♪ 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™ that's it for us. we'll be back for another edition of 360 in two hours.

time to turn it over to chris cuomo for "prime time." >> good to see you my friend. we have a facts first feast. tonight. new information about what a controversial fbi agent did during the clinton investigation. urs that trump asked yet from another top justice official for loyalty. are you on my team? he asked. wait until you hear whom he asked. and why. does this show why trump wants to release the much me lined nunes memo? let's get after it. i'm chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." breaking news tonight. cnn learned exclusively president trump asked another for loyalty. deputy attorney general rod

rosenstein the man in charge of the russia investigation. he asked if he was quote on my team. according to to sources familiar with the meeting which took place in december. that's when rosenstein was preparing to testify before the house judiciary committee. we'll go one on one with former cia director michael hayden. what was said to rosenstein and the memo. as you know, this show has a mandate. facts first. let's look at trumps loyalty plays. when rosenstein testified to the house judiciary committee he was asked about president trumps alleged effort to get a pledge of loyalty from jim comey. here's what he said. >> is it ever appropriate for president of the united states to department the department of justice official of fbi trekt that.int have an opinion about no one asked me to take a loyalty pledge. other than oath of office.

>> can't say that anymore. the president has a pattern of controversially pressing top officials. more examples. not only did he ask gym comey, he asked director of national intelligence dan coats. to lean on comey about the russia investigation. and he asked nsa director mike rogers to publicly announce there was no collusion with russia. and he tried to stop attorney general jeff sessions from recusing himself from the probe. do you remember that? he was reportedly grousing saying session was supposed to be his guy. ask where's my roy cone? referring to the lawyer that taught trump how to attack his enemies. had asked mccabe who he voted for in the lebs as well. we have the president trying to get the deputy attorney general to commit to mim being on his team. it all seems to relate to the president desire, shared by

certain members of his party, to release a memo that may well under mine the administration of justice in this country. those, my friends, are the facts. let's take this situation within oun within. fo former cia director. general michael hayden. good to be with you. i have two i have never seen observations off the top for you. please, tell me if you share them. i have never seen something like this where a sitting president and members of the party are going around the intelligence community to release classified information saying it is intentional because they do not trust the doj or the fbi. have you? >> i have never seen it. it's a remarkable spectacle. and credit to the director of the fbi who went out there and issued a statement. not with his name on it. but his bureau.

complaining about this and saying it's harmful to the bureau and america. >> relevant also because this is the man that president trump chose. right? that's reason one. reason two, this is the man who many lawmakers have said to me over the last couple days, we sent it to the fbi chief. we gave it to chris wray. he didn't state any objection. now, he's stating a lot of objections. the counter argument is this, take this on for us. of course he doesn't want to get it out. it shows they're dirty. they were abusing our rights. in political interest to get their own justification and to get their own result. in that fisa application against carter page. that's the allegation. what do you make of that? >> i have been in the circumstance. where people are saying you're just pushing back because you're defending your folks or defending your institution. i suppose that could be a motivation for me then. maybe for the director now. fund emmet tally this is about

the facts. what the director said was that the memo is so incomplete, so deficient in the wholeness of information that it leads to lse cclusion. he's offered to go up there in front of the whole committee. not just the authors of the memo. which is one party. in front of the committee with the people who crafted this particular fisa application. and walk them through the logic and the process. after that, if they have issues, we have issues. they're honest ones. >> that makes it reek of politics. if the concern is how tfts done and the people want to come and explain. even in open session. some of it you have to figure out whether or not they can talk about it in open session. if you don't want that it begs the question of why. you have the two almost absurd conditions going on. nunes his name is on the memo. even if it was written by staff. sdp the word is he didn't read the classified information. that their conclusions in the

mel are based on. he didn't read the facts that the conclusions are based on? and as you pointed out, you have all of the lawmakers jumping up and down saying this memo proves that they relied on that dirty dossier. to get this surveillance done. but none of them have seen the fisa application. so how would they even know, general? how much of the application for the warrant was a function of this dossier? >> there's a lot of questions imbedded in there. first of all with what was in theisa application, there's nothing in my experience that would suggest to me that a that was in there was a narrow thread back to the dodge dossier of christopher steel. after all, let's keep in mine this was a renewal. they had already established probable cause. as to why they want to go up on this coverage. they probably had evidence from the coverage.

