the homeland security secretary. >> completely qualified. excellent at her job. >> that was a tough day for her. we'll see what it brichks out in the wash. one thing's for sure, she can handle herself. >> she sure can. >> ronna mcdonnell, thanks for being with us. you're always welcome on the show. thanks for having me. let's get after it. >> everybody else in america has a budget except the united states government. it's embarrassing. >> we want to do everything we can to avoid a shutdown. it will fall on the republicans' backs. >> what happens, i think you only have one place to look and that's to the democrats. >> he's definitely changed his attitude toward the daca issue and even the wall. >> as senators, we figure out what he is for, then i would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels. >> when they have no collusion, it seems unlikely you'd even have an interview. >> white house counsel thai cy

>> he's had little contact with the white house. >> i'm frustrated when witnesses talk to the media but can't talk to members of congress. this is "new day" with quiz cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning everyone. it's thursday, january 18, 8:00 in the east. big test today for house republicans as they vote tonight on the short-term spending bill to keep the government open. lawmakers have less than 40 hours to avoid a shutdown. at this hour, it does not appear they have the votes. anything can happen. republicans and democrats still struggling to find common ground. conservatives want more funding for the military. democrats want protections for d.r.e.a.m.ers. neither are in the current stopgap measure. >> the president is focusing on his border wall this morning, tweeting about it. general kelly says he's evolved, the wall idea has changed. he says it has not evolved and it has not changed. again vowing that mexico will pay for it, but offering no

proof on how they will. sources tell cnn the president's chief of staff told democratic lawmakers that mr. trump's promises on the wall were, quote, n informed. we've got cnn plift david gregory and cnn political director david chalian. let's begin with the state of play on the shutdown. david chalian, where do you hear, where do things stand as the numbers kick down right underneath your face. >> i've been thinking we're careening towards a shtdown. right now, there's no clear path to avoid a shutdown. the house freedom caucus, the conservative wing inside the republican conference says that they do not have enough votes to give the paul ryan for him to pass this on republican votes only. republican leadership disagree.

what to watch for today, watch to see if the vote for this is getting delayed at all, if we see any sort of side meetings popping up. that would indicate leadership doesn't have all the votes they need and their confidence may wane in the hours as they go by. >> david, what time is it supposed to happen? >> i don't know that the vote has a scheduled time yet, aliynn alisyn. you'll be able to tell real fast if you see the house freedom caucus going into leadership and that negotiating is happening. that means leadership is still looking for votes. >> david, go ahead. >> there's also a separate compromise deal on immigration floated by bob goodlatte on the publicanide in the house that there's talk of getting more traction and paul ryan is trying to arrange a listening session for members. so there trying to advance that. that kind of goes to daiftdvid'

point about side negotiations trying to get republicans in the house to yes. on the democratic side you see the split, too. there's obviously concern among some senators this isn't the way to govern. the conventional was come is that republicans catch the heat for this if there's a shutdown. we are in the new year, in an election year, and there is hell to pay on both sides for a shutdown when washington is not working and not doing its job. the tension on the democratic side is the resistance movement among progressive democrats who say this is where we have to draw the line in the sand over daca and immigration as we challenge the president. >> go ahead, david. >> a new poll out this morning at cbs that showed 57% of democrats say that the democrats in congress should indeed not vote to fund the government if daca is not part of it. a majority of the democratic party is in the position of, it's okay if the government

shuts down if daca is not taken care of. the reverse, 51% of republicans say it's worth not going forward wi funding the government if a wall is not included. this is what you see in this polarized moment in america. >> another issue you have here is the disconnect between the white house and the ruling majority. mitch mcconnell laid it out. he said i need to know what he thinks about immigration and i know what to give him. that's unusual. then there's another layer of it. general john kelly goes on tv and says this. >> he's very definitely chapgtd his attitudes towards the daca issue and even the wall. he has evolved in the way he's looked at things. campaign to governing are two different things. this president is very, very flexible in terms of what is within the realm of the possible. >> except donald trump then this morning, right when we were talking about this issue on the show, charts tweeting, the wall

