for "all the money in the world" michelle 1,000. >> well, it's interesting mark wahlberg is the highest paid actor in hollywood. can we expect some pay gap. isn't it fair to expect some pay gap? >> i don't know. that's a big difference. $1.5 million to $1,000. that's in "usa today". thanks for joining us. i'm christine romans. >> i'm dave briggs. "new day" starts right now. we'll see you tomorrow. a federal judge temporarily blocking the prison's effort to end daca. a solution will not be found by either a judge or a president. >> if we do daca, we're not too far away from comprehensive immigration reform. i'll take the heat.

i don't care. >> the president understands the physical wall across the entire border doesn't work. >> i would love not to build the wall, but you need the wall. >> mr. president, you need to close the deal. >> dianne feinstein decided to release this fusion gps transcript. >> they pushed back against arguments that the dossier was directed by democrats. >> this is a signal of the end of bipartisan cooperation. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> we're talking about the fusion transcript. >> hundreds and hundreds of pages. how long it took to read it. >> i had to read it, though because you get such a sense. if you want an opinion on that issue, you better read the whole transcript. it really told us so much what was going through the minds of the committee people, what's fact and what's just feeling. so welcome to you our viewers in the united states and around the world. this is your "new day".

it's wednesday, january 10th, 6:00 here in new york. we begin our starting line with breaking news. a federal judge temporarily blocking the trump administration's efforts to end daca, the policy of course protecting hundreds of thousands of d.r.e.a.m.ers, people brought here as children illegally. how will this affect negotiations today on capitol hill? the timing of the ruling coincides with this tv sensation of sausage making. did you see this hour-long meeting of both sides and the president in the white house candidly bringing up what matters to them on immigration. trump seemed to change on the wall and on what he wants. but the gop clearly not willing to help d.r.e.a.m.ers if they get nothing back. >> meanwhile, the trump white house may be facing another staffing exodus. aides are told to make a decision before the end of this

month before they intend to stay through the midterm elections. two senior officials may be on the departure list. the feud over the trump/russia dossier, dianne feinstein releases the interview with the head of the firm behind it. do these 312 pages, do they undermine the efforts by republicans to discredit the dossier author. we'll discuss all of that. we have it all covered. let's begin with joe johns live at the white house with our top story. joe? >> reporter: good morning, alisyn. the surprise nationwide injunction adding a level of uncertainty to the complicated battle over the d.r.e.a.m.ers. it came after an almost baffling performance on live tv by a president who states much of his campaign on anti immigration rhetoric now starting to sound more accommodating to the idea

of comprehensive immigration reform. a federal judge blocking the trump administration's decision to end the d.r.e.a.m.ers program on march 5th. ruling that protections must remain in place while pending legal challenges pursue and ordering the government to take renewal applications. the justice department says it does not change its position that the obama-era program is unlawful. the late night court surprise coming hours after the remarkable televised meeting between president trump and bipartisan lawmakers over a potential deal for the d.r.e.a.m.ers. >> this should be a bipartisan bill. this should be a bill of love. truly should be a bill of love. >> reporter: the president suggesting flexibility. >> i think my position will be what the people in this room come up with.

>> reporter: and signaling an openness to pursue a larger immigration deal. >> if we do this properly, daca, you're not so far away from comprehensive immigration reform. if you want to take the further step, i'll take the heat. i don't care. i'll take all the heat you want to give me. and i'll take the heat off both the democrats and the republicans. >> reporter: at times, the president appearing to contradict himself, insisting that border security must be part of any agreement but also suggesting he is open to a clean daca bill. >> i have no problem. i think that's basically what we said. we're going to come up with daca, do daca, and start immediately on phase two, which is comprehensive. >> reporter: kevin mccarthy interjecting this. >> mr. trump, you need to be clear. when we talk about daca, we don't want to be back two years later. you have to have security. >> reporter: it was unclear if border security meant a wall. the white house offering little clarity. >> what has to be part of a deal

in order for the d.r.e.a.m.ers to have protection. >> border security has to be part of this process. >> you understand how a wall can be different than border security, sarah. >> actually, no, i don't. no. >> it could mean more agents, more fencing. >> that is part of the negotiation we expect congress to have. >> reporter: mr. trump later tweeting a wall must be part of any daca approval. the president's televised meeting yesterday was clearly an attempt to put to rest questions about his leadership. a source calling it an effort to seize the mega phone. now, today we expect to see the president at a joint news conference with the prime minister of norway, his first news conference with all the news media quite frankly, since about november. chris and alisyn, back to you. >> plenty to talk about. joe johns, thank you very much. joining us now is cnn chief analyst jeffrey toobin and john

