good evening. we begin tonight keeping them honest, with the white house continuing their effort to gaslight the american people. now, if you haven't seen the 1944 movie "gaslight" our ke, in someone tries to make you question your own reality and sanity. and they do this by lying, they

do it by speaking in contradictions and denying the reality you know to be true. that's how the white house is gaslighting the american people daily in an effort to cover up how it handled the case of rob porter. today, the white house changed its story and tried again to shift the blame for how a man who had been accused by domestic abuse by at least three women ended up working side-by-side with the president hand at the right hand of the chief of staff. the story, magically, changed hours after the fbi director testified about a timeline that directly contradicted what the white house had said just yesterday. the white house tried to make a case that you shouldn't believe your own eyes and your ears, you should, instead, believe each version of the white house's shifting narrative. and you should believe the white house when it says that the president really cares about victims of domestic violence, even though the president has never actually said that publicly. again, this center s around rob porter, the former staff secretary who resigned last week after news broke that his

ex-wives had accused him of physical and verbal abuse. porter denied the allegations. ever since this picture came out, the picture we're showing you right now, last week, showing his first wife with a black eye, the white house has been scrambling to come up with a consistent story about when they learned about these allegations. and the amazing thing is, they still have not been able to do that. cnn has reported that white house counsel don mcgahn knew a year ago that the allegations may come up in the fbi background check and learned more details over the past year. well, yesterday, the white house said it learned of the extent of the allegations just last tuesday, and acted quickly. the background check was ongoing and they hadn't received any papers relating to it. well, today, the fbi director completely contradicted that, and he did so in public, sitting before the senate intelligence committee. >> the fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march, and then a completed background investigation in late july.

that soon thereafter, we received requests for followup inquiry, and we did the followup and provided that information. and then earlier this month, we received some additional information and we passed that on, as well. >> so, not only does that contradict what the white house said yesterday, it contradicts what the white house said earlier today. this is deputy press secretary on "fox and friends" zwlus morning. >> what we know about rob porter specifically, and that's the incident that everybody is talking about, is that his background check investigation had not been completed yet. it was still in the investigative process and had yet to be adjudicated. so, prior to an adjudication, the white house is not going to step into the middle of a process and short circuit it. >> hadn't been completed, was

still being investigated. so, that was at 8:40 a.m. then at 10:46 a.m., two hour and six minutes later, you heard chris wray say that the white house's version of events wasn't true, that in fact the bureau submitted a partial report in mash ch and march and a completed investigation in july. that's a totally different timeline than what sarah sanders described from the podium just yesterday. >> look, we learned of the extent of the situation involving rob porter last tuesday evening and within 24 hours, his rez ig nate had been accepted and announced. we let the process play out. it was ongoing. had nts been completed. look, this is a process that isn't -- doesn't operate within the white house. it's handled by our law enforcement and intelligence community. the process for the background was ongoing. and the white house had not received any specific papers regarding the completion of that background check.

>> so, okay, that's just not true. so, yesterday, sanders blames an ongoing process, one that supposedly doesn't operate within the white house. she actually said that, he said it's handled by law enforcement and intelligence community. not operating in the white house. then, the fbi director testifies and today, sarah sanders at the podium again and is asked what accounts for the discrepancy? >> the fbi portion was closed, the white house personnel security office, who is the one that makes a recommendation for adjudication, had not finished their process and not made a recommendation to the white house. >> wait a minute. who? the office of white house personnel security? that is who she's now pointing the finger at. remember, she just said yesterday, this is a process that doesn't operate in the white house. now, she's naming an office that has white house in the title and she's blaming them for not making a recommendation yet to the white house of which they are part. now, even if you believe this new story, and that is a big if,

given how the story has changed, but if somehow the white house's credibility is in tact, then you have to disbelieve what they said yesterday. in the briefing room, reporters tried to get some clarity. >> so, those two statements, the fbi director's statement, mr. wray, and your statement yesterday, seem to be at odds with one another. do you see anything that you'd like to clarify in terms of what i asked you today, based upon your answer yesterday? >> yeah, as i said earlier, my understanding is any information would have gone to the personnel security office. that office did not complete their process in order to make a recommendation for adjudication to the white house. that was still ongoing and therefore recommendation had not been made. >> the fbi director said the completed background investigation was actually submitted in late july. so, which one is it? >> let me read this to you again. the white house personnel security office staffed by career officials received