is the wall. it's never changed or evolved from the first day. it was never intended to be built in areas where there's natural protection such as mountains, waeft lands, tough rivers or water. the wall will be paid for either directly or indirectly or through longer term reimbursement by mexico. then he goes on to talk about nafta. david, what's the plus-minus on this disconnect? >> it's so strange. to have a president and a chief of staff publicly so disconnected. when i think kelly is channelling trump in some ways to say, look, he wants to get to a place of getting a book comprehensive deal, that he's the only one who can do it and he's evolved enough to understand what the practicality is versus what he thinks the need is on the wall and then the president doesn't back him up. what i think is so interesting about what david laid out in

terms of this new polling is this immigration issue, compromise, realizing who we are as a country of immigrants, being compassionate about how we look at immigrants versus demagoguery, nativism, scare mongering and fear of the other, this is the proxy fight of the trump presidency. that's what's really playing out. you see it in the disconnect between those two. >> daiftd chalian, when john kelly says the president is very, very flexible. i mean like clay that immediately hardens. this is what the problem is. flexibility is generally seen as an asset, a good thing to be open-minded. the problem is, as everybody knows, he's very ag agreeable wi whover he's talking to at that moment, be it lindsey graham on the phone or somebody in a meeting, and then it changes. lawmakers have no idea. we've talked to them today.

they don't know how to deliver what he wants and what he'll sign. >> this is even before he's president. this is the history of donald trump as negotiated throughout his business practice as well. that kind of, whatever room he's in, that's how people talk about negotiating with him. to see the president brush back his chief of staff this morning so publicly to me indicates donald trump believes -- understands his connection with with his voters and his base better than anyone else around him. john kelly wasn't the one saying we'll build the wall and who is going to pay for it. the moment someone not donald trump communicates in a way he thinks is building distance between him and his most ardent supporters, they why you see donald trump inserting himself and brushing back his chief of staff. >> david, you say what he wants is to say, i got something done

that no one else could. do you think there's an alternative that he may be thinking small ball, i need to be able to say i got the wall. i don't care what else is in this bill, i need to be able to say this, it was such a big part of my campaign, they'll kill me if i don't get it. >> he'll find a way to say he got what he wanted regardless f what it is. islexibility point, alisyn, you have to leave room on the other side. i won't be surprised if in the next day there's a daca resolution and the president signs on. maybe he doesn't even tell mitch mcconnell he's decided. the truth is kelly can be saying one thing, he can be tweeting another and he can find a way to compromise on the wall and still declare it's this big, beautiful wall and everything he always talked about which didn't have to be a contiguous wall all along. he's going to redefine this in a way that his negotiating mind is going to figure out. i do think, chris, that that's

important. i think winning on security or however he defines the wall is something that's critical to him. >> david chalian, david gregory, thank you both very much. obviously the clock is ticking. a revealing interview with reuters. the president said a lot of things. he accuses russia of helping north korea avoid sanctions. russia is it foog back this morning. joining us is reuters white house correspondent jeff mason. he interviewed president trump on this range of topics. great to see you. >> great to see you. >> set the seen for the atmospherics of this interview. >> a bunch of different headlines that came out. it was an interview with me and a few other white house colleagues. we talked to him about north korea, about immigration, about his exercise habits and about jerusalem. there are a lot of foreign policy headlines that came out of it. i think some of the standouts were what you were just mentioning on north korea.

he believes russia is sort of offsetting any helping that china may be giving to the united states in terms of sanctions with north korea, basically by providing fuel which is annish yoo u that north korea struggles with and needs from foreign providers. >> let me tick through a couple of these. let me read for people who haven't read it yet. on that putin-russia moment, russia is not helping us at all with north korea, the president said. he, vladimir putin, can do a lot. but unfortunately we don't have a relationship. i think it's too bad. but unfortunately we don't have much of a relationship with russia. in some cases it's probable that what china takes back, russia gives. the net result is not as good as it could be. did he expand on why we don't have a good relationship with russia? because he hasn't often said that. >> he didn't build on it much more than what we had in that story. the context is his chagrin over the russia investigaon and the fact he has wanted to have a

closer relationship with russia and has often been very dismissive of the finding of the intelligence community that russia intervened in the 2016 election. this is sort of a constant theme with him. more broadly i think he's frustrated he's not able to make more progress on north korea and even though he is partially complementary of china for having helped, he feels the little bit of help china is providing is being offset by moscow. >> whether or not in terms of north korea the u.s. should engage in talks, here is what he told you, i'm not sure talks will lead for anything meaningful. they've talked 25 years and taken advantage of our presidents, of our previous presidents. he also then, in terms of north korea, did go on to blame the three immediate predecessors, clinton, bush and barack obama. a day after his doctor gave him a perfect score of a cognitive test suggested he had the mental acuity to solve it.

