teenaged girls and contacted the women who were reluctant to speak. only after multiple conversations were they convinced otherwise. the "washington post" says that korfman, the then 14-year-old was consistent in six different

interviews. today, she's 53, she says that she's voted republican in the last three presidential elections. including for president donald trump. details of korfman's initial encounter with moore seem corroborated by records of her mother's court appearance the day that she says she met moore. and her mother recalls moore meeting her daughter on that day. also, that moore's office was then just down the hall, that's not disputed. and other details lend credibility to her story. like that korfman remembers being driven a half-hour to moore's home. which had an unpaved driveway. moore has written about living in a rural home 25 miles west of where they met. additionally two friends of korfman corroborated that she told them at the time she was seeing an older man and one of them said she identified moore by name. that friend also recalls being

told the detail of moore's tight white underwear. yesterday in an interview with sean hannity moore said the claims are completely false and misleading. he says he does not know korfman. he questioned why she waited 40 years and until an election was four weeks away, before coming forward. he said he never knew, never met her and it never happened. that's what he said. no jury will ever hear these claims. so how is the public to decide what happened? famed criminal defense attorney mark geragos is here to offer his legal expertise. and his street smarts. mark, how are we to make sense of this? he's offered a blanket denial. she seems to have a sufficient level of detail to bring credibility to her claim. >> the idea that he's been such a polarizing and kind of lightning rod figure in alabama

politics, i mean remember this is somebody who was the chief justice and then he was basically defrocked as the chief justice. he's been through several campaign, he's been somebody who's been known to the public. his point in his interview is look, why are they waiting until four weeks out of the election after 40 years to bring these kinds of complaints? the counterbalance to that obviously is that the "washington post" reporters were out there, and this is probably front and center, one of the biggest elections around the next four weeks, clearly towards the end of the year. the idea that somehow the defense is that it's the "washington post" or amazon, bezos "washington post" i think that probably something that people who are inclined to believe him, will like. because it gives a bias, if you will. that would never come in in a courtroom. an evidentiary wise that would not come in. what would come in is what you

detailed. the idea that her story is consistent. that yes she had the opportunity to meet him. yes, she was there that day. yes, her mother remembers it. his house being 25 minutes away. being unpaved. that she said it took an half an hour to get there. all of those things are consistent with the story. but frankly, if it were a prosecutor looking at this case, the prosecutor would, and you didn't have any statute of limitations issues, this would be what would be called a prosecutorial reject, they would not file this case. >> what aspect of her story, as represented in the "washington post" jumped off the page if any, to mark geragos? >> the facts that i thought were probably most telling, most supportive of her story, is the reporting that was done. and if it's true that she was there that day, she was in the courthouse that day, that he would have been, his office would have been close by, the

fact that she then was able to describe in detail some place that she went and the time limit roughly that it took to get there. those are the kinds of things that make, make me say this kind of thing is true. i will say one other fact. and i don't mean this to be facetious. he does look like the kind of guy who would wear tighty whiteys. and so that to me, if i am defending him, i'm going to ask that question and ask him if in fact he's somebody who back then was wearing tight white underwear. because believe it or not, those are the kinds of things that a prosecutor would say are an aha moment. >> i want to play two cuts from the interview with sean hannity. the first of them is one, mark, where he offers pretty much a blanket denial. i don't know her from anybody. roll the tape. >> i don't know miss corfman from anybody. i never talked to her, never had any contact with her. allegation of sexual misconduct with her are completely false. i believe they're politically

motivated. brought out to stop a very successful campaign and that's what they're doing. i've never known this woman or anything. >> never talked to her, don't know her from anybody. if anyone can put the two of them together, it will prove that part of his statement to be false. little risky from a defense perspective, is it not? >> yes, it is. you don't want to stake out that ground. you don't know what else it could have showed. but remember, he obviously is as a lawyer, and a former chief justice of their supreme court, he understands that there's nothing that there's no harm so to speak. this isn't a situation where he's within the statute of limitations and he has to worry about those things. so at the end of the day, for him, it's a political calculation. it's not a legal calculation. and trust me, if he said he knew her, if he conceded any kind of a relationship with her whatsoever, that in this present

