it doesn't -- we need to make sure this never happens again. we need to put processes in place that makes sure we have accountability, that we are protecting young children for tomorrow. >> sterling reithman, thank you very much for being with us and sharing your thoughts on this incredible week that we've all watched around the country and around the world. best of luck to you in the future. >> thank you so much. >> thanks to all of our international viewers for watching. for you cnn "newsroom" is next. for our u.s. viewers, "new day" continues right now. >> i'm looking forward to it. >> i wouldn't look forward to a circumstance like that even if i had a good story to tell. >> there's no collusion. now they are saying, oh, well, did he fight back? if you fight back, it's obstruction. >> you can try to divert saying there's no collusionment the teal will not let that happen. >> i think it's a nice thing to have the incentive being able to

have service. >> this is all dicey. any amnesty is controversial with a lot of conservatives. >> if i was a d.r.e.a.m.ers, i would only believe it once the ink was dry on a bill. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning. welcome to your "new day". president trump arriving in switzerland to taught his america first policies. the trick comes after a revealing and impromptu q&a at the white house. the president took on a number of issues and said he's looking forward to being questioned under oath by special counsel bob mueller if his lawyers agree to it. cnn has learned mueller's team has given the president's lawyers possible topics for him. president trump also commenting on his feud with the fbi. he says he is very disturbed when he was asked if he trusts

the fbi. and he added another twist to the immigration debate. he is willing to offer a pathway to citizenship for some of the d.r.e.a.m.ers but only if he gets billions of dollars for his border wall and border security. we have all developments covered for you. jeff zeleny is live in davos traveling with the president. hi, jeff. >> good morning, alisyn. president trump got a bird's-eye view of the snowy swiss alps as he arrived in davos a short time ago. he will make his first appearance, indeed the first appearance from a u.s. president in nearly 20 years. but all the president's words here likely to be overshadowed by his words last night at the white house on the russia investigation. president trump touching down in switzerland this morning for the world economic for numb davos. after a remarkable session with reporters before leaving the white house. the president now saying he will commit to questioning from special counsel robert mueller. >> i'm looking forward to it

actually. >> you want to? >> here's the story, just so you understand there's has been no collusion whatsoever. no collusion whatsoever. i would like to do that, and i'd like to do it as soon as. good luck even. do you have a date set, mr. president? >> i don't know, no. i guess they're talking about two to three weeks. i have to say, subject to my lawyers and all of that. but i would love to do that. >> to reach a higher standard, you would do it under oath? >> i would do it under oath, absolutely. >> white house lawyer ty cobb doing damage control. he's still in negotiations with mueller about the type of interview the president will agree to. cobb telling cnn, while mr. trump was speaking hurriedly before leaving for davos, he remains committed to continued complete cooperation with the office of special counsel and is looking forward to speaking with mr. mueller. the president also saying his efforts to defend himself have been unfairly portrayed as trying to interfere in the case. do you think robert mueller will be fair in this larger investigation? >> we're going to find out.

we're going to find out. because here's what we'll say, is and everybody says no collusion, there's no collusion. now they're saying, oh, well, did he fight back? if you fight back, you say okay instruction. if you bite back, john, if you fight back, oh, it's obstruction. so here's the thing, i hope so >> reporter: repeatedly saying this when asked if he trusts the fbi. >> i am very disturbed, as is the general, as is everybody else that is intelligent. >> reporter: justice department official tells cnn a technical glitch impacted thousands of fbi phones. mr. trump also renewing his criticism of the number two man of the fbi, andrew mccabe, but insisting he does not recall asking mccabe who he voted for in the 2016 election, despite the fact that the white house official confirmed the conversation on tuesday. >> did you ask mccabe who he voted for?