i guess they all realized they're going to have to leave it to a president who scored the highest on the test. he joked. he's the only one asked to take that test. the others didn't. >> that's a dig at his predecessors. not uncommon for him to dig at his predecessors especially on north korea. anything else he feels he unfairly inherited in the policy world, he'll strike out ot bill clinton, barack obama, george w. bush for not having handled it. it wasn't unusual for him to go in that direction. it was certainly a bit of a quip and a dig that he brought in the reference to his mental acuity test. >> in terms of the larger issue, he doesn't believe the talks with north korea would help, what's his suggestion? did he suggest what he thinks will move the needle? >> no. this is an issue where he has gone back and forth. at some point he's been very dismissive of the idea that talks with north korea would be helpful, including one secretary

of state rex tillerson has suggested it. other times he's left the door open to that. he did not want to be specific with north korea's leader, but t again, he interpreted it as something that maybe he would be open to, but probably doesn't think would be helpful. >> jeff, what is his mood during this? this is basically his one-year anniversary this weekend. how did you find him? >> he was in a good mood. he was excited about the positive reports from his doctor about his health the day before. he wanted to talk about that. he was excited about how well he had done. we talked a little bit about his exercise regime or the lack thereof. >> what did he say about that? >> he said he gets more exercise than people think. and when we asked him about that, he listed the fact that he'll run from the white house to another building on the white house campus. and i think run in this case means walk. >> that's how i run, also. >> exactly. he talked about the fact that he

golfs a lot which he does. he also conceded he doesn't spend a lot of time on the golf course walking. it sounds like he uses a golf cart because he likes to get through with his game and proceed with meetings later at the headquarters. but he did say he understood that he needed to lose some weight and was hopeful for dieting and was hoping the white house chefs would reduce his portions and take out some of the fatty ingredients. >> jeff mason, thank you very much. >> my pleasure. both steve bannon and corey lewandowski are refusing to answer questions about russia meddling in the 2016 election. is the white house restricting their testimony? the top democrat of the house intel committee joins us live next.

you can't predict the market, but through good times and bad at t. rowe price we've helped our investors stay confident for over 80 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

sources tell cnn the white house is working behind the scenes to restrict testimony by former trump associates to congressional investigators. both former white house strategist steve bannon and former trump campaign manager

corey lewandowski both refuse to answers questions about the transition before the house intel committee this week. joining us is democratic con man adam schiff, the top democrat on the house intel committee. good to see you as always. >> thanks, chris. >> is steve bannon coming back today? >> he's supposed to come back. whether he will, i can't say. at some point he has to come back. this broad declaration that he won't answer questions about the campaign including up to the present date is unsustainable. he's going to have to come back and answer questions. it's interesting what the house tried to do yesterday through secretary kelly, and that is to say, well, we never asked him to invoke executive privilege. technically that's correct. but they did tell him keep your mouth closed. we don't want you talking about what happened during the transition or what happened when you were in the administration. a bit of a misleading impression from those answers yesterday. >> is there any reason other

than executive privilege that could be exercised by the white house, by suggestion to bannon for him not to testify. >> no. there's no legal basis at all. executive privilege isn't going to apply to the broad majority of these questions on if they do invoke it, but which thant ka both ways. they're trying to say we haven't invoked executive privilege, but we are instructing the witness not to answer. you can't do that. >> well, you can unless somebody checks you on it. >> exactly. >> let me ask you something. why don't you know if steve bannon is coming today? he's under subpoena, is he not? >> he's under subpoena. as is sometimes the case with witnesses that we have compelled to attend, we don't know until we see the whites of their eyes whether they, in fact, show up. i do want to make one other note of comparison here between lewandowski and bannon. it's not just that they refuse