avlon. the ruling, jeffrey toobin, a california federal judge saying that what the administration has done is wrong with ending daca the way it did. that they must continue to process applications of current d.r.e.a.m.ers. legal impact, practical impact. >> well, certainly this is a victory for the d.r.e.a.m.ers. the uncertainty, though, is how long and what exactly it will mean for them in the short or long term. this is a decision, obviously, that the trump administration objects to. they have said they're going to pursue their legal options. presumably that means an appeal. so the d.r.e.a.m.ers are safe for now, but it is still true that congress has to settle this issue. that if the d.r.e.a.m.ers are going to have any sort of long-term security, it's not going to come from the courts. it's going to have to come from

congress in a bill that would be signed by the president. so this may allow congress to kick the can down the road a little bit. but i mean, you could be talking about a matter of weeks until this ruling is overturned. so the heat still is on congress and the president to reach a deal on daca. >> so they started that process and we saw it in that remarkable moment. normally, as it's been pointed out, we normally just see a spray of what's happening. here are the players in the room. no, president trump said, hey, you guys can staeurbgs the media. is and we watched the actual negotiations. just yesterday when we were on the show we said nothing will really happen in this meeting. no. they actually took the opportunity to express themselves and sort of fight it out. >> and that was great. it is great for people to be able to see what chris calls the sauceage making spectacle. it is about civics. the president is showing he is in command. he can oversee a negotiation, the long promised art of the

deal. it wasn't always the most coherent but it was real give and take. >> kudos to him. he should be applauded when he gets people together. he did that by definition yesterday. let's see what came out of it. now it starts to get messy again. let's put up some of the priorities. border security, chain migration, the visa lottery, the deferred action for childhood arrivals policy. daca is the last one. all right. jeffrey toobin, as we remember, chain migration and the lottery were lord chewed on by the gang of eight. they had general consensus. it sealed to me the big thing that was left nowhere yesterday is how we will help the d.r.e.a.m.ers. will you do it as a stand-alone, or must it be connected to other security measures that the gop wants, including this now unknown definition of a wall? >> well, and your question is

one that the president appeared to be on both sides of. >> right. >> in that long meeting. that's what was so confusing about it. is that the democrats -- their priority by far is daca. they want protection for these 700,000, 800,000 d.r.e.a.m.ers for good. they want these people safe. if not with actual citizenship, then with essentially the equivalent of green cards. and they want just a deal on daca, period. at one point the president said, okay, let's just do a deal on daca and we'll do other stuff later. after the meeting, he said, no, no, no. there can't be a deal on just daca. it has to include border security, which almost is certainly includes the wall. whatever the wall turns out to be. >> let's just watch this moment. joe johns played a little of it, but let's watch the whole moment. the president, one of the things people have said about him is he

is not doctrineaire about policy. this shows how malleable he is much to the republicans's anxiety. so watch this. i would like to ask the question about what a clean daca bill now with a commitment that we go into a comprehensive immigration reform procedure? >> i think that's basically what they said. we're going to do daca. then we can start immediately on phase two, which would be comprehensive. i would like that. >> mr. president, you need to be clear, though, i think what senator feinstein is asking, when you talk about daca, we don't want to be back here two years later. you have to have security. >> i think that's what she's saying. >> no, i don't think that's what she is saying. >> feinstein said let's do daca now and then we will take

everything everything else. >> he said, wait. that is totally not our position, right, mr. president? there actually seems to be some personal will to get daca done. but if it is combined with border security, and that is the key as jeffrey toobin pointed out. for democrats, what's the difference between border or security and a border wall? as jeff flake said after the meeting, maybe they can compromise on the definition of the wall. several is hundred miles, let's say, and the rest is security. the democrats have been strengthened by this overnight. the stars may be aligned and there is a deadline for daca in the d.r.e.a.m.ers in march. >> well, that's the problem, though. even though there is a date certain they will say it will end, there are problems every day. as these application for renewal have come up, they haven't been processing them. the court said you can't do that. we will see if they appreply wi