information last year and what they considered to be the final background investigation report in november. but they had not made a final recommendation for adjudication to the white house because the process was still ongoing when porter resigned. in the view of personnel security office, the fbi's july report required significant additional investigatory field work before personnel security office could begin to evaluate the information for adjudication. we find those statements to be consistent with one another. >> all right. just keeping them honest, those statements are not consistent with one another. and let's not forget, this isn't some policy dispute. this is about a man with a sensitive white house position accused of domestic violence against at least three women. just last week, he was being praised by the white house and today, cnn learned that he was in serious discussions to actually be promoted when all of this blew up. sarah sanders was asked about that today, she said she didn't know. chief of staff john kelly is quoted in "the wall street journal" in regards to how the case was being handled, he said,

quote, it was all done right. end quote. it was all done right. again, from the white house, don't believe the fbi director, don't believe your eyes and your ears, believe us. on friday, the president said it was a tough time for rob porter. and then, over the weekend, he lamented on twitter about lives and careers being destroyed because of, quote, a mere allegation. no mention of lives ruined because of domestic violence, no mention of women at all, but the white house is sticking to its story that above all, the president cares about victims. >> does the president believe the women? >> again, the president takes all of these accusations very seriously. he believes in due process. above everything else, he supports the victims of any type of violence, and certainly would condemn any violence against anyone. look, we've condemned domestic violence in every way possible. >> keeping them honest -- that's actually not true either. the president has not condemned domestic violence in every way possible. he actually hasn't condemned it in any way possible. opening his mouth and saying those words, that would be one

way to condemn domestic violence, but he has not done that. in fact, he has a long history of defending men accused. the president was on camera two different times today. he had two different opportunities to get on the record with this deep held belief the white house swears he has. here was the first opportunity this morning. here's how it went. >> mr. president, do you believe rob porter's ex-wives? do you believe rob porter's ex-wives, mr. president? >> thank you very much. >> do you believe rob porter's ex-wives, mr. president? >> now, remember, according to sarah sanders, the president supports the victims. here's the second opportunity for him to say something this afternoon. >> mr. president, do you have a message to domestic violence victims? >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thanks, everyone. >> thank you. >> and that was it. now, above everything else, the president supports the victims, says the white house. the white house says, don't

believe your eyes, believe us. we asked the white house for anyone to come on the program to talk about any of this tonight, they said no. jim acosta is going to join us right now from the white house. jim, i understand you have new reporting on don mcgahn and john kelly and when they knew specific information. >> that's right. you don't have a white house official, anderson, but you do have me. i was told by white house official earlier this evening who said that don mcgahn simply has not shared enough information about what he knows and what he knew at the time about rob porter's background. keep in mind, the fbi director, christopher wray said earlier today, the background check process, at least in terms of the fbi, was completed in july. and it was at that time this white house official says that don mcgahn knew some of this information that was lurking in rob porter's past. and simply did not share enough of it with top officials, including the chief of staff, john kelly. now, this official did say that perhaps kelly did not dig enough or prod enough for this information, but according to this official that i spoke with earlier this evening, a lot of

these questions are going back to don mcgahn and asking the question, why has he never said much about what he knew at that time. >> this is yet another example of the white house not being able to get their stories straight on something. what is going on here, do you think? >> well, you know, last week, anderson, you know, they were saying that rob porter was a good guy. that he was a man of honor and integrity and the next day they changed that story, and said, well, we do care about the issue of dhesic violence, and then this week, you had the white house press secretary pointing to the fbi and today the white house press secretary was pointing to the white house office of personnel security. the american people can listen to all of those four different versions in terms of how the white house is explaining this, or they can just listen to the one version that came from the fbi director earlier today, who said, we completed our investigation last july and anderson, our reporting on this has not changed. that multiple white house officials including the chief of staff, including the white house counsel, have known for months. anderson, instead of the me,

too, movement, it seems to be the anybody but me movement over here at the white house. >> jim acosta, thank you. kate lynn collins joining us now with more on this newest white house scapegoat, the white house personnel security office. so, sarah sanders blamed intelligence and law enforcement agencies yesterday for not having finished their investigation to rob porter. today, after the fbi explained actually they had, she pointed to the white house personnel security office, which is so obscure, many folks that we talked to from the previous administration never even heard of it. what have you learned about this office? >> yeah, anderson. it's not just the previous administration, it's people who are currently working in the white house right now who had no idea what the press secretary was talking about today. so, we went from two different narratives, yesterday, it was that the security clearances aren't just done through the white house, it's through the law enforcement and the intelligence agency, and then, today, after the fbi director blew a whole in that, sarah sanders brought up this personnel security office.

