speaking his own lingo. one day saying my iq is much higher than these people. >> i am nonbraggadocious. >> even a supporter can't keep a straight face. >> don't worry about it little marco. >> cnn jeanne moos. >> thank you for joining us, anderson is next. good evening, at the end of a full and harrow are day which included a record day on wall street. and president trump accusing of unamerican for not clapping. talking about the nunes memo on saturday, the president tweeted this memo vindicates trump and probe. no collusion and no obstruction.

collusion is dead. this is an american disgrace. today in cincinnati. he went off prompter and said this. >> did we catch them in the act or what? oh, did we catch them in the act. they are very embarrassed. they never thought they would get caught. we caught them. we caught them. so much fun. like the great sleuth. >> well we should point out that earlier today he lashed out at adam schiff. the president calls him adam schiff. and calling devin nunes a man of tremendous courage and grift t.y let's focus on the idea that the president is pushing that the nunes memo totally somehow

vindicate trumps. whatever else you might think of the nunes document, whether you believe as the fbi does it contains omissions of fact. the memo does not exonerate or vindicate anyone let alone president trump. it deals with applications for pfizer warrants. the memo alleges, andrew mccabe told the house intelligence committee that no warn the would not have been sought without the steele dossier. opposition research on candidate trump by a conservative media outlet and later hired by the dnc and lawyers of the clinton campaign. three subsequent renewal applications was the clinton application disclosed. democrats say that the court was

told there was some sort of political motivation behind the fusion gps information. legal experts telling us the dossier would not have been the soul basis for the warrant. carter page had been on the radar for at least a year prior to this. even if you believe the nunes memo alleges about bias. it undermines any notion that the russian probe then follows. something in july sparked the probe. that is when the fbi launched a counterintelligence investigation of george papadopoulos. pleading guilty about lying about contacts in russia. the fbi was looking at possible trump campaign/russia

connection. as we and others have been reporting, george papadopoulos boasting to diplomats. the nunes memo does not speak to any of it. and the indictment of his former campaign chairman manafort. comey letter re-opening the clinton e-mail case 11 days before the election. if peter strzok's behavior shows bias, you can argue he was bias from both candidates. however you choose to read the memo you ought to know how hillary clinton's harshest critic also reads it. >> nothing to do with an e-mail sent by came bridge, the dossier

has nothing to do with papadopoulos's meeting. there is going to be a russia probe even without a dosier. >> congressman gowdy is not alone. it does not say what the president says it does. >> this memo isn't about the special counsel investigation. >> i support the mueller investigation. >> it would be a mistake for anyone to suggest that the special counsel doesn't complete his work. i hope he finishes it as quickly as possible. this memo has nothing at all to do with special counsel. >> president trump is claiming that he is vindicated by the nunes memo. and he isn't. and if he was expecting other congressman to back him up, that

is one memo they didn't see. making public the democratic memo rebutting allegations that the fbi abused surveillance laws. and whether the democrat memo gets released that is in the president's hands explain to us what happens now. >> reporter: five days to act on it as they did last week. this is sort of the battle of the memos part two. the seek quell not as quell goo the other one. my guess is that he would not say 100%. we have been talking to our sources this evening and they are going to go through the same vetting process they say through the white house. they are going to have law enforcement and the intelligence community weigh in and make sure there are no practices and

methods. at this point if you are going off of what the president was saying, for not standing up and applauding him at the state of the union and the fact that he was calling adam schiff, little adam schiff, don't hold out hope for the release of this memo. >> the white house hasn't given any indication about whether or not they are going to release it. >> reporter: that's right. we pressed them this evening on this. stopping short at this point of saying yes they are going to release the memo. they are saying, they are going to apply the same pain taking process is the phrase we heard this evening from one senior white house official. the president was saying that memo last week was going to be released 100% before he had even read it. it is not all together clear what kind of vetting they are going to put this memo through.

