good evening. we begin tonight keeping them honest with something we have not seen very often with this president, an opportunity to watch him doing more than just making a speech or signing a bill. this afternoon, president trump let the cameras stay for a bipartisan meeting at the white house on immigration. it was carefully stage managed, no doubt about it. it was showing the president work and command on complicated issues and has potential and obvious pitfalls but it was done

according to cnn's reporting to counter the narrative that this is president working and not a president cooped up in the residence watching tv and tweeting. and his supporters are certainly praising him for that tonight. at the same time, for nearly an hour, what must be said was pretty gripping television. viewers, as well as the lawmakers, also saw some of the president's characteristics, his fogginess on policy details and his eagerness during face-to-face moments to be liked. we also got to watch someone who builds himself as a master deal maker do what he says he does best, and it really matters. on march 5th, a program called daca expires. that gives people who were illegally brought here as children the right to stay and work here. the president has been trying to make funding for the border wall a condition of making daca, including 10,000 more i.c.e. agents, ending so-called chain migration and a crack down on

sanctuary cities and more. the president whether you agree or disagree with him on immigration was all over the place from the beginning to very end when he said this. >> my position is what the people in this room come up with. if they come to me i'm going to do it. because i respect them. >> it was that talk that drew strong criticism from the right. and tweeting, quote, nothing michael wolff has hurt him as much as the daca love fest. what the president said depended largely on who he was talking to and apparently to the extent of which he understood the details. for instance, at one moment in the meeting the president seemed only to deal with daca with no strings attached at all. >> what about a clean daca bill now with a commitment that we go into a comprehensive immigration reform procedure like we did back remember when kennedy was

here and it was really a major, major effort. and it was a great disappointment that it went nowhere. >> i have no problem -- i think that's basically, we're going to come out with daca, and then we can start immediately on the phase two, which would be comprehensive. i think a lot of people would like to see that, but i think we have to do daca first. >> all right, so there saying do daca first, talking about a clean bill. the president agreeing by the sound of it to a bill with none of the other stuff the white house has been pushing for months and then seemingly to agree to comprehensive immigration reform. but maybe not. what as kevin mccarthy jumps in steering the talk back to those cessions that the president himself has been demanding in the past. >> mr. president, you need to be clear, though. i think what senator feinstein is asking here, when we talk

about daca we don't want to be back here two years later, you have to have security as the secretary will tell you. >> and as mccarthy talked the president began to agree with him as well. >> it's kind of like three pillars, daca because we all in the room want to do de, border security and chain migration. it's just three items, and then everything else that's comprehensive has kind of moved to the side. >> and the lottery. and merit based. >> i don't know who's going to argue with merit based. >> so in the space of about two minutes the president seemed to abandon his long embraced positions and reembrace them and then minutes later seemed to flip back. >> we can do daca and certainly start comprehensive immigration reform the following afternoon. we'll take an hour off and then we'll start. >> so talking to republican kevin mccarthy and the president remembers some of the hard line

measures in exchange and talking to democrat diane feinstein it's d.r.e.a.m.ers first and what he calls comprehensive immigration reform. also absent from today's meet, not a word about this. >> we are going to build a great border wall. and who's going to pay for the wall? >> mexico. >> who's going to pay for the wall? >> mexico! >> who? >> mexico. >> it'll be a great wall. mexico is going to pay for the wall. mexico is going to pay for the wall. mexico will pay for the wall. and mexico's going to pay for the wall, and they understand that. mexico is going to pay for the wall. believe me, 100%. >> again, nothing at the meeting about mexico paying for the wall. however, on that note the president did just tweet about the wall. jim, any mention of who pays for it in that tweet in. >> there's no mention of mexico paying for wall in that tweet.