>> i don't think so. no. >> is it possible you did. >> i don't remember asking the question. i think it's also a very unimportant question, but i don't remember asking the question. >> the president says he supports a pathway to citizenship for some d.r.e.a.m.ers. if he gets $25 billion for his border wall, an idea he rejected just a week ago. >> do you want citizenship for d.r.e.a.m.ers? >> we do, we're going to morph into it. >> what does that mean? >> over a period of 10 to 12 years, somebody does a great job, they've worked hard, it gives them incentive. they do terrifically, whether they have a little company or whether they work, whatever they're doing. if they do a great job, you i think it is a nice thing to have the incentive after a period of years to be able to become a citizen. >> will you extend the deadline? >> i might do that. i might do that. i'm not guaranteeing it base -- but i certainly have the right

to do that if i want. >> reporter: that promise of citizenship in 10 or 12 years sparking immediate outrage and backlash from the conservative website breitbart which is suddenly called the president amnesty don, referring to his immigration view. this will all be front and center as republicans and democrats try to get-together on some type of a deal on d.r.e.a.m.ers. this is all coming as the president is scheduled to meet in a couple hours with brush prime minister theresa may and isis raily prime minister benjamin gnat anja hue. this is not necessarily president trump's crowd. it is a crowd of globalists here. he brought a cheering section, if you will, with him. seven cabinet secretaries is and almost eight or nine senior advisers flying over here. so a lot of trump administration presence here at davos as he begins this meeting shortly. chris and alisyn? >> all right, jeff, appreciate it. let's bring in cnn political analyst david gregory and michael zeleny. he worked with bob mueller.

he is an expert in money laundering and cases of this nature. great to have you both here. michael, let me seize on something that was really instructive for people in this gaggle from the president. he said a couple of things that really shine a light on what might happen if he sits down with the investigators. and i want your take on it. first, he said it's not obstruction when you're just fighting back. okay. that's one thing, he said. then he said this about andrew mccabe. let's play it. >> did you ask mccabe who he voted for? >> i don't think so. no. no, i don't think so i did. >> you don't? >> i don't think what's the big deal with that, because i would ask you who you -- who did you vote for? i don't think it's a big deal, but i don't remember that. i saw that this morning. i don't remember asking him that question. >> is it possible you did? >> i don't remember asking him the question. i think it's always a very unimportant question, but i

don't remember asking him the question. >> michael, please tell me if i'm wrong. boy, this seems like exhibit a why the lawyers are reticent to put him in there. what could happen if he is sitting across from federal agents and says, fighting back is not obstruction. i was just fighting back. and if he gives that answer about andrew mccabe and the white house already said he did ask him that question, andrew mccabe said he did ask him that question and he follows up by saying it is not an important question, what could that mean to investigators? >> so there's so much that got compressed into what happened yesterday at that impromptu press conference. firstly, of course, ty cobb has to be pulling his hair out. this is not the way you want to go into a negotiation with robert mueller around the terms of your interview. second, of course, it is exhibit a about the problems that they're going to have in controlling the president in ary stricted interview with mueller

because he does not tell the truth all the time. or he has convenient lapses of memory. with respect to the two other things. one, mccabe. of course it is an inappropriate comment. he is a federal employee and he can't ask another federal employee how he he voted. there are regulations about it. he is acting director of the fbi and just fired former fbi director who said i was asked for loyalty. this is sort of back door loyalty question in and of itself. so the pattern of inappropriate communications between the white house and the fbi in an ongoing investigation context is manifest in that exchange. finally, the last thing, chris, is this fighting back thing. the fighting back thing may be the beginnings of what we see as a legal strategy out of the white house, which is to say this. the crime of obstruction of justice is a crime of intent. did you intend by your action to

obstruct justice or attempt to obstruct justice. he could say, y he es, i did that, but my intent was to protect the office of the presiden presidency, to protect my good name, whatever it is is that is of value to me. that's why mueller wants to sit down in person to make judgment calls about whether or not when the president said i didn't intend to obstruct justice, mueller can credit or discredit it. >> david, before i let you answer, this is what cnn reporting said that mueller is particularly zeroing in on. these are the topics that mueller has given to president trump's lawyers. okay. so they want to know and ask him about asking comey to drop the michael flynn investigation is, of course. i guess, what the motivation there was. the reaction to jim comey's testimony in front of congress. and then the outreach the president made to intel leaders,