an appeal. this was a big deal for us last night with anthony scaramucci. there are positions in their policies. and it seemed clear to us this was a major distinguishing feature for trump. they were saying it needs a wall. not me. full china. a wall with the brick and the door, everywhere. and yesterday it seemed to fall away, jeffrey. let's play some sound. >> that doesn't mean 2,000 miles of wall because you just don't need that because of nature, mountains and rivers and lots of other things. but we need a certain portion of the border to have that wall. >> this is what he had been told by people since he got in the game, jeffrey. stop saying is just wall. i know it sounds good. i know the base now believes that you're somehow more

protective than anybody else. but it's just not rational. now he adopts it like he's the first one to think of it. >> and, remember, you didn't have to go to many donald trump rallies to hear who was going to pay for the wall you? >> yeah. >> it was such a familiar position that he would have his audience chant out the words mexico. everybody knew it. they didn't have to have trump himself say it. that's completely gone. that's forgotten. it was absurd when he said it. but it certainly was as clear a campaign process as any presidential candidate has ever made. but that's gone. and now the wall appears to be a considerably smaller thing. the question i have about a lot of this is not so much will the democrats go along, but will the republicans? >> sure. oh, yeah. >> and the answer to that is i don't know. >> you heard from ann coulter, that wing of the sort of right

wing saying they're not happy unless it's, you know, as tall a wall -- i don't know how she spelled it out, but she is not happy with this wishy-washy thing. >> they don't like it at all. they said no daca. you come here illegally, you go. so he's got some work to do. >> let's see constructive compromise. see if they're capable of it. see if the president can deliver on the art of the deal. everybody will have to get a little bit. the far left and the far right will be unhappy. that's not a bad thing. they feel burdened from the '86 agreement. they feel security never happened. enforcement never happened. here is where lindsey graham can partner with the president. >> he said i'll take the heat off the republicans, off the democrats. let it all come on me if people don't like what we do. we have never seen him follow through on that behavior before. there's a first for everything. >> jeffrey toobin, john avlon,

thank you very much. >> senator dianne feinstein angering her republican colleagues because she released the full testimony of fusion gps founder. you will see what's going on in that committee and you decide for yourself if this is about getting to the bottom of what russia did or settling a political score next. dad, one second i was driving and then the next... they just didn't stop and then... i'm really sorry. i wrecked the subaru. i wrecked it. you're ok. that's all that matters. (vo) a lifetime commitment to getting them home safely. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

of the season' on the only bed that adjusts on both sides to your ideal comfort, your sleep number setting. does your bed do that? right now our queen c4 mattress is only $1199, save $400. ends soon. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you.

democratic senator dianne feinstein ignored her republican colleagues. cnn's manu jaju live in washington with more. what's the fall out? >> reporter: chris, they will release the transcript despite furious objections from skhubg grassley who warned it would undermine the investigation. according to simpson, steele was so alarmed he felt obligated to alert the fbi in the summer of 2016. now, simpson said this in the transcript, chris said he was very concerned about whether this represented a national security threat and said he thought we were obligated to

tell somebody in the government, in our government about this information. >> he thought from his perspective there was an issue, a national security issue about whether a presidential candidate was being blackmailed. he testified steele told him the fbi had similar intelligence from an internal source to help back up the dossier. we now know from our own sources that was information passed on to the fbi about the former campaign adviser george papadopoulos, who since then has pleaded guilty to lying to the fbi about his contacts with russia during the campaign. now, senators on the committee, including democrat chris kuhns, said it shows in investigation is at a partisan impasse. >> i think it's really unfortunate that the majority and minority on the judiciary committee have come to an impasse in terms of being able to make progress. i think in some ways this is the signal of the end of bipartisan

cooperation in the senate judiciary committee. >> simpson also would not reveal who steele's sources were. even saying one of the russian sources had been killed. we now know from our own sources that comment was in reference to the string of debts of high profile russians in the aftermath of the 2016 elections. now, this all comes as trump's personal lawyer, michael coe hen, announced plans to sue both fusion gps and the news organization buzzfeed over his concerns over defamation. he says the will gas stations against him in the dossier are just wrong. >> manu, thank you for describing all the details to us. reporter and editor at large chris cillizza and welcome back john avlon. chris officer steele, his motivation was he felt, for doing it -- after he got the information, for going to the

fbi, he was worried that donald trump was being blackmailed. does this change the republican narrative, certainly donald trump's narrative, that this was all sort of a democratic plan can employing they were the ones colluding? >> breaking news, no. because donald trump will always come back to the fact that the christopher steele dossier was funded by hillary clinton and the democratic national committee. we know that. that doesn't change. a lot of other things he says are not true, which include the fact, and glenn simpson testified to this, the dossier -- amount of people think the dossier is the reason why we have special counsel. that is not true. the fbi has confirmed some of these things. it is not due solely to the dossier. i did think, however, alisyn, glenn simpson referred to steele as this is like calling 911 when you drive by an accident.