of course, the president has not said since he's been in office neither has this administration said anything about how they're going to force mexico to pay for the wall on the border. i think that's been abandoned. putting all that aside, we should show this tweet because i think it offers some clarity, anderson, to what you were talking about just a few moments ago which is that the president was sort of all over the place at this meeting. the president tweeted in the last several minutes, our country needs the security on the southern border which must be part of any daca approval. and that was the question we had all day long, which is would the president be okay with a deal that deals daca now and gets the kids from actually seeing them deported on the evening news, and dealing with that discussion later. and the president clearly saying

in that tweet, he wants this wall. but listen to the exchange i had with sarah sanders, the white house press secretary as i was trying to drove down that point. >> border security does have to be part of this process. >> i mean there's a difference -- >> why we want to secure our border, i absolutely do. because the safety and security of the people of this country are the president's number one responsibility and his number one priority when it comes to anything he does, so absolutely. >> but you understand how a wall could be different than border security service. >> no, actually i don't. >> it could mean agents, more fencing. it doesn't necessarily mean a physical -- >> and that's part of the negotiation we expect congress to have. >> but you understand democrats saying they may not be in favor of this deal. >> if democrats aren't in favor of protecting american citizens, then i think we've hit a sad day in american history. as we've heard many of them say as they sat around that table

they are committed to border security, they do want it. and most of them have voted for it previously before this legislation hit the floor. >> they say thanks but no thanks for a wall -- >> jim, i'm not negotiating with you. i'm going to let congress take care of that. >> you had that exchange there, and you heard sarah sanders really using that term border security wall. she did not want to say the president specifically having a wall. i will point out i talked to senior official just a few moments ago who said this wall has to be part of a daca deal, has to be part of phase one of this immigration two step they want to do over the next several months. anderson, these d.r.e.a.m.ers are running out of time. the deadline for them to have this protection expires or begins to expire after march 5th. after that point they can start to be deported in waves. i talked to a senior democratic aide this evening who said this detail matters a whole lot.

but if he wants a physical wall like we've all heard about during the course of the campaign, quote, that is ridiculous, and they're not going to go for that. and i think at the end of the day this is going to come down to will democrats vote for a wall on the border. and i don't know if they're there yet, anderson. >> and also the president talked about today comprehensive immigration reform. i'm not clear he's using that phrase in the way it is normally used. because that's used in talking about a pathway to citizenship or talking about the 11 million people who are undocumented here. >> that's been an issue for the past few years. the president was throwing around this phrase comprehensive immigration reform as part of this phase two. you do daca first, border security first and these other issues later like a pathway to

citizenship. but the breitbart wing of the party is saying that runs completely counter. that runs completely counter to the campaign the president ran for nearly a year and a half. >> for more of the political take away as well as what it reveals for how it operates we're joined now by maggie haberman. frankly, why the white house allowed us to watch it. >> i think the why the white house allowed us to watch it was it was aimed at quelling these questions about not the president's mental fitness but whether he's intelligent. that was one of the themes that ran through the michael wolff book was various aides saying they don't think he's smart. what i think you saw in terms of the four different answers that he gave at various points is what we saw throughout the

campaign. he has vague, loose ideas. he can be swayed by whoever he last talked to. he doesn't know the details of these policies at all, and he will often take two different positions that are in conflict with each other within the same sentence. you don't normally see it play out like this in realtime, and the white house has done a lot to shield people from what we saw today over the kcourse of te last year. what ends up happening is the president says these different things and sometimes pick one and say, look, that's what he said. at the end of it day, to your point, he often says comprehensive immigration. he means something else entirely. he doesn't understand the connotation. the hard liners in his administration have asked him to stop using it over and over again. he still says it. i don't think you could say anymore now than you could this morning about what exactly he wants. >> gloria, it was just

fascinating. to diane feinstein he says one thing and then to kevin mccarthy he says something different. >> and you can see kevin mccarthy there trying to set the president right and help him out. we want daca, border security, we want to get rid of chain migration and on and on. the president is sitting there nodding. i think what we saw today was much more about pictures than words, because they wanted to sort of counter the narrative of the president's empty schedule which was written about. they want to counter the michael wolff narrative. they wanted to show him as somebody in charge. the president wanted to show himself as somebody in charge. and what we saw there was a president who wasn't the master negotiator but who came out and said, look, guys whatever you give me, i'm willing to sign it. and it was quite different from somebody who says this has to be

in the bill, this doesn't have to be in the bill. and i spoke with a senior white house advisor late this afternoon whose phone was blowing up by conservatives who were believing that the president had kind of sold them out on these key issues. >> another fascinating moment gloria alluded to when he said, look, anything you come up in this room i'll agree with you because i respect you all. if he's a master negotiator, i don't know if that's a negotiating technique or it does sound like just throwing it up. >> it's outsourcing policy by his administration, which we have seen time and again but which they have resisted when we've all written it. again, what i found strange about this event and the fact of it is that the number of people who helped set this event up, had to have known, i understand they were placating him and making him feel, to gloria's point, these were set pieces and about pictures above the fold of him in the cabinet room.