>> they'd have to have it right? >> they had the origin promise. that the court accepted as probable cause. they had the coverage. during the period when the fisa was alkts active. and probably additional information which may or may not have included information from the steel dossier. that i'm quite comfortable in telling you that wouldn't have been niktd there by itself. it would have been corroborating information. that's what the director wants to explain. how big a web this was. how complex the arguation was. if there was some information is wasn't the basic premise of the fisa warrant. why they're doing this, why they are rejecting the offer to come up and walk through it. i'm saddened and dispinted to say that i think some members of the committee want the ambiguity rather than the precision. want the question out there rather than the answer.

>> the value of ambiguity rather than clarity. that's a line i took from you. you are very good. i don't remember asking the first question. and you answered it. the political expedience si that seems to be at play. let's assume that wind up being a deuce. people look at the memo and it's not as great as they're making it out to be. now you get to the what's the impact. why would this be bad for the intelligence committee and the doj? >> two or three reasons out there. number one, i think it's clear. i'm putting kmchips with the bureau. the memo is incomplete and misleading. it's not the kind of truth telling that we would like to have. secondly, there's probably a danger of putting sources and methods at risk. that can actually be resolved

through redaction. we'll see if that happens. and then finally over here you have the whole question of precedent. this fisa process is very closely held. it's actually more classified than most of the things that i touched as director of either agency. it's kind of itswn sacred ground because this is very sensitive stuff. you're talki about the privacy of americans. and it's a closed universe between intelligence professions and the american court system. now we're opening that universe and insert what by anyone's definition has to be an intensely political process. that's really a bad precedent. >> general, give me a quick yes, no. other than kennedy and terms of when he didn't listen the second time. other than that circumstance, maybe. have you ever seen where a president has their own hand picked people from the doj and

rosenstein and boid. and his hand picked fbi director whom he picked to be a cleansing agent. come to him and say don't do something and he did it anyway? >> it's even worse than your premise. bay of pigs is political. there are factors on the problem. this is a narrow technical, legal question. and here you have the president rejecting the advise of his technical and legal experts hand picked by him. in these organizations in favor of a political judgment. made by a congressional committee. that turns my world on its head. >> general michael hayden, thank you so much. your sperktive is needed and appreciate. trumps choices to lead the fbi and the doj use words like dangerous, reckless, and grave concern. about releasing the gop nunes memo. so, why would the president commit to releasing it?

up next, we go one on one with a republican congressman steve king. judiciary committee. he says the president is doing the right thing. next. people confuse nice and kind. but they're different. it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we choose real ingredients like almonds, peanuts and a drizzle of dark chocolate. find your favorite and give kind® a try.

gathered here are the world's finest insurance experts. rodney -- mastermind of discounts like safe driver, paperless. the list goes on. how about a discount for long lists? gold. mara, you save our customers hundreds for switching almost effortlessly. it's a gift. and jamie. -present. -together we are unstoppable. so, what are we gonna do? ♪ insurance. that's kind of what we do here. all right. let's get more on the breaking news. really, this is more than that. this is something that we have almost never seen. anything like this. yes u you had the politics surrounding the torture memo. and you have to go back when the kri was on one side and

politicians on the other. not like this. we have president trump and a sliz of his party throwing their people under the bus. president trump and the fbi director he appointed as a cleansing agent. christopher wray. they are in a show down over the expected release of a republican intelligence memo alleging fbi abuses of surveillance laws against the trump campaign. tonight the fbi is expressing quote grave concern about making the memo publi why? they say it's inaccuratebecause it doesn't ha complete basis. and worried about sources and methods. however, the white house chief of staff john kellily says he predicting a quick are lease. adding the whole world will see it. what is this about? is this going to be good for the democracy or good for political expediency. a strong opinion and a voice in the matter.

republican congressman steve king. member of the house judiciary committee. before we get after it, what's right is right. thank god you are okay. you and the other congress members on that train. horrible what happened to the driver of the truck. horrible that any of it happened. thank god you're all right. good to have you, congressman. >> well, thank you, chris. i do want to say that there's a family that's saying good-bye to a loved one tonight. and other families sitting around hospital beds and that tragedy it took place if it was going to take place, the people that were on that train i counted nine doctors that answered the call. and two nurses that answered the call and a priest that gave last rights. the circumstances if it was going to be a horrible tragedy the american people would have been proud of how members of congress and the team launched into action and did the right thing. and we all got together and did a sermon and prayer session and prayed if the families. we're grateful it wasn't worse.

