good evening we begin tonight with a number of breaking news story all had to

do with ongoing investigation of russia and possible obstruction of justice. the other item appears to fit a patternment another alleged instance in which president trump tried to asscertain or obtain the loyalty of the top official of justice, we are talking about rosenstein in this case. the new reporting according to our sources that shortly before rosenstein's testimony, the president asked him, "are you on my team." this is after asking mccabe and james comey for his loyalty. we'll have more on both of the stories tonight. we want to begin with the deal of the investigation and the people running it and the latest

so-called nunes memo' memo. the fbi and christopher wray now publicly releasing it and addressing security issues. the white house intends to get the memo out one way or another. the president was caught on an open mic saying the chances of it being released are 100%. >> don't worry. 100%. >> can you imagine that? >> 100%. that was last night. the four-page memory row alleges that the fbi viewed of surveillance act by using the so-called steel dossier of carter page. for days republicans have been

saying that christopher wray was shown the memo and had no problems with it. basically, he signed off on it. here is what one republican congressman said on this broadcast two nielghts ago. >> the fbi director has seen our memo and it was only four pages so he can read that readily and come up with an opinion along with his top advisers and legal counsel and as i said, there were no issues factually raised with the content or with our memo. >> okay, so he said no issues raised with the content of the memo. a lot of republicans on the hill said the same thing. it was a talking point of theirs for days. here is what the bureau really think about this memo. quote, "the fbi was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo. as expressed during our initial

review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact memos' accuracy." those certainly seems like issues with the content thrust of the memo. the fbi says these concerns were addressed during the initial reviews. all of those republican talking points about the fbi director having no problem with it does not seem to be true or the fbi is lying. someone is not telling the whole truth here. before, christopher wray showed the memo, steven boyd, also raised concerns. the department of justice said they would like to review it and so as the fbi. john mclaughlin served both the democrats and republicans president, had this to say. if the nunes memo is about four pages, it is a careful pick bowl of cherries.

a real debate needs both. someone fears that. now, keep in mind there is ample reporting of a number of factor and not just the so-called dossier, the white house and supporters of the president have been saying repeatedly the fbi and the justice department are all tainted and this dossier is a big part of it. does those white house talking point sounds like the nunes memo? did the white house consults on republicans of the hill who raise this memo. quigley says was any of this done during conversations or consultations of anyone in the white house. no nunes says as far as i no, no. mr. chairman, does none of the

staff members had any cons consultations or communications at all with the white house. chairman nunes did not answer o nor sarah sanders. >> did devin nunes worked with anybody in the white house. >> he worked with the white house before when it comes to intelligence and russia investigation. >> look, we have certainly coordinated with members of congress as it is appropriate as to specifics on this, i don't know the answer. i am not aware of any conversations or coordinations with congressman nunes. >> she's not aware of any coordinations or conversations. the congress is to oversee the white house and not collaborate on some of the national security questions possible.

it would be crazy thinking this would be possible, right? sadly, it is not so hard to imagine, in fact, it has happened and it happened with devin nunes. lets go back to march 22nd of last year. >> what i read seems some levels of surveillance activities and perhaps legal but i don't know if it is right or the american people would be comfortable with what i have read. >> so that's congressman nunes last march having just rushed to the white house to brief the president on these allegedly disturbing details that he just learned of the alleged improper of unmasking scale of the target. there is a technical term for the process. it was a crock. here is sean spicer being asked about it the next day. >> chairman nunes today refused

to -- will you rule out that the white house or anyone in the trump administration gave chairman nunes that information. >> i don't know if we briefed the president or not. i don't know if that makes sense. i did not sit on that briefing. i don't know why he would travel and brief the speerk aaker and down that we'll brief him on. i am note aware of it. >> i am not sure what his smell test was but the stink was quite real. as we learned a few days later, that's exactly what happened. here is the headline on march 27th. fast forward, now to this. this time nunes is not saying whether his staffers collaborated with the memo at

the white house. his office put out a statement, "having stonewall congress demands for information for nearly a year, it is no surprise to to see fbi and doj issue." >> the one thing they all have in common is they're all involved in investigating the president and under suspicion by the president for not doing his personal bidding. we'll have more on this and possible redaction. cnn's andrew acosta is joining us now.