and also members of congress, about the russia investigation. to michael's point, there is a lot of run way there where the president, if he is not disciplined and on on message, obviously for the lawyers that would be a headache. >> right. there are accusations and a pattern based on his statements, his own statements that the presses made that he was trying to interfere with this russia investigation and wanted it to be shut down. he said that he was tired of how comey was handling this investigation. he said that in an interview and proceeds to fire comey. he says for cause because of how he handled the hillary clinton investigation, which nobody believes because of how he was handling the investigation. and let's also remember when he's talking to andrew mccabe and said i don't recall asking the question but it is important, there is a reason why the fbi director has a 10-year term so that the fbi director can be immune from political pressure, that it should be an independent institution of our government as part of the

justice department and the president has shown that he doesn't respect that. so you're going to see how that would play out and whether that was actually illegal. there's something else i want to enter line from this impromptu press conference. every time the president is asked about his confidence in the fbi or confidence in the fairness of this investigation, what does he say, as chris pointed out, i don't know whether he has confidence in the fbi, which is such a horrible thing for the president to say about the fbi without a basis. two, he says we'll see. we'll find out. in other words, the process is already under way of bashing this investigation, mueller and the fbi, because if they come back with something against him or people close to him, he will seek to delegitimize the entire investigation. he is signaling that's exactly what he will do. >> michael zeldin, last night we were talking about what this negotiation could be about

between trump's attorneys and the russian interference investigators. it seems to me that topics, they're not going to have a lot of leeway. under oath doesn't matter. they will be sitting with a federal agent. whether or not it's in front of the grand jury may come up. it seems like it will be all about duration and that the investigators are going to want a lot of time because they have to know this president filibusters. he spins. he talks for a long time. they're going to want to come at him different ways to he get him to say things like he said in this gag order. >> el with, the timing of the interview and the length of time and the scope of the interview are questions that ty cobb and robert mueller's team are going to try to negotiate. but having taken a deposition of george herbert walker bush in our independent counsel investigation, i know we said to them we're going to ask our first question and ask our last question. if we need to do it over a two-day period or three-day

period, that's just the way it is going to be. you cannot shortcut, if you will, the amount of time or trunk ate the amount of time we get with you. we'll take as much time we need. otherwise, we have to go to the grand jury and do it there without your lawyers present and we'll do it under terms that we want. and so in the sense, chris, i don't believe he has any, you know, sort of discretion or opportunity to filibuster this because mueller won't tolerate it. he can't tolerate it. >> i want to switch topics and talk about immigration because there is a big development. we have been asking on our show any lawmaker -- yeah. turn that off. who is trying to call you right now? >> it's my wife. >> you should take that call. she's an expert on these issues. just let her answer. >> she's probably correcting something you said earlier. >> how about that ringtone. >> i know, i know. >> was that a soap opera sound

track or something? >> chris will take any opportunity to say you don't have a manly enough ringtone. >> that is a violation of man law, the ringtone. >> the thing was i was going to continue talking but i thought it was the academy awards music saying get off the set. >> it is disturbing on several levels. >> david. >> yes. >> let's talk about immigration. because my point was that we have been asking all sorts of lawmakers do you know what the president's position is on the d.r.e.a.m.ers? and none of them have been able to answer it because it's a moving target. so yesterday he said something that was remarkable and that was he's open to a path to citizenship. so not just legalization, a path to citizenship for the d.r.e.a.m.ers. who knows where they'll end up. but that was a big deal. >> it was a big deal. the obvious question is that today's position and will it change. this was the same president who said a couple of weeks ago that he wanted a big comprehensive

deal and he would take the heat from conservatives only to see him not take the heat and not follow through when the negotiations broke down as part of the government shutdown. now we're outside of that. he certainly feels he vested democrats on the shutdown. now he is signaling the basis of what could be a big comprehensive deal. a deal on d.r.e.a.m.ers to get a path to citizenship in exchange for what he wants, which is more funding for a wall and border security. now, it's interesting the figures that are being floated that may not matter in theened. he's talking $25 billion for a wall, which is the figure that reportedly schumer offered to support the democrats. i think there is a potential for a deal. the big question is whether he really can and will fend off opposition from conservatives and even hardliners within his administration. >> all right. we have seen the the breitbart headline. they don't like it. >> right. >> they don't like that he said that. today we will see if he back pedals on that.