and our prayers are the with the families grieving tonight. >> look, it is good to hear that people stepped up and it is horrible they had to at all. we'll keep track of what happened to the people on the truck. and tell their story. thank you for relaying the informing. let's get to the matter at hand. make the case to me. why is releasing this memo the right thing to do when you have your own people republicans at the top of the fbi, trumps choices at the doj. rosenstein and steven boid saying don't do this. >> i think the fst place when the department of justice pout the message that said don't release the memo, i don't believe any of them had read the memo. i'm not anybody in doj has at this point. i'm of course we know christopher wray the director of the fbi went to read the memo last sunday. and the next action that took place that opening a business

was that mccabe was gone from employment. as number two in the fbi. so that should tell us something. and. >> it could tell us nothing. the reporting is -- we'll talk about your ability to do over sight. when you guys are this divided and i read the transcript of that vote to release this, that doesn't sound like a group that can work together. christopher wray with mccabe the reporting is maybe something in the inspector general report triggered a concern that wray had with mccabe. maybe, maybe not. nothing about this memo wray had to step forward and put out a statement from the fbi saying grave concerns. so what makes it worthwhile? >> well, i wish he was more specific about grave concern. >> what else do you need to hear? >> we can't point to a potential ig report and say that's the reason wrist christopher wray made the move to remove andy

mccabe. that had to be -- i have read the memo. i have that advantage of course. it's a memo incomplete, according to to the assertion of the d. have they read itaven'they i don't know. there's nouch thi as a complete memo. you can always assert that. it's solid it's factual. but also it being object i have, the information that's used to build the memo is not in the memo. i have not had access to that. i do know devin nunes. and i know a good number of the members. i trust they wouldn't put their names on the line and have anything but the most solid information. i read it carefully. i believe it's objective. one more thing. i do not believe that there's anything in there that jeopardizes our national security. or sources or methods. >> all right. well look, good. i would hope you wouldn't want to release it otherwise if you

knew that. however, a few questions. one, you haven't seen the fact bases for the conclusion that has to give you pause. you're reading conclusions you don't know where they came from. you trust devin nunes. running around at the white house getting intelligence. playing games. not telling the rest of the committee. getting investigated. he didn't read the fact basis for the conclusions of his memo either. devin nunes who like you and everybody else who says this is the right move hasn't seen the fisa application. that you're criticizing. where does your confidence come from? >> how does ghet the fisa apication? i want the american people to see. >> how do you judge it when you haven't seen it? >> we are going to have to pull all of this out. that's one of the things the memo does. >> you already concluding it was wrong. >> i know what's wrong.

>> how do you know it was wrong if you didn't see the application? >> chris, the data will come out. the data will come out. i want it to come out. i want it all to come out. i don't know ever get to the bottom of this. if we have a congress that does over sight we can't accept the fbi or doj or branch of government from closing the gate saying sorry you can't look at this because it's classified. what i saw and what i believe happened could go on and we become a banana republic. this is earth shaking. it goes deeper than water gate. >> deeper than water gate? how? >> deeper than water gate. and how is it deeper? because the fbi and the doj by the information that i have observed and the testimony that i have -- i'll say the testimony i have analyzed from listening to and questioning multiple members of the fbi and the doj.

tells me that fbi and doj have been weaponized. if they have been weaponized for political reasons much many the say way the irs was weaponized for political reasons, america cannot tolerate that. if it was used to influence an election, and to under mine a tran sigs a under mine an inaugurate president. that should chill and shock you as well. >> the problem is that you're all in on the conclusion. but you don't know it's true. you haven't looked at the judicial proceeding that you're saying was dirty. >> i said if. >> you said this is what you read in the memo is more troubling than water gate. >> here's what. it's not a conclusion. i said what i read is more troubling. we have to bring the evidence and prove it. ichtd out front. i want it examined. >> why release the conclusions in the memo? we talk a lot about things. >> if we do not, we're allowing the fbi or the doj to decide

they'll police their own house. we can't let it happen. i think a will the of jeff sessions. tremendous attorney general. i'm worried about other people in the ranks. >> i get that. i get you believe there are bad apples. listen to the totality of what you're saying. of course, there's over sight over the department of justice. that's how democracy works. but, fact for the record the inspector general that's doing the independent review of the practices during the campaign brought out the texts that devin nunes and the rest ov you seized upon as if they were your discovery. and the missing texts that you seized upon as if it was relevant. was cleared up. within the fbi. and they found the texts. the secret society that you seized upon that wou up becoming bogus. this is a pattern of jumping for a conclusion because it is a beautiful distraction from investigation you don't like. now -- listen to what you're