his sort of motivation. >> he sees him as a whistle-blower. >> it won't change donald trump's line because of the funding. i would urge people to -- you're not going to read all the testimony. >> no. hold on a second. one, i love you. i disagree. if you want to have an opinion about this, if you care enough, you think it is as important as it actually is, read the transcript. it is everything you need to know, especially this. senator chris kuhns, again, i'm sorry to say -- >> i know. >> he is right. he is right. the bipartisan nature of this thing. >> yeah. >> has to be over. and here's why. you read that transcript, the questioning of glenn simpson has so little to do with, hey, what did you figure out and how did you figure it out and what do you know about these russians. you're supposedly an expert. none of that. it is who do you work for? where do you get your money? are you working for the russians? let me ask you things about

chris officer steele. was he working with the fbi? any conspiracy they could thread into it. and simpson went into them like a cheap carnival trick. >> this is a larger problem about what a lot of these are about. a fixation on process not substance. and a partisan approach to the process, which is what you're saying. simpson is saying, remember, this was originally funded by republicans. then picked up by democrats which is when steele came. the mandate was to simply find information, not a particular agenda. he reaches out to the fbi. he's concerned about a national security issue. this is something out of a spy novel he is being black mailed by a hostile power. the real issue is did russia try to influence our elections? did they compromise -- >> it's not -- i'm so glad you're pointing that out. that's the mind-blowing part is

that somebody who had sources on the inside in russia believed that donald trump had been compromised from what he had learned from his sources. >> agreed. and by the way, let's also note there are things not up for debate here. with the exception of donald trump, the entire u.s. intelligence apparatus has said unanimously, yes, russia not only interfered in this election but did so to help donald trump and to hurt hillary clinton. >> right. >> that is not a -- can you debate it? no. it's not a debate. it's not a debate. like everyone says -- everyone in a position to know says one thing. donald trump says the other. >> let's just say that's not -- >> let's file it under now we know. you read this transcript. you'll say now you know what they want to get to on the republican side in this committee. that's why senator chris kuhns said they're at an impasse.

lindsey graham, you want chris officer steele part of a criminal investigation after sitting and understanding his testimony that way, it has to be political. what a tv extravaganza. an opportunity you don't usually get. people were candid. both sides. the president and his alleged deal-making prowess on display. here is another taste of a moment. >> when this group comes back hopefully with an agreement, this group and others from the senate, from the house, comes back with an agreement, i'm signing it. i will be signing it. i'm not going to say, oh, gee, i want this, or i want that. i have a lot of confidence in the room that you people will come up with something really good. >> number one, chris cillizza, this is opposite world how mcconnell went into this situation. look, we can't really negotiate in good faith. i don't know what he really wants. there he flips the coin. and the other point of confusion for democrats, they came out why

are you asking me whether or not i'll fund the wall. i don't know what the wall is. if he wants it to be the security that's necessary in different areas, fences, sensors, i already tried to fund that. we're okay with that. he keeps saying it's something else. and he did it in the tweet right after. where are we left? >> pass. >> lifeline. >> you use the 55 minutes. it was sort of an amazing spectacle. i don't know where we are left. there's a point in there where he says -- he seems to agree with dianne feinstein. let's just fund daca without the security and wall. and i think it's kevin mccarthy steps in and said, well, mr. president. so what's really difficult here is i think the most revealing thing he said was at the end where he said my views are going to be the views of the people in this room. for all the focus on the wall, that was a political thing that he happened into that, yes, oh, people like the wall, okay, we

will say more about it. he lacks any cohesive set of views on this and frankly most things. he is very flexible. i would not take that to the ba bank. >> hold on. i want to talk about style over substance if you will indulge me. forget if the wall comes out or if it's 700 miles or whatever. that moment is why people voted for president trump. they wanted him to shake up the establishment and do something refreshing. he did it. we're all used to nothing happening in the meetings. that's what we were predicting. it looks like the spur of the moment. because the lawmakers didn't know what he was going to do. he said why don't you guys stay to the cameras. we get to see fly on the wall these people negotiating for the next hour. that's what people hoped president trump was going to do.