but it's very hard to spend a year telling people, no, he's not outsourcing policy. he's very interested in the detail, and then present this. as we have seen with trump over three yea the years now you constantly get this. to your point, anderson, yes, at the end of the day i think that was the most sincere point he made, and it will be the one that is most troubling to his base, which is do whatever and i'll put my name on it. >> it was during the campaign that then candidate trump derided jeb bush for calling immigration an act of love. and then today at this meeting he called daca a bill of love. and so -- >> that's a good point. >> you can see republicans just rolling their eyes all around the country saying what's kind of going on here, who is this man?

and again it gets back to maggy's point and your point which is this is a person who likes to tell people what they want to hear. which is why republicans go crazy when he's in a room with democrats because he tells them what they want to hear. and i think he wanted to tell the public, i'm in charge, and i'm really a good guy. >> which is why he tweeted out now, which i said very clearly. next more breaking news. what newly revealed testimony does to the president's claim democrats were the ones who colluded with russia. and high level departure from the white house. for my constipation,

my doctor recommended i switch to miralax. stimulant laxatives make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. unblocking your system naturally. miralax. coming at you with my brand-new vlog. just making some ice in my freezer here.

so check back for that follow-up vid. this is my cashew guy bruno. holler at 'em, brun. kicking it live and direct here at the fountain. should i go habanero or maui onion? should i buy a chinchilla? comment below. did i mention i save people $620 for switching? chinchilla update -- got that chinchilla after all. say what up, rocco. ♪

dianne feinstein in her position on the senate judiciary committee took action that angered some of her republican colleagues and keeping them honest, also refute to gop narrative on the russia probe. and hat is breaking news. what she did was release against the wishes of chairman chuck grassley the transcript of glenn simpson's testimony. he's co-founder of fusion gps which was hired to do opposition research on candidate trump. as part of that effort, simpson brought in former british intelligence officer christopher steele who compiled that dossier which was was a bunch of memos on citizen trump and russia. and we're not reporting on the

more solas vegalacious aspects dossier. we've also reported on claims by the president and his supporters that the dossier was concocted by democrats and russia to damage candidate trump. >> didn't she spend 12.4 million on a dossier that was a total phony? i think it's very sad what they've done with this fake dossier. i think it's a disgrace. it's a very sad commentary on politics in this country. when you look at that horrible dossier, which is total phony, fake deal, like so much of money we're talking about, it it is a disgrace. >> the notion that russia which the u.s. intelligence community was already working to defeat hillary clinton was somehow also helping her in the form of dirt on her opponent which democrats then persuaded steele and gps to trigger their investigation.

what emerges instead from the transcript is something simpler. christopher steele uncovered things that pretty much freaked him out. here's a passage. sawer said so after mr. steele found out the information he put in the very first of these memos, he approached you ubtaking this information to specifically the fbi, the federal bureau of investigation. simpson responded that's my recollection. sawer said so to the best of your recollect that request came from mr. steele and nobody else? simpson said, that's right. if that testimony is to be believed the claim that the dossier prompted fusion gps to go to the fbi is not correct. according to "the new york times" one key factor among others was a trump advisor getting drunk and boasting to an

australian diplomat. quote, chris said he was very concerned about whether this represented a national security threat and said he wanted to. he said he thought we were obligated to tell someone in the government, in our government about this information. respective there was a security issue about whether a presidential candidate was being blackmailed. jim sciutto, joins us now. what are you learning about this concern that candidate trump, concern by steele, may have been blackmailed? >> anderson, as you laid out there the trump line, the gop line on the dossier has been this was a purely political document drummed up by democrats, pursued by democrats to political end. there was no real credible. but if you listen to the sworn testimony, when you're testifying on the hill you hear a very different story of this. this is christopher steele, a former agent of the british national intelligence service,