saying. >> there are dots that need to be connected along the way. and history will look at this and say if we fail to connect the dots we were naive and foolish. that's the other side of the coin. we have an obligation to use good judgment and common sense. there have been a number seven different people removed from the fbi and the doj. seven of them. over the last since james comey and down the line. >> why would christopher wray -- >> he's not the last one for the week. >> the fact you get rid of people and chase them out of office not necessarily a bode of confidence on any kind of justification. if wray -- did they? how do we know why they left. do you know why mccabe left? >> i have a good idea. i don't think andy mccabe woke up monday morning and said i'll take add vase from wray and leave the job. i think he was told you're gone.

because of what was read in the memo. >> i don't think -- look. i know you read the memo. here's the thing. you can release this memo. the intelligence community doesn't want to. the justification for why that's okay coming from your side is suspicious. and then you're saying i haven't seen the fisa application. i need to see the facts. why wouldn't you do it the common sense way? i want to know what happened in the fisa application. you cand that outtomorrow. the doj guy said they will come to you. they said they would come to you and explain how they did it and answer any questions that you have. >> they have duress. that doesn't necessary mean if they explain it to us it will be how it was. we have gone through this for a year. >> what if they show you the application? >> the fbi or doj. and they have not been forthcoming. i do think christopher wray is

an honorable individual and has an opportunity to put the fwi on the rail again. >> he has grave concerns and think it's the wrong thing to do. >> rosenstein was not forthcoming either. what i saw in his eyes if he was asked if the fbi paid for the dossier. told me something different than the answer he gave under oath. time will tell. it took a long time to drill through water gate. there's a lot. >> water gate was a felony. that you had an obvious cover up. and material movement by the president of the united states. to stop the administration of justice and resulted in his impeachment. if that fits anything that's going on it would be a possible, possible potential out come of the russia investigation. and it really seems like you guys are trying to mirror the we have to wait for what comes out. >> let me point out something. >> once you lease this memo the

geeny is out of the bottle. >> it goes deeper than water gate. the reason it isn't bigger is because it hasn't identified a president. i remember president obama saying in april of 2016, when he said an interview with chris wallace there is no corruption, there is no fraud. there's guaranteed full stop. how many times do i have to say it. we should go back and look at the words. we'll see how they ring in the ears of obama and clinton. and activity within the fbi and doj as with e get to the truth. i want the american people to see it all. >> well, it should start with the facts and go to the conclusion. congressman, you out of your way to be here tonight. this is an important matter. you had a rough day. thank god you're okay. i appreciate you making the case to the american people. >> let's see how well my words stand up over time. >> you will be invited back. when we learn more.

>> i'll be willing to do that. more breaking news tonight. in the russia investigation. maggie haberman from the "new york times" will call in right now. she has a headline you need to hear. next. the commute is worth it. for all the work you pour into this place, you sure get a lot more out of it. you and that john deere tractor... so versatile, you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive. but just like a john deere, it's worth it. nothing runs like a deere. now you can own a 1e sub-compact tractor for just 99 dollars a month. learn more at your john deere dealer.

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. all right i'm actually getting read in on what we're about to learn right now. breaking news tonight in the russia investigation. "new york times" reporter and cnn political analyst maggie haberman is on the phone. what do you got? what's the headline? >> complicated one. a tick tock in to the drafting

of a statement of what air force one. the president supervised. he had hope hicks, donald trump jr. and a lawyer involved with the writing of the statement. in response to a times story that was coming about donald trump jr.s with a meeting with a russia lawyer in december 2016. specifically we learned a couple things. one is who was involved in the drafting. how it came about. the how it sparked an enormous amount of insight. the spokesperson for the president's legal team for a time is anticipated to tell robert mueller and the special counsel who want to speak with him and that's previously reported, about a conference call he was on with hope hicks and the president the day after the "new york times" story. this would have been a sunday. they were discussing e-mails. involving a discussion between donald trump jr. and people