>> i think that's true. it could be what the trump camp could be. the down side is there is not policy mastery. >> alisyn brought up style. there's good context for that, which is was this a demonstration that he is fit for office? >> that's it. >> and he is perhaps a stable genius approximate. >> there is no question that that is the reason that this was done. that doesn't take away -- i'm with alisyn. kudos for having a 55-minute public meeting with top congressional leaders. >> if his goal was to quiet all the conversation about fitness, did that show him being sort of in command, not using strange bizarre syntax, and being focused? >> the bar is historically low. you shouldn't be trying to simply show that the president can string together sentences he coherencily in order to pass

muster. however, it was good for the president to do to show what he is capable of and show delivery he could shake things up and focus on a deal. >> these people who are in his brain is broke camp, he comported himself as a president shoo-in that situation. he brought him together. he did the nice bait and switch, which was tv genius. now, in terms of what was in it for people who want to be a critic of his, he didn't get the clean bill stuff. he didn't show a mastery of the issues on hand. >> a bunch ofcontradictory stuff. >> in terms of "fire and fury", did it help? >> it helps. >> as soon as it was of, the republican national committee sent out a big thing with tweets from saying trump looks presidential. trump looks stable. that was clearly, clearly the goal from a style perspective. stkpwhreupt w >> it was all very outcomes.

tonight we're going to have kellyanne conway on. she can talk about what is the wall these days, what did that meeting to them, what is the president on the points that matter. and the map next to her just as important in a way. former sheriff joe arpaio running for senate in arizona. he will be tested. >> that will be interesting. first, it was raging wildfires. now californians are being ravaged by deadly mudslides. a live report from the scene next.

i needed legal advice for my shop. that's when i remembered that my ex-ex-ex-boyfriend actually went to law school, so i called him. he didn't call me back! if your ex-ex-ex-boyfriend isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal.

wildfire ravaged southern california now being ravaged by deadly mudslides and flash floodsing. paul is live in montecito, california with the latest. paul? >> reporter: well, chris, as you look behind me, utter

devastation in montecito. at least 13 confirmed dead, but they expect the death toll to rise. this is one of the many houses completely covered or surrounded by debris. i'm on a straight that became basically a river. and you can see what was pushed down this river. trees and parts of other completely destroyed houses. somewhere between three and six completely destroyed. and there are people actively being searched for. this is not in in way a done search and effort. we also understand in the canyon community, in the foothills, there's about 300 people who have been caught off from similarization, if you will. they can't get to them. they will pull them out later by helicopter. that is the scene repeated over and over again. how did it happen? in nearby carpenter ria, they

got an inch of rain. it was stripped of vegetation hill sides. when the rain hit the ashy hill sides, the mud, the torrent came cascading down into montecito and carpinteria. they have a lot of heavy lifting to do here. >> thank you, paul, for the update there. should the white house be influencing what the justice department investigates? we will talk to former attorney general alberto gonzales about all the day's news next. take 5, guys. tired of your bladder always cutting into your day? you may have overactive bladder, or oab. that's it! we really need to get with the program and see the doctor. take charge and ask your doctor about myrbetriq (mirabegron)

for oab symptoms of urgency, frequency and leakage. it's the first and only oab treatment in its class. myrbetriq may cause serious allergic reactions. if you experience swelling of the face, lips, throat or tongue, or difficulty breathing, stop taking myrbetriq and tell your doctor right away. myrbetriq may increase blood pressure. tell your doctor right away if you have trouble emptying your bladder or have a weak urine stream. myrbetriq may affect or be affected by other medications. before taking myrbetriq, tell your doctor if you have liver or kidney problems. common side effects include increased blood pressure, common cold symptoms, urinary tract infection, constipation, diarrhea, dizziness and headache. okay, time to do this! don't let your bladder always take the lead. ask your doctor if myrbetriq is right for you. and visit myrbetriq.com to learn more.

