building, just i while ago one of the people just said, i just got a check and i have 221 there are more than i had last year at this time in my envelope. really, that's what we were -- we were waiting for february. and then we got hit with these corporations giving tremendous bonuses to everybody that nancy pelosi called crumbs. that could be like deplorable, does that make sense, deplorable and crumbs? those two words seem to have a resemblance. i hope it has the same meaning. but she called it crumbs, when people are getting 2,000 and $3,000 and $1,000. that's not crumbs. that's a lot of money. we also double the child tax credit and that's been a help to so many. we've gone from one of the highest business tax in the world to one of the lower ones so our competitors can compete

and win against anyone. we've now given them the tools to go out and win. and that's what they're doing. and they're also pouring back. a lot of you folks, you saw davos the other day. they're coming back. i believe i brought hundreds of billions of dollars with me back from europe, back from switzerland when i went there the other day to make a speech. they're so excited about this country and what's happening here, and they would never, ever have come. in fact, if the opposing party had won the election, you would have had tremendous new rules and regulations put on everything, and other things would have happened, and instead of going up almost 50%, your stock market, in my opinion, would have gone down 50%. i really believe that. because they were stifling it. they were getting prepared to stifle even worse than it was. the changes to our business tax alone are expected to raise average household income by

$4,000. roughly 3 million workers have already received tax cut bonuses and raises totaling thousands and thousands of dollars per worker, and that's just over the past six weeks alone. because of our tax cuts, apple is investing $350 billion in the united states. they're bringing 240 billion back. 240 billion. they're going to pay a tax of $38 billion, 38 billion. but they're going to invest a total of 350 billion. when i first heard the number, i said, you don't mean billion, you mean 350 million. because i've been saying to tim, tim, we got to build plants here. for 260 million you can build a pretty nice plant. but for and they're hiring

20,000 workers, by the way. >> exxonmobil, among others, just announced they're going to invest $50 billion in the united states. i want to thank tim scott, investing in distressed communities who have been left behind. we want every american to know the dignity of work, the pride of a paycheck and the satisfaction of a job really well done. we're reaching our hand all across the aisle in pursuit of common ground and common century forms for the good of all americans, all americans. we can reform our prison system

to help those who have served their time, get a second chance at life. i've watched this and i've seen it and i studied it. people get out of prison and they made a mistake. and not all, some are very bad. but many are very good. and they come home and they can't get a job. it's sad, they can't -- they can't get a job. now, the best thing we've done to fix that will is the fact that the economy is just booming. that fixes it better than any program we can do, the kmi is so -- the community is so strong. we can open more vocational schools because we want every american to reach their full god-given potential.

vocational schools. today you have community colleges and all of the -- when i was growing up, we had vocational schools. and when i was going to school, i remember i was in high school, and there were people in class, one person in particular, he wasn't like the greatest student. he just wasn't. and yet i saw him one day and he was able to fix a car blindfolded. he had a different kind of a talent. and we should have vocational schools. you learn mechanical, you learn braikl bricklaying and carpentry. we don't have those things anymore, and i think vocation is a much better word in a lot of cases than community college. a lot of people don't know what community college means or represents. so when all those people move into this country, we'll have

work forces to help them. and we'll give them incentive to train themselves. in wisconsin we have a great company moving in. they make all of the apple iphon iphones. they're going to have a tremendous program to teach people how to do this, because it's a whole new skill. it will be very success. . we c -- successful. we can reduce the price of prescription drugs and determine that terminally ill patients have the right to try. those drugs sit in there for 12, 13, 14 years, and a person is terminally ill, they have two months left, and under the old system they don't want to give them even experimental medicine because they're afraid they're going to be hurt. well, they're not going to be around for two months, so they'll sign a waiver and we're going to give them the hope of finding something. i've known people like this,

they travel all over the world to try and find a cure. and we have great experimental drugs, but it will be years before they come onto the market. so it's called right to try, and i hope you folks can approve it and i hope you agree with it, but i think it's so important. it's so important. it's got laborers heading it up. the other thing you get is you learn pretty quickly how effective it is. does it work? but you learn it really very quickly. so right to try. we can fix bad trade deals and negotiate new ones that are fair, and the most important word to me on trade is reciprocal. because we have deals where companies will send in a motorbike, we charge them nothing. but when we send a harley-davidson or a motorbike to those countries, they charge us 100% tax. that's not fair. so they'll send their motorbikes or something in to us, zero.