keep in mind as you were hearing those republican lawmakers raise doubt about the strength of the nunes memo on the talk shows. i talked to a senior congressional source from the republican side earlier saying there a lot of hype around this memo and clearly it did not meet the hype. serious doubt as if it accomplished anything. it is hard to imagine the president wanting to release the schiff memo which the democrats believe it under cuts the nunes memo. >> thanks. manu raju reports that chairman nunes had no comment after the vote today. one of which he did earlier today hanging over all of this, the question of whether chairman nunes or his staff in any way discuss committee business in particular his memo with the

house. last week mike quigley confronted nunes and nunes would not be pinned down. apparently the same thing happened today. >> my colleague mr. quigley again and repeatedly asked the chairman whether he or any of his staff had consulted with, coordinated, conceptualized this memo in combination with the white house. the chairman embarked on a similar effort to coordinate a campaign early on in the investigation. and once again, mr. nunes refused to answer the questions. at the very end of the hearing, he gave a very lawyerly written response or read a written response saying that the white house had not been involved in the actual drafting of the memo. but in terms of the whether it was coordinated with the white house, or they were consulted or

strategized, the whole concept, he refused to answer those questions and that is an important question for our and the committee. >> can you tell us exactly what chairman nunes said when you questioned him. as i recall last week, you asked him if he had been involved with the white house and he said he had not or any staffers been involved in writing the memo and he didn't answer. >> you don't want to give anybody an out because you don't ask a specific enough question. so every possibility i am going to make sure i get it right. p perceived, prepared reviewed. he wouldn't answer questions. he answered another member's question and said i will answer

your question because i like you. as my colleague mr. schiff said at the end he had a lawyerly answer that responded to one small aspect. >> it seemed to be an easy question to answer. >> it is fairly obvious. they have been blocking back for the white house for a long time. and they have coordinated with him when it came to that first nunes trip to the white house. if you witnessed what we have witnessed for almost a year now, with the chairman, refusing to sign subpoenas in key witnesses, going along with the gag order of the white house, it is a pattern of behavior that makes it extraordinarily difficult to do this. it is tough enough. we are investigating a foreign adversary, you are not going to be able to subpoena a russian

oligarch. for the independent investigator to block us too, it makes it very difficult. >> do you believe the president is going to allow the democrat's memo to be released? >> i think when he is briefed on it. i can't imagine that he is going to read ten pages of footnoted academic type material, i believe he is not going it want to. i believe he will get pressure from his party or staff. but i can't imagine he goes along with it. best case scenario, redacting it. >> do house intelligence committee have other ways in short of leaking? >> we don't want to leak this. we don't want to be as bad as we acre accuse the republicans of doing last week. this is reckless and dangerous to release these materials. we think releasing the first memo was a bad idea.

and the only thing worse than that is not being able to respond to this. so we are talking straight to the american public. >> some republicans have been critical of the democrat memo saying adam schiff doesn't want to the president to release. full of sources and methods that would be dangerous to release. and made so look the president look bad. >> at this point in time, after the first memo release. the second needs to be released. we spent a sllot of time and we hope the american public gets a chance to judge for themselves. >> why is it okay for democrats to have their own memo? >> yeah, again, i think the difference here is that i would like to think third party

objective actors that reviewed it. as you referenced, the fbi and the justice department. the fact is they have thrown something out there which not only attacks the soul of our relationship, the trust that we have had with the justice department and the intel community. it is also attack their credibility. whatever it is they say. look, i am glad that mr. gowdy and others have said what they have said. the fact is i don't know of any republican who has said those things who is not about to retire from the house. where are the profiles encourage of the members who are sticking around. >> congressman i appreciate your time tonight. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> a lot more ahead tonight. that is congressman quigley. the president's claim that the gop version vindicates him. trumps lawyers want him to

refusen inquiry. and maggie is here. today's record on wall street. left a lot of people worried today. details ahead. 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. not necessarily after 3 toddlers with boundless energy. but lower back pain won't stop him from keeping up. because at a dr. scholl's kiosk he got a recommendation for our best custom fit orthotic to relieve his foot, knee, or lower back pain, from being on his feet.

by reducing shock and stress on his body with every step. so look out world, dad's taking charge. dr. scholl's. born to move.