a federal judge blocking protections for d.r.e.a.m.ers. here to discuss this and more, former u.s. attorney general and counsel to george w. bush, alberto gonzalez, dean at belmont university college of law and author of "true faith and allegiance, a story of service and sacrifice in war and peace." dean gonzalez, thank you very much for being here. >> alisyn is, good morning. >> what does this judge's ruling mean? are d.r.e.a.m.ers safe today to

stay? >> i think they're safer today than they possibly were yesterday. but long term i fear that it may take the pressure off congress in doing its job in providing long-term relief for the d.r.e.a.m.ers. so that concerns me a bit. i think everyone understands and agrees this is the responsibility of congress to deal with this issue for d.r.e.a.m.ers. i support relief for the d.r.e.a.m.ers. i think the majority of americans do. this is a very difficult issue. obviously it's a political issue, politically charged issue. one of the things is this ruling does relieve some of the pressure upon congress to get something done. >> because of the urgency. correct me if i'm wrong, if lawmakers don't think they have this march deadline that they're up against, they can back off making a decision. so my question is how long are the d.r.e.a.m.ers safe?

and can president trump appeal this judge's ruling? >> no question. it's going to be appealed. you ask how long will it take? it depends how long it will take to get a final decision from the courts. and of course the district court ruling is going to go to the court of appeals. and then most likely to the u.s. supreme court depending on the outcome. it could take a period of months. perhaps a year. so at the end of the day, though, the d.r.e.a.m.ers may have lose in the courts. and at that point they are out of luck completely. i'm hopeful congress will move forward. >> it looks like they're working on it if yesterday's meeting was any indication. i want to ask about the russia investigation has it pertains to jeff sessions and don mcgann.

white house counsel, don mcgann, went to attorney general jeff sessions and relayed a message from the president asking sessions not to recuse himself. the president didn't think jeff sessions needed to and didn't want him to recuse. you are such an interesting guest because of course you have been attorney general, white house counsel. was that a legitmate ask? >> the power is there for the white house to make that communication. because after all the department of justice is within the executive branch and the president to have the executive branch. >> should he have made that? >> it creates political challenges. optics are not good. it does set up possible obstruction of justice down the road in doing so. at the end of the day i'm on record saying, and i think defini jeff sessions didded right thing.

there has to be no bias, impartiality. after consulting, i think he made the right call. to have gone against the advice of the career folks at the department of justice, it would have caused him to lose credibility. and i think it would have done damage to the department of justice. so i support the decision. >> when you were counsel to president george w. bush, would you have done that? if he asked you to go to the attorney general, would you have made that ask? >> president bush would not have made that ask. we had an understanding, you stay away as far away from it as possible. you cooperate fully if there's a

request for documents. when i was because counsel, we were never privileged in any ongoing investigation. but the fact that president trump did ask don mcgann to do that, is that obstruction of justice? >> it depends. i'm not in a position to answer that question without knowing a lot more information. i don't know whether or not don mcgann put it this way. listen, the president wants you to think hard about not recusing yourself. we know it's a judgment call. we know you will exercise your own best judgment as to what's right here. the president hopes you can stay on in that investigation. so if it was presented that way, you can make an argument that there would be nothing improper about communicating the president's wishes. but understanding at the end of the day general jeff sessions has to make this call based upon his own best judgment is. that would not have been inappropriate in my judgment.

>> but it sounds like from what you've read, you're not comfortable with what happened there. >> well, again, there's a lot i don't know about the relationships. a lot i don't know about the investigation. based on my experience as white house counsel, this is not a conversation that would have occurred. >> okay. alberto gonzales, thank you very much. it was great to get your expertise on this. >> thank you, alisyn. the trump administration removing florida from its planned expansion of offshore drilling. why not other states? that's next. looks like i need a fork! oh no. (giggles) birds eye veggie made. so veggie good.

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.

what is this? when we love someone, we want to do right by them. but some things we can't control like snoring. (snoring) introducing theravent anti-snore strips. clinically shown to reduce snoring. theravent. the answer is right under your nose.

clinically shown to reduce snoring. the toothpaste that helps prevent bleeding gums. if you spit blood when you brush or floss you may have gum problems and could be on the journey to much worse. help stop the journey of gum disease. try parodontax toothpaste. ♪ the trump administration is reversing course now saying there will be no oil and gas drilling off the coast of florida. interior secretary ryan zinke unveiled the proposal last week, rolling back offshore drilling restrictions. but then republican governor rick scott objected, saying florida's coasts are heavily reliant on tourism. as a result, zinke changed his