mi-6, who gathered this information and was concerned himself enough to go of his own volition to the fbi in june 2016 because he believes there was a national security threat here, a possibility a presidential candidate being blackmailed. and in in addition to that when he met with the fbi in september of 2016 he was told the fbi had other intelligence in a similar vein, which we now know this meeting with george papadopoulos who told the australian ambassador he knew russia had dirt on hillary clinton. so one a british former spy and an australian diplomat who felt compel today the go to the fbi because they felt this information was dangerous, important enough -- and i might remind you when donald trump, jr. and others got that information at the trump tower meeting in 2016, none of them wasn't to the fbi. >> one said that a person had died as a result of the publication of his dossier.

do you know what he meant? >> that's right. let me quote specifically so our viewers know what we're talking about here. this is how simpson related to story. simpson's lawyer, somebody's already been killed as a result of the publication of this dossier and no harm should come to anybody related to this honest work. now, we've learned in that comment he was not referring to one particular person that he knew was killed because of the dossier, but you and i have talked about this, anderson, nine or ten or so rugs in official positions have died in recent months since the publication of this dossier, since it was made public, and there's been a lot of questions why that was, some of them connected to this dossier. so he was referring to that, making a supposition people might have died as a result of this. based on our own reporting it's not clear he had any hard information one particular person was killed because of this. >> republican john kennedy of

louisiana joins us. we appreciate it. some of our republican colleagues have said the dossier was solely the creation of hillary clinton and democrats. do you believe it was not hired by a conservative outlet which received most of its backing from a republican billionaire? >> let me say first, the substance of this, anderson, bothers me less than the process. >> how so? >> well, it doesn't bother me that the american people are presented the facts of the testimony. i had not seen the testimony before this. i'm not happy with the process. if i had been the senior senator from california i would have asked to have the whole judiciary committee come together in executive session and say, you know, here's why i want to release this document, what does everybody think? but having said that, i've not read the full transcript. >> do you think it should have

been released? >> it doesn't bother me it was released. i know it bothers some. >> it's not the standard protocol to release it which is why it bothers some senators. >> i understand, but it doesn't bother me to have the american people know the facts or at least the alleged facts. i don't think based on what i've read that it's going to change the trajectory of western civilization. also i don't know mr. simpson, and i don't mr. steele. they may be perfectly credible. they also might be a couple of whack jobs. i don't know. i'm going to depend on the fbi and the department of justice to sort all of this out. and i think eventually they will. and once they do, i hope they will make it an exception to their normal procedure and actually report the facts that they have found to the american people. >> does it impress you at all, and again you said, you know, few people know steele directly

or simpson directly. according to simpson's testimony, steele went to the fbi out of his own volition out of concern then candidate trump may have been blackmailed. does that impress you about steele at all or undercuts the narrative steele motivations were political in nature? >> well, i don't know if it's true. i'm not saying it's not. mr. simpson may be telling the truth, and he may also be trying to cover his own rear end. he has an opinion here. >> he's testifying under oath here. >> i understand. people have been known to lie under oath around here as well, as we both know. this is just -- >> so are you saying you just don't know? >> i'm saying i have no way of knowing. he my be credible or he may be a whack job. i'm depending on the justice department and the fbi and mr. mueller to get to the bottom of

this. and i think if we all let them do their job, they will eventually. i hope they're thorough, but i'd like to see them do it sooner rather than later. i don't want to have a big fight with my colleagues like a bunch of kids in the back of mini van over something that's already been done. the transcript is out there, and i think the sun will come up tomorrow. >> senator coons says it has reached an impasse and bipartisanship is -- >> i don't know what his basis of saying that is, but most of this stuff that's gone on between the chairman and ranking member, both of whom i have extraordinary respect for, but they each have one vote. i have the same thing, one vote. i would have preferred if

senator feinstein had called the committee together and said, hey, here's what i'm going to do, i wanted you to know about it. here's what's in the documents i'm releasing, what do you think? i would have extended to her that courtesy. she didn't. it's done. you know, it's not the end of the world. that's my attitude. >> well, senator, i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> you bet, anderson. ahead talk about steve bannon. remember him? president trump's key political advisor who was going to lead a political revolution when he left the white house? well, there's another chapter. that's next. the perfect hotel by using tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings! tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices.