so, we did some digging to find out what is this office, it's essentially located right next door to the white house, they do not have a lot of employees. and the white house described it as the fbi takes their information that they get when they're doing a back ground check, they turn it over to the personnel security office and the personnel security office then goes from there to the white house counsel's office. but to be clear, this is underneath the umbrella of the white house. it's not some other building out in washington. it is part of the white house. so, the white house was not very clear on that, when they were explaining that today, saying that it goes through them, and a u.s. official told me colleague jeff zeleny that the security clearance office is akin to what the hr would be in a private sector, they're more of a clearing office and they do not make decisions, they essentially, anderson, take information and pass it on, which is not what the white house was saying today at the briefing. >> right, it was interesting, sarah sanders actually didn't use the word, claiming that the white house security personnel office was doing investigations, she didn't say that, she just kept using the word their

process hadn't been completed. despite what sanders, you know, continuing to make it sound like there's some distance between the white house and this investigation, that office, i mean, just to reiterate, is part of the white house. either way, we know white house counsel don mcgahn and john kelly were aware of these allegations for some time. >> yeah, that's right. we should not let what is important here get lost in what the white house is saying today. it has been seven days, anderson, since that first story on rob porter first broke, and today was the first day the white house had even mentioned this personnel security office, but what's important here, regardless of what the personnel security office relayed to the white house is that we know based on cnn reporting that the white house counsel, don mcgahn, knew about these allegations, the chief of staff, john kelly, knew about the allegations, and other senior administration officials knew about the allegations and not only did they allow rob porter to continue to work in the white house, as i reported today, they were considering promoting him. >> and i just want to reiterate, people you talked to in the white house working currently in the white house, they had never

heard of this office? >> multiple people in the white house had never heard of this office. multiple sources that i reached to. i talked to dozens of people in the white house every day and anderson, several people could not even name me one person who worked in the personnel security office. just to give you a sense of how obscure this office is, even here in washington. >> appreciate the reporting. thank you. up next, our panel weighs in on the conflicting timelines from the white house and the fbi. how does the white house get out of this mess? total agreement on russian meddling in the upcoming election.

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. listerine® cleansaches 25virtually 100%.. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™

this is food made to sit down for. slow down for. put the phone away, and use a knife and fork for. and with panera catering, it's food worth sharing. panera. food as it should be.

it's pretty clooer that the stories still aren't straight at the white house. today, as we mentioned, press secretary sarah sanders pointed in a new direction, a white house so obscure, few people have heard of it before. >> the fbi portion was closed, the white house personnel security office, who is the one that makes a recommendation for adjudication, had not finished their process and therefore not made a recommendation to the white house. >> joining me now to plow threw the timelines, james schultz, former white house counsel, fill mudd, and cnn's gloria borger. phil, you used to work for the fbi. did you know about this white house personnel office and what do you make of the conflicting stories? >> in some ways, yes, i did, i had to go through a white house security process myself. in some ways, the stories aren't conflicting. this is speculative, but i would

bet this one in vegas, anderson. let me give you a way this works. the fbi completes the investigation in july. that means they pass over a file to the white house security office. that file could include things that are pretty basic. the guy shoplifted when he was 17, who cares. he smoked dope when he was a sophomore in college, who cares. let's adjudicate him. or, you step forward and say, he might have hit two ex-wives, those are the allegations, how do you adjudicate that and why can't you adjudicate an expedited security clearance for a white house official in seven months? let me tell you what i think happened here. i think the fbi sent over a really nasty package in july, they updated it in november and the white house guys said, wow, we're not sure what to do with this one. that's what happened here, i think. >> gloria, i mean, we're a week in. the white house story does keep changing every day. previously, they were saying the fbi process hadn't finished, the law enforcement intelligence community and now it's this office. >> i mean, it's kind of m

malpractice, coming from the podium at the white house. they had to know that the fbi director was testifying today. that he was going to be asked about this. and that he was going to provide a record of what the fbi did. and he was quite clear that the information had been given to them multiple times, starting in march of last year and the fact that the white house and the chief of staff in particular said, well, i only learned the worst details 40 minutes before rob porter was fired, and we have not heard from the white house counsel, don mcgahn, who was clearly dealing with a lot of this information, is something i think they need to address and address quickly, because -- because of what chris wray, the fbi director, said today. >> jim, i mean, sarah sanders has not been willing to go into any detail about when kelly, or don mcgahn actually got this