>> although we should point out this source is telling us redaction is are likely to be made. that redactions will be made to this memo and at this point would be released. we could caution our viewers, the president has not received the final recommendation from his staff. this source, get this, this source says a final decision has not been made as of right now in terms of releasing that memo even though the president says it was a 100% deal at the state of the union last night. >> you tried to ask the president about the memo, how did it go? >> the white house really clamped down on responding at all and as a fmatter of feedbac, they did not responded to the fbi's statement tonight.

we tried to ask but essentially they shot us down. >> here is what happened. >> thank you all so much. >> mr. president, any response to the fbi saying in that statement that the nunes memo should not be released. >> all right, we are leaving. lets go. >> there you go. i think one of the staffers tried to tug on my jacket to get met out the door. >> as you saw the president did not want to comment and obvio obviousobviou obviously this puts him in a difficult spot. his hand pick choice to leave the fbi recommending this memo is not released. it appears the white house is going to try to meet the fbi half way and recommend some redactions. it is not clear whether satisfy the fbi. >> look, chris wray saw it and clearly wray has objections to

this. we saw that from the letter and department of justice days before wray was given the chance to see this. they said it would be a big mistake. >> that's right, not only raising objections and releasing to the public. it is not everyday that the fbi would put out a statement. this is a rare public statement saying mr. president, don't do this. that's why you are seeing of what is a constitutional clash that's going on inside the administration or at least a clash between the white house and the national security community because there are people concerned inside the fbi of sources and methods being revealed in all of this, which is why i think the white house is talking about this redaction. the white house appears to be going with these political demands inside the conservative base with their party and along

with paul ryan and saying they want this memo out. make no mistake, this is something that could haunt this white house in the months to come if, you know, if it turns out somehow the release of this memo damages the russian investigation where people inside the bureau feels like they cannot do their jobs. >> jim acosta. >> mike quigley as you saw squared off on devin nunes, you said when uconn frontyou confro. his mannerism led you to believe he was not being candid, can you describe it how so? >> let me add to that, my first year of watching chairman nunes of his run to the white house, i have also witnessed his unwillingness to sign subpoenas for key witnesses. i think there is a long history

leading up to questioning. it is hard to read in the transcript mannerism, that's why jury don't read transcripts. i think if there is audio and video combined, we can see he's ruffled and not wanting to answer questions. the totality of skicircumstance led me to believe that he was being truthful. >> we saw sarah sanders, i don't know, i don't have the answer to that. do you believe chairman nunes or his staff was in fact working with the white house. what's next? is there anything trying to do to prove that? >> well, we have to look at the totality here. also in the transcript, i pressed the chairman about having the intelligence agencies brief congress on this or at

least tell us what their concerns are and check these memos. he said i am not going to have them contest before us. we are investigating them. it is another example of the chairman's unilateral stealth attempt to break all the rule and the tradition and the customs. he's with a few staff that i think acting as an agent of the white house and has through the entire of the year. all i can do is ask the right questions and make sure the american public know what's going on. this is the president of the united states acting to defend himself legally and politically at the disfenpense of your natil

security and complicit in that is the fbi and chairman nunes. >> would they want to answer questions in front of them? >> absolutely. our memo released at the same time. at the business meeting, we are talking about that transcript, they voted against that on party lines. they did not want anybody to come here and brief the entire congress or executive sessions. they did not want anybody to have a long-term to review or critique it or a chance for redaction. it is clear they wanted this out and transparency on a one sided bases. they did it with a phleflimsy m. i was a little harsh as a former

pro professor. i describe it as a report written with two red bulls under their belts and they have not read the book. >> in nunes' statement says top officials using unverified court documents. have you seen any evidence to support that claim. nunes himself to your point and i talked to adam schiff about this and he has not seen the under lining evidence. >> this investigation began independently of the steel dossier, that's an important statement as i can make. if the minority memo is released in the public or at least congress is allowed to read that, it is a more scholarly report with actual footnotes which will point by point, i