>> it's who he wants to please. 80% of americans see this as compassion. michael zeldin and david gregory. for the record, i am jealous not just of your intellect but also your personal style. >> you're not using my ringtone? >> no. >> no, he has standards. >> my phone rings and it says who is it, who is it. warning a republican chairman from a memo. a congressman that sees the memo joins us next. shawn evans: it's 6 am. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston, 1,200 workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage,

craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day. putting money back in the pockets of millions of americans. as one of those workers, i'm proud to bring you gillette quality for less, because nobody can beat the men and women of gillette. gillette - the best a man can get.

the justice department warning devin nunes it would be extraordinarily reckless to release a memo that claims to show surveillance power abuses, especially without showing it to them first. which nunes is refusing to do. now democrats are countering with their own memo, saying that the gop has miss leadsing findings. joining us is the top democrat on the house judiciary committee

congressman jerry. good morning, congressman. >> good morning. >> is this a sad state of affairs. there are committpeting memos. will it come out? will we get to judge? >> it shouldn't come out. i have read it and the underlying source material. sit profoundly misleadng. >> you don't have further questions about the fisa process? >> no. i can't comment actually. it's secret. >> too late. continue. >> suffice it to say, the document is, extremely miss leading compared to the underlying documents. it is very dangerous for the republicans to say, oh, we have this document that's terrible but we can't tell you what's behind you. we can't show you the evidence because that's secret. if you only knew what we knew, you would know things are terrible. >> what do you think about not

showing it to the department of justice. the rationale is you don't show the people you're investigating the basis for your investigation. >> number one, why are they investigating the department of justice? there is an inspector general for that. but number two, the department of justice is the agency which got all of these secret documents and information. and you really should -- you are playing with the national security of the united states if you're going to on release documents based on classified information without showing and hearing from the department why it is dangerous or what you can release and what you can't. the department of justice is not claiming the right. but they are saying a at least show it to us and let us show you what's dangerous and what's not. >> lisa page, a member of the investigation for a while, remember, the fbi. she left the investigation before these revelations. she was romantically involved

with peter strzok, who was involved. >> he was removed. >> he was removed by bob mueller after the i.g. brought them out. in one of the exchanges, she says maybe it's time to have our first meeting with the secret organization, whatever she called it. the republicans seize odd that to say it is proof that a shadow organization exists in the fbi to undermine justice. >> well, that's ridiculous. first of all, she and strzok were sending e-mails back and forth with their personal opinions. and the opinions stated in those e-mails were the opinions of the majority of american people. they didn't like trump, they didn't trust him. >> that's the proof that we need. those are the questions that have to be asked. >> the is the investigation biased not whether the personal opinions of some people who work in the investigation. >> how do you get that answer?

>> you see the evidence that's brought out? >> do you need a committee, special counsel? how do you figure it out? >> you wait for the investigation to be concluded because there's no evidence right now. right now all we know about this investigation really because there have been no leaks. two people have been indicted, two people pled guilty. we know the names of some of the witnesses. that's all we know. and the republicans are trying to say, hey, we know some of the personal opinions of people who work on the investigation, but you can't conclude anything from that. people are entitled to their personal opinions. lots of trump supporters working on this. >> hillary clinton said i remember you and others complaining during the e-mail investigation that there is personal and political bias here as well. >> there could. you have to show bias on the investigation not on opinions of people that work on the investigation. >> the president came out yesterday and upset people certainly in his own party.

he believes there is a pathway to citizenship for certain d.r.e.a.m.ers to be negotiated here. do you believe that is what he believes. do you believe he will stick by that? >> i don't know since he seems to change from day to day. he goes back and forth. i hope he believes that. 87% to 90% of the american people believe these young people who were brought here as little kids and have grown up here, know no other country, ought to stay here and become citizens. that is the overwhelming opinion of the american people. it is the humanitarian thing. they know no other country. yes, i hope he believes that. he says he supports that. the republicans, many of them say they support it. the democrats support it. the american people support it. we need to get that done and then debate all the other immigration issues. >> they say no way. they say all of those things must be included in the bill

that deals with the d.r.e.a.m.ers. congressman nadler, thank you for your perspective. >> thank you. >> the mandate at 9:00 is facts first. what are the facts underlying these suspicions about the text messages and the fbi, and the fbi investigation overall. we'll take it on. president trump says he's willing to give some d.r.e.a.m.ers a path to citizenship. so are republicans in the house open to that idea? we ask one of them next. - [narrator] imagine a shirt that actually makes