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party.

well in the annals of falls from grace, this one is pretty near the top. steve bannon is now out otbreitbart, the conservative that he helped catapult to fame and was the man that president trump said lost his mind after being quoted thoroughly in michael wolff's book "fire and fury." he wrote a book about him, devil's bargain. he joins us now. how much of this is direct fall out from bannon's book? the key thing is he wants to

focus on politics. >> yeah, i think the wolff book was the straw that broke the camel's back. >> there was anger over your book as well. >> right, and i would say it goes back even farther than that. in the earliest weeks of the administration bannon took a lot for that. he continued to talk to the press. obviously he talked to me at great length on my book, to michael wolff for his book. really what bothered the president was the public perception that bannon was the true architect of the campaign victory, which he was but not trump himself. and he got tired of it. and the meeting you had between don junior and the russians that bannon talked about in the book, where people realized collectively around trump that bannon was doing more harm than

good. >> it's interesting because the bannon people are saying he wants to focus on politics and that's why he's moving away from breitbart. that doesn't really make much sense. without the platform of breitbart, how does he get his message out? having the platform of breitbart behind you or underneath you is a huge advantage. >> i was doing some reporting literally right before we came on the air talking to people from breitbart. and bannon thought he was hosting his radio show on sirius xm tomorrow morning. and he was fired from that show, too. when you remove him from his national radio show and breitbart news, he now has nothing to spread any kind of influence. to go out and to continue to try and build this movement, give public speeches. i know that as recently as two

days gow ehe was meeting with donors. so somehow or other he really didn't see the end coming, but it came today and came very suddenly and swiftly. >> just in terms of his relationship with the president, the white house says there's no way back into the president's good graces. do you believe that? is the relationship, do you think, fully severed? >> well, trump is known for going back around. and he did it after bannon left the white house in august. however, none of those guys have been buried to the degree that bannon has been buried, not just by trump but by the mercer family, his financial benefactors. he's now been kicked out of breitbart news, which he did probably more than anybody else to lift up into the right wing power it became in the election. it's really hard to see how he

would maneuver his way back into trump's good graces unless trump were to run into some kind of a serious problem where he felt like the need to reconnect with the base was necessary and that somehow bannon could help him there. but without these platforms it's not clear that bannon himself is going to have any influence like he once did. >> the turn around just kind of boggles the mind. coming up next, more breaking news on which key staffers in the white house could soon be leaving the white house. so there are no artificial colors, no artificial flavors, no artificial preservatives in any of the food we sell. we believe in real food. whole foods market. [ horn honking ] [ engine revving ] what's that, girl? [ engine revving ] flo needs help?! [ engine revving ] take me to her! ♪ coming, flo! why aren't we taking roads?! flo. [ horn honking ] -oh. you made it. do you have change for a dollar? -this was the emergency? [ engine revving ]

yes, i was busy! -24-hour roadside assistance. from america's number-one motorcycle insurer. -you know, i think you're my best friend. you don't have to say i'm your best friend. that's okay.

more breaking news tonight. the possibility of big white house departures. a source telling cnn aides have been told to decide whether to stay or go. jeff zeleny joins us with who may potentially be on the way out. >> reporter: anderson, there's definitely a sense here there is about to be a big if not shake-up certainly turn over before this second year begins. and two senior officials of all those mentioned here are two people potentially being mentioned as names, that's don mcgahn, the white house general council, he's of course at part of the russia investigation, how he's handled it. he's been at odds with the president on some matters. h.r. mcmaster, the national security advisor, someone else

we're also being told at least being considered in discussions for potentially moving on. of course, he's a three star army general. he's still a government employee. of course like most three stars would like to end their career with a fourth star. so that is potentially something that could happen. beyond that, anderson, much more. the rank and file national security members, national economic council members, a lot of those senior administration officials we talk about so much will decide in the coming days if they'll take their leave or not. chief of staff john kelly wants an answer by the end of the month or sooner. >> is that kind of turnover expected, by the end of the first year or different? in the white house you hear at the end of the first year, people switching. >> reporter: i remember in the first year of the obama administration, in the bush administration i covered both of those white houses and it definitely is more turnover than that. even more than that there's not a bench waiting outside this white house, a republican bench