mileau, he would be toast. the 17-year-old or the 18-year-old, that's okay. there's no problem. there isn't anything untoward if there was kissing, that certainly is something that, in that day and age, was not going to be anything that was going to be a real problem. but, he understands, i mean there is the calculus on his part, look, politically, the last thing i can say is i knew her, but i didn't fondle her or anything like that. he doesn't even want to go there. he's savvy enough to understand he has to -- the only thing he's got to say is they're lying and i'm denying. >> here's the second cut i want you to hear. critics of judge more say ah this is at odds with the blanket denial. let's see what mark geragos thinks of it. >> and you can say unequivocally you never dated anybody that was in their late teens like that when you were 32? >> it would have been out of my, out of my customary behavior, that's right. >> out of my customary behavior.

how problematic if at all is that for judge moore? >> well that would be what you would call impeachment. it wouldn't be because of the way that sean framed the question was, anybody in the late teens. he can always, his default would be when asked to explain it is going to be late teens. were you asking me about 17 or 18, that's late teens. 19 is late teens. so that's not going to carry the day. at the end of the day, only at the fringes are people going to say -- or is he going to be able or anybody going to be able to change their mind. when it comes to his base core of support. none of these things, as long as he keeps denying it, are ever going, are ever going to present any kind of a problem for him. >> here's what i'm taking away from my conversation with mark geragos, peel will read into these murky facts whatever they want to. in my view the next 72 hours are going to be critical. because whether others now come

forward might be the determination of his career. your final thought? >> yes. i was just going to say, what happens in these cases, where the danger lies is if there is somebody else who comes forward. that's when you get some kind of momentum. if there's somebody else who comes forward. i'm not talking about another 17-year-old or 18-year-old who went on a date with him and they made out in the back seat of a car. if somebody else comes forward and says yeah, i was 13 or 14 and he had, he was wearing tighty whiteys and we were, he was guiding my hands here, there, everywhere, then he's toast. but as long as he can say i don't know her, nothing ever happened and by the way let me pivot to the 17-year-old and 18-year-old, he'll be just fine with the group that's going it support him in the first place. >> thank you, mark geragos, i really appreciate it. >> thank you. what are your thoughts? tweet me @smerkonish or visit my facebook page.

i'll read some. gayle says think it is a she said/he said and it isn't going anywhere. gail, politically speaking. i think you're probably right. unless there are further developments as i just pointed out with mark. one more? i think that if grabbing by the p didn't matter, then neither will this. they don't care, as long as they beat the dem. sam, what's so frustrating to me and what i tried to say in my opening monologue is how people don't want to engage in critical thinking. they don't want to parse the report and listen to what he said. they suit up in their partisan armor, depending upon who the players are without regard to the facts. the shooting of 26 churchgoers in texas captured on video, should that video ever see the light of day? and now that we all have seen pictures of the extensive brain damage to the late player aaron hernandez, what's the future of the nfl? veteran sportscaster bob costas here to discuss.

are helping plan my next vacation. japan, how's dinner? this is delicious. i'm sorry. three times points on travel and restaurants. sapphire reserve, from chase. make more of what's yours. you feel better. introducing tommie copper's all new shoulder centric posture shirt. they're biggest breakthrough yet. advanced engineering promotes healthy posture and relief for achy shoulders and back. visit tommiecopper.com to see the entire line of wearable wellness compression. they have you covered from head to toe. go to tommiecopper.com right now and find out how you can save 25% on your first purchase, plus first shipping. life hurts, feel better.