we send it to them, 100%. that's not fair trade. that's not fair. so i like the word reciprocal. if they're going to do it to us, we're going to do it to them. what's going to happen is your numbers are going to either come down or we're going to make a lot of money. either one is okay as far as i'm concerned. we can rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, and we will. streamline the horrible approval process. roadways that take 12, 13, 14 years to get approved, we used to build them in three months. and now it takes years and years of approvals. we're going to bring that down ideally to one year. two years is our goal, but one year is our real goal. we can get it done under budget, and we want to get it done ahead of schedule. because you don't have too many of them. under budget and ahead of schedule. we can deliver for our police, our veterans and our brave servicemembers.

and finally after decades of waiting, we can finally pass immigration reform that protects our country, defends our borders and modernizes our immigration rules to serve the needs of american workers and of american families. so important. one of the strengths of the republican party is we're a big tent with diverse views, but one thing we can all agree on is that every decision we make it our highest priority to serve and to protect the american people. we want an immigration policy that's fair, equitable but that's going to protect our people. we want people coming in to our country based on merit and based on the fact that they are going to love our country and they respect the people in our country. we don't want visa lottery. pick a lottery ticket.

pick a lottery. we don't want that. we want it based on merit. we have a chance now to pass into law the immigration reforms that the american people have been demanding for decades and that many of you have been working on for your entire careers. we have a great opportunity as a republican party, as the republican party we have a great opportunity. we're getting very little help from the democrats, but i hope after i leave this room, we're going to get a call from these people saying, let's go. they talk a good game. we have to get help from the other side, or we have to elect many more republicans. that's another way of doing it. really, that's another way of doing it. and based on the numbers we just saw, we have a real chance of doing that. '18 is going to be very interesting. we have to do one or the other. either they have to come on board, because they talk a good game with daca, or they don't

produce. we're going to have to really work and get more people so we can get the kind of numbers we need to pass, in a much easier fashion, legislation. to get it done we'll all have to make some compromises along the way to get it done this way. to get it done the other way, if we win more, we don't have to compromise so much. with the tax bill we got what we wanted because we had essentially a unanimous vote. but we have to go and we have to get it done and get it done properly, and we have to compromise unless we get more republicans. we have to be willing to give a little in order for our country to gain a whole lot. if we're united, if we work together for the good of the nation and we can fulfill our sacred duty to the country and to our incredible voters, we

have really fulfilled a solemn promise. as you know, i have put forward an immigration framework based on many months of meeting and working with tom cot, and david perdue. incredible people. david goodlad, who is out here someplace. really incredible people. it's a strong bill, but it's a very fair bill. and it protects our borders. we have to protect our borders. reforms that are overwhelmingly popular with the voters, including democrats. the democrats want to have -- the real democrats want to have their borders protected, but it includes democrats, independents, republicans, americans want an immigration system that works for safety.

and we need a strong military. our military has been depleted for the last long period of time. even before obama, it's been depleted. this should not be a party thing, this should be common sense. without our military, we might not be here talking. we have to have a strong military, and i think we're very much on our way from the one standpoint. we're going for funding, which we need, and i think we'll get it. but we have a lot of fighting on that from the other side, and we can't even think about it. we need a strong and powerful military. we're going to have far more powerful than ever before. nearly 7 in 10 americans support an immigration reform package that includes a permanent solution on daca. i've been hearing about daca for so many years. some people call it dreamers. it's not dreamers. don't fall into that trap.

it's much different than dreamers. and i said the other night, we have dreamers, too. we have dreamers in this country, too. we can't forget our dreamers. i have a lot of dreamers here. but daca, we want to take care of daca. and i hope we will. we need the support of the democrats in order to do it, skprk they might not want to do it. we want something that is very, very tough and strong in terms of the border. we need to end chain migration and we need to cancel the terrible visa lottery. [ applause ] >> and those are the four pillars that i talked about the other night. we call them the white house famework, a plan that will finally bring our immigration system into the 21st century. the republican position on immigration is the center

mainstream view of the american people with extra strength at the border and security at the border added in. what we're asking for and what the american people are pleading for is sanity and common sense in our immigration system. we want immigration rules that protect our communities, defend our security and admit people who will love our country and contribute to our society. i know that the senate is planning to bring an immigration bill on the floor to the floor in the coming weeks, and i'm asking that the framework we submitted with great flexibility working with both parties, that something will come out of it for everybody, for our country. i think that can happen. if the democrats choose to filibuster a framework that