information. every time he's asked, she says, well, i'm not going to get into a tick tock, we generally knew, we, meaning everybody in the white house, generally knew, you know, when it was reported in the media. >> well, what we do know is that what chris wray testified today was that the office of personnel security, or, the white house, and we assume the office of personnel security, sent back the file for more work by the fbi back in july, when they had reported it as complete. now, why that happened, that went back to the fbi for further investigation, that's not clear at this point. was it the white house counsel's office, was it the office of personnel security who was responsible for making that determination? and then it comes back as complete in november, as a result of being sent back and then more information trickles out in january. at that point in time, we don't know who knew what and who gave the order to do more investigating. i think those are the questions that are open at this point.

>> phil, wouldn't even in that initial fbi investigation, they've interviewed the two wives, they have access to the temporary order of protection that one of them put out at the recommendation of a police officer, they have the police report of the inincident. i would imagine there would be a fair amount of solid information in that report, no? >> yeah, but let me give you a couple perspectives on this, anderson. this is an investigation into the private life of a private citizen who is going into government. the security guys are not going to reveal everything to people in the white house about what individuals in this person's life, including ex-wives, have said. there's a privacy issue. let me flip the question. we're in february. the file closed in july and reclosed after a followup investigation in november. even if you don't know the details of the file, are you telling me in an expedited investigation, you don't step back as a chief of staff and say, why can't we close this after seven months? that's the question i would ask, not whether they know the detail office what'sing in the file,

but why can't you close the investigation in the first place? that's the question. >> jim, do you have an answer to that? this is a person who was, you know, essentially the right-hand of kelly and apparently was being thought of for promotion. >> i think kellyanne conway said it this past weekend, that you don't want folks with this type of record working in the white house, having these clearances, and it's incumbent upon the white house to make these adjudications in a timely fashion. once they had enough information, they did swiftly make that determination. the question is, when did that happen. >> well, they had a lot of information before they made the determination, i mean, they're saying that it was the picture that finally did it. but now, from the fbi timeline here, we know that there was information, we know that they asked for more information, we don't know who did the asking, which i think we should know, so, we knew that they had at their disposal inside the white house a lot of things that would

have made anyone say, rob porter should not be working here. >> yeah, and jim -- >> they didn't do that. >> jim, do you really believe that the white house has been handling this in an honest way? i mean, again, sarah sanders, every time she's asked point blank about what kelly knew and when, she dodges the question. she says, well, i'm not going to go into levels of detail, same thing for don mcgahn and just yesterday, he's pointing the finger at the fbi and law enforcement communities and intelligence communities and now she's bringing up this white house office that doesn't have any investigative powers that i can find, of their own. >> no, but they do have a review and they do make recommendations, the office of personnel security. and i don't think she's pointing a finger at that office and i don't think she was pointing -- >> she did. she said the process wasn't closed from the fbi and the intelligence communities and it was closed. she was saying it was still an

go ongoing process. >> i think the answer to your question, though, is that it's been -- there has been the moving of the goal line on this one. and the facts keep evolving and what they needed to do early on was just put this one to bed and explain themselves more clearly at the outset. >> yeah, gloria, to your point, it is important to remember, cnn's reporting is that kelly and mcgahn knew about some of these issues with porter long before last week. >> in the fall. >> so, the white house to blame this on the white house personnel security office, again, it just -- >> i don't know that they're casting blame. i just don't think they're casting blame. >> well, they are. sarah sanders absolutely is casting blame. yesterday, in fact, from the beginning, their whole exclan nation has been, this is, you know, this security clearance review was not over, the investigation was still going on, just yesterday, she specifically said, law enforcement and the intelligence community. and now, after chris wray says,

actually, we completed ours, now, she's saying it's this obscure office that doesn't have any investigative capability. she's not even claiming they're still investigating, she just says their process wasn't complete, whatever that means. >> well, and it's our reporting that kelly knew in the fall. don mcgahn certainly knew. and the question i have, and i don't think we know the answer to, is what conversations, if any, did mcgahn have with porter, did kelly have with porter? was this, apparently from some reporting out there, he was trying to sort of downplay this at a certain point, but did those conversations evolve as more and more information piled up from the fbi. we don't know the answer to that. >> phil, does it make any sense that someone in an important position like porter, who is working very closely with the chief of staff, that no one in