decision for florida but not other coastal states with the same complaint. florida's democratic senator bill nelson called it political posturing, saying it is meant to help scott, who is expected to challenge nelson for his senate seat this week. federal judges ordering the state of north carolina to redraw its 13th congressional districts, ruling the current map is unconstitutionally partisan, rejecting the republican-controlled general assembly map saying it violates equal protection clause, the first amendment and article one of the constitution. the state now has three weeks to file a new redistricting plan for the 2018 midterms. a kansas state lawmaker is stepping down from two leadership posts after remarks suggesting that blacks had a general is etic predisposition for abusing drugs. he made the comments last weekend, arguing against

legalizing marijuana in the state. you have to look back at why we got rid of the drugs in the 1930s, to protect black people from users. >> i hate to say it. the african-americans, they were basically users and they basically responded the worst of those drugs is just because their character makeup, their, their genetics and that. >> just to be clear, that is what the controversy is all about. there's no science, no logic, no suggestion to back up the idea that african-americans were more susceptible to marijuana and drug use because of their character and makeup. >> that was swift action of him losing his leadership.

stpwhre >> it was important to point out because -- >> because it's crazy talk. what does the release of this fusion gps reveal about the motive of the dossier author? someone who knows all about the dossier, james clapper, joins us next.

i tried hard to quit smoking. but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how.

have you read the released transcript of the interview of the head of fusion gps?

the company that came up with the help of dossier chris fear steele, the former uk intelligence agent. the founder, glenn simpson, was before a senate committee and it revealed that the author of the dossier, christopher steele, was worried that candidate trump was being black mailed. does it undermine efforts by republicans to discredit the dossier's author? joining me now is former director of national intelligence james clapper. good to have you on the show, sir, as always. >> thanks, chris. >> your takeaway from the transcript? >> well, i think it validates the character, frankly of christopher steele. he was well regarded, and i'm speaking, i should say, the

caveat here, i'm speaking of contemporaneously when i was serving as dni before january 20th. chris steele was regarded as a dedicated professional both by his british colleagues. i know this firsthand, as well as by the fbi. and i think it speaks to his instincts, his professional instincts that when he grew concerned about what he was learning that he first apparently reported this to his own government as well as to the fbi. i think the transcript to me just a casual read of it, it seems like there is a lot of focus on trying to shoot the messenger rather than the substantive content of what he was reporting, which to me is the important consideration here. in the end it's who put it together. having said that, i ever to reiterate as well that the

reason that we did not include the dossier per se as an organic part of the intelligence community assessment we published on january 6th of 2017 in which we briefed to then president trump on that day was we could not, in the time we had, corroborate the second or third order assets that were used to compile it. but as far as christopher steele's own credibility, we didn't have any question about that. >> now, that's an important point. let's clarify that. then i want to get into what the transcript makes clear of this particular senate committee. there is a notion that the reason that they have to go after the dossier is it's all you guys had. the fbi based everything they did, the intelligence from the dni on down, based everything on this dossier. you got nothing else?

>> that is incorrect, completely incorrect. the reporting we did was drawn from other sources entirely, in which we had very high confidence. that was one of the ground rules we set for ourselves. i say we. the fbi, nsa and my office. we had a high confidence level of anything that we put in that intelligence committee assessment. because of our in ability to validate, verify the sources that were used in the dossier, we did not include it as part of the intelligence community assessment. i will also say, though, that some parts of the dossier were corroborated in our report from separate sources that we did have confidence in. >> beyond what wound up being to our best approximation, papadopoulos and the diplomat

who said papadopoulos said the same types of things to him. did you have that? >> absolutely. george papadopoulos was a new name to me that i was not aware of until the revelation of his plea. >> all right. and back to the transcript for a second. when you read through it, what does it seem to you is the clear intention of the committee questioners. does it seem they're getting to the bottom of interference and what was done by russia and who might have helped them, or something else? >> well, i'll just say, chris, this is -- what was manifested in that transcript i think is characteristic of this whole matter. whatever was done, whatever was reported, the meeting becomes political, politicized. and so republicans, not surprisingly, seem to be more

interest in is saling the credibility of the company that sponsored chris steele is's research and of course chris steele himself. and i think frankly the criminal referral on chris steele by senators grassley and graham is another manifestation of this. so we are more concerned about the attackers than the content which to me is the important matter. >> jim clapper says the dossier was not what the investigation was about. there is independent sourcing above and beyond that. thank you for the clarification, sir. always a pleasure to have you on the show. >> thanks, chris. >> thanks to you, our international viewers for watching. cnn "newsroom" is next for our international viewers. for the u.s., "new day" continues right now. let's get after it. >> a