coaching means making tough choices. jim! you're in! but when you have high blood pressure and need cold medicine that works fast, the choice is simple. coricidin hbp is the #1 brand that gives powerful cold symptom relief without raising your blood pressure. coricidin hbp. we are talking tonight about the two breaking news. one maggie haberman's report. also the house intelligence committee voting to release a

counterpart to the nunes memo as well as president trump's claim that the memo vindicates him. joining us now is republican congress lee zeldin. so this morning you tweeted friends don't -- loaded up his memo with sources and methods that shouldn't be released and he knows it. zero% chance this is deliberate. you also tweeted that you don't have a problem about congressman shiff's memo coming out. what evidence do you have that he deliberately constructed his memo in a way it can't be released. >> you can tell the way he is answering questions in regards to the memo. he has not revealed the fact that his memo is filled up with different sources that have to be redagted.

the responsible thing to do is the drafter of the memo to prepare the memo for release. it includes sources and methods that shouldn't have been in there in the first place. >> the committee unanimously voted to release the memo today. wouldn't republicans have voted it down if you are right. and the white house saying it goes through a review process like the republican memo did. >> i am comfonfident that as th memo is going through the process, you will have to redacted. i want the american public to have enough information as possible and that includes getting the schiff memo as well. i said if congressman shiff wants to change anything that he is making the same exact point but without revealing sources and methods, i am for this.

as it goes through the process of declassification, i am confident we can get it to the public. >> you would think they would share your concerns about sources and methods. >> they do. and as it goes through the process over the next couple of days i don't want to speak for them, but i am not alone. as this memo gets prepared for a public release, it will include redactions. and i am not saying redacting points that congressman shiff wants to make. make the same exact point just removing sources and methods. >> congressman shiff says nunes refused to answer today. he did in schiff's words make a lawyerly statement. it still leaves a lot of room for possible coordination. if there was coordination, would

you be comfortable with that? >> i am no tt aware of there beg any coordination. anything that i came in contact with, all of my conversations substantiate there wasn't any cooperation at all. for the staff. and those are the people who read the underlying source material and the preparing of the document, i am not aware. >> why not say so. this is the second time nunes has been asked, the white house has been asked and no one has given a straight answer. >> i wasn't in the meeting tonight that took place, but congressman shiff, you could say has been full of schiff at some times, he said that the majority of the memo was going to include national security that couldn't be released. that wasn't true. now we can see that is not true. he said it was materially

altered and there were grammatical changes and the only changes beyond were requested by congressman shiff as well as change requested by the fbi. issues with regards when don junior was testifying, schiff walking out of the room. and congressman shiff keeps feeding all of these talking points to the public. i wasn't anyboin the house inte committee, but consistent to the way he puts that he is talking points i woouldn't be surprised >> the president has been advised by his lawyers. if the president's lawyers say don't do it that he shouldn't?

>> i am not aware that there has been collusion at all between president trump and the russians. the biggest risk if he was talking to his own attorneys with regards to his own meeting is just a trap. when peter strzok and the others were asking about it, he didn't tell the truth. same thing with papadopoulos. >> that is not a trap. that is just lying. >> no. and it is important that if the president was to give testimony, you have to be careful. each question that is asked, you can shoot from the hip at all. you have to give the best answer you can give with the information you are aware of in order to avoid that from happening. >> it sounds like you are worried the president would lie or misremember fact. >> i am trying to answer as to why his legal counsel may not want him to give his testimony. but i don't know what is going on behind closed doors in their

conversations. >> sure. >> if the president wants to give testimony or not, you know, that is really his decision with his attorneys. i would encourage, you know, the white house is provided tens of thousands of documents to special counsel. many in the administration have sat down for long depositions with the special counsel. i am someone who advocating for the investigation to end. not prematurely. but to allow him to investigate th thoroughlily and quickly. >> congressman zeldin i appreciate your time. more on the story, maggie haberman. adding new context to it. dealing with what the president a few weeks ago appears to welcome. >> are you going to talk to mueller? >> i am looking forward to it. >> you want to.