to answer a question here or answer here. both of them drew exactly the same line, we won't answer any questions that took place, conversations, events that took place during the transition or during the administration and many conversations up to the present day. that's not a coincidence in thigh view. >> you're saying they used the same exact language? >> they drew exactly the same point in which they refused to answer questions. >> let me ask you thing. is there any chance that bannon is once again communicating with the majority and telling them whether to come today and w theeal is through counsel and you just don't know because you're on t democrat side? >> it's certainly possible. >> that's what happened. the majority counsel knew he wasn't going to answer certain questions and you didn't. >> that is true. it may be that many of the majority members didn't know that as well. the staff works for chairman nunez who doesn't participate in these interviews, but does answer to chairman nunez.

that's the staff that would have reached any kind of understanding with steve bannon's counsel or the white house. we are not privy to any of that. >> corey lewandowski said i'm not prepared to answer any of these questions. i'll come back. do you buy that? >> no, i don't buy that at all. of course they're prepared. it would be malpractice for his lawyer to bring him into an investigative hearing and not prepare him for questions and expect somehow the committee is not going to be interested in asking him what have you learned about the issue of collusion or obstruction of justice since you left the campaign in your conversations with anyone involved in the campaign, your conversations with the president. of course those questions were anticipated and, of course, they were prepared. what they were prepared to do is say we're not going to answer, and for some reason they expected they would have a docile majority to go along with them. sadly that's exactly what they had. >> but they did different things in deference to bannon -- words

i don' say very often. he said i can answer, i've just been asked not to, so i'm going to respect that for mao. let me work with my counsel. corey lewandowski says he was not prepared, he needs someone to el him rebel what he must obviously know? >> it was the same in both respects. bannon said i'm willing to answer questions, but i'm operating on instructions from the white house. lewandowski said i'm willing to answer questions, just not today. both were not under any kind of claim of privilege exerted by the executive office. so they both of their own volition said i'm not going to answer and they both said i'm not going to answer the same categories of questions. so in the case of mr. lewandowski, we tried to find out was this as a result -- did you discuss your testimony with the white house, with the president. he would not answer those questions and certainly not completely. >> you'll have to see, if this continues as a trend, we'll pick

up on the conversation we had last time we spoke which is you're going to wind up in court, right? >> we could. the interesting thing, too, chris, we had another witness in yesterday, a current executive branch official who answered all of our questions, answered questions about campaign transition -- >> how do you explain that? >> the only way to explain it is the white house is clearly treating steve bannon differently, and perhaps corey lewandowski the same way. in the case of steve bannon, it may be because they can't trust what he's going to say. with these other people in the administration, they know very well exactly what they're going to say but with steve bannon they don't. steve bannon may have an interest in getting back in the good graces of the white house. >> what is your vote tonight in the house continuing resolution? >> my vote is a no. if we're not going to fix the daca problem that the president created, we shouldn't be passing

this bill. we ought to insist on it. the republicans control everything. so they can do it without us. if they're going to come to us and ask for our help, we'll insist on their resolving this mess they created and the uncertainty they inverted into the lives of these d.r.e.a.m.ers. >> sure they control with the house, but with the filibuster rule, they need 60 votes. that's why the democrats have been drawn into focus. that's the senate, not the house, not your problem specifically. thank you for updating us, we appreciate it as always. >> thanks, chris. >> alisyn? >> i'm going to tell you about cuomo prime time. you have an exciting show. you have time sire -- >> it sounds better when you say it. >> i wasn't that into it. but u now i am. >> i hope you show up for this because i want to see this. >> me, too. >> meanwhile, the house planning to vote on the spending bill tonight that would keep the government open.

it's not clear. republicans have the numbers, a member of the house freedom caucus joins us next. with expedia, you can book a flight, then add a hotel, and save. ♪ everything you need to go. expedia for you, it's always now over later. and pause. not even in your vocabulary. so when a cold sore tingle strikes you act on it. only abreva can heal a cold sore in as little as two and a half days when used at the first sign. it starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. nothing heals a cold sore faster. and because abreva acts on it... you can too.