includes a generous path to citizenship or something that is not fair, we are not going to approve it. we're just not going to approve it. so we'll either have something that's fair and equitable and good and secure, or we're going to have nothing at all. and this has been going on for many years. it doesn't make sense, however, to have nothing at all, because this is something that people want. so we will be demonstrating that we are very, very serious. one of the reasons i gave -- a number i gave that i thought was a very generous number i was interested in what they thought. if they don't approve something within that sphere, that means, very semimply, that they're not looking to approve it at all. they want to use it as an election issue, but it's now an election issue that will go to our benefit, not their benefit.

[ applause ] >> but make no mistakes. i will not rest before we deliver to the citizens of our great country so many things. immigration, the strong military. we've done an awfully good job of protecting our second amendment. that was in question during the campaign, you remember, and we have done a very, very good job. for the last 12 months, i've kept one promise after another, and we're just getting started. so often i'll see, and i must say six, seven months ago, they were saying, he didn't fulfill his promise or this or that. i said, i've only been here for four months. other people were there for eight years and they would finally get something passed. i was there for four months. they were saying, he didn't fulfill a promise. but now we fulfilled far more promises than we promised.

they're having a hard time with that. i call it promises plus. and one of the things we're doing that's so important that mitch has worked so hard on, and don and everybody is the justices, the judges all over the country. we're filling up the courts with really talented people who understand and read the constitution for what it says. so it's really not talked about that much, but it's having already a tremendous impact. we have incredible people just lined up getting ready to go into the courts. in many ways, mitch, i think it's going to be one of the most important things, if not the most important thing that we're doing. defense is always the most. got to be the most, john, right? what we're doing with the courts, i think, is going to go down as one of the greatest

achievements, so i want to thank you for that. thank you. [ applause ] >> not only are we protecting america at home, we're protecting interests abroad. it's time to end the dangerous defense sequester. it would be wonderful if we could go back to a budget. in order to fully fund our military and do it properly and order properly and have it over a period of time and do it the right way, so at some point i hope we're going to be able to do that and it should work. in order to defeat terrorists who are also asking congress to ensure that we continue to have all necessary power, and everything we need to defeat and detain the terrorists, we can't treat terrorists like common criminals. they are really unlawful enemy combatants. [ applause ] >> when you see what they do and the way they do it at the level

of ferocity, we can't treat them the way that we do the ordinary criminal. as you saw on tuesday, i've signed an order keeping open our very secure detention facilities at guantanamo bay. another promise kept. there's one more very important promise we're keeping. no longer are we making apologies for america. we don't apologize anymore. [ applause ] >> we're proud of our history. we're confident in our values. and we're grateful to our heroes, and we are determined to create a brighter future for all of our people. we are restoring the bonds of love and loyalty that unite us all as friend, as neighbors, as citizens, as americans. because when americans are

united, nothing, nothing at all, nothing can stop us. we win. [ applause ] >> as i said the other night, we are a nation that built the empire state building. to be exact, we built it in less than a year. would you believe it, working 24 hours around the clock. we built the hoover dam in record time. we built the golden gate bridge. we linked our nation together with railroads and highways. we dug out the panama canal. we're the nation that won two world wars, defeated fascism and communism and put satellites into space and planted our great american flag on the face of the moon. we've healed the sick, cured

disease and cared for the poor like no other nation. we've lifted millions into prosperity and delivered millions into freedom. this is our legacy. this is our birthright, and this is the foundation on which we build our very glorious future. because together we are, indeed, making america great again. thank you and god bless you all. thank you very much. thank you. [ applause ] ♪ >> the president of the united states wrapping up his remarks, echoing on many of the themes he delivered in the state of the union address before congress, before this republican retreat out there in white sulphur springs, west virginia. the president going through all the issues he raised and discussed at great length in his

speech at the state of the union. that one was 89 minutes, this one was about 35 minutes. we'll have all that coming up. i'm wolf blitzer here in washington. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i want to get to some breaking news we're following. cnn has learned new details about why president trump plans to release a secret republican memo, a memo that's generating a political firestorm. according to multiple sources, the president is telling associates that the memo could help discredit special counsel robert mueller's entire russia investigation. the document alleges fbi abuse of its surveillance powers. the president is expected to release it in defiance of a very stern warning by both the fbi and the justice department not to do so. let's go to our white house reporter kaitlyn collins. what more, kaitlyn, have you learned about why the president seems to be so determined on making this controversial republican memo public?