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.

president trump says he is open to providing a pathway to citizenship for some dreamers. >> do you want citizenship for d.r.e.a.m.ers? >> we're going to morph into it. it will happen in the future. over a period of 10 to 12 years, somebody does a great job, they've worked hard, it gives in septemberive to do a grape job. but they've worked hard, they have done terrifically, whether they have a little company or whether they work. whatever they're doing, if they do a great job, it is a nice thing to have the incentive that

after a period of years being able to become a citizen. >> but of course there are conditions. joining us now to talk about this and so much more, leonard lance of new jersey. were you surprised to hear him say he is for a pathway to on citizenship. >> i was not. we should be working on this in a bipartisan capacity, and i'm open to that. >> how do you think the hard line republicans will ask? i ask because breitbart already has a headline calling the president amnesty don. we know folks like steve king, et cetera, just do not like this idea. >> there's obviously a debate in the republican caucus on this. i favor addressing the d.r.e.a.m.ers and also addressing border security. and i think that that can occur at the same time. and there will obviously be a compromise because for legislation to reach the president's desk, alisyn, has to pass the house and the senate. and this will be a matter of discussion. but the president has put forth

a proposal yesterday at his press conference and i'm willing to examine it. >> is that condition $25 billion? does the pathway for citizenship for d.r.e.a.m.ers come with a price tag of $25 billion for the border wall some. >> i think that's a high figure. that is a negotiating strategy. that will be part of the negotiations. i do favor greater border security. >> including the wall? >> including drones is and perhaps more agents. >> what about a wall? >> i don't think there has to be a wall in all places. perhaps in some places. i have been at the southern border. there is no need for a wall in southern arizona because the terrain is so rugged. >> are you saying you think you can get what you want and what many remembers want, including the president, for less than $25 billion. >> i would imagine so, yes. >> what about the president's promise of a real brick and mortar wall? will he move off that? >> i would imagine that's a negotiating strategy. but we certainly need greater

border security because when the last leg was passed the promise was made to greater border security. that path didn't occur. we don't want to go through this 20 years from now. >> let's move on and talk about other things percolating. is there a secret society in the fbi as be senator ron johnson and a couple others have suggested? >> i do not know whether there is a secret society in the fbi. i did read the memo. i think the memo should be made public. i understand now there is a democratic memo as well. i would make that public and let the people judge. >> let's separate them. there's supposedly, according to ron johnson, he has seen these messag messages. they were not fans. there was something maybe we

should save this for the secret society. nobody knows if it was in jest. then the mystery memo that you're referring to crafted by devin nunes of the house intel committee. nobody in the public knows what's in it. in fact, he won't give it to the department of justice. he won't give it to the senate intel committee. what's so mysterious, damning? >> i'm not able to discuss what's in the memo because it is classified. but i would hope that it could be made public. alisyn, if there is a democratic memo, as i understand there is, that should be made public as well. >> you don't see anything in the memo that couldn't be made public? >> i don't want to comment on the substance of the memo. >> we just heard from jerry nadler, who said he also has seen the mystery memo. he said it is profoundly misleading. >> i think that's why the public should judge. and i read what i read. i'm certainly willing to read a democratic memo if that's made

available to me as well. >> why isn't devin nunes releasing it to the senate intel committee or the public? >> i think it should be released to the american people. and i hope that that process can occur as soon as possible. >> the justice department has called it reckless. do you agree? >> i don't want to comment on the substance of the memo, but in my opinion it should be released to the american people and then experts across the board can decide. >> i understand you are hamstrung by the classified. you can't say anything. i got it. but in broadbrush strokes, in other words, some of your republican colleagues are talking about this mystery memo and planting the seed that something ominous is afoot. is that reckless? >> i think that the american people would judge and i would urge that the memo be made public. there is a process to do that. as i understand it would have to take a vote of the intelligence committee and a decision by president trump. >> all right. next topic.