act on it, with abreva. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. 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 ght for yo and visit myrbetriq.com to learn more.

the house preparing to vote tonight on a short-term spending bill to avert a government shutdown. are members on board? let's ask republican congressman warren davidson of ohio. he's one of the members of the freedom caucus. good morning. >> good morning. >> are you going to vote yes or no or this temporary short-term spending bill? >> probably no. when you look at the challenge, in the house we've been at a framework that funds our defense at a higher level since september and we've been waiting on the senate and, of course, the senate is waiting on 60 votes to be able to move forward. it's not really clear what funding levels the senate would actually support because they've held up their commitment on funding over daca. >> but just explain to us why you would vote no. what's your beef? why won't you vote for this?

i know it's temporary, but why not keep the government run? >> i don't want to shut the government down. since september, our troops are waiting -- we had fewer combat fatalities last year than training fatalities. under president obama and the way he applied the sequester which is across-the-board cuts, not selective, funding things like $300 a gallon jet fuel, our fighter pilots -- our troops are waiting for funding. this does not get the funding to our troops. our troops are in need of more funds for combat readiness, in need of more flying time. in more need of spare parts. look at the kpiends of things that have gone in our military. we agreed to do this back in the summer. we took the votes in september and we want to spring this out, and the whole purpose of stringing it out isn't to resolve things for our troops. it's to do a daca deal. so what i want to vote on is a

clean vote for the full year of funding for the military and not some half measure that really does a deal that prioritizes 800,000 people whose parents brought them here illegally. if we grow on funding the troops, why can't we fund them right now and continue to work on the things we don't agree on. >> democrats say why can't you agree on protections for the d.r.e.a.m.ers? >> they haven't worked out an agreement. bob goodlatte has a bill who has some interest. you have an agreement that maybe could be a compromise. we're looking at that. that's its own path. it's its own bill. we allegedly have an agreement on defense spending. why can't we have a clean vote on defense spending. >> listen, you're stating your

case of what you want, i understand. as of midnight tomorrow night the government shuts down. so the very people that you're trying to protect in terms of soldiers at some point, they don't get paid. >> it's up to the administration to determine how -- what is essential, and i have confidence that nick mulvaney and president trump would prioritize funding our troops. unlike the previous administration, he spent extra money 230 block world war ii from going to the war memorial. you won't see any of that nonsense under this administration. >> you're confident your troops will be paid, obviously hundreds of thousands of people who lose their paycheck tomorrow night at midnight. >> payday is january 30th. my confidence is we'll get a better range of options by saying no to the current bad option. >> some of your fellow republicans believe you are being obstructionists.

here is adam kins ling. >> we're hearing the plan. our friends at the freedom club decided they want to oppose it. the freedom club, they're not the ones advocating for robust military spending. many of them are fans of sequester which i am not. >> you heard what he said. he believes you're hanging you hat on this, but it's not genuine because in the past the freedom caucus wanted the sequester which cut spending. >> i wasn't here for that. adam is a good guy, strong military guy. he's pushing for the same kinds of funding. in some of the folks' case, they would spend more money on defense no matter how muchore money whi spent. that would be great if we had the money. we're effective going to borrow more than the defense budget again. we're really borrowing money

from our enemies to defend our country which is not a sustainable path. unthor the sequester, president obama could have allocated the money, but instead he did half measure after half measure which has crippled our military readiness. >> at this moment, all the freedom caucus will vote no on this bill? >> i can't speak for everyone in the freedom caucus. my voting card belongs to the people of ohio's eighth district. i think this so not the deal we should be voting on. i plan to vote know. >> congressman warren davidson, thank you for sharing your perspective with us. >> thank you. the state of california standing up to president trump with no sign of backing down. activists describe the growing resistance coming up. but if you're about to have breakfast, listen up. cnn's lisa drier has options to help you eat less throughout the day in "food as fuel." >> if you start your day with

avocado, it could help you eat less later. it contains heart healthy fats and fiber. one study found when people ate the green fruit in the morning, they felt more satisfied and less hungry over the next six hours. try it on whole grain rooi crisp pred. whole grain rooi makes you less hungry and you eat fewer calories at lunch compared to those who eight refined bread. the high amount of fiber in rooi helps you feel fuller, longer. if you need a mid morning snack, keep almonds at your desk. these nuts can help curb your appetite and keep your weight in check despite being high in calories. it's believed fat and fiber in almonds contribute to lower blood sugar levels after meals which help decrease cravings.