believe it will bolster the integrity of the entire investigation. this is a rush to action. it is not a return to judge t s this. it is a delivered attempt to judge and totality of circumstances. we like to see this where members of congress are allowed to do this but instead we rushed materials which is a lie and misleading and it is inappropriate and it hurts our national security, putting us all in an extraordinary position, destroying the trust and relationship that's critical in keeping us safe between the intelligence agencies and congress. >> let me repeat that, you are saying that you can say with complete accuracies that these so called steel dossier was not the basis for the application? >> what i am saying is this investigation that began as as

counter intelligence investigation began independently of the steel dossi dossier. >> congressman quigley, appreciate your time tonight. coming up next, our intelligence, what they have to say about the white house what's doing and later cnn reporting on the news revealing encounter between president trump and rosenstein and the question questioning him being on his team. that and more when we continue. yahoooo! ahoooo! plus, unlimited family plans come with netflix included. spectacular! so, you can watch all your netflix favorites on your new samsung phones. whoa! join the un-carrier and get a samsung galaxy s8 free. all on america's best unlimited network.

this one's below market price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value.

when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout...

...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. . the show down between trump and picking his member. anyone remember that? today was all about the nunes' memo. last night, the president made it plain that he wants the public to see it. it is that open mic moment again at the state of the union. >> don't worry, 100%. >> can you imagine that? >> this was the president last

night. tonight, jim acosta told, the white house made redact portion of the memo. chairman rogers, i bring this up again to you, we heard from paul ryan and the congressman broadcast that you were on two nights ago. all are saying christopher wray had a chance to see this and nobody raise objections and started making changes to this. the implication was that the fbi had to essentially, christopher wray signed off on this. clearly, that's not the case. >> well, as my understanding when the fbi director was there, hey, this is a lot to take in. i want to take this back. he reads it and sees it and he said hey, it was just himself. the fbi director a few months now. he says i am going to go back and look at it. you need to give them the opportunity to run through that information with his folks and clearly they came to a different

conclusion that it was, they admitted important facts to that case. here what i say drives me crazy about this is whole thing anderson. listen, if there are allegations that the fbi perjure themselves, both republican and democrats should be upset about that. >> sure. >> number two, they should not say nothing there. clearly the way republican majority is trying to release this without all the facts? i think it is a disservice, this is a classified committee designed to deal with very sensitive intelligence classified information and you want a joint committee investigation into the problems of which they see dooliually me will do nothing but confuse the public and taint people's vision of what the important work of the committee does but the intelligence committee at large. >> yes, would it be if they were

investigating this and had concerns about this would not bring in christopher wray or other officials into ask them questions. would that be a normal step? >> we, i am really going to get in trouble now, anderson. i don't think any committee or any member of that committee should have voted on that. i am told they all read the under lining intelligence information based on the memo including all the information that was in the affidavit to the fisa court. without having all of that information, digesting it and reading it, you cannot make the information in the memo accurately reflects the concerns that you have. that's what the fbi is saying. hey, there maybe some truth in that and there may have been which, i struck, that was big fu news today. they did not disagree with the point. the facts that you picked omitted a lot of the facts. that tells me a little something

there that they need to look at but without understanding the whole picture, you had no idea that the memo is accurate and now they're talking about redaction and other things. by the way, the fbi is not immune to over sight and they should be held to account if they did those things. that's important here and the way they go about this. there is a notion of the democrats have a memo that's somehow pure and none of this is good. if the republicans are doing it, none of it is good. >> if fbi are concerned about it and fundamentally impact the memo's accuracies, how would redaction fix that? >> it won't. as the chairman says the affidavit will lay out the whole

picture. these are incredibly long, fisa affidavit and what you have are a number of facts that are gathered from a number of different sources to paint a different picture that shows the judge that you met your probable cause standard. a source may tell you person x is doing this but then you have bank records and financial records and intel coming in from other sources and all of those are presented together. if you pull any one of those out may not be enough on its own. the other thing, anderson, apart from this investigation, this particular case, if this is not a substantiated claim of abuse, this is not in fact abuse, if the fbi actually followed the pro procedures, this could have a dramatic impact of the fbi overall efforts. if people mistakenly have the

impression that the fbi cannot be trusted, you know the bread and butter of the fbi mattis go o is to go and talk to people and mostly to get sources. >> yeah. >> if you are an fbi agent who has a source, you know, you wanted to be able to show that you can protect them and the fbi is now -- >> thank you and thank you chairman rogers as well. coming up more breaking news of what his president trump wanted from rosenstein and new information about this and by the way, it may sound familiar, stick around. fast acting zzzquil liquicaps help you fall asleep fast,

like stop staring at the clock fast, like stop worrying about your boss fast, like wow, you're already asleep fast. when life keeps you up... zzzquil helps you fall asleep in as little as 20 minutes.

. . . all of that is similar from

a loyalty pledge that he asked from rosenstein and from james comey. >> so what really happen? >> deputy rosenstein wanted to speak to the president. sources tell us that the president had other things on his mind just ahead of rosenstein's upcoming testimony before a house committee. you may recall that from this past september. the president asked rosenstein where he thought the investigation and of links of his campaign is headed. a reminder here, rosenstein is the person who oversees the russia probe, the special counsel investigation, he was the one that appointed robert mueller. this is the latest episode that

the president asks questions sometimes crosses the line. the exchange could raise further questions about whether trump was seeking interference of the investigation by special counsel robert mueller. >> do you know any word on how rosenstein reacted to this? >> we were told that rosenstein was surprised by this and he did not give details in terms of where the russia investigation headed as the president asked him. he responded awkwardly of the president's team request, of course, we are all on your team, mr. president. the president did appoint rod rosenstein to be the deputy general. after the meeting, rosenstein was asked about loyalty pledges, here is what he said about that?

>> is it appropriate for the president asking for a loyalty pledge. >> i don't have any opinion on that, nobody has asked me of a loyalty pledge other than the oath of office. >> he told lawmakers in the same hearing that as long as you are following your oath of office, you can be faithful to the administration. we are told by sources that the president was focussed on this testimony that was upcoming. it was clearly top of mind during that meeting. we are told that the president was asking congressmen or suggesting specific questions they should ask rosenstein in that hearing. >> fascinating. >> thank you very much. joining me now discussing something that's familiar, jeffe jeffe jeffery tubin. it seems to be a pattern when it

comes to the president. >> a pattern of obstruction of justice, what is he saying to rod rosenstein when he's discussing the investigation of himself? he's saying are you on my team. he's not about on my team of fighting isis or fighting the mafia. are you on my team in connection with the investigation of trump? >> that's evidence of obstruction of justice and it is one of many pieces that have come to light already. >> carrie, if rosenstein overseeing the investigation, does that put him in an odd position if in fact mueller's team wanted to talk to him >> it does. there is been observers who's been paying attention or wondering whether or not rosenstein is a witness or whether that does raise questions about his continued over sight of the investigation.

but, the other part of pamela's reporting that's so interesting is that not only he asked if he was on the team but he also asked him about the substance of the investigation. early in the president's administration one could perhaps suggest that he did not understand of the relationship between the white house and the department of justice, he did not understand the norms that are supposed to be observed in terms of not pressuring the department of justice officials. there is no way by december of 2017, that one could make that argument about the president. >> kent, how do you see this when it comes to the president asking for loyalty. that certainly seems to be an reoccurring theme, it is several people, is that a problem? >> well, certainly when we look at the justice department as being different from all the other cabinets because of their

independent law enforcement decision they -- decisions they have to make there. you know early in the report that you just cited of the under statement of the report was this president crosses lines that previous presidents stayed on the other side of. i think donald trump does not all over the place. jeffery thinks that this one is evidence of criminal activity but, look, he crosses lines all over the place propriety and language and putting things on twitter that used to be in-house discussions. how do you digest all this is a little different. an example of that is no one

would believe that bill clinton never talked to his white house counsels about being rid of ken star. when donald trump does it, it is somehow and we know about it and it is somehow shocking. you know i just -- the comparisons just don't holdup with a guy of this personality. eventually he'll be talking to mueller's team either in writing or in person, he's going to have to leave the president that we saw usually, rath. >> this is criminal behavior. >> obstruction of justice. >> and the fact that donald trump is kind of a wacky guy does not excuse him from violating the law >> you are saying that goes to intent.

>> it goes to intent. it is also the under line crime. if you are obstructing justice, you are obstructing of justice regardless of what kind of personality you have. >> the president has a pattern of pressuring those involved in the investigation and different folks that come out of the investigation. that's where communications and contacts between the white house and the president and the department of justice, it is more important in that circumstance that those protocols be followed and procedures for white house influenced and communications on ongoing investigation between the white house and the department of justice have actually been relatively consistent in terms of policies over the past several administrations of both parties. >> ken, would it everyone

bbe be -- the bounds of propriety for trump discussing the investigation? >> the time line and that sort of thing but not at the level of detailed questioning and i would agree with the statement about just the first part of the statement just made about the fact that it is reasonable to expect certain lines of propriety to be maintained when dealing with the department of justice that don't exist to others. that goes back to the president willingness to not abide by all those expectations and it can have consequences here with the justice department that don't exist with any other department. >> kent and jeff and carrie, i appreciate it. with all the new investigations and including the storm of the

nunes' memo that has not come out yet. we'll get more from james clapper in all of it. 'sup, world? it's the box with 30% savings for safe drivers. coming at you with my brand-new vlog. just making some ice in my freezer here. so check back for that follow-up vid. this is my cashew guy bruno. holler at 'em, brun. kicking it live and direct here at the fountain. should i go habanero or maui onion? should i buy a chinchilla? comment below. did i mention i save people $620 for switching? chinchilla update -- got that chinchilla after all. say what up, rocco. ♪

today we learned that last month, the president asked rod rosenste rosenstein quote, "if he was on my team." >> the nunes' memo can be

released tomorrow and we can learn tonight with redactions. our time to speak with our james clapper with the former director intelligence. releasing this memo is dangerous. do you agree with the assessment? >> well, without having seen the memo, certainly, yes. i was quite struck by the fbi's statement today which actually did not say anything about sources or methods in jeopardy. what it spoke to was errors of facts through omission. i am not terribly comforted by news that this memo will be published with redactions because i don't think that's a reflective of corrective for omission of facts. t

. >> which is essentially saying it is cherry picking of information. if you have pages of pages and you end up with a four-page memo that it is possible that it is cherry picked. >> yes. i have seen this happen before in congress and particularly when you are into a partisan issue where only one side is writing something and you know staffers are smart and they can pick and choose what they want to make a case and that's, i think is what probably prompted the the statement by the fbi. >> a number of republicans from the hill on this committee have said, well, of course the department of justice and the fbi did not want this memo released. i guess what i don't understand is if this is a real investigation of the fbi and the department of justice and maybe they did do something proper, would one of the first steps

bring christopher wray or whatever officials in front of the committee and grill them. >> yes, in ta closed environmen. yes, i have been on the receiving end of that. one of the members or the committee thought the members are not up to any good. in this case, it was the general who was there, obviously, this got all kinds of political over tones and where it seems to me, chairman nunes is most concerned of trying to protect the president. >> how unusual the situation is. when we see nunes in a situation where he made the midnight run to the white house and he's been

briefed and turned out they got information from the people at the white house itself. how unusual to have the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein that's fallen to deaf ear or is it a possible redaction of something? >> i don't recall of another example of this. i do remember very well since i went through it was one of the senate committee, it was democrats released its report, a version on the extraordinary interrogation techniques. we went through a rigorous redaction process with him and a lot of back and forth discussions in a closed environment. that's what i am used to and i have seen it has been worked out

but never something like this. >> this reporting that the president wanted to know whether rod rosenstein on his team, i want to know your reaction to that? >> i thought immediately when i heard about that was the conversation he had with james comey of the 27th of january when i was at the fbi and he gotten a call from president trump to have dinner with him and i remember and this is my characterization. because of the importance which he hopes to convey to the president of an independent fbi director and i thought immediately that were, this apparently, the team reference maybe a little more benign than a pledge of loyalty. it is never theless smacked of the same thing and it sort of falls into a pattern here.

>> last week, mike pompeo met in the u.s. with the russian counter park, that russian spy chief is under u.s. sanctions and not details emerged about the meeting. you know there is always danger of multiple events, i am wondering when you see that, does any of that strike you as unusual? >> well, having all three of them at once is unusual. now. there is been long tradition of engagement and attempts to engage with russian intelligence officials. i certainly did that. i think what's important is whatever it is director pompeo said. i hope he did not give him a free pass and not acknowledge hey, we knew what you were doing meddling in our election. lets get on with business.

as far as engaging with one of them who was under sanctions, well, i think i would have a conversation with my general counsel about that. again, i don't know what the specific modalities were adopted. on one none i engaged in were successful. it was always a one way street. but i do hope that there was some mention made of those very same services by the way were the ones leading the interference. >> yeah. director clapper, appreciate your time. coming up next the exclusive new roring that shows an fbi agent under republican attack for allegedly aiding the democrats. evidence shows may have done the opposite. details ahead.

there's a vacation at the end of every week. whatever type of weekender you are, don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com directv has been rated #1 in customer satisfaction over cable for 17 years running. but some people still like cable. just like some people like banging their head on a low ceiling. drinking spoiled milk. camping in poison ivy. getting a papercut. and having their arm trapped in a vending machine. but for everyone else, there's directv. for #1 rated customer satisfaction over cable, switch to directv and get a $200 reward card. call 1.800.directv

to treat her frequent before diheartburn...xium 24hr lucy could only imagine enjoying a slice of pizza. now, it's as easy as pie. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn?

more breaking fuse remember all the bake to last week. terks messages between the fbi agent and lawyer were supposed to be part of a secret society designed to under mine the trump presidency? that turned out not to be true. the fbi agent at the center of the storm was deeply involved in lt decision the democrats and others think seriously damaged the dam pacampaign of hillary c. >> what do we know about the role this fbi agent played in the decision about clinton. >> anderson, we're getting a detailed picture tonight about how peter strozk played a role in the crucial decision that

essentially turned the clinton campaign upside down days before the 2016 election. we have obtained a string of e-mails that show strozk took the first crack at draft of the new infamous letter that james comey sent to congress. informing them that the bureau was investigating newly discovered clinton e-mails on ant any weaners laptop. days will ever the election. it maybes sense that strozk would be involved in this. as the number tw counter intelligence. he was leading the clinton investigation at the fbi. it's also significant politically. why the republicans typecast strozk as having his thumb on the scale for clinton given his private text mess annals trashing the president. he didn't hold back when it came to taking action against clinton back in 2016. there's a for more nuance picture. >> strozk had reservations about making a public announcement

about this sfwl a source familiar with strozk tells me he was firmly of the view that the fbi had to pursue whatever leads were on the laptop. he was being aggressive about it. he had real reservations at the same time about making such public announcements just days before the election. in fact his text messages that were turned over to congress you see him and this lawyer grappling with the fall out. in one, page said she's not sure they should issue a public statement. strozk agrees. and it turns out that was sent on the very same day that comey sent his letter to congress closing out the clinton investigation. >> this report for the justice department inspector general supposed to be coming out. how much is on strozk? do we know? >> republicans have focussed on what strozk said in the text messages since he was on mullers team briefly. the inspector general report is supposed to take a broad look at how the fbi handled the clinton

investigation. from top to bottom. including whether limpynches tac meeting with clinton was appropriate. without following the typical protocol. in other words this report is going to be explosive and a potential land mine for the justice department and fbi far beyond text messages. much more news ahead. we'll be right back. she's always up on the latest trends. she got in early on the whole goat yoga thing. and her sunsets are always #nofilter. you like her. but you'd like her better if you made more money than she does. don't get mad at @just_marea. get eátrade. new year, new phones for the family. join t-mobile, and when you buy one of the latest

samsung galaxy phones get a samsung galaxy s8 free. yahoooo! ahoooo! plus, unlimited family plans come with netflix included. spectacular! so, you can watch all your netflix favorites on your new samsung phones. whoa! join the un-carrier and get a samsung galaxy s8 free. all on america's best unlimited network. you won't see these folks they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer.

get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. this valentine's day i wanted to turn everything i love about you into one thing you'll love forever. the jared valentine's day diamond event. save up to $1,000 off any diamond when you buy her setting at jared. and let our expert jewelers help you find or create the one ring that could only come from you and only be for her. only at jared.

♪ get ready for the wild life with one a day men's. a complete multivitamin with key nutrients, plus b vitamins for heart health. your one a day is showing. you wof your daily routine, so why treat your mouth any differently? complete the job with listerine® help prevent plaque, early gum disease, bad breath and kill up to 99.9% of germs. listerine® bring out the bold™