>> you have a date set? >> no collusion whatsoever. no obstruction whatsoever and i am looking for it. >> to reach a higher standard, you would do it under oath? >> i would do it under oath. >> maggie haberman. carl bernstein and jeffrey toobin. maggie, let's talk about the new reporting, four sources? >> there is a divide in the president's legal team. almost the entire universe advising trumps lawyers versus tie cob who is part of the president's advisory circle. he has been about a strategy of being fully compliant. i have been hearing, and we have all been hearing concerns about this for a while. >> given depositions he has

given in the past. >> in depositions in the past he has been pretty aware of where the line is. much more so than truth. those were civil depositions. and most people think he could end up there with a number of investigators who are looking to trap him. that is their perspective. you won't know what else has testified to. he won't be able to help himself because of his pension of exaggerations. where this ends up remains to go seen. and then there is a legal battle over it which would draw this out for some time. >> when could go to the supreme court. >> the supreme court has ruled in two previous cases. this would be a different

circumstance. clinton showed that a president could be deposed in a civil case but this is different. >> jeff, how have they ruled? >> well, the most relevant precedent is the paula jones case where the supreme court said bill clinton could not put off his deposition after he was president. if he couldn't -- if bill clinton couldn't put off a civil deposition, if mueller hits the president with a grand jury subpoena to testify, i think the odds are that mueller would win that case although it is not at all clear, this is untrod constitutional ground. the president is a unique figure under our constitution. so it is not a slam dunk but i think the odds would favor mueller winning that case. >> and why wouldn't mueller

automatically subpoena the president? >> in a normal course, you would talk to someone's lawyers and say come in. >> if the president refused. >> i suspect he would try to convince the lawyers that if he did not come in, he would issue a subpoena. he would say i am going to put that document in your hands. again trying to be respectful to the person of the investigation. it is important that people are acting that we know all of the evidence and all of the information. and the only thing we know for sure is we don't know everything that bob mueller knows. i would believe that if he are asking to interview the president, there is a reason he wants to interview the president and you would push forward to get there. but i think he would go step by step. >> this is a departure from what the president said publicly. >> he is big bravado as we know.

he genuinely believes that he could go in and talk himself out of anything. and then he added depending on what my lawyer said. there had been this conversation as best as i can tell from anybody involved is a nonstarter about having him written questions. not what robert mueller is looking for. >> the supreme court got involved, certainly it is not pretty, what do you make of this news t news tonight? >> i think maggie has got a first-rate story and at the same time, and i would like to ask maggie this, what i am hearing from people in the white house, trump is going around the white house continuing to rage at mueller, at mueller's investigation, and that he is

determined to make it go away whether it is by firing mueller, getting rod rosenstein to recuse himself or issuing pardons that he is a rage-aholic on this subject. is that what you are hearing as well? >> to a deg. his rage is on sessions and then rosenstein the determination to make it go away from the people i have been speaking with has been less explicit. he has not been as vocal on it according to my sources. >> it also gives us reason to belief that he is disingenuous in saying how much he really wants to go -- >> depending on what his lawyers say. >> primarily, he wants an end to this investigation. >> that's true. >> on his terms and his base to

support him. >> which has mag jogie points o does not bring a quick end. also tonight how the white house is responding to the market meltdown. the worst point decline ever. # you both need to be watching that on the iphone with verizon. the best streaming network. how long have you been here? i've been here a couple days. (avo) get the best unlimited on the most awarded network. and now, when you buy iphone 8, you'll get one on us. dominika: i saw something i was not supposed to. (music) dominika: they gave me a choice... dominika: die... or become a sparrow. (music) nathniel: in moscow, there's a program... nathaniel: they call them sparrows... trained to seduce and manipulate. nathaniel: that is what she is. she's out of your league. (music) you have a gift. (music) vanya: you see through people. take your life back. (music) i'll find a way. (music) vanya: you are always one step ahead. (music) you're right. (music) rated r.

kayak compares hundreds of travel and airline sites so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. cheers! kayak. search one and done.

. more now on our breaking news new york times is -- back with maggie haberman who shares the by-line on the story. at what point, does there have

to be a formal decision by the president and his attorneys? >> i am not certain what the precise drop date is but i think we are coming up on it soon. sef everything is going to be viewed through a political lens. but he would rather have it done sooner rather than later and he is going to go through the opportunity to exhaust all possibilities for getting this interview to happen until he goes ahead and files the subpoena. >> carl, if it continues on and on it does start to impact 2018 elections more than it might already. >> that is certainly possibility. but we need to look at the possibility that trump is getting what he wants these day. he is making this investigation and particularly the argument surrounding the two memos into a partisan political football in the view of many americans and