plus first shipping. from thecompanystore.comwith the new lacrosse comforter made in america and handcrafted in wisconsin. our exclusive hypoallergenic down and special breathing technology senses your body to never be too hot or too cold, so you are guaranteed the best sleep ever. starting at only $99 including shipping and a lifetime guarantee. for your best friend - our new dog beds are just as dreamy and made with the same quality and advanced technology. this offer is for a limited time, so visit thecompanystore.com today.

t-mobile family plans now come with netflix included. that's huge. that's right. t-mobile's got your netflix subscription covered... ...when you get a family plan with two or more lines. really? that's incredible. so go ahead and watch however you want. you're messing with me, right? all at no extra charge. this is awesome! another reason why t-mobile is america's best unlimited network. mic drop. gripping video of news events burns them into our national consciousness. think of the zapruder film of the kennedy assassination.

but there are some tragedies many of us hope to never see on film. even if it exists, like a terror attack. that's the issue with the recent shooting in the first baptist church in sutherland springs, texas in which 26 died, including young children and a pregnant mother. many family members and locals understandably want the video locked up forever or even destroyed. law enforcement has its own concerns about the release, impeding investigations and the ability to get a fair trial. others like film maker michael moore argue that keeping such videos under wraps allows politicians and the public to avoid confronting the horror of mass shootings. is there an answer? joining me now is tony leyal, a former chief of the texas rangers, a unit leading the investigation into the southerland springs attack. chief, in this case, this guy took himself out at the end. thank goodness there will be no trial. so why not release the video? >> you know, the duty of these

rangers, police officers, fbi that are conducting this investigation is to answer all the questions, and to be able to tell the story in a way when they're through if someone asks a question, that they can answer. when you release video before that investigation is completed, then you can no longer hold the integrity of what people are telling you, what they may have seen in the video, what they really know. you know these things turn out, we're already seeing this in the las vegas investigation there was a lot of live video there, a lot of people with their phones there. a lot of people posting video. and we're already having conspiracy theories or asking why details change from one day to another.

you can't investigate the scene. you can't do it all at one time so you have to go through the evidence. tie it with the video. tie it with the ballistics, with the witness testimony. and what you see there, smell there, hear there. and put the case together so that those questions can be answered. and conspiracy theories don't start. and they're able to answer reasonable questions that are presented to them. >> that makes sense, how about when the investigation is over. >> when the investigation is over, is not a police matter. when the investigation is over, whether that video is released, is a social matter. and it is up to not for the police to make that decision. and i don't even think it should be for the government to make that decision. i think that is the type of the decision we need to make as a society. i can tell you that i have seen

these tapes. not these particular tapes, but tapes of individuals in the last minutes of their life. i have seen that occur in real life. and no one that doesn't need to see that will be better off after seeing it. their lives will not be better. it is a, a gruesome thing. and death is a very personal thing. i think what people should ask themselves. i'm not for, not releasing the tape after the investigation is complete. or for releasing the tape after the investigation is complete. i think what people need to ask themselves, if this was me, if this was my baby, if this was my father, my mother, my sister, my brother, my wife, my husband, would i want strangers to see that intimate moment when something like that happens to everybody? you know it's one thing we all

have in common. we will all die. do we want that broadcast? >> yeah, i worry as well about giving the next assassin some motivation. because now he knows that even though he may check out, the video will live on. soy think, i think you're right. thank you, chief, i appreciate very much your being here? >> yes, sir, thank you. >> let's see what you're all saying on my smerkonish twitter and facebook feeds. we've got twice as many characters on twitter right now. my producer, tc, who is the first line of defense on twitter, is being overworked today. julia, from facebook in my opinion show the video to lawmakers, but keep it -- wow this is interesting, julia. but keep it safe from public eyes. could influence copycats or induce and trigger trauma. i like your compromise. that maybe in a closed session of congress, that video is

available for whoever wants to see it. but never publicly disseminated. if we could keep it under such wraps, you might have the answer there. katherine, can we do another one? no time. all right. more later, though. up ahead, newly released pictures of aaron hernandez' brain injuries reinforce the fact that the nfl's concussion crisis could permanently cripple the entire sport. i will talk to sportscasting legend, bob costas, next. ♪

at lincoln financial, we get there are some responsibilities of love you gotta do on your own. and some you shouldn't have to shoulder alone. like ensuring your family is protected, today and tomorrow, no matter what the future brings. see how life insurance from lincoln can help start protecting your family's financial future now, at lincolnfinancial.com. our recent online sales success seems a little... strange?nk na. ever since we switched to fedex ground business has been great. they're affordable and fast... maybe "too affordable and fast." what if... "people" aren't buying these books online, but "they" are buying them to protect their secrets?!?! hi bill. if that is your real name. it's william actually. hmph! affordable, fast fedex ground.

or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com. more offfield bad news for the nfl this week. the public got to see pictures of the visible damage to the brain of former player aaron hernandez, who killed himself while serving life in prison for murder.

hernandez suffered the most severe case of chronic traumatic encephalopathy ever discovered in a person his age according to researchers at boston university. the disease analyzed in the 27-year-old's brain was quote one of the most significant contributions to our work unquote. said ann mckee, the head of b.u.'s cte center. meanwhile my next guest made headlines when he was quoted on the future of football. broadcast legend bob costas who hosted "football night in america" on nbc for more than a decade, was part of a symposium of sports journalists at the university of maryland, when he was asked about the biggest stories in sports right now. his answer was reported as this quote, the issue that is most substantial, the existential issue is the nature of football itself. the reality is that this game destroys people's brains. the stories proliferated. but context matters. and this week, he was honored by the concussion legacy foundation at its annual gala.

for his quote leadership keeping the concussion and cte conversation in the national spotlight. he's been warning about this issue since at least 2007. as this montage, which was shown at the gala, evidences. >> more urgent football issue. concussions. >> it's the hundreds, if not thousands of subconcussive hits, those are the ones that actually cumulatively take a greater toll than the concussions. >> that may become like the roman circus. where people watch it but they don't let their kids play it. >> bob, the point from the montage is you've been speaking about this issue for a long, long time. had you a viral moment this week. provide the context. >> well it was a symposium at the university of maryland involving other sports journalists, christine brennan, michael wilbond and tony

kornheiser. it involved a wide array of subjects, including the state of the sports media. tom shad of the "u.s.a. today," i had no idea he was there, i thought, we all thought we were just primarily speaking to some 400 journalism students and faculty members. but tom shad of "u.s.a. today" did an excellent job of providing context. and not only that, they provided a link to the entire thing. the entire two-hour thing. you could click on it and see all of the surrounding material. you could see the new answer that was part of the conversation. nuance, not just me but the other three commentators. what happens inevitably now is no matter how credible the initial source is, it gets picked up with each iteration, the ninth, the 10th, the 11th, the headline becomes more inflammatory. the context is lost and it sounds like some sort of broadside was launched against the nfl. whereas in fact all i with as doing was acknowledging that the

nfl has a problem. that problem is obvious. the question was, what's the biggest issue in sports. and some of the other panelists pointed to things going on at present. and they certainly were important issues. but my answer was that the most enduring problem is the one that affects the most popular sport in america, which is the nfl. and it's not going to go away in one year or six months or whatever. because it's about the very nature of the game. and that is, that no matter how exciting the game is, and i've said this with you before, i grew up a football fan. no matter how exciting it is, no matter how dramatic it is, no matter how much we value the generational connections, no matter how interesting it may be, the nature of the sport is that not all or not most, but a substantial and alarming number of those who participate, especially if they participate in youth football on, are going to suffer significant brain damage along the way.

and the more the research comes out, the worse that looks for the nfl. in context, that's what i said. >> it doesn't sound like you were misquoted. but rather people didn't appreciate the totality of the remark. and you remind me, i spoke several times this weekend in one particular gathering, a number of people pulled out their phones and started to record what i was saying. and my point to bob costas is, there's no such thing as an intimate setting any more, right? >> yeah, you know it used to be -- this is not a matter of being more or less candid. i stand by anything i say publicly. but it used to be understood. you don't have to explain this. that you have a conversation among a half-dozen people at dinner. even if the content is the same, you might express yourself differently. you might express yourself differently in front of 18 people in a class as opposed to 400 people at a symposium. or as opposed to speaking to you

now. or as opposed to speaking at halftime of an nfl game. it isn't that i would say anything different. but depending upon how much time you have, you might craft it differently. you might choose different words. so i stand by what i said. but what i said in totality, because i wasn't directing it to your audience or to the sunday night football audience. i was directing it to 400 young journalists at the university of maryland. where i said in totality, it's something different than what some people took from little fragments of it. but again, i give tom shad and "u.s.a. today" full credit. because what they wrote provided context and better yet, they provided the link to the whole thing. so if someone was actually interested enough to really know what was said, all they got to do is click on and spend a couple of hours watching it. and they may have something better to do than that, but go ahead. >> to someone who would say bob costas, you're only finding your voice on this now, the tape and i only showed a snippet of it for time purposes, i think it was four, five minutes long.

but the tape says otherwise, for quite some time you've been willing to speak out on this issue. >> you know what happens? and it's not unique to me or to you. it happens all the time now. rather than deal with the merits of the argument, the easiest thing to do is to try to discredit the person who said something you don't want to hear. and try and ascribe to them some sort of unworthy motivation. so i did hear oh, now that costas is no longer hosting "sunday night football" now he says these things. well that's 180 degrees from the truth. i i've been saying these things for the better part of a decade. and often on nbc. in front of the biggest audience, not just in all of sports, but in all of television, sunday night football. and i think nbc sports deserves credit for this. because very often network television as opposed to print journalism, network television, because they're in partnerships with the leagues, can be a

little skittish about addressing some of these issues. but nbc over time has allowed me to address significant issues. whether at the olympics, or whether with football. or even this year, i was no longer on the program, but when the issue came up about players kneeling during the national anthem, i thought with dan patrick and rodney harrison and tony dungy, that nbc sports did a very solid journalistic job of covering that story. now sports on tv is not "meet the press," it's not "nightline." but you do have to acknowledge the elephants in the room and you do have to acknowledge that there are some significant issues that are more important than who the seahawks are going to draft in the fourth round. and it's just the responsible thing to do to address those issues. and generally speaking nbc at least occasionally, has provided me an opportunity to do that. and i've never been shy about doing it, even when i was hosting nfl football. >> right, which is why the concussion legacy foundation honored you this week. one final question, and then i

hope you'll stick around for a tweet or two. so nbc was accommodating to bob costas, that's good to hear. how about the nfl? did you ever get any blow-back for your outspokenness on this issue from the league? >> no. i never have. i like roger goodell personally. obviously he's on the receiving end of some criticism these days. it comes with the territory. i'm hopeful that this year nbc has the super bowl. and as it turns out, i'm hosting the super bowl this year because mike tirico, who succeeded me in that role, and has succeeded me and i'm sure will did a very good job as the host of the olympics. he's got to be in cree yarks because the games stant only four days after the super bowl. i'm hoping in front of an audience that large that roger goodell will sit for an extended interview. it will not be a softball interview, but it will be fair. it will be pointed, but fair and comprehensive. i would rather put the questions that the public is interested in, to commissioner goodell.

i hope that happens. >> me, too. i want to watch it and i want you back here talking about it hey, bob, they expanded twitter to 280 characters. >> oh wow. that should give us plenty of context. >> let's see what's come in put it up there quickly for mr. costas. if the brain damage is proven to come from nfl football, could nfl be held liable for these players' crimes or suicides? i don't know if mr. costas wants a piece of that, but i welcome you to it, if you do. >> i'm not a lawyer and i don't play one on tv. my thought is, unlikely. it's obvious the nfl has now acknowledged finally that there is a danger of brain damage. of cte. connected with the game. and i wouldn't be at all surprised, i haven't seen the fine print that exists now. but i wouldn't be at all surprised if in future agreements with the players association, there isn't a specific stipulation of willing

assumption of risk. >> bob costas, always a privilege. thank you so much for being here. >> bye, michael, thank you. still to come, doctors say yes to medicinal marijuana for pain. chris christie and the white house commission say no. and it shouldn't be used to combat the opioid epidemic. was that the right call? more of your tweets and facebook comments. when i look in the mirror everyday. when i look in the mirror everyday. everyday, i think how fortunate i am. i think is today going to be the day, that we find a cure? i think how much i can do to help change people's lives. i may not benefit from those breakthroughs, but i'm sure going to... i'm bringing forward a treatment for alzheimer's disease, yes,

in my lifetime, i will make sure.

the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain... but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

pcountries thatk mewe traveled,t what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm everything. i'm from all nations. i would look at forms now and wonder what do i mark? because i'm everything. and i marked other. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.

trying to fix the opioid crisis, chris cystsie's white house commission on combatting drug addiction has called for wide changes to drug policies. the commission specifically declined to endorse the use of marijuana for pain. despite some studies suggesting access could decrease opioid deaths. christie said there was a lack of quote sophisticated outcome data on dose, potency and abuse potential for marijuana. but the nation's only academic resource for marijuana research, education and practice disagreed. saying that patients who were

treated with cannabis were more likely to experience a significant reduction in pain symptoms. so who's right? joining me now, dr. yasmine herd, the director of the addiction institute at mount sinai behavioral health system and professor of psychiatry and neuro science at mount sinai's school of medicine she wrote this recent article in "fortune," under the headline there's a better way to fight the opepioid crisis. why aren't we focusing on it. dr. herd, can pot be a solution to our epidemic? >> it's not pot that's the solution, it's medical cannabanoids. so the lines have become blurred. in recreational marijuana that people have legalized medical marijuana. and when we say medical marijuana, a lot of people, including perhaps governor christie and the president, thinks that it's the marijuana

on the street. it's not. these are cannabanoids that are being tested for research and clinical studies that have for example no intoxicating effects. the marijuana plant has over 100 cannabanoids, it's not just thc, the one that produces the high. it's other compounds that being studied in regard to potential beneficial effects, for pain, for treating the opioid addiction itself a and other symptoms. >> said we lack sufficient outcome data. is he right in that regard? >> absolutely. i completely agree. and that's the whole issue. an epidemic, we need more information. we need everybody at the table. we need much more dedication and resources to coming up with alternative strategies.

and for that, you need data. there's currently not enough data. but there are some anecdotal evidence out there. and anecdotal is not proof. so we need causal studies to be done. and so yes, there's not enough information to completely give 100% you know, results to say this is exactly what the specific cannabanoid can treat this specific pain or symptom. but that's why we need much more research. and the support by the president and the governor to conduct those kinds of studies. >> dr. herd, governor christie said something else about cannabis users on television. i want to you watch it and then react. play the tape. >> the national institutes of health no partisan organization just came out with a report that said you're two and a half times more likely to be an opioid addict if you smoke marijuana.

>> is he blurring the line between recreational and medicinal use? >> again, yes. absolutely. even our studies, if you take an animals and give them thc, they show greater sensitivity to opioids, in terms of their reward sensitivity. but if you give them cbd, the cannabanid used for treating kids with epilepsy. they show a reduction in their opioid intake and that's the cannabinoid brought to clinical trial to show that in human heroin users, this chemical compound does lessen that. it is a blurring of the lines and stop talking about marijuana, and say medical

cannabanoids. this is not the marijuana on the street. the marijuana on the street has today app a concentration even 20%. people are making cannabanoid formulations for recreational use that go up to 80% thc, that's not the compounds being used in the clinic. that's the thing that i think that both the person on the street needs to know. and the government needs to know. we are talking about developing specific cannabanoid for pharmaceutical intervention. it's no different from any other medicines that are being developed. you have to know the dosing. you have to know the formulations. that may be best for treating that particular symptom. and without the research, we will not move further. and there are a lot of regulations that unfortunately prevent research being done. >> dr. yasmine herd, we really appreciate your expertise on an important subject. thank you. >> thank you.

still to come, your best and worst tweets and facebook comments like this one -- marijuana being illegal in the land of the free, is/would be like wine being illegal in the land of the free. so many proven benefits. national media, the times are a-changing, what we up to, 29 states plus d.c.? give it a bit more time. back in a moment. an my next vacation. japan, how's dinner? this is delicious. i'm sorry. three times points on travel and restaurants. sapphire reserve, from chase. make more of what's yours. america's small business owners. and here's to the heroes behind the heroes, who use their expertise to keep those businesses covered.

and here's to the heroes behind the heroes behind the heroes, who brought us delicious gyros. actually, the gyro hero owns vero's gyros, so he should have been with those first heroes. ha ha! that's better. so, to recap -- small business owners are heroes, and our heroes help heroes be heroes when they're not eating gyros delivered by -- ah, you know what i mean.

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. amanda's mom's appointment hello mom. just got rescheduled - for today. amanda needs right at home.

our customized care plans provide as much - or as little help - as her mom requires. whether it's a ride to the doctor or help around the house. oh, of course! tom, i am really sorry. i've gotta go. look, call right at home. get the right care. right at home.

remember you get to participate in this program by sounding off via facebook and twitter and i react in real time without seeing them in advance. what do we have,y ied to

influence the election just as we tried to influence politics in other countries all over the globe. chip, i talked about this. went through those incidents able to be documented where we had. meddle d in other outcomes, but it wasn't in democratically collected nations. it was trying to influence leadership change in nations that were being ruled by dictators, but your point is well taken. what's next? we're in real trouble when u.s. believes a russian president over his own u.s. intelligence. george, you know what i was thinking? the senate voted 98-2 to impose sanctions on the russians because of the meddling. and who signed it? president trump. hasn't been implemented yet, but he signed it so was he telling us what he thought then or now? next. smerconish, the moore story was

well sourced and details are all we need. shame on any adult, republican or otherwise, so dismiss this as false and misleading. susan berger. hello. i would say this, shame on anybody who doesn't take the m time to at least read "the washington post" story and lend some critical think iing to it, but instead ways in and says well, it comes from "the washington post," it can't be true. really? why? because they're the ones who brought us the access hollywood tape. that was the true story. there's no logic or critical think ng any of this. it's like noise and 20 second sound bites. one more if i have time. football will be done with in 25 years or less. mothers won't let their children play anymore and the love for the game will be over. i have long said for a long time, bob to tas has been sounding the alarm on head injuries. i have been saying suburban moms in the end will determine the fate of football. see you next week.

why did you take credit card debt on? second kid. private school. medical bills. moving costs. solid ground. a personal loan from sofi is a smart way to consolidate credit card debt. certain borrowers cut their credit card interest rates 42% and increased credit scores 17 points on average. borrow up to $100,000 with low rates and no hidden fees. find your rate in just two minutes, and take on your debt at sofi.com.

you are live in the cnn newsroom. the president like to say america first. unless it's about putin's denials of election meddling. that's cool n. a series of astonishing statements today, the president seemed to take the russian leader's side over that of u.s. intelligence. not sure if you need the word seem there. every time putin sees me, he says i didn't do that and i believe, i really believe, when he tells me that, he means it. he means it. you know who else means it?