>> reporter: well, wolf, we're learning a lot about why the president has been just so eager to get this memo out there. it's because he's telling friends and allies that he believes this memo being revealed to the public will help discredit the entire russia investigation, and we know he's been phoning those friends and allies saying he believes once the memo is president that it will help expose bias at the top ranks of the fbi and show that some of the people leading this investigation have been bias against him since the beginning here, wolf. it really goes to show what's been behind the president's mindset with all of this, because as you know, after the state of the union address on tuesday night, the president was overheard telling a congressman he 100% was going to release the memo even though the white house said he had not read it yet and no final decision has been made. to add to that, wolf, we also know the president was highly upset yesterday after the fbi issued a statement condemning the release of this memo, saying that it doesn't give the full,

accurate picture and instead was misleading, which is what critics and democrats have said about the release of this memo. we're certainly learning more here, wolf, about what the president's mindset is about the release behind this memo. >> we certainly are. that fbi statement, as you pointed out, was a very strong statement. i'll read a couple stentsz from that statement with regard to the republican memorandum, the fbi was provided a limited opportunity. the as expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns brpz, and may far impact the accuracy, an extremely strong sfwamt the fbi according to his current decision. when we get back to you, there is new changes in the republican

memo, changes surfaced made by devin nunes. the ranking democrat on that committee, adam schiff, tweeted, breaking. discovered late tonight that chairman nunes begged for changes to the memo he sent to the white house, the changes not approved, so they're looking at a document they did not complete. tell us how congressman nunes is responding. >> he's pushing back, wolf. he's saying the changes that were made were minor in changes. he says this is all an effort to distract from the merits of his memo. now, one thing that's pretty clear here, wolf, is that there is no dispute that there were changes that were made to this

memo. the dispute is whether or not there were substantive changes. the democrats say that there were several material changes to this memo that have -- they were much different than what members of congress, members of the house reviewed in a classified setting after the committee approved all house members to review this memo in a classified setting. they said there were changes that were made but were not informed to the house intelligence committee when the house intelligence committee voted on monday to release the memo publicly. that has caused calls from democrats, mainly adam schiff and members on his committee to have another vote and the house intelligence committee on the memo actually being reviewed by the president right now. that is something, however, wolf, that republicans are resisting, including members of the house intelligence committee. republicans are saying, we don't need a revote on this, including trey gowdy, one of the top

republicans on the committee whose house just told me they oppose the notion of revoting on this memo because they said there were changes made before that revote and before that monday vote happened. he did not even know that it was the memo reviewed, apparently asking the speaker to stop this memo and even removing nunes from the chair committee. we'll see what happens when he meets with the president later today. >> president trump's plan to release that controversial memo puts him on a collision course with the fbi director. he appointed and warned the pflt

of those members. house speaker paul ryan, devin nunes, the fbi director christopher wray, the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. a lot to discuss with our panel. let's bring in the former u.s. assistant kim wheley. what do you make of the president actually telling associates that the memo will help discredit this entire mueller-led russia investigation? >> it is another rather stunning instance. they're not the first one of trump seeming to say out loud what their highest critics requested? they said this is a fundamental political move. he's only interested in muddying the waters of the investigation, and substantiating the narrative that there is a witch hunt going on, which proponents of the memo say, no, no, we're concerned about corruption in the fbi,

what's happening in this investigation where our motives are pure. here's trump telling all these people, yeah, yeah, this is about me. i want to approve what i've said all along about this is a witch hunt. >> christopher wray, the white house director, he's been in office for about six months, he tells the white house in a very strong statement -- you don't use these words easily -- that we have grave concerns about material omissions and deeply concerned about releasing this memo. if the president rejects the recommendation of christopher wray, the fbi director, if the president rejects rod rosenstein, the man in charge of this investigation, the deputy attorney general, the attorney general jeff sessions has recused himself, that's a slap in the face of two men, the president himself appointed. >> the two agencies whose job is to keep america safe. it really is an unprecedented public battle between the president and u.s. intelligence and law enforcement agencies here. keep in mind the point wray made