setting up the meeting. that describe the intent as of offering up dirt on hillary clinton and hope hicks allegedly said the e-mails would never get out. her lawyer denies that was said. he's expected to tell investigators that he wondered whether that meant he was looking to obstruct justice. her lawyer has insisted she was never discussing anything about disclosing document. it's another turn of the screw in how they handle what was one of the deepest crisis of last year. reverse side will be trump jr. if the same body of e-mails that went into the discussion of the meeting that had e released the e-mails. that hicks may have been referring to. you have act and intent. and when they're looking at obstruction of justice. the intent is the tricky part. can the prosecutor find evidence

of corrupt intent. so impeding and doing acts with bad cause. maybe this fits into the puzzle. it fits ento our understanding. maggie haberman, whatever you are doing. get back to it. thank you for calling us. all right. perfect. that really helps us to set the stage for tonight's great debate. cnn contributor, former obama white house ethics czar. and cnn legal former trump white house lawyer. james shults. thank you very much. counsellor, this latest piece of information. that pr guy for the legal team for trump for a while says he heard hicks say these e-mails will never get out. they did get out. trump jr. put them out. is this relevant? >> chris, thanks for having me back. it is relevant. it's another part of the mosaic

the evidence that is accumulating of as you say corrupt intent to obstruct justice. we're not ready yet to find that the offense occurred. but it's troubling. part of the problem is it's evidence of cover up, chris. that's what always goes along with obstruction. the effort to hide it. when ever you have a witness who may have said and i know bob trout from my day ins the whoit collar bar. he's an honorable guy. if he says no you can take that seriously. whenever there's an indication that a witness may have tried to hide a document or suggested a document might have been destroyed, that's another problem. that you have. so we have this drip, drip, drip and this incident was so alarming that mark who is a very seasoned veteran of the wars ran for the hills. he was scared of obstruction. he saw it coming and quit.

the case. that takes a lot. >> so, jim, i'm suspecting that where norm sees a mosaic you see an inkblot test. where people see what they want to see. >> first we see a denial by her lawyer. and again we don't know the facts here. >> the lawyer said he would have never been discussing destruction of documents. obviously he's given her cover from what would trigger a statute. let's say she denies it. >> let's say@it's in the context of press conference. remember her job at the time. everything needs context. and the context of this just doesn't match up to obstruction in my view. she's the press person. she has to deal with crisis. she's not dealing with evidence and the facts and issues that will come before an investigator or court of law. >> all right. we don't know enough is one piece of the puzzle. you have discussed it.

i like it. i have something else to chew on. i have to go to the white house. kevin spent so much time doing this board. we had a whole fight and i did half. you can go to my instra gram. who did a better job. you'll take on the two sides of what this move with the memo is. it's either what is being sold as by the gop which is transparency. this is about transparency for the american people. or it's about expediency. distractio fm the russia investigation. distracting focus. on the transparency side. the house intel took a vote. they went through the procedure. had the vote. there's the public disclosure. which they're saying is the value here. that the people need to see. the people will judge. counsel is saying scrub this to make sure it was okay. they don't think it will hurt sources and method. the big sell was christopher wray, trumps hand picked fbi

director had seen it. and hadn't offered any push back. do you believe the case for transparency? make the case yourself. >> here's what we have. we had the intelligence committee with staff and some of the best lawyers on the hill in the intelligence community conducting their review. and ultimately preparing a product that was put before the committee that the committee decided to release. this isn't something that's just done willy nilly. this is seasoned staff on the intelligence committee. folks who know the laws as it relates to sensitive information. then you have the similar process under taken by the democrats. and led by schiff. and they have their own memo out there. let's not forget about that. >> it's not out there, though. >> to the majority memo. >> it's not out there. >> it's been prepared. >> important facts. they voted not to let it out. >> it's been prepared.

>> they're not letting it out. >> it goes to the white house. it's now the whoit house determination as to whether this thing goes or not. there's going to be folks who have spent careers in the intelligence legal community. working on these issues reviewing that document and making a determination. and they're going to take into consideration what the fbi director a had to say. >> are they? >> they'll make a judgment as to whether things are redacted. a decision will be made. because that's the process. that will be the process that takes place. if you hear the white house statement they keep talking about process. i know you'll say the president said last night. the white house said today they'll walk through a process. >> who makes the decision? >> ultimately it's the president. and the chief of staff. >> he hasn't read it yet. >> after the lawyers have had an opportunity to review it. that's what's being done.