especially in conveying that message to his base. so that we now are setting up a kind of false equivalency about the dueling memos and this is the most important thing going on when in fact the real issue is the conduct of donald trump as the president of the united states. and that's getting lost in this and he is the beneficiary i think of both the press, members of congress getting down in the weeds and fighting out every little paragraph about how the fisa application came to be. that's exactly where he wants the issue to be. >> so and just in terms of what mueller already knows and again, as you pointed out rightly, we have no idea we know a tiny tip of the iceberg, would people who have already called in, would they be able to claim executive privilege in talking to robert mueller in conversations with the president and would the president be able to claim that. >> before we get to executive

privilege, the rone thing that the president can invoke is fifth amendment. which allows him to not incriminate himself. in terms of executive privilege, the issue here, this is a criminal case. and donald trump is an actual witness to potential crimes. if there is obstruction of justice being investigated and if his campaign is alleged to have been colluded and the standards that the court uses, it is different than an actual crime. there is nobody else that can provide the information than donald trump can provide. and that would also be a legal battle as well. they could invoke that and they can go on the mat on that. >> the president does not know what all the other people from the white house have been called in some from inner circle have

already told mueller. >> that is true, about you i have to say one of the terms that i have always objected to is perjury trap. oh, maybe they are setting a perjury trap. simple way to avoid that problem, just tell the truth. the idea that it is a trap to ask the president or anyone else questions about events that occurred in the world, it is absurd to suggest there is something unfair about that as you have the president's defenders have been saying, they are trying to trap him. they may have documents that he doesn't know about. too bad. tell the truth. it is not a crime to make a mistake. not a crime not to remember things. but if you lie, that is not a perjury trap. that is just lying. >> and so maggie, when the president's attorneys argue that mueller doesn't have standing to interview the president on these things, that is something that ultimately would be decided by the court. >> right. and i think that it is a

difficult case to make. i am not surprised that they are make it go again, jeffrey would know more than i do. but not an argument that it seems likely to succeed. essentially, playing for time for lack of a better way of putting it which is kicking the can down the road and daring mueller essentially to subpoena them and see what happens. and after, that i don't think that they have a whole lot of legal argument to make. we are, as jeffrey said, in other charted argument. >> much more on this discussion and breaking news when we return. # ...you could learn you're from ireland... ...donegal, ireland... ...and your ancestor was a fisherman. with blue eyes. just like you. begin your journey at ancestry.com

the things we do rising before dawn. sweating it out. tough to do it all. but we can always find time to listen to great thinkers and explorers whose stories take us places our hamstrings can't. all we have to do is listen. download audible to start listening. presents... the quicker downhiller with lindsey vonn when you live your life as an olympic downhill skier... you can't let spills slow you down. that's why i use bounty, the quicker picker upper. bounty picks up spills quicker... nailed it! ...and is two times more absorbent. boom! proud sponsor of the olympic winter games 2018.

. question tonight, the new question will he or won't he talk to the mueller investigation. new york times is reporting the president's lawyers are telling him no. carl we should mention -- i guess the president is rolling the dice. if they do go to the supreme court they could similarly again. >> and what we are seeing here is the willingness of donald trump to provoke a constitutional crisis to keep from having to reveal the real facts that mueller is uncovering in this investigation.

he does not want this to go forward. and one way is to not testify and that indeed could provoke this constitutional crisis. trump does not want a report on whether or not there was collusion. whether or not there was an obstruction of justice. whether or not indeed the president of the united states has sought to cover up and undermine all of this investigation which he has from beginning to end. he doesn't want that report made. and he is willing from everything we know, from those who talked to him regularly, he is willing to provoke a constitutional crisis and at that point, perhaps republicans might finally have to say you know, we might have to leave this president's side. we need to find out what happened with the russians. >> is it possible that this is another bargaining chip. a tough stance they are letting people know about. >> this was not some authorized

leak, number one. and number two, everybody has become pretty consistent in their reporting. there have been concerns about trump appearing before mueller. some of this is posturing but also the added benefit of what they think that it is a huge problem if the president goes and speak to mueller. one second, one that his white house advisers who are not his legal team share. almost all of them think this is a risky dangerous idea. >> the more -- one issue that is very much outstanding is if you have an interview, how long is it. and if, you know, he is saying, no, no, interview at all and he winds up saying, i will give you one hour, that looks like a bigger concession if you have been saying no all along.