was that this is not just a security issue you're revealing secrets here, which is a concern, i know, i've spoken to intelligence officials that expressed that -- he made the point that the we are getting the full picture here. this is coming from the fbi director that was appointed after he fired the previous one. we need to look at republican versus democrat,thatthis is a president pitched against his intelligence agencies, the fbi, the department of justice who has also said there is no basis to accusations of misuse of the fisa warrants, and those who oppose for a number of reasons. >> for the president to ignore the strong words coming from his justice department, from the fbi, men that he named who are both republicans. >> absolutely. i'm only a law professor and i worked on ken starr's whitewater

investigation, and i would say this is really a constitutional abomination and we have challenges here. the directions in the memo is to release the information in the memo. in the memo itself, we know was actually created by a member of congress. this is not some kind of factual piece of evidence that was in a file somewhere that actually dmon stratsd realtime information. this was a memo created by a partisan branch of the government. so this has severe consequences to the integrity of our powers. paul ryan said this is about bui accountability and this is not how accountability works in our structure of government. >> he wants people to be loyal to him, and now we've been

reporting that back in december he asked the deputy attorney general. the president asked, are you on my team? that sounds like he's seeking some sort of loyalty test. >> it wouldn't be the first time. that's what he did to comey during the comey allegation. he said, who did you vote for, along with mccabe. he wants people who he thinks work for him, serve him primarily. when something seems to be done loyalty what is the potential end game here? we know, based, and that would be a disaster. it would be a political problem for him. if this memo comes out and he manages to convince a large enough swath of the american

public that the whole investigation is dirty, potentially that means perhaps that he believes he can then fire mueller with a clean conscience. >> let me read to you and to our viewers what the former cia director john brennan is now saying. he's blasting republicans for want to go release this controversial memo. quote, i've had many fights with demes over the years on national security matters. but i never witnessed the type of political partisan behavior i'm seeing from nunes and house republicans. absence of moral and ethical leadership in washington is fueling this government crisis. those are serious, serious words. >> this is trumpism, right? if you attack him, criticize him, he's going to hit back, no matter who you are.

we've seen this from the presidency. he's going into looking to who supports the nazis. he does not have to convince everybody that they're wrong, but then he convinces others, well, is it really fair? if he accomplishes that he accomplishes that. we saw that with the revelations about the usa? hough do you go? this is about a president attacking other institutions currently affecting him and other designations. so there seems to be a debate about whether civil liberties are being violated. >> it was only a few days ago

that the president said he was looking forward to answering questions from robert mueller. he thought that subject to my lawyer, subject to my attorneys. he then added that now we're learning that apparently the attorneys think that the threshold for president of the united states to answer these kinds of questions has not been met and they don't want the president to do so. can they force, can mueller force the president to sit down and answer questions? >> sure, if the grand jury issues a subpoena. the president has to respond to it or plead the fifth amendment. >> if he pleads the fifth, he's not going to answer any questions. >> then there are political implications, it looks like he has something to hide. his attorneys are representing their client. if he sits down with some kind of agreement, there is no guarantee that what he says won't lead to incrimination for him.

we saw this with president clinton, he sat down with the attorney. the supreme court held that bill clinton could be held subject to a lawsuit. so the president is not above any kind of investigation, as a matter of leader krimz. >> it was a live video link with the grand jury. he was allowed to do it with the white house back in 1998. i remember that vividly, that videotape we all remember once it was released. there is more news following. i'm going to speak live to a democratic senator to respond to the president's reporting on the motivation to release this. hope hicks denying she revealed

e-mails about the infamous trump tower meeting. that and a lot more coming up. plus...what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i made a point to talk to my doctor. he told me about eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. not only does eliquis treat dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis had both... ...and that turned around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines.

tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis right for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you. 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. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is

with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪

more now on breaking news. there's more details on why president trump now plans to release a secret republican memo that's generating a political firestorm. according to multiple sources the president is telling associates that the memo could help discredit special counsel robert mueller's russia investigation, alleges fbi abuse of its surveillance powers. the president is expected to release it amid defiance of a very strong warning by the fbi and the justice department not to do so. let's bring in senator jeff merkley who is joining us. senator, thank you very much for joining us. >> you're very welcome. good to be with you. >> we've learned, as you know, the president sees this memo as a way to discredit the entire russia investigation robert mueller has been leading. what's your reaction to that?