>> legal counsel is only as good as it is listened to. right? even if everybody there was being as conscientious as you say. and reason to suspect it's not. it's going get out quick and the world will see it. the president saying 100% it's getting out and he hasn't read it yet. this is you. this is political expediency. congress going around the intelligence community. we have not see seen this even the torture memo. and what happened there where the cia under obama was against it. it was the senate that muscled ta through. it wasn't obama. the doj and fbi concern. remember these are trumps people. christopher wray, rosenstein, steven boid, these were his choices. for this. they're saying don't do it. the senate intelligence committee. nunes won't let them see it. not even the chairman republican

hasn't been able to see the memo. the president hasn't everyone read it yet. devin nunes reportedly hasn't looked at the classified information. the facts that the conclusions in the memo are based on. and none of them, not a single person calling for the release of this memo because of what is show about corruption in the fisa process have seen the actual fisa application. they haven't seen the proceedings that they want to say were wrong. >> chris, with all due respect to my fellow white house counsel- to james and his focus on the process. this process is a sham. and it is putting our national security in danger. for the sake of the president's political expediency. you heard it last night.

when he was caught on hot mic. are you going to release it? 100%. he hasn't even read it yet. they don't know what's in there. this is not an isolated incident. they're using it as a smear on the theory that the best defense against the russia investigation is a good offense. they don't know if the fisa warrant was proper or not. they haven't looked at the under lying evidence. here's what's most disturbing. this abuse of the process is not a one off. i have a new report out tonight with the american constitution society in my watchdog group crew zemseven big lies. they have done this again and again. trump and his enablers. with the phony claim. >> don't go through all seven. we don't have time. >> the phony claim mueller a republican himself has con flil flikts. this bogus memo.

in open revolt. saying it's a danger and it's false. and you know where it's headed, this is the most ominous. it's headed to create a false justification to get rid of rod rosenstein. he is in the same jeopardy as jim comey was. this is bad. >>so, last word to you james shults. it's a travesty of a sham of a mockery. why is he wrong? >> chris wray said himself that the sources sp methods are not being released. we're not talking about a national security crisis here. as norm would seem to portray. what we're talking about is this dispute of facts. and the fbi disputing what's in the report. not necessarily the sources and methods and the giant issue that will bubble up as a result of some national security emergency. it's not there.

>> all right. gentlemen, thank you for presenting both sides of this. i appreciate it. good to have you tonight. another topic that needs our attention. the president says americans are dreamers too. what did that mean? how did that line land with people? that is something that needs to be debated. we have two great people. navarro and schlapp.

a lot that happened in the state of the union address. the president used it for one part to pressure lawmakers. support the white house immigration plan. now part of the plan part of the offer is path way to citizen ship for dreamers. this is ambitious by the president. member of his own party don't like it. however what's the offset in there's a givake. the take is very tough conditions for family migration. and diversity lottery. then, there was a line that mattered a lot to a lot of people here it was. >> my duty and the sacred duty

of every elected official in this chamber is to defend americans. to protect their safety, their families, their communities and their right to the american dream. because americans are dreamers too. >> all right. we can take it a lot of ways. the american dream. if you want it you're a dreamer. but, how are americans like this one group of people we're talking about who are in so much jeopardy right now? ana navarro. we have political and mat schlapp former political director for president george w. bush. how did you take the line? >> with a shrug. it's one more line from donald trump. and him giving red meat to his base. a will the of the dreamers felt it diminished their plight. i think that the line is fine. americans are dreamers too. and dreamers are americans too. and every way but one. i think we should not get hung

up on one line. we shouldn't get hung up on the semantics and the focus for anyone who wants this solved should be pressuring the congress and pressuring the white house. and doing everything you can so that they reach a bipartisan deal that can pass muster and get the votes necessary toake let's n waste time on this word debate. nobody even remembers what president trump said 24 hours ago. we are focusing on russia. the focus needs to be on getting a law passed. >> there's a reason that the second part of the clever line that she came up wasn't there. americans are dreamers and dreamers are americans too. he didn't say the second part. because there's a big contingent in the party.