donald trump can eat up an hour answering one question. there is a lot of negotiating here. he could eat up that time on his own with little risk to himself. >> do you agree that he holds a lot of cards. >> he will try to negotiate all of these pieces. for the prosecutors, they will want to go through all the facts. and that will take a considerable amount of time. the prosecutors will not agree to a time limit and that does set up this kind of conflict. so i think the president has some cards. i do think, you know, it is obvio obviously not something bob mueller want to subpoena the

sitting president. >> why not? because it looks badly for him that he is forcing the president >> the president is different than other people in a certain way. and mueller is trying to get every way he can to get the president in the door short of issuing the subpoena. >> and also in mueller's interest to say we tried everything. we offered everything possible accommodation. so both sides are doing an amount of posturing for good reason. >> thanks everybody. the stock market suffers an historic loss. on the day president trump travelled to ohio to talk about his successful economic. more on that ahead. #

there are two types of people in the world. those who fear the future... and those who embrace it. the future is for the unafraid. ♪ ♪ the future is for the unafraid. and butch.aura. and tank. and tiny. and this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace. laura can clean up a retriever that rolled in foxtails, but she's not much on "articles of organization." articles of what? so, she turned to legalzoom. they helped me out. she means we helped with her llc, trademark, and a lot of other legal stuff that's a part of running a business. so laura can get back to the dogs. would you sit still? this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace and this is where life meets legal.

renein the caribbean.onder... for a limited time enjoy two free perks, like complimentary wi-fi and drinks.

a savings up to $300 when you book now, during the celebrity cruises sail beyond event. renein the caribbean.onder... for a limited time enjoy two free perks, like complimentary wi-fi and drinks. a savings up to $300 when you book now, during the celebrity cruises sail beyond event.

as president trump was speaking this afternoon in ohio and talking about his administration's economic record, cable news networks cut away and quickly focused on the stock market, which was taking a huge dive while the president was speaking, plunging to its biggest point decline in history during a single trading day. here are some of the remarks the president has made about the market since last summer. >> the stock market is at an all-time high. our stock market is at an all-time high. you look at the stock market at an all-time high. the stock market is at an all-time high. the stock market is way up. we're just hitting a new high on the stock market again. the stock market smashes one record high after another. the stock market is setting records. the stock market is shattering one record after another. the stock market hit an all-time record high today. the stock market is way up again today, and we're setting a record literally all the time.

i told you the stock market is hitting one all-time record after another. >> with us now, stephen moore, former senior economic adviser to the trump campaign, and austan goolsbee, a professor at the booth school of business. as we just heard president trump obviously takes full credit, boasting the economy's roaring under his presidency and talks about particularly the stock market, not just the actual economy. but on this day that we saw the largest single-day point drop in the market's history, he was silent aside from a pro forma statement from the white house. isn't that one of the dangers of linking yourself to the stock market? >> well, it's not too surprising that donald trump has been talking up the stock market since it has risen like a meteor since he was elected. you go back to the dow was at 18,000. now even with this big fall, there's no question, anderson, we've seen 1,800 points off the dow in the last two trading days. that's a big decline, but we're

still way ahead of the game. instead of 7 trill dollars created, it's about $5 trillion. i agree with your central premise. presidents probably shouldn't be watching the stock market day by day and get too carried away with, you know, the financial situation because, you know, you live by the stock market, and you die by it. but i will say this just to reassure your viewers. when you look at the kind of real economy, jobs, investment, earnings by company, it all looks really good, and the economy looks really hot. that's why it's sort of surprising the stock market has gone through this big tumble. >> austan, what did you make of what you saw today and the president's relative silence on it? >> well, look, the president was right all along. we set a new all-time record, only it was the biggest point drop in the history of the stock market. so the thing that you have to know -- and as you know, anderson, the president is shameless about citing data, statistics, or anything. in the republican primary, he

loved talking about his polling. then when the polling started to show him at historic lows in terms of approval, you have never heard boo about that again except to describe it as fake news. we've seen the same thing talking about climate change. he'll say, well, if the climate is really changing, even if 2017 is the hottest year ever, why was the super bowl so cold in minnesota? so, you know, if you razz people and you taunt them because the patriots won the super bowl, what do you think they're going to do with "h" when the patriots lose the super bowl? the president is about to learn this message. >> one interesting thing about the decline, when we try to look at what triggered the selloff, we got very good news on the job market on friday. then we had the federal reserve board of atlanta saying they thought we could get to 5% to 5.5% growth in the third quarter. that sort of spooked the markets

because, austan, it seems to me wall street doesn't want pay raises for workers because we got a pretty good number on the wage increases for workers in the last jobs report. you know, i'm just flabbergasted about -- >> i guess my question to that -- >> it's not bad -- >> well, steve, i guess i would have two questions about that, steve. the first is if that's true, then why did we just give a $2 trillion tax cut to those same corporations on the grounds that they were supposed to be passing it on in the form of wages? >> but they are. they are passing it on. >> and, two, what you see here is this is the trump move, which is try to claim credit when something is good. then if it starts to go wrong, blame others. no, it was the fed. it was somebody else. corporate america doesn't want to give wages. what are we going to do? look, donald trump should not have been getting up and saying that just as he shouldn't have been getting up saying that the real unemployment rate was 50% and then a few days after he takes office, he says, well, look, now we have a record low

unemployment rate. as i say, the president has proven shameless at citing statistics, and he's going to get bit by this. they're going to run footage of him saying, look at how the stock market is up that shows him a good president. and now the stock market is down. >> yeah, except that, you know, this is two or three days of bad stock market news. you know the stock market could -- look i actually think there's a lot of good buying opportunities out there right now because there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the economy. >> the stock market almost tripled under barack obama. >> okay. sounds like you're boasting about the stock market. >> it's interesting that none of the people now who are trying to trumpet trump's stock performance were willing to say that when it was happening under obama. >> gentlemen, appreciate it. coming up, more on the new reporting that president trump's lawyers don't want him to answer questions from robert mueller. the story broke just about half an hour ago, 45 minutes ago i should say. questions in the russian probe. that could lead to one big legal battle, perhaps even go to the

supreme court. more of the details ahead. [ clock ticking ] what can a president do in thirty seconds? he can fire an fbi director who won't pledge his loyalty. he can order the deportation of a million immigrant children. he can threaten an unstable dictator armed with nuclear weapons. he can go into a rage and enter the nuclear launch codes. how bad does it have to get before congress does something? a heart transplant... that's a whole different ballgame. i was in shock. i am very proud of the development of drugs that can prevent the rejection and prevent the recurrence of the original disease. i never felt i was going to die.

we know so much about transplantation. and we're living longer. you cannot help but be inspired by the opportunities that a transplant would offer. my donor's mom says "you were meant to carry his story". (male vo) raging wildfires continue to scorch parts; (male vo) allegations of misconduct; ♪ oh, why you look so sad, ♪ the tears are in your eyes, mvo: how hard is it just to take some time out of your day to give him a ride to school and show him you support him. ♪ and don't be ashamed to cry, ♪ let me see you through, ♪ 'cause i've seen the dark side too. ♪ ♪ when the night falls on you, ♪ you don't know what to do, mvo: when disaster strikes to one, we all get together and support each other. that's the nature of humanity. ♪ i'll stand by you,

♪ won't let nobody hurt you. ♪ i'll stand by you, ♪ so if you're mad, get mad, ♪ don't hold it all inside, ♪ come on and talk to me now. ♪ hey, what you got to hide? ♪ mvo: it's a calling to the nation of how great we are and how great we can be. ♪ i'm alive like you. ♪ when you're standing at the cross roads, ♪ ♪ and don't know which path to choose, ♪ ♪ let me come along, ♪ 'cause even if you're wrong ♪ i'll stand by you. ♪ i'll stand by you. ♪ won't let nobody hurt you.

♪ i'll stand by you. ♪ even in your darkest hour, ♪ and i will never desert you. ♪ i'll stand by you. welcome to the second hour of 360. on the table this hour with the panel a "new york times" story breaking in the past hour that president trump's lawyers are advising he refused to sit down for any interview with special counsel robert mueller. also the democratic rebuttal to the memo. will the president let it see the light of day? also president trump's claim today that some democrats were treasonous and un-american during the state of the union address. we begin with what the president's legal team is telling him. cnn's pamela brown, gloria borger brought us the first details of this last week. pam, this "new york times" report which broke about 45 minutes ago, it tracks with what