>> this is a very bizarre twist in which the release of this memo seems to be a way to obstruct an investigation into the obstruction of justice. it also goes to the heart of manipulation of very sensitive national secrets, highly classified information that is given to the intelligence committee with the understanding that it will not be released in a fashion that endangers the united states or in a fashion that manipulates the information for political purposes. so that understanding goes to the heart of how the committee is able to get sensitive information in the first place, why the government is willing to share it with the committee. so this really threatens to blow up the whole contract between the branches of government over sensitive information. >> so what you're suggesting is that the u.s. intelligence community, the justice department, the fbi may now be reluctant to share sensitive classified information with the house intelligence committee -- not necessarily the senate intense committee -- where there

seems to be greater bipartisan cooperation, but the house intelligence committee? they're not going to do so down the road because of what's going on right now? >> it is certainly a fundamental problem because for the fbi and the cia, the intelligence operations to be able to share information, they have to know that it's going to be -- there's going to be good stewardship of that information. it even goes further than this. that is, any individuals that might share information with the intelligence agencies or the department of justice or the fbi might be reluctant to do so if they thought it might then be released to the congress which would then poorly steward it and release it inappropriately. that's one piece of this picture. but the other pieces is this deliberate effort by nunes and the committee to basically interfere and discredit an investigation that is so important in our constitutional system that no one is above the law. if there was collaboration with

the russians, we're going to get to the bottom of it. they're trying to prevent that from happening by manipulating information, we've heard from very responsible party, from the department of justice itself, from the fbi itself, the information that is going to be released is manipulated, incomplete and misleading. >> it's interesting because we just heard from the third ranking republican in the senate, your colleague john thune. he's issuing a very stern warning to the house of representatives, the intelligence committee there. listen to this. well, we don't have the sound but he's warning them that releasing this memo could really hurt. what's your reaction when you hear these kinds of recommendations coming in from the number 3 republican, number 3 republican in the senate to the house? >> it's so important that we have members of congress who are willing to put their responsibilities to their office

and to our government above pure partisan politics. also the thought that mark warner weighed in very clearly on this as well, saying he had reviewed the information, that this memo is highly misleading. mark warner has been an extraordinarily competent steward of the senate side investigation, and we should really listen to what he's having to say. >> because if the fbi director, christopher wray in that extraordinary statement yesterday that was released, he says, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy. if the fbi director feels that strongly, don't release this memo, there are grave concerns, and the use of the word "grave" is very pointed. there's been suggestions already. how can he continue on his job if the president of the united states slaps him down and says, i'm releasing the memo, anyhow? >> we have to view this as a

five-alarm fire. these types of warnings coming from the fbi, coming from the justice department to the house intelligence committee, to nunes, this is not an ordinary set of affairs. this is extremely dangerous manipulation of information in order to discredit an investigation into the president. we know the president has thought his best operation has been to try to manipulate the investigation, of course, he's weighed in on that factor with three different fbi directors, with rosenstein. he's done that, and the sum of this has been just to increase the recognition that there is information that the president doesn't ever want released, and to discredit this investigation would be a tremendous salt on justice and the fbi.

>> the justice department warned that not only releasing this kind of information could undermine the way the u.s. intelligence committee collects information where they talk about sources and methods, very classified information, but also the impact it could have in terms of foreign intelligence services, friendly intelligence services sharing information with the united states. our ability to share and receive sensitive information from governments, the letter from steven boyd, the assistant attorney general, suggests could be in danger. so there is a lot going on right now, and if the president decides to release this memo, i wonder in these individuals are going to stay on the job or will they protest with resignations of their own? so this is an extremely sensitive moment. i'll give you the last word, senator. >> well, this appears to be a setup to enable the president to fire mueller and grind

everything to a halt. this would be the equivalent of a saturday night massacre, setting the stage for it. everyone needs to pay attention. it's 100% unacceptable for the petition team and the house intelligence committee to interfere in this fashion. >> senator merkley, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. another potential bombshell in the russia investigation. hope hicks' lawyers denying a report that she allegedly concealed e-mails in that trump tower meeting. we're going to discuss if she's in hot water right now and the president's role in all of this, when we come back.

new family connections, every day.llion that's more ways to discover new relatives. people who share your dna. and maybe a whole lot more. order your kit at ancestrydna.com