parodontax, 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. ♪

as we approach the one-year mark of donald trump's presidency, the battles between the white house and california are intensifying, both sides clashing over immigration, recreational pot, taxes, the environment. cnn's miguel marquez on why the divide is only deepen iing. >> reporter: the california republic versus president trump. >> the resistance is legion. >> reporter: one year into his administration -- >> trump is a wake-up call. >> reporter: -- the world's sixth largest economy fighting trump administration policies on everything from legal marijuana to taxes to the environment. >> california is not waiting for we're not waiting for all the deniers. >> reporter: a the escalating fight over immigration. >> we're going to fight and

we're going to win. >> reporter: california now an immigrant sanctuary state, a new u la limbing. prank road signs welcoming to people to the land of the illegals the acting head of i'm grace and customs enforcement on fox news says california politicians who made the law should be held personally accountable. politicos here aren't worried. >> have you ever seen the enmity between california and d.c. like it is today? >> i wouldn't call it 'em any tis. certain policies that are radical departures from the norm. california will fight those. >> reporter: the immigrant community finding its voice in the era of trump. >> we're actually working harder and galvanizing more people. >> reporter: a daughter of

mexican immigrants, lydia avila says the president, his rhetoric and policies have only emboldened her community. >> this is a movement that is not going to be stopped. the president cannot wen. he's not going to be there forever. we're going to win. >> reporter: equally galvanized, the entertainment industry with its deep pockets and powerful voice. >> the power of an idea to change the way people think and change the way people feel is really what's important. that's really what we're fighting for. >> reporter: jeremy zimmer ceo of unit talent agency, one of the world's largest, says trump represents a threat to the idea of america. >> we all see that the freedoms and the life we assume we have, the incredible privileges we have to be raised in this country, to live in this country, we all see that -- how

fragile it can be. >> reporter: cheryl conte, an activist in the tech community says it is a fight over principles. >> i think that you're going to find californians be completely unapologetic about fighting for what we see as california values. >> reporter: working from home on her pedal desk, one-foot soldier, among millions across the state countering, resisting trump. miguel marquez, cnn in the california republic. >> all right. it's time now for "cnn money now." a government shutdown is looming. what could that cost the ufrmt s. economy? chief business correspondent christine romans is here to tell us about that. you've crunched the numbers. >> good morning. the last shurtdown cost the u.s. economy $24 billion. if negotiations collapse, most federal agencies would close. hundreds of thousands of workers would be furloughed, taking leave without pay. but that's not all federal workers. those deemed essential will work, like air traffic

controllers, law enforcement, federal court staff, and they won't be paid until after the shutdown ends. what about the u.s. military, "the biggest loser" according to the president? the good news is the troops have been paid. you will get your social security check. that program is mandatory, social security is. you can also get a new passport. you should act quickly, if you think there's going to be a government shutdown, there could be delays. out of luck if you plan to vacation to a national park, museum or monument. taxpayer funded sites would be closed. who does get paid during a shut down? those who have constitutional duties, the president, supreme court and members of congress. it is their job, chris, to keep the government running. that is pretty much their core meaning. they would still get paid if they don't do their job. >> the irony. christine, thank you very much. out coming republican senator jeff flake rebuking president trump's attacks on the press saying america's democracy

is at risk. is that true? are these fake news claims more than just ramblings? let's discuss next. hi i'm joan lunden. today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

[ click, keyboard clacking ] [ keyboard clacking ] [ click, keyboard clacking ] ♪ good questions lead to good answers. our advisors can help you find both. talk to one today and see why we're bullish on the future. yours.