this personnel office, when they got the initial report, would have at least red flagged, said, hypo, you know what, there's this issue here, do you think they just took it upon themselves to send back for more information and then they're just holding onto it, waiting until they make some decision to inform don mcgahn or the chief of staff? that just seems to defy logic. you would think they would at least raise some red flags about, hey, this is why he doesn't have a security clearance so far. >> seven months? i went from being a 24-year-old american citizen to a top secret security clearance within nine months. as someone who didn't know anybody, and the white house is going, saying, exme tithed process for somebody who is going to be a white house official, and you can't come up with an answer after you initially closed the investigation in july? what do you think happened there, anderson? i think they got a hot mess delivered to them by the fbi and they said, we don't know what to do with it, of course the investigation isn't closed or the adjudication process,

because they couldn't close it. they couldn't come to a conclusion to give him a security clearance because there's too much trash in his file. this isn't very complicated. >> also seems like this is what's happening with a number of people in the white house. i mean, jared kushner, included, who still doesn't have a security clearance. >> let's not cast a wide net on that. >> well, jared kushner doesn't have a security clearance. >> i agree with that. i think one of the other additional issues is whether people are filing the followup paperwork. for example, financial disclosures. it doesn't mean negative information. may mean that jared says, i'm not giving you that stuff and he still doesn't have a clearance. coming up next, a deeper look both at the job and at times the combative style of white house press secretary sarah sanders. patrick woke up with back pain.

but he has work to do. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

(announcer) purchase $699 or moret tat helzberg diamonds and get a free megablast waterproof speaker with built-in amazon alexa. a $339.98 value. for 100 years, heritage and innovation have made gillette the #1 shave in america. now get gillette quality at lower prices - every day. brought to you by more than a thousand workers in boston. we're proud of giving you our best. gillette - the best a man can get.

no question it's been a tough few days for sarah sanders, answering questions about the rob porter miss. at one point, she, quote, huffed like an exasperated teacher, p reprimanding a classroom troublemaker. here's an example of how she dodged some of today's questions. >> i can't comment. can't comment. i'm not aware of any communication. i'm not aware of any communication. not that i'm aware of. not that i'm aware of. i don't know the answer to that. i can't say with 100% certainty. i can't say definitively. that's something that would be well beyond my scope.

again, that would go beyond my scope. that's my understanding. my understanding. my understanding. i wouldn't know the specifics. i haven't asked hem about that specifically. >> well, with a deeper look at miss sanders, here's brian seltzer. >> her title is press secretary, but sarah sanders really serves at president trump's top stonewaller. >> i don't know. we'll keep you posted. certainly keep you posted. i'll let you know. i'll have to get back to you on that one. >> by now, she's been behind the podium longer than her predecessor, sean spicer. with a long list of fibs to prove it. on the subject of a very serious probe of russian interference -- >> this is a witch hunt and a hoax. >> on the president's relationship with his former chief strategist steve bannon? >> i'm not aware that they were ever particularly close. >> she is lying, critics say, lying to please an audience of one, the president himself. and she's shown a trumpian tendency to attack the media. >> you cannot say that it's an

honest mistake when you're purposely putting out information that you know to be false. >> offensive comments like that have stirred tensions with the press corps. some days you can see the frustration on their faces. >> that doesn't answer the question. you think that's an accurate statement? >> it wasn't confusing to me, i'm sorry if it was for you. >> sanders might not know what the president will say or tweet next, so, deflection is an all too frequent solution. last week. >> has he seen the photos? >> i don't know. >> later, aides said trump was disgusted by the photos. sanders can be combative. she can be dismissive. >> said it was a racial slur. what is your response to that? >> i think that's a ridiculous response. i think that the premise of your question is completely ridiculous and shows the lack of knowledge that you have on this process. >> can you explain -- >> i tried several times. >> fully self-aware about her style, she has a sense of humor,

too. >> great to be back with you guys. >> but by the end of most briefings, nobody's laughing. >> brian steltzer joins me now. is sarah sanders really speaking to an audience of one, president trump here? she's talking to the press corps and the nation. >> indeed. the sense is that the president does tune in on a regular basis. he wants to see how sanders performed, just as he did, wanted to watch spicer this time last year. i think when we look at her dishonesty, the confusion, the deflection, it's all a reflection of the president's own attitudes. his own dishonesty and denialism. our new reporting tonight, that the president is still in denial about russian meddling, still unconvinced that the russians really interfered in the election. when you have a boss like that, that means sarah sanders is in a very hard job. at the same time, there's a lot of times it seems she doesn't want to know the answers to the