i want to ask about one of your former colleagues on the ethics committee, patrick meehan. he had to step down because of this inappropriate relationship that he had, i don't know if relationship is the right word. he sexually harassed an underling on his staff and then paid her with office funds, i.e., taxpayer money. she had to leave her job. why does he still have a job? >> i believe that this is a matter that will come before the ethics committee. i believe that the congressman has self referred this to the ethics committee and therefore they will be examining it and i will be a part of that because i am one of the members. there are five republicans and five democrats and because congressman meehan has left, a new republican will have to be appointed to the ethics committee. i want to ensure the public through your program, alisyn, that the ethics committee works

in a by part san capacity and we will examine this and all other matters that come before us. >> from what you've heard would be paying an underling who you sexually harassed, would that be a violation of ethics? >> i'm not going into details but obviously there are strict rules regarding these matters. and we work in a completely bipartisan capacity, and we will get to the bottom of any matter that is referred to us. >> how long will that take? >> it may take two or three months because there is a process involved. it involves due process for all concerned. congressman lance, thank you for talking with us. a 12-year-old girl commits suicide. police found something on her cell phone that has them accusing two other children of cyber stalking. details next.

breaking news. a manhunt under way at this hour after a sheriff's deputy is killed in the line of duty in adams, county, colorado. he was shot in the chest as he responded to a call about assault. one suspect is in custody. two others are on the run. this is pretty severe. people some who live in the area are told to stay inside, stay away from doors and windows. it is an active and dangerous search. the suicide of a 12-year-old florida girl leading to two of her classmates being charged with cyberstalking.

diane gallagher is live in panama stu, florida with more on this story. diane? >> reporter: this is an especially tough story because the two teenagers were classmates of gabrielle. she hanged herself in her home january 10th. as police were investigating that, they determined that two of her classmates, two 12-year-olds, seventh graders were participate anything cyber talkinging, one girl and one boy. they were spreading rumors about gabby, basically saying she had sexually transmitted diseases, saying she was going to ruin her reputation. when she killed herself, the little girl deleted all the apps

because she thought she might get into trouble. the boy a little bit more disturbing. on the day gabby hanged herself, the moments before she reached out to him. she had been friends with him before, her parents tell me. she said she was having a bad day. they facetimed. she said i tried to hang myself. she showed the marks on her neck. and he said if you're going to do it, you should just do it. it is important to know this is not the only reason they believe gabby hanged herself. they believe there were other contributing factors here. her family tells me she had been bullied since the sixth grade came to the school. they are asking to do more about bullying in schools right now. chris, you can understand a community that is very upset with the two middle school students charged related to their classmate's suicide. >> oh, my god. diane, thank you very much. this is such a scary story.

i have two 12-year-old girls. look, it can be a cruel time, as we know, 7th grade. but the school has to be on it, obviously. social media is a scary place for adolescents and beyond. >> cyber bullying is real. i've covered it as a journalist for a very long time. it is more pernicious, more damaging than even physical bullying in a lot of cases. and the problem is, yes, schools have to do more. they often run away from bullying situations when they take place in the classroom. they are more limited with internet policy. the first line of defense is the parent. you have to know what your kids are doing. there is no expectation or right to privacy by a 12-year-old. their social media should be yours. i know it's a pain in the ass. i know it is tough to get their messages. i know. but you have to do it. these kids are doing things and you don't know and they can hurt one another. >> i'm going right home and reading their texts. >> your phone blows up.