without truth and a principled fidelity to truth and

shared facts, president trump, our democracy will not last. >> that's republican senator jeff flake rebuking president trump on the senate floor, accusing the president of echoing joseph stalin's attacks on his enemies. he said america under his leadership is charting a a dangerous path. joining us now are professors of government at harvard who know about the dangerous path. they are authors of the new book "how democracies die,". it's good to have you both here, professors. there's a lot in this book for people to look at contextually to check the demise of a democracy. good. specific to us here, let's start, steven, with why you think the american democracy may be in any real trouble. >> well, we're hopeful that it's not. we don't think american democracy is dying, but there

are warning signs. the first one is we elected a demagogue and we elected somebody who has dmons strably weak commitment to democratic and constitutional norms. it's the first time in a century that a major party candidate has shown author taeitarian instren >> his supporters say he's not a demagogue, he's just channelling what they felt about wanting to break the mold. >> that's certainly a paradox of democracy at some level. what happens with electoral authoritarians, they go after the media, accuse political rivals of being criminals. they threaten to lock up their political rivals. these are warning signs we've se seen. >> this isn't the first time a large number of americans supported a deck gog. henry ford back in the 1920s, george wallace had a lot of

support. mccarthy for a while had a lot of support. this is the first time one of these demagogues became the nominee of a major party. >> if it's true that the trump base said we felt this way already. this could make him by definition a demagogue because a demagogue uses existing prejudices to advance their own cause. the check on it would be, he's not serious, he's not taken seriously. he doesn't have serious sway over a significant portion of the country. he's consistently seen as talking but not believing does that help democracy survive someone who says the things he says? >> it helps he's pretty inept, not very popular, pretty weak. were he more experienced, more serious, more popular, i think he would be more dangeros. but our experience looking at other countries around the world suggest that most of these guys who talk in authoritarian talk during the campaign, use a lot

of bullying bluster, actually end up throwing punches as well. they end up doing stuff. it's rarely just talk. >> you've been looking at this for years. is there a comparison, a historical time that you think can be used as a comparison for what we're seeing now? >> the u.s. is unique in that it's the oldest democracy in the world. it's rare for old democracies to breakdown. chile in the 1970s collapsed as a democracy. uruguay as well. there's a history of some countries with strong democratic norms breaking down. this usually comes in the form of polarization, a spiraling conflict on the two sides. in that sense we see something similar happening. >> proletariat revolt is in those examples. whether or not what the president says mobilizes some type of civil action on his

behalf. do you see signs of that? >> polarization has different roots in different countries. in the united states we have a a dangerous level of polarization. we have different sources of polarization in american politics today. recent gallup poll from 2017 said significant portion of republicans, actually more favorable view of vladimir putin than hillary clinton. so this is a remarkable level of polarization. unprecedented in the 20th sentry and into the 21st century. >> democrats and republicans really despise one another to a degree that we've not seen in any of our life times. >> so what keeps you up at night? having studied this for decades, what are you looking for? what worries you? >> i think one major worry is the prospect of a crisis. often electoral authoritarians incrementbly chip away at a democracy in a moment of crisis and can use that crisis to take control of the system.

>> you think there's a chance trump would reintroduce sadition laws. the election of 1800 ruz a huge referendum on that. it seems we're in a similar time right now. >> i don't know if we're in a similar time. there's every indication that trump would be willing -- never shown an attachment to the constitutional norms that would lead you to think, no, he would never do that. the key is whether the republican party would go along. that's what we worry about, what keeps me up at night. normally we expect, okay, we elect a demagogue but the republican party, the congress will check him. it's not. jeff flake is alone and jeff flake is retiring. republicans in congress, republicans in the senate are rolling over, and it's not clear what they would do, for example, if trump were to fire mueller. it's not clear what they would do if he were to begin to

trample on civil liberties. that's terrifying. >> the book again is "how democracies die." >> thanks for having us. cnn "newsroom" with poply harlow and john berman after this break. prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

feel the power of thenew power...smax. ...to fight back theraflu's powerful new formula to defeat 7 cold and flu symptoms... fast. so you can play on. theraflu expressmax. new r.powe top of the hour, 9:00 a.m. eastern. good morning. i'm poppy har bow. >> i'm john berman. the breaking news, new reporting and new evidence that the president is fuming. he just directly contradicted his chief of staff and declared himself completely unevolved. at least on the issue of the border wall he wants to build between the u.s. and mexico. in an early morning statement the president wrote, the wall is the wall, it has never changed or evolved from the first day i conceived it. that is not