americans think that the trump immigration plan is a good plan. so i think it actually does strike a balance. by the way, as a conservative here on this panel, this is controversial. the idea of giving any single one person who is -- who came

here illegally the ability to earn their legal status is a controversial thing with republicans and with conservatives and the president is willing to bend and give in order to get something that he wants, which is real border security on the southern border. >> ana, do you think a deal gets done that has a pathway to citizenship? >> you know, i hope so. i hope so. look, asking for $25 billion for a wall is a lot of ransom money when you are using the dreamers and i think a lot of the people on the lt, a l o people who are immigration advocates, a lot of moderate republicans who want to see the dreamers get citizenship are willing to budge despite fiscal conservative concerns, despite the concern of what does that mean? why aren't we spending that money on the infrastructure? what it mean regarding eminent domain on the border and how are we going to deal with ranchers on the border there? there is a host of issues that come with that but people are willing to do that. the more problematic issue are the other two, the visa lottery

and the family reunification, or chain migration, depending on what side of the issue is. they should go to a clean d.r.e.a.m. act on the wall. >> why isn't it good enough? >> because there are too many conservative republicans, especially in the house but also in the senate, that they're not going to strike that deal, chris. >> but why? what's the rationale? >> okay, the rationale is the following, which is we continue to allow people to come into this country. sometimes they get temporary protected status and then there is an immediate pressure campaign to give them a pathway to citizenship. and also when it comes to questions of chain migration, which is beyond the nuclear family, let's make this clear. these are cousins -- >> very few cases. very few cases. >> chris, well, then they should be fine with doing this. >> they want to -- >> let me finish the answer. >> it iludes immediate family and parents andt includes

siblings. there are no cousins -- >> you get a 5 million backlog of applications. >> it's a 15-year. >> hold on. matt, go ahead. >> >> if it's not very many cases, this should be an easy thing for them to give in on. >> no, because they don't want to get rid of it. >> i know they don't. then they're not going to get a deal, chris. you all think that the cause is the dreamer cause but there are a lot of us on the other side of this question who believe simply like ronald reagan did in 1986, taking care of a population that is here illegally and giving them legal status without solving the fundamental problems in the immigration system and securing the southern border will be right back here again and we'll be right back here again. by the way, there are people waiting in line to be american citizens. they shouldn't be allowed to be cut in line by these other folks. it's not -- >> you guys want to reduce legal immigration also. they'll probably be in that line forever. >> no, chris, i don't. i'm pro-immigration republican. >> ana, last word.

we've got to go. >> there is a lot more that goes into the fixing the immigration system. modern easing the immigration system. making it meet modern day american demands than these four things. >> right. >> so, you know, i'd say handle d.r.e.a.m. act and wall now and then go on to comprehensive immigration reform and handle the lottery visa and handle family reunification and handle all the other aspects. >> let's leave it there, guys. we're going to have to see. everybody says they're going to get something done byhe deadline. we'll see what that is. lady, gentleman, thank you very much. all right. a little bit of final fact action for you right after the break. the commute is worth it. for all the work you pour into this place, you sure get a lot more out of it. you and that john deere tractor... so versatile, you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive. but just like a john deere, it's worth it. nothing runs like a deere. now you can own a 1e sub-compact tractor for just 99 dollars a month. learn more at your john deere dealer.

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. ♪

and i'm the founder of ugm before shipstation it was crazy. it's great when you see a hundred orders come in, a hundred orders come in, but then you realize i've got a hundred orders i have to ship out. shipstation streamlined that wh the order data, the weights of , everything is seamlessly put into shipstation, so when we print the shipping ll everything's pretty much done. it's so much easier so now, we're ready, bring on t. shipstation. the number one ch of online sellers. go to shipstation.com/tv and get two months free.

all right. final fact. there is a lot of bad info about immigration out there. the crimes they commit are grossly exaggerated. undocumented folks commit less crimes than the rest of us. the cost benefit is backwards with the dreamers. they put more money into the economy than they take out. then there is chain migration. a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives the president said. that's wron. cousins, for example we are are there is a 5 million-person backlog right now of just near family, thousands, kids, because of the vetting. the question, why lie to paint an ugly portrait of immigrants? that's all for us tonight. thank you for watching. anderson cooper is going to be back for a special edition of

"ac 360." that starts right now. good evening and welcome to a special late edition of "360." even on a big night of breaking news, this stands out. the fbi lead by christopher wray directly challenging him on releasing the so-called nunes memo. that's the document, outlook, written by republican staffers for house intelligence committee chairman devin nunes. it's the memo that republicans on the committee voted to release over the objection of democrats. now, for days republicans have been saying that director wray of the fbi was shown the memo and had no problem with it, that he made no changes. basically saying, look, he signed off on it. here is what the bureau actually believes. they publicly said, and i quote, the fbi was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. as expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy.