solutions for problems that don't exist. it is one of the few countries in the world in which the united states does not maintain its embassy in the preferred capital of the host country. the problem is one person's floor is another person's ceiling. the united states has awe broader obligation not just to deal with the realities at home, domestic politics or israeli political realities. we need to think more broadly about what constitutes american national interests. this was in my judgment ill-advised, ill timed, and ill conceived. there will be a price to be paid even though the price may not be as severe as some of the world enders believes. >> we're watching kids getting treated, teens, young men. i don't know how old they are. we're showing you the scene now.

ian lee is probably going to have to move. this is one of the setups where they have set up a blockade in front of the security forces. they have lit things on fire. there's ian lee now. and there's going to be reaction from the military there. there almost always is. >> chris, keep your eye on tomorrow's friday prayers a shareef temple mount. that will be an indication where this is going. >> thank you so much for your sophistication on this. >> always a pleasure, chris. >> the pleasure is ours. we're following a lot of news, including what you were just you watching in ramallah. let's get after this. >> there is no attorney/client privilege here whatsoever. >> capitol hill is a circus. it is mueller's team to tell the truth to. >> he has a very serious case of amnesia. >> enough is enough. i do not feel he should continue

to serve. >> senator franken said to make an announcement about his future in the senate today. >> sexual harassment is nonpartisan. if it applies for al franken, the same standard for republicans. >> jerusalem is us rail's capital. >> this is just a reality check. palestinians and israelis need to live in the situation they settled together. >> no future role in peacemaking. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to your "new day". don trump jr. refusing to reveal details to congressional investigators of a call with his father about that now infamous trump tower meeting last summer between the trump campaign and russians. using attorney/client privilege. how does that work? >> it doesn't. unless lawmakers allow it to. that's what appears to be happening. we'll take you through what the right answer is.

meantime, a whistle-blower tells a house committee that former national security adviser michael flynn tested a business colleague saying russian sanctions would be ripped up as one of the first acts. a majority of senate democrats are now calling for embattled senator al franken to resign as the number of women accusing him of sexual misconduct grows. franken is set to make an announcement about his political future today. we have it all covered. let's start with cnn's evan perez live in washington with our top story. >> good morning, chris. donald trump jr. said attorney/client privilege is the reason why he doesn't have to tell lawmakers what he and his dad talked about this summer after news reports emerged about this 2016 meeting with russia. now you remember this is a meeting that occurred at trump tower in which the russians promised to provide junior with information to undermine hillary clinton's campaign. the president's son made yesterday with house

investigators to answer questions for several hours. he told lawmakers that the father/son conversation handled after trump junior issued a misleading statement about the trump tower meeting and ultimately he released e-mails showing what the meeting was really about. trump also told investigators that he spoke to hope hicks, one of the president's closest aides as they scrambled to prepare a statement to the media. that conversation occurred while the president was traveling overseas. as we reported, white house aides and the president himself worked on board air force one to prepare that initial misleading statement which claimed that the 2016 trump tower meeting was about adoptions. now, we know the trump tower meeting and the white house response are under scrutiny by special counsel robert mueller. neither trump jr. nor the president are lawyers. but trump jr. said lawyers were present and so it's covered by attorney/client privilege. democrats certainly dispute that idea. it appears that as long as

republican lawmakers allow the privilege claim, the president's son won't have to provide more details to congress. >> evan, thank you very much. you have given us a lot to gnaw on. joining us are political analysts john avlon and gregory. it does not sound like the house intel committee got what they were looking for yesterday. in fact, adam schiff and jackie spear both talked about how he was not forth coming. let me play you jackie spears saying she thinks he might have amnesia. >> he has a very serious case of amnesia. and he was pretty nonresponsive on a lot of issues that he would have a recollection of considering it was just a year ago that many of the events took place when donald trump was the candidate. he was by his father's side. he was campaigning with his father.

>> while he has had recall about what it was about and wasn't about that he wouldn't remember how to deal with it publicly, especially amid reports that his father is the president was dictating what the response ought to be from all of this from air force one. so that's problematic. but it also showings you this congressional kphaoelt is going to hit certain road blocks in getting to the bottom whether there was any attempt to obstruct this investigation. we simply don't know. but we know this goes to this second piece of the investigation, which is the extent to which the president has tried to shut it down. and the ultimate question of why, why is he so worried about what ultimately be found. >> might they hit road blocks?

yes. might they create road blocks. that's what we're seeing. this is not how the attorney/client privilege gets asserted. homework. google u.s. shoe. these are facts. they allowed him the privilege because they wanted him to have it. he does not deserve it under the law. it has to be an exclusive relationship. the fact that trump was present, there can be no privilege. that he wants the law. that he wants the rule. but they allowed it anyway. it is a metaphor for the constipation of this process. they are going to do what is politically ex bead kwrepblt. that's why so many call for mueller. that's why people call for an independent commission instead of these partisan panels. and this is the proof of it.

he can say it doesn't recollect. that's his right to do it. but what they are doing is not right, which is helping someone not avail themselves of questioning. >> sorry. we're out of time. i appreciate the tutorial. i'm kidding you. >> it's important. but it underlies the hypocrisy of partisan panels which are not interested in the truth. it is is self preservation. >> put his hand on the column and say base! one, two, three, four, five, base! >> i think we should have tag congressional testimony. this is convenient amnesia. this is politically driven. it is what it seems to be. he's trying to avoid what would be convenient to the president.

there is a denial of any connection to the russians. that be belied by the evidence. the problem is when it undermines correct in our institutions and congress in particular. >> one of the things i'm interested in that we don't talk about a lot, which is crucial for the investigation, all of these investigations is when and whether there is any russian source that actually flips and provides information from the other side of this alleged or suspected transaction of collusion. that's what i will be interested to see over time. i wonder short of that if you will have anything thattism indicates anyone in any collusion during the campaign. >> all right. let's go from where you have a clear standards and the politics are just prevailing to one where you don't have any standard and the politics seem to be prevailing. franken will give his announcement today. it seems to stand to reason.

it would be hard to stand up to this pressure. can you make the argument that maybe he should. >> before the ethics committee comes to a conclusion. just like roy moore, if he wins, this idea, well, they will never seat him. yeah, they will. they will go through an expulsion process which has almost never been successful. can they get rid of people this way? >> there is a playbook for that. that is roy moore. the tension is between that and making the argument that he could make versus, well, what's for the good of the party? this is a power play on the part of democrats so that they can say, look, we stood up even when it was our own to do the right thing. we will use this against republicans because republicans won't stand up to their own

decisively to really push, you know, roy moore despite the fact that they did initially. that's what democrats are doing. they are no doubt saying to him, look, the game is up here. you've got to do this for the best to preserve the best for the democratic party. that's where the attention is. >> corey lewandowski made an interesting point, interesting logic. roy moore has apologized. >> yeah. i think denial and deflection as a strategy is saying, well, folks get a pass when it is about partisanship. it undercuts the severity of what we're dealing with as a culture. that said, al franken is -- what happened yesterday was extraordinary. within a period of hours the vast majority of his colleagues, democrats in the senate coming out against him. it is a sixth woman making an allegation is very serious. but democrats will say, we need

self-evident moral clarity when taking on roy moore. we understand the political calculation. but the due process piece is troubling. it creates a troubling precedent. >> john avlon, gregory, thank you very much. all right. we have to take awe broad to what's going on over the move of the embassy to jerusalem. protests are banking out in the west bank now after president trump's decision to recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel. this comes as the top leader of hamas calls for a new uprising against israel. cnn's ian lee is live in ramallah with the breaking details. ian, i was worried for you, brother. i was seeing you there. i know how those situations can devolve quickly. what is the state on the ground? >> chris, this is really a pitch battle right now. on the side we're at, palestinians are throwing rocks. some of them have slingshots, putting rocks and tossing them

at the israelis. i would say a few hundred yards in that direction, you have israeli troops there. we have heard tear gas being fired, rubber bullets being fired. we have seen a number of people who have been injured, ambulances. you can see over here there's a number of ambulances that have staged that are getting ready to ferry anyone who is injured to a hospitalized. i want to show you something else, chris. down here you can see a lot of skins of onions. they're all over the place. pieces of onions. that helps counteract tear gas. this one in particular is a protest site that happens from time to time. but we haven't seen this number of people here. when you speak to people, there's a lot of anger, palpable anger directed towards the united states, towards israel. and these are the warnings that we heard from leaders is that --

we've got to move back a bit. hold on a second. >> ian, move back. when they start shooting the canisters, it will overwhelm you quickly if they're near you. make sure your cameraman is getting back. >> yeah. i think we're okay at this point now. you know, you get these kind of situations where you get a couple of people start running and you have that herd where everyone starts running. it does create a dangerous situation. but, you know, this is a situation that a lot of leaders in the region warned about, that you could stoke violence and tensions like this. this is what we are seeing play out here in ramallah. >> we have heard that. this is what yesterday we reported on, there were some palestinian leaders. some was just grassroots movement that called for three days of rage in reaction to what president trump had said. do you get a sense, ian, and

maybe you can't because you're there and so consumed, is it just ramallah or the three days of rage, is it stretching across the region? >> reporter: well, we know in the west bank is that bethlehem has also had protests and clashes. this is thursday. fridays are usually the main days of protest here. if we're seeing this many people come out on a thursday, you could expect to see something similar on friday. now today palestinians did call for a strike. businesses are closed. schools are closed. you're seeing a lot of people go out in the street and voice their anger. over here, i want to show new. this is what you're seeing is, the tires that they are burning. that's what is creating this thick, black smoke that you see in the distance here. also an ambulance over here. it looks like someone was injured.

they're rushing someone there. but this is really the scene. this is the reality here in this part of ramallah where -- we're going to move back some more now. >> get to safety. you let us know if the situation changes. stay safe, all right. we hear them firing the tear gas. >> it's coming in. >> get out of there. >> we're out. >> just keep running, ian. don't worry about broadcasting. the problem is when this tear gas hits, if that's what it is. there are lots of different things they can use to disperse crowds, it hits you so fast. and you can't move anymore. it literally freezes you in place. i don't care how many onions you have. there is a mixed bag with the tires also. they create almost instant thick black smoke. it is a distraction.

but it also removes the field of vision from the military on the other side. and very often it becomes a reason for return of force. >> you can see people there struggling. let's check in with ian. ian, can you hear us? how are you? >> yeah, i can hear you. >> what's happening? >> i'm all right. i'm okay. they just released a volley of tear gas towards the protesters. usually from one of their trucks -- okay. we've got an ambulance coming through. we're able to push back the crowd. but you get these volleys of tear gas usually from a truck that fires a number of canisters -- we have to move off this side again. ambulance coming through. >> hey, ian, do you have any sense on the ground there of what degree of resistance is

forming there on the street? are you seeing weapons or are you seeing just the typical slingshots of things being thrown and lighting things on fire? have you seen any other weaponry? >> reporter: we haven't seen any weapons. >> good. >> reporter: only thing we have seen are rocks, slingshots, burning tires. but nothing to escalate in terms of weapons or guns or anything. we haven't seen any of that. this is just a typical protest that you see where you do have these palestinians coming out with the rocks and their slingshots and squaring off with the israeli military. >> all right. ian, do you say a favor, you take care of yourself and the crew there. we'll keep you on the ifb. let us know if the situation warrants coming back to you. but safety first, okay? >> reporter: okay, chris. will do. >> thank you very much for the eyes and the calm in that situation. ian lee is one of many top-notch pros we have.

let's bring gregory back into this. first of all, we have a raw reality on the ground, all right. it's very dangerous because it can just tip into a bad to worse so quickly, david. and that's the reality. how long it lasts plays into the politics. if the move was worth it, one day, two days of this, some people injured. god forbid somebody dies, what is the calculation in which the move to jerusalem becomes a negative? >> well, i don't think that the trump administration was sufficiently worried about the tinder box aspect of this that jerusalem really is. aaron miller was on earlier talking about watch what happens at friday modern prayers at temple mount, the western wall, the holy site for jews. and shabat will be friday

evening. i'm not sure this administration thought through the ramifications of short-term violence and he netanyahu's administration that is supportive of the decision. there is no peace process. for the president to announce we're going to take this move and maybe this will be the catalyst for the peace process, i think the opposite is potentially true here. >> john, i see it different based on the surrogates of the trump campaign. they understand that it is a tinder box. they understand something could erupt. and donald trump is not going to let that stand in the way of a campaign promise that he made. this is how they explained it to us. >> and i think that's how they see it themselves. this is not surprising. the question is degree of escalation. when the president spoke yesterday, he used the rhetoric of peace. the goal is peace. but certainly if that is the goal, it is going to go through increased escalation of some kind of violence. the question is how much will

this tinder box be lit? contained to areas of jerusalem or kaoeult go wider? because everybody knew this was the reason that presidents traditionally said we may have promised that during the campaign but the u.s. embassy needs to remain. >> these are live pictures from bethlehem. they are shooting off munitions there. this will repel any type of protesting that's going on, violence in the streets. they obviously have a lot more range there. you see water being deployed as well. this is bethlehem. we are seeing similar violence in ramallah. this is what was warned about even by officials around the president saying let us beef up security. give us time before you make this announcement. but now we're discussing the political implications of this. is this a sign that this was a mistake or a sign that it was the right move? that is what john avlon was just talking about, gregory. we're not going to let violent people bully us out of making

the right decision. the white house using what we're seeing in our screens right now as a reason this was the right move. >> well, the notion that you're going to start off a peace process with this as a beginning i think is very difficult. we don't know. this is the beginning. there is certainly reason to believe there could be widespread protests. we've heard warnings about this. yet this is being welcomed by the netanyahu government. again, from a strategy issic point of view and the united states administration, there doesn't appear to be an indication that they have a truly global strategy here for how they want to approach mid east peace. this is coming at a time when you have a gutted state department and secretary of state who does not seep to be that enthusiastic of diplomacy, period. and to reach in and to give away a major concession like this to israel before a peace process is

amazing without extracting any kind of concession. >> right. >> so if this is a president who wants to strike the ultimate deal, he has rushed the head to the end and made it a pronouncement -- i know palestinians will find highly prejudicial. and i do think it's worth noting the religious dimension to this. the extent to which this is a big move for evangelical christians for religious reasons, not just political reasons. >> sure. but chris pointed out something very different. secretary mattis had requested more time. >> yeah. >> said give us time to bolster our defenses against this kind of eventuality. that was denied. the mid east peace was outsourced to the president's son-in-law. now we are seeing the beginning of a predictable protest. >> just to be clear, we do not believe what you are is seeing there is mortar fire all over

social media they say they are firing at the protesters. they look like launchers for tear gas. that that is a water cannon. let's keep this in perspective as the situation on the ground changes, we will bring you more information. >> we want to bring in the senator from rhode island. you have been watching the developments in ramallah and bethlehem. what are your thoughts? >> well, the public objection is one thing. i think there are factions within the trump white house to think this all makes good theater for elements of their base. i think what's really dangerous is what this means for our relationship with turkey, which we still depend on for a lot of basing for our military efforts in the middle east and with the saudis, who the trump white house have bent over backwards to accommodate as our new best friends in the region.

if we look to the saudis like we are untrustworthy, that limits our capacity to move with them against iran. and if the turwith the turks its significant problems. >> senator, i want to stop you for a second. what gives you any indication that this is political theater and that the administration is somehow reveling them as ginning up their base. >> what the person before me just said. for strong evangelicals this is part of the biblical prescription that jerusalem shall return and all of that. and so i think it's a dangerous idea that let those religious beliefs get ahead of our national interests and our diplomatic interests. >> look, what the white house, i believe, said, at least this is what is some of the surrogates told us yesterday. three days of rage doesn't stop -- a threat of three days

of rage doesn't stop the president of the united states from doing what he thinks is right. he is not going to be kould by threats of coins. there is often kould there. why let that stop the policy and the campaign promise? >> thafter what we have seen fr in particular the saudis and the turkish prime minister, we have some real diplomatic issues. and if they really decide that they're -- that this is a big deal and they need to push back against us, then they can hurt us in important ways and it can really degrade our ability to be effective in that area. >> just so i understand, more than the street speaking means this is a proxy for something? >> no. i'm saying there is a difference between what the political leaders in our allied countries say versus the street. if the political leaders and the allied countries are upset, and

it seems they are, we may have a lot less room to work with them on other issues. it is important to find a coalition and keep it together. if the turks are mad enough that they are going to start degrading their support for our military efforts if the saudis are angry enough, they feel cornered into a position where they can't work with us on other things, then those government-to-government problems have real ramificati s ramifications. >> look, donald trump promised this on the campaign. this was one of his campaign promises, that he was going to move the u.s. embassy to jerusalem. so, you know, he won. and so what would you have him do? >> i think he owns the consequences for his decisions, like any president does. and that to listen to the advice of our senior diplomats, listen to the advice of your senior allies, and to listen to the advice of your military experts is not something that ought to be beyond the prerogatives of the president of the united

states. a campaign promise is one thing. governing is another. and listening to responsible voices around you is part of governing. >> senator, we will continue to monitor this while you and i move on because there's other pressing matters to get to today. cnn has just learned cnn al franken will be addressing the nation as well as all of you, his colleagues, from the senate floor today and will be making an announcement. these are on our screen, a list of at least 34 fellow senators and lawmakers who have called for his resignation. what do you want to see happen today? >> well, i think senator franken has a pretty clear choice. he can either announce that he will be resigning and move on to another chapter in his life, or he can say, look, i'm entitled to my day in court. i have not had my say yet. >> which one do you think is appropriate? should he wait for the ethics

committee? which one would you like to see? >> i'm on the list of people who urge that he should resign at this point. >> but why not wait for the ethics committee. >> but he is within his rights to ask for that. he was in those rooms, he was in those situations. and if he wants to stand and fight and defend this through the process that we have set up in the senate, highways that righ he has that right. i think it had reached a point where there were enough allegations, enough credible allegations and there was a very significant leadership move here that had made i think his position hard to sustain. again, this is a decision that senator franken gets to make. and he would be within his rights to say i am going to stay and see this process through and let my colleagues judge me on a complete record and recommendation from the ethics committee rather than what has

just appeared in the public forums. >> okay. let's move on to the russia investigation. it doesn't sound as if the house intel committee got what they wanted out of don junior yesterday. he invoked attorney/client privilege, which is, you know, experience and that he exercised amnesia instead of being forth coming. do you think he can do better? >> it is hard to tell. we have been up against a lot of those same strategems. we have had failure of recognition. i don't know if it is full-on amnesia. certainly there was a lot of not recalling. and we have seen a lot of what i consider to be improper assertions of executive privilege, not attorney/client privilege but nonassertion

assertions of privilege, or assertions of privilege that don't have any foundation. they are a challenge to get around until you have a legal procedure to enforce them. usually it's in reaction to a subpoena because republicans controlled the gavels get to go a subpoena is very difficult. >> right. i wanted to ask you about that. i'm sorry to interrupt. do you agree with senator feinstein that the chairman, senator chuck grassley, is slow rolling this on your committee intentionally? >> well, when we have had more and more consequential hearings in my and senator lindsey graham's staffless little subcommittee than in the full judiciary with all of its staff support, i think there is a case to be made that the committee is not standing up to its responsibilities at this point. >> thank you very much for helping us sort through all the news of the day. >> pleasure. >> chris. >> all right. let's go back to the live pictures of what's going on in

response to the united states move of their embassy to jerusalem recognizing it as israel's capital. this is ramallah. we are seeing the same scenes in bethlehem. with hundreds of pieces you'll only find at jared. december 7th through 10th. that's why he went to jared.

when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.

right now. we have been following this violence here in ramallah. these are protests you're seeing, live pictures in the west bank after following president trump's decision to recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel. this comes as the top leader of hamas calls for awe new uprice anything israel. ian lee has all the breaking details. what's the situation, ian? >> reporter: alisyn, this is a battle going back and forth. we saw a number of people injured. here you can see an american flag going forward. this man is waving it. he is walking forward. let's just see what he does with

it. looks like he is putting it into the tires that are on fire there. he's burning the flag. this is the anger that we have seen directed towards the united states. people angry about president trump's decision yesterday. this battle, though, we have seen palestinians throwing rocks. they have had slingshots. the israelis are about, oh, 200, 300 meters in that direction. they have been firing rubber bullets. earlier they let loose a barrage of tear gas. that really sent everyone scrambling. but you can see here people are gathering more rocks going forward and throwing them in that direction. you can't see the israelis because they are covered in black, thick smoke. but this is the violence that a lot of arab leaders warned that could happen. now, will this sustain itself? that's to be seen. but today this is the largest

protest in this area that we have seen in quite a long time. people out here on the front line. you have men and women throwing rocks in that direction. it's a real -- a lot of people are just really angry. that's all you can say. directed towards the americans, directed towards the israelis. and there is some anger toward the palestinian leadership, frustration that they don't believe they're doing enough. but today, as you can see, they're just venting that anger, venting that frustration. >> so we're watching you in ramallah. in bethlehem, we are seeing a similar scene with different equipment. they have a tear gas launcher and what i thought was maybe a water cannon. but alex march cart said a skunk truck where they shoot a foul smelling liquid into crowds and it forces people to disperse. it just went off now. are they using that type of

equipment there as well or you're unable to tell because of the black smoke? >> reporter: well, you know, chris, just a little while ago it was that truck that released all of those volleys of tear gas that pushed everyone back. that's what we saw. but also you have -- you do have the water cannon trucks. that skunk water smells like raw sewage. it gets on you and it doesn't go away for a few days. and that really, you know, really stinks up the place. and that's something that we have seen actually in the distance. you can see one of those trucks. but you can't -- they haven't used it, at least we haven't seen them use it yet in this protest. all right. that sounds like a stun grenade. we have heard those from time to time too. a small grenade about the size of my fist that goes off and releases a loud noise. but, you know, this is the -- this is really the scene in

ramallah we have seen play out also in bethlehem. we have been talking to people who say this is something that they plan on continuing to do, continuing these protests. >> all right. ian, thank you very much. again, the first order is always to be safe. thank you so much for your eyes and ears on the ground, helping us understand this first wave of reaction. stay safe. we'll check back with you. you let us know when you have information that warrants your exposure there again. all right. our thanks to ian lee and his team. he is calm. it is not easy to be calm in the situation he is in right now. those are great men and women bringing you reality. chris stewart of utah. congressman, thank you for joining us. appreciate you taking the opportunity. >> good morning. >> so these scenes in bethlehem and ramallah, not necessarily a surprise. but how do you think they should be weighed as a pressure of the

decision of the united states to move their embassy. >> well, i think it's a little bit too early to tell. there are many of us who did have concerns about the timing of this. i met with king abdullah, for example, last week and others who generally support the policy. they're a little bit concerned about the timing. but, you know, we look back on on many frustrations over many, many years now. maybe this opens the door. i'm a little bit hesitant. again, i wish maybe we had waited a little bit. but let's wait and see what happens. hopefully there is no violence and people don't get hurt. >> what's the upside? >> we don't know yet. clearly it is to move forward the peace process. >> how so? >> well, i know that is the president's intention. it says something we have been saying for a generation now. jerusalem is the undisputed capital of israel and this

reflects that reality. but we have been talking out of both sides of our mouths on this. i mean, republicans, democrats and other countries as well. on the one hand we have said jerusalem is the capital but we will put our embassies somewhere else. this is an effort to reflect that idea. jerusalem is the capital. we will put our embassy there. and then we'll hopefully move the peace process forward despite that or because of that. that's what remains to be scene seen. >> but why is that okay proposition that it's a 50/50 measure of whether the peace process will happen despite this move or because of this move? >> because this is such a complicated issue, as you know. there have been good men and women who for generations have tried to solve this, trite to settle the settlements issue or capital issue. when you go to the area, you realize how incredibly

complicated and difficult it is. and nothing is assured. you have to try different things. hopefully something moves the pieces a little bit. but you never know that. there is no guarantee on anything that we try. >> well, we'll see how this plays out. i guess. i hope it wasn't just checking a box of a campaign promise because that's a real tinder box over there, congressman. >> it is. and i sincerely expressed my concerns about that. it's not just israel. there's jordan, who is a key ally of ours. president al sisi. we are trying to thread a needle. it has been tossed in the air and we are trying to thread it before it lands. in all cases we want to be as hopeful as we can. >> let's talk about something a little more simple on its face. you are a member of the senate committee on intelligence. the permanent select committee on intelligence. don junior met with the house intel committee.

they allowed him to assert the attorney/client privilege as a way to refuse to answer questions. why? >> well, i've got to tell you it wasn't a refuse to answer questions. incident was one question about one meeting. it was because it was in the presence of their attorneys. and i think that's reasonable. >> hold on, hold on. >> okay. >> are you an attorney, congressman? >> no. thankfully, i'm not. >> but there were attorneys there, right, on the panel? >> he had his attorneys, yes. >> among the lawmakers in the room, there had to be attorneys somewhere? >> oh, he yes, there was. >> nobody will tell you who knows anything about the law that was a rationale assertion of the attorney/client privilege. it doesn't meet any of the standards. there was someone else president and that vitiates it. >> i was going to finish my thought by saying. look, this hearing went on a

long, long time. i actually felt bad for him because i thought how many ways can you ask the same question. so i wasn't there for everything. for the parts i saw when we were discussing this, and i think this is true generally, he didn't say i won't answer the question. he said let me go back and talk to those who were present and to the attorneys and i believe that i'll be able to answer the question. i just want to check. and i think that's a fair response. he just wants to be careful to make sure he's not violating attorney/client privilege not only for himself but others who may have been involved. he will have a chance to come back. one other thing is oh, my gosh, this is like being lost in the him lay yeas. rescue is over the next ridge. that is the next piece of evidence, the next piece of evidence. if there was something dramatic from this hearing, you would already know it because it would have been leaked to you. this came out of hours and hours of hearings.

he said i will answer the question. i just want to check. there just isn't much drama that came out of this day-long meeting. >> the question is why? and your democratic colleagues say it is because he had a selective case of amnesia and didn't recollect or wasn't forth coming on why he had been misleading about what the meeting was about, what the president knew and when, and what happened after that meeting. >> yeah. i'm telling you there just isn't anything there. >> how do you know if he doesn't answer your questions? >> we have been looking at this for more than a year now. on this one issue, you're right. maybe we will come back and he will tell us something dramatic. but i really don't think so. it will be out of context of everything else we know. we violate him back to answer this one question. he gave us a reasonable response. he tried to be as open on everything else. hours and hours of questions that he went through, was very forth right on this one thing, i think he was being careful. i can understand that. but it takes a very in gracious

reading of this and franklien a unbelievable reading of this to draw some conclusion that this conspiracy in collusion, i don't think it will be proved to be true. >> that is your right to believe. you are seeing evidence in a way that surely we are not. i thank you for your perspective on tphafplt let me ask you about al franken. democrats ganging up on him, saying he should get out. very different standard being applied by the republicans when it comes to roy moore. >> not for all republicans. i'm an example of that. i don't care who you are, senator, democrat, republican, congressman. if there are credible allegations of this kind of behavior and if you admit to this kind of behavior, you shouldn't be serving in congress. >> so the standard is only if you admit it. >> no. i said if there's credible allegations. >> do you think there are credible allegations against roy

moore? >> there are. i said he should drop out of the race. my view on that hasn't changed. >> when you see your party seemingly pivoting, your leadership at least going from the position you're asserting right now to well, we'll have a vote and then we will decide. i'm not going to take a position on whether or not he should or shouldn't be in the race, what do you make of that pivot? >> there are some who have taken that view. many of us haven't. for those you described, i disagree with them. >> if there are credible allegations or if they admitted to this he behavior, i don't think they should serve. whether they're in a campaign or sitting now, i don't think they should serve. >> should the there be due process on the findings? >> that is the questioning, isn't it? you want to be fair with these individuals. perhaps allegations are unfair. perhaps someone looks and says, holy cow, i can remove someone from office that i don't like by coming forward with allegations. we do want to be fair about it. once again i say if there are credible allegations, especially

from multiple victims, and then if you can't refute those, i don't know, i just think we should have a higher standard here in congress. we have trouble getting the faith and trust of the american people anyway. we're already in such a polarized world. let's not add this type of doubt and this type of resentment from americans by carving out exceptions for those serving in congress. we should be held to a higher standard not a lower standard. >> as long as you enforce that standard through due process, whatever you choose it to be should be satisfactory to the people who put you there. chris stewart, thank you very much for being on "new day", as always, if i don't get to speak to you again, best of

senator al franken will make an announcement from the floor today. in the past 24 hours more than 30 democratic colleagues have called for his rez. . this is confusing. we're in a murky time. al franken, do his crimes rise to the level of career suicide, career ending? >> i don't think this is murky at all. it's straightforward in the sense you have people that behave appropriately, and we have a new red line in the sand, you can get away with sexual harassment or you can't. this is the new tipping point where we have accepted the bad behavior of the past is no longer going to govern our future action. >> in other words, groping, sexual propositions, assault, all of that is now -- we see

that now, all of that is bad and you lose your job if you do any of that. that's where we are? >> yep. >> i am amazed people are saying what he did, he's not harvey weinstein, and not a rapist is not the standard we are going for here. the idea that what he did is not that bad is completely wrong. >> what he did is at a minimum, sexual assault. >> grabbing women and forcefully kissing them is assault. i don't understand the idea that what he did isn't that big of a deal. i am hearing people say that. it's not -- it's on the same continuum. you have to remember that when people sexual harass or assault women, you are saying i can do whatever i want with your body and i don't need your permission to touch you.

i think we have got to drop the idea that what he did wasn't that bad. >> what about the idea, because you are putting such a fine point on it, that in the roy moore case, the voters get to decide and in the al franken case they don't get to decide. >> i don't think the republicans are behaving badly is a good excuse that they are behaving badly. what if they send a member to the kkk to the senate? are we supposed to believe democrats are going to go, well the voters decided. oh, well. if the republicans don't want to have morals it's not an excuse for the democrats to have the same thing. >> to me it's not a choice of whether you are in a political

party of the dems or republicans. this should not be, unfortunately, a partisan issue. it is. the democrats are leading on the issue because democrats are responding to their base, primarily a female base, and we saw the backlash when nancy pelosi tried to parse her words with respect to john conyers and the backlash was immediate and she had to change her tune. i wish we could see more courageous women in the gop party and say no to ray moore or donald trump and no to anybody that would incaengage in that conduct. >> hold on. margaret, she is one of those republican women. >> you are right, and that's one of the things that has been so deeply disappointing and demoralizing as a republican

woman is seeing how easily republican men can simply play politics and absolve themselves in the face of these issues, and that's what happens when you have a party that doesn't have many women. if there are only one-third of women in congress, a third of that third are republican women. when you say the republican party has problems with women, that wassester year. >> i am glad you are helping me through this. how far are we going to rewind the clock? i feel we are at the tipping point, so does the clock start here today or as we are seeing, are we willing to rewind it ten years for al tprepb kfranken ors for roy moore, and so the bad

behavior in the past, we feel they can never change? >> no, this was always wrong and people knew it was wrong. the idea that there was a point where al franken would have seriously to argued ten years ago it was okay to grope a woman or grab her and kiss her is ridiculous. they knew it was wrong -- >> it's a character issue then and today? >> i don't think al franken is rotten to the core, and his colleagues don't think that, and this was a difficult position for the female senators, and the fact there are so many female senators in the democratic party is why this is happening. it was the women senators that drove this process 100%. >> ladies, we have breaking news but i could talk to you all day about this. thank you very much for all of your opinions about this. we are following breaking news out of the west bank, so let's get right to it. they are turning tires.

there are rocks being thrown. israelis are responding with rubber bullets. >> this is a long overdue step to advance the peace process. >> you are killing the two-state solution, and you are moving the palestinians to push for a one-state solution. >> from my perspective all the questions were answered. >> the only reason why we come up with a caulk maimy legal strategy is to hide something. >> senator franken is going to speak to this. >> we're the republican voices. this is the time when we can make a culture change. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning and welcome to your "new day." it's 8:00 in the