. big question for the president in the russia investigation. the "the new york times" now reporting that the special counsel robert mueller is zeroing in on that trump tower meeting in new york city between donald trump jr. and russias and

the involvement of the white house communications director hope hicks. let's go to our white house reporter jerry diamond. what do they say is the reason the special prosecutor robert mueller is now looking at hope hicks' role in all of this? >> reporter: that's right. we know for a long time the special counsel has been fascinated and really honing in on this alleged trump tower meeting that happened back in 2016 but he's also very interested in the statement that was crafted by the president and his aids aboard air force one. that was a response to that meeting, the initial report about that meeting in the "the new york times" that donald trump jr. had met with this russian lawyer who was alleging to provide incriminating information about hillary clinton and so now the "the new york times" is reporting that mark ca roll lowe who is is a spokesman for the president's personal legal team is expected to testify before robert mueller that during a conference call that he had with the president and with hope hicks the communications director that

hicks said that she believed the e-mails will quote, never get out, and according to the "the new york times" it's unclear whether she was suggesting that she would prevent them from getting out or whether she was simply being naive in believing that those e-mails would never see the light of day eventually did, of course. hope hicks' attorney is firmly, firmly denying these allegations. he said in a statement to cnn, she never said that and the idea that hope hicks ever suggested that e-mails or other documents would be concealed or destroyed is completely false. all of this of course raises questions again about this pattern we're seeing of questions about potential obstruction of justice in something that robert mueller is going to be zeroing in on with this interview. >> jeremy diamond thanks very much. >> i want to bring in our cnn legal analyst laura coats. is this mark's word against hope hicks' word? how do they figure this out?

>> remember when comey was going to give information about his now infamous meeting about loyalty pledges you have corroboration through memos, he may have had conversations with other people about what he just learned and heard. it's very conceivable that he may have that corroborating information to avoid that he said/she said scenario and that's what mueller is going to look for. whether the person is credible, whether there is corroboration and whether there's actual substance to the claim. >> lying to the news media is bad, politically it's always stupid too, but it's not necessarily a crime. >> absolutely not. unfortunately the idea you're going to hang all your hat on what the media has been receiving the information. however, think about this. if part of the intended audience was not simply the news but also for robert mueller and his investigative team, were they trying to steer them away from some scent trail? were they trying to create a false narrative that would mislead the investigation?

very different scenario. >> what key moments do you believe robert mueller's looking at right now and potentially developing an obstruction of justice case? >> we're talking about the firing of comey, talking about any pressure that may have been imposed on jeff sessions not to recuse himself, any potential to fire or let go of andy mccabe and this now infamous meeting in trump tower. what was the role of the president of the united states in crafting either a media strategy or an actual response either to mueller's team or the media and the "the new york times" to respond to this. all these are going to come into play to give the context wal clues at intent. >> does it look like mueller is getting closer and closer to wrapping things up? remember the president the other day said he thought he would be happy to answer his questions in the next two or three weeks. usually a prosecutor along these lines, they want to wait to get the biggest fish at the very end. >> absolutely. it's hard to gauge the tom line.

where we are is smack dab in the middle of an investigation. what prolongs it are continuous reports from the inside, people who are targets of the investigation who give additional information that the investigation needs to continue. if there's information about hope hicks' role, if there's information about other key players who had a hand in trying to either obstruct, impede or do away with the investigation it will continue to be prolonged. it's pretty much, wolf, has long as this investigation will go on for as long as people continue to impede it. >> what do you think of the president's lawyers don't think there's a threshold, a case has already been built that would justify the president asking mueller's questions? >> if wishes were horses beggars would ride. it's not their prerogative to say what they can ask about and what they can't. the purpose of mueller's team is to ask any question under the scope of their directive. that includes anyone trying to obstruct justice or undermine their investigation in any way.

this is all fair game and it's not to say of trump's attorney. >> we'll see how the release of this controversy memo that the republicans in the house put forward, we'll see how that plays out and hofrz over this entire investigation. thanks very much. >> that's it for me. thanks very much for watching. i'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern in "the situation room" for our international viewers. for our viewers in north american "newsroom," brooke baldwin starts right after a very quick break. ♪ that you'll ever need ♪ staying ahead isn't about waiting for a chance. it's about the one bold choice you make, that moves you forward. ( ♪ ) the one and only cadillac escalade. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac escalade. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac escalade from around $879 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer.

this is cnn breaking news. >> hi, everyone i'm pb. you're watching cnn here on this thursday afternoon and here we go. another hour, another bombshell on this russia investigation right now. here's what we've got for you. sources say top white house aids are worried that the director of the fbi, christopher wray could quit if this highly controversial republican memo is released. chris wray who the president hailed as having imp