you have to know what they're doing. you just do. we'll stay on that story. we'll figure out where it goes because it happens a lot. time for cnn "money" now. steve mnuchin defends weaker dollar. chief business correspondent christine romans in our money center with more. words matter, especially when they come from people with that kind of power. >> they do. a huge break in tradition. it is unheard of for a u.s. treasury secretary to go on the global stage and welcome a weak dollar. mnuchin yesterday said he's not concerned the dollar fell 10% and a weaker dollar is good as it relates to trade and opportunities. today he is clarifying he's not worried about the dollar in the short-term citing a weak dollar means cheaper exports. but it makes imports more

expensive. angela merkel and emmanuel mack reason calling it backward, a thinly veiled dig. he bailed on tpp. and he announced tariffs on chinese solar panels. lg is raising prices on washing machines in the u.s. alisyn, south korea just moments ago appealed to the world trade organization to say the united states and those tariffs are illegal and wrong. alisyn. >> okay. wow. christine, thank you very much for keeping us up to speed on all of that. president trump insists again there is no collusion and was none between his campaign and russia. so how does he define collusion? ? when i needed to create a better visitor experience. improve our workflow. attract new customers. that's when fastsigns recommended fleet graphics. yeah! now business is rolling in. get started at fastsigns.com.

i'm the one clocking in when you're clocking out. sensing and automatically adjusting to your every move. does your bed do that? i'm the new sleep number 360 smart bed. let's meet at a sleep number store.

but their nutritional needs (vremain instinctual.d, that's why there's purina one true instinct. nutrient-dense, protein-rich, real meat number one. this is a different breed of natural nutrition. purina one, true instinct. you wouldn't feel good not knowing the price here. don't let it happen when you buy your diabetes test strips.

with the accu-chek guide simplepay program, you pay the same low price. all without having to go through insurance. plus, they come in a spill-resistant vial along with a free meter. skip the guessing game and focus on your health. not the cost. make saving simple today at simplepaysaves.com.

president trump has said it again and again. it doesn't make it true, but he keeps repeating it. there was no collusion between

his campaign and russia. he says everybody says it. everybody except those investigating it and the special counsel's investigation where we've heard nothing. cnn contributor and "new york times" columnist maggie haberman wanted to know what this word means to the president, collusion. she asked white house press secretary sarah sanders to clarify. >> can you define what he means when he says collusion? >> i think the accusation against the president is that he had help winning the elect. that's simply untrue. the president won because he was the better candidate, because he worked harder, because he had a message that america actually cared about and believed in and came out in a historic fashion and supported and voted for him. that's why he won. >> maggie haberman joins us now. you're not a columnist, you're a reporter. i shouldn't have said that. i apologize. you were there. you asked. you got an answer. what was the sense of that? >> i got an answer to a point. what sarah sanders said is he

won without the help of anyone else. when people talk about russia this is a, quote, unquote, madeup hoax to try to delegitimize his election. we know how the president used this. i asked is he saying the reports from the intel community that russia engaged in e-mail hacking, that there was a spread of weaponizing information. she said he addressed that and he doesn't believe it played a key role here. that's fine. i asked it of the president last night when he did this impromptu gaggle with reporters and his answer was less clear. it is the thing he says over and over again. what i really took away from sarah's answer yesterday was a narrowing so that it's not anyone involved in my campaign which she tried to walk back later. but she said, you know, i asked specifically who is he speaking for when he says that. she said essentially he's speaking for himself, that anything he had knowledge of,

anything he might have done, and that is a bit of an evolution. >> i don't know, maggie. i heard it -- something crystallized for me with that response, i hadn't heard it phrased that way. of course, we knew instinctively he didn't like it because it suggests he didn't win fair and square. when she said because i think the accusation against the president is that he had help winning the election and that's simply not true. that crystallized it. >> it's also not true, by the way. that's not what the investigation is about. >> of course. but that's how he hears it. the idea that she went on to say -- >> it's a made-up hoax. >> tell that to george papadopoul papadopoulos, to robert mueller, that she would repeat it again after all this time. >> i agree with her. her saying he needed help winning. that's all he cares about. i think the legal issue is weighing on him quite a bit. i think what he ultimately cares

about is you all think i didn't get there on my own. i did this on my own. none of you believed i could do it. i did it. look what i did. why wouldn't you give me my due. he said that last night because i pushed him again about collusion. he gave an answer i couldn't really understand. then he said, you all say hillary was a bad candidate. you never say i was a good candidate. it was a really startling statement. >> just because we now have a better understanding of why he says it, it doesn't make it anymore useful for less destructive. it does sadly remind me of my favorite movie "the princess bride." he keeps using that word, i do not think it means what he thinks it means. >> inconceivable? >> all of this is inconceivable. we know collusion is not a crime. there's no crime of collusion. but he seems to ignore the reality that he started this by telling us, maggie, as you maybe

even reported, nobody did anything. certainly me, was his only little hedge. since then, so many did so much. >> look, we have had michael flynn take a plea deal, george papadopoulos who nobody even knew was doing this, was in the process of doing this which again raises the question of what else does mueller have? only mueller knows. it is worth considering that there is possibly a universe of information out there that we are not yet privy to. >> maggie, you were in the room yesterday when the president surprised everyone by coming into the chief of staff -- john kelly's -- barging in. we see your tony tail. spotted it immediately. >> very attractive. >> distinctive, smart. >> describe this scene where the president just walked in unannounced. >> we were sitting there waiting for a briefing -- a background briefing on immigration that i think they would like to have kept as a background briefing.

this photo is distributed by the white house. it has john kelly's name on the door. we were four minutes into the briefing and suddenly the president pops in. my understanding is he found out that this was going on, that there were a bunch of reporters assembled and he basically wanted to make a show of it. most people i spoke to in the white house took the fact that he did this as a shot at john kelly. it was not an overt shot. remember, it was not that long ago that the president was angry that john kelly was on capitol hill and telling fox news that the president had not been fully informed in his view of the wall. the president talked again about the wall. i think it was a show of, i'm running things, you're not. >> so john kelly was surprised, the chief of sta? >> i originally wondered if there was orchestrated. sort of, whoa, look at our surprise guest. i don't think it was. i think the president found out about it and showed up. the president was not accompanied by anyone from his communications department. there were two people that were

already there, but the president showed up with his guards. >> kelly didn't know this, the staff didn't plan it. this is what they're dealing with with the president. >> every day. >> he heard about it, saw it as an opportunity. it's not as if he opened the door and said this is not the executive steam. >> what are all of you doing here? >> thank you, chris. what ended up happening was, he said two things. one was he talked about speaking to mueller under oath. realistically as you know very well, chris, when you talk to the fbi, you are lying to investigators regardless of whether you're under oath or not if you tell a lie. the oath question doesn't really matter. he went much further than his lawyers wanted him to. you had ty cobb walking this back furiously soon after. you also had the president emphasize a path to citizenship as part of their immigration plan. my understanding from somebody in the white house that was indeed -- the possibility of it

was going to be what they talked about in this framework on monday, but it was going to be described as a piece with the wall and changing what the president has emphasized as chain migration and making it just a nuclear family instead of parents, and funding for the wall was critical. it's a question of degrees and emphasis. the president leaned very hard into path to citizenship which is an 1/2 ma to his base of support irs. >> maggie, stick around if you would. >> we're following a lot of news. let's get after it. the president talking about this, how to make his lawyers a bit nuts. >> he didn't mean any of that. he's going to follow his lawyers' advice. >> there's no way mueller will agree to anything but an in-person interview. >> i would do it under oath. >> the first time he used the term fight back was today. >> if he tells the truth, he may walk into an obstruction case. if he lies, it's a false statements case. what a terrible dilemma. >> no one should ever ask anyone

else who he voted for. i hope mr. mccabe didn't answer. >> it's not the republicans who created a theory of a secret society, it wasn't republicans that deleted five months of text messages. >> a lot of my colleagues need to take a deep breath and stem back from some of these conspiracy theories. good morning everyone. welcome to your "new day." it's thursday, january 25th, 8:00 in the east. president trump is in davos, switzerland at this hour where he plans to meet with britain's prime minister on the sidelines of the world economic forum. >> how did you not get this assignment? >> i don't know. i am going to wrestle jeff zeleny to the ground next year for that. >> i've seen that before. it ain't pretty. >> no, it's not. the president held an unplanned q&a session with reporters declaring he's looking forward to being questioned under oath. this as cnn learned mueller's team has