questions reporters are asking, so, she avoids even finds out. >> that's the thing. she says, well, i haven't talked to the president about that, which just allows her to say, well, i just don't know. her job is to have information and seems like oftentimes, she either has one talking point or not enough information. >> yeah, i mean, traditionally for press secretaries, she wouldn't be the first one who declines to find certain things out, because she doesn't want to have to lie. there have been plenty of press secretaries to use that dodge. i think in some cases, too, the answers that people want from sarah sanders don't exist, because the president hasn't made up his mind or he's said conflicting things, or he is not in touch with the reality of the situation in some cases. so, she is on a tight rope. she does seem to me to have really taken down the temperature from the spicer days, where, yes, it's tense in the briefing room, but there's not that sense of sort of performative aggression that spicer brought to the job that i think the president appreciated for the way it goosed the ratings. but there's not the sense that every briefing is this must-see

performan performance. >> to your point, every press secretary does have to, probably lines at some point, or, you know, miscommunicates or makes up some stuff or exaggerates. do you think sarah sanders has taken it to a different level? >> spicer and sanders together have taken it to a different level. there are some differences between spicer and sanders, in some ways, though, her attempts to, you know, bring on a surprise guest in order to avoid questions like she did today, those tricks, all of them, they mask what's really going on and i think it's useful, after she's been in the job six months, to step back and say, this is the still really unusual behavior from a white house. these are spokespeople paid with taxpayer money and she spent the entire briefing today just like yesterday just avoiding every question we have about this porter mess. >> she will say, well, i'm not going to get into specifics on that. there's no reason she couldn't, she's just choosing not to

answer the questions. >> right, and i think, to your point, brian, i mean, the reason that the behavior of sanders and spicer isn't normal for a press secretary is because this president isn't normal for a president and they reflect him. and there's very much a sense, you know, sarah sanders doesn't actually work for donald trump, she works for the american people. we pay her salary and it is her job to give information to us, the american people, not us, the press corps, even, to the american people, so they can know what is happening in their government. but trump, as we know, has the sense that everyone from the fbi to the entire white house staff exists to serve him and to make him feel good. the people that end up in those jobs are the people who are willing to go along with that. >> molly, brian, thank you. up next, president trump seeking advice how to handle the fallout of the porter scandal, according to sources. who the president is call, and the two main questions he's asking, when we continue. ♪ ♪ 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. ♪ ♪

♪ 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.

the fallout of the porter scandal has expanded into another week. and president trump is looking forred a vus on how to stop the negative coverage. he spend the weekend, even monday night, calling his allies and associates. he had two key questions. when does it end, and what do we do? the answers may seem obvious. yet, the president is looking for help. joining me now is michael dantonio, author of "the truth about trump." he had exclusive interviews with

then citizen trump. is this something that trump has always done, to reach out and take a temperature of things? >> it is. when he was a businessman, he would actually ask almost anyone he ran into for advice. he'd ask the guys running the elevators in trump tower, what do you think of this, what do you think of that? even on political issues. so, that's common. the difference, i think, between donald trump and many other executives is that he's often venting and he's looking for confirmation of his instinct, so, he's not actually soliciting deep wisdom from the people -- >> he's not looking for advice he doesn't want to hear, is that what you're saying? >> precisely. so, occasionally, he'll hear it. i think he actually hired john kelly with the hope that maybe this was a strong person who would go after him a little bit, with the truth. but in general, the president is not a person who wants sharp

criticism or advice that is contrary to his instincts. >> it's so interesting how he's handled this issue with domestic violence. they ushered the press into the oval office for prepared remarks and what his remarks were were praising rob porter, saying how sad he is and how sad they are that he's left and hope he has a great career. nothing about the alleged victims, nothing about domestic violence in general. and now sarah sanders is saying, the president is relaying the message that he cares greatly about domestic violence, of course about due process, as well. those words have not come from the president's mouth. he had two opportunities today to do it and chose to remain mum. >> it's a stunning thing. but he filters all, including what goes on on the news, through himself. so, when he hears that someone's been accused of a crime of domestic violence or abusing someone, he recalls his own 16 accusers, and they're people he