to come in and fill those positions. simply several people don't want to endure the legal consequences, potentially, the legal costs potentially. so the turnover is somewhat common but more than what we've seen in previous years. but there's not a bench the president can turn to hire at least talented people in some of these top spots. >> and what about bannon's role in the white house? are they looking for a replacement. >> reporter: he was the chief strategist, of course that is central player in the election campaign. so i'm told the white house is looking for if not a replacement but a strategist to pull up all together politics and things. we'll see who they can find to fill his shoes. >> for the next few weeks my buddy chris comeo is going to take over the 9:00 p.m. hour.

>> what a perfect guest to talk about steve bannon being out at breitbart. once bannon was out all of a sudden you saw a totally different trump on an issue that was a signature issue for him and bannon. you pick you the perfect night to start, my friend. and i have to say i'm usually getting ready to go to sleep right now. i watch your clips in the morning. the show is amazing live. it's even better live. >> thanks very much. coming up next back to immigration. your all you can eat riblets. okay. enjoy. thanks. ♪ ♪ when i touch you like this ♪ and i hold you like that. ♪ it's so hard to believe ♪ but it's all coming back me. ♪ baby, baby, baby. ♪ if you touch me like this ♪ and when you hold me like that. ♪ all you can eat is back, baby.

applebee's. eatin' good in the neighborhood. let your inner light loose with one a day women's. ♪ a complete multivitamin specially formulated with key nutrients plus vitamin d for bone health support. your one a day is showing.

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.

news on immigration reform. at first president trump tweeting tonight, quote, as i made clear tonight our country needs the security of the wall on the southern border.

i talked to jorge ramos. are you clear on where he stands on daca right now? >> no, i don't. know exactly what the president wants. at some point he wanted the d.r.e.a.m. act and then he said he wanted comprehensive immigration reform. i don't know if he knows but that means legalizing 11 million people, the same 11 million he wanted to deport. so i don't know exactly what president trump wants. what i know for sure is that i cannot trust president trump when it comes to immigration. i cannot understand how come the same person who ended daca, hurting 800,000 d.r.e.a.m.ers now says he wants to legalize them. the same person when the tps, which is program that protects people from el salvador, haiti and nicaragua, the same person who did that now says he want to

legalize 11 million, i don't know exactly what he wants. maybe what is clear he wants a wall that is completely useless. >> when he talks about daca as >> i don't trust president trump. a little history lesson here. the president that established daca was president obama in 2012. the president who ended daca in september 2017 is donald trump. that's what happened. those are the facts. now, it is very hard for me to understand that the same person who ended daca now says he wants to help the dreamers. ui don't buy that. i uhope i'm surprised at the end. but at this point i don't trust president trump on immigration, and for that matter on anything else. >> congressman steny hoyer has taken account with the white house saying it laid out the republican priorities, not the democratic ones. i assume miscommunication doesn't surprise you at all? >> yeah, because i heard from the meeting, which was remarkable.

it was fantastic just to listen what they were saying, how they were discussing all these important issues, and they're important issues. daca is important. what they call chain immigration, those are words from president trump saying he doesn't want more immigrants from latina america and asia. when he was talking about the wall. i think those are really important issues. but i don't think president trump has any credibility whatsoever when it comes to immigration at this point. >> after the meeting the white house clarified what they say the first phase of the negotiations would include. border security, chain migration, the visa lottery and daca. is it realistic that they will be able to come to an agreement in time for the march daca deadline? >> i don't think so. i think it's a myth when we say that the border is more insecure. that is not true. there's no invasion coming from mexico. the undocumented population has remained stable for last decade. mexico won't pay for the wall.

so it's a big issue that won't be resolved. i think they have to approve. if they really -- look, republicans control the white house. they control congress. if they really, really want the d.r.e.a.m. act and approve daca, they can do it tomorrow. they have the votes to do it tomorrow, and they're not doing it. i don't think they have time to do that. if the president wants to wall for the d.r.e.a.m. act, well, they can negotiate that. look, there's already 700 miles of wall between mexico and the united states. but it's a completely useless wall as we discussed in the past. thousands of immigrants come by plane or with a visa. if he says he's a genius and really intelligent and he wants to waste $18 billion in a wall, let him waste that money. but let's just approve daca. >> it's interesting because hoyer, congressman hoyer also said today he believes president trump uses the term "wall" when he is talking about border security in general, which is

obviously different than what he was saying on the campaign trail if that in fact is true. >> and the fact that the wall won't stop immigrants most of the drugs comes from ports of entry and through tunnels. as long as you have about 25 million americans who use illegal drugs in the united states, they're going to keep on coming. a wall won't stop that. that's not a genius decision. it's not something that is a smart person would say, but if he wants a wall, let him have the wall. it's not going to stop anything from coming to the united states. >> jorge ramos, thank you. >> thank you. coming up, something to make you smile and inspiration if you've been dealing with bitter cold. the ridiculist is next.

dale. dale! oh, hey, rob. what's with the minivan? it's not mine. i don't -- dale, honey, is your tummy still hurting, or are you feeling better to ride in the front seat? oh! is this one of your motorcycling friends? hey, chin up there, dale. lots of bikers also drive cars. in fact, you can save big if you bundle them both with progressive. i'd like that. great. whoo. you've got soft hands. he uses my moisturizer. see you, dale. bye, rob. get ready for centrum micro-workouts. the bottle curl. the twist n' turn. the stretch n' grab. the gummy squish. centrum micronutrients fuel your body from the inside out. grab a centrum and join in. repeat daily.

time for the "ridicu-list." it's been so cold in many part of the country, we want to talk about the south. take a look at these pictures from south carolina. this is a state park. yes, you're looking at an alligator snout sticking out of the ice. with the water frozen, the al gates poke their noses out to be able to breathe, and they're actually perfectly fine. >> i mean, these guys are die-hard, just amazing survivors. and this is just one more example of that.

>> the alligators are broomating, like hibernating but for reptiles in cold weather. it's not just the alligators that are adapting to the cold in ways that are cool and terrifying. in florida, it has been raining frozen iguanas. >> iguanas are not built for the cold. they'll fall out of trees. they'll end up in areas where cars are, parking lots. you'll see them in a lot of areas where they're cold stunned. >> that's the reptile keeper at the palm beach county zoo who says don't worry, in most case frozen iguanas will be just fine. >> if it's just for a day or two, they will get to where they're completely frozen in time. they're still able to breathe they're still able to do bodily functions, just very slow. >> so once it gets above 50 degrees, the frozen iguanas start to activate, which sounds like a sci-fi movie i would actually like to see.

and there is a way for humans to help. >> pull them over to the side if you feel comfortable to put them in the sun, or off the road so you're not rung them over. >> it's good advice. there's one advantage to a temporarily frozen iguana, namely, it can't climb into your toilet. >> holy jesus! >> that's what i said. it's fricking huge! >> that is a lizard, right? >> if you drop this thing -- [ screaming ] >> oh my god! close the lid! >> now, it probably won't surprise you we had to cut around a fair amount of cursing to show you that video. that was woman who called her friend to help with her very floridian iguana in toilet situation. >> i don't want them anywhere near me. the kids think it's funny to throw them on me. i don't like lizards. >> much like thawed iguanas, this is a temporary situation. and there was a happy ending. for the toilet reptile. >> as for the spiny-tailed iguana, this is him.

justin matthews with matthews wildlife rescue said he'd keep him. >> and his name is flushy. >> flushy, yeah. i think the point is there's always hope for the most cold blooded among us. >> this week looks much better, buddy. it will be in the 60s. you'll be out in the sun, suntanning, and enjoying life. >> as shelly asked, if winter comes, can spring be far behind? and as bill haley and the comets once said, see you later, alligator on "the ridiculist." that's it for us. thanks for watching "ac 360." time to hand it over to andrew cuomo. andrew cuomo "primetime" starts now. >> thank you, anderson. i'm andrew cuomo. we have the perfect guest to talk about the big steve bannon news, anthony scaramucci is here. welcome to "primetime". >> all right. thank you for joining us for this cnn special program. we're going to take the next few weeks at the start of the year to see where things stand on the