detests, that's an experience that made him very upset. he has empathy for himself, he has empathy for this other male who has been accused. i don't think he goes to any concern about the women who are making the accusation s and hav clearly suffered. >> do you think it's a political calculation, that's not something his base necessarily needs to hear from him, and that the notion of him seeming to be strong as he defines strong, which others may defind as weakness, but know addressing things or not apologizing, that that plays well for his base? >> i think there is something to that. so, cnn has reported that among the people in his base, even many women, still are standing by him, and i think he calculate d long ago that there's a certain pose that he can take, this tough guy, and that everything is about winning. and the problem is, when you're president, not all problems are about winning. there are problems that require

empathy, require opening up to a variety of perspectives, but if you look at the white house, he's hired so many people who are so much like him. this is not going to yield the result that he needs. >> michael, thank you so much. >> thank you. coming up next, the top intel chiefs reveal that russia is already meddling in the midterm elections and it's only going to get worse. details ahead. whoooo.

when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.

as we've been reporting, fbi chief christopher wray is offering a different timeline from the white house about when his agency first briefed administration officials about the background check on rob porter. wray appeared before the senate intelligence committee along with all of the nation's intelligence chiefs to tell congress they view russia as a threat to the 2018 midterm elections. the director of national intelligence dan coats saying, quote, "there should be no doubt," unquote, that russia sees the elections as a target. cnn's jessica schneider joins us

now with more. the intelligence agencies were asked if the president has directed them to take action to stop interference from the russians. what did they say? >> they all either said flat out no, the president has not directed them to take any actions or they danced around the issue saying the president has only indicated they should fight all foreign threats. but it was quite clear that despite this uniform response from all six intelligence chiefs that russia has meddled and continues to meddle. the president has not been directing a fight to combat this huge issue and in fact, anderson, tonight cnn has learned from multiple sources that the president is still unconvinced that russia interfered in the 2016 election. and those sources say that he views any notion that russia meddled as his opponent's way of undermining his victory. and lawmakers in today's hearing were so frustrated by this, that the president hasn't acknowledged this, that they actually pressed the intelligence chiefs to persuade the president that russian

interference is still a real and present threat, saying that really the time is now to do something about this with the 2018 midterm primaries really right around the corner, anderson. >> they also talked about how russia considers the efforts they conducted in 2016 incredibly successful. >> yeah. it was director of national intelligence dan coats. he said exactly that. he said that there was, quote, no doubt that russia perceives its past efforts as successful. and really all of them agreed that the sights are now set to the midterms this year and then on to the next presidential election in 2020. and we know that this russian interference campaign, it really does extend far beyond the elections themselves. we've seen this repeatedly. russian bots have been targeting social media. they've made up fake accounts, fake events. we saw this in the election. and it's interesting because even just recently we know that russian-linked twitter accounts, they were found to have been pushing that release the memo hashtag all across social media.

of course that was part of that effort to get out the republican memo that was eventually released that accused the fbi of abusing surveillance court warrant processes. so of course we know that in the end that release the memo hashtag, it was successful in some ways. president trump approved the memo for release just about a week and a half ago. but these russian efforts, they religion really pervade all outlets and all platforms. it's elections and social media too, anderson. >> appreciate the reporting. the senate is debating immigration this week, a contentious issue coming to a cross roads with big questions about daca as well as the wall that the president wants. leyla santiago went to mexico's southern border with guatemala to see if the people are still determined to make the trek to the u.s., and here's what she found. >> reporter: mexico's southern border with guatemala. you will not find a wall here. for many, this is the gateway to the u.s./mexico border thousands of miles away. some use this river to transport goods. others use it to migrate north.

just 20 minutes here, we find ronnie cardona's family crossing. so he made it to the u.s. and then was deported back to honduras, and now he's trying again. ronnie is heading north to escape violence and poverty in honduras. they once feared trump's talk on immigration. not anymore. >> [ speaking foreign language ]. >> reporter: he says he's going to get there with or without a wall. every day people cross the suchiaca river. this is not part of the challenge for those fleeing violence in central america. it only costs about $1.50 to go from guatemala into mexico. but once you get to that side, the risks can be deadly, forcing many to hire a smuggler. this is a coyote, a human smuggler. he would only speak to us if we concealed his identity.

>> [ speaking foreign language ]. >> reporter: he says he's brought in 3,000 to 4,000 people to the united states. he charges about $6,000 per person and works with a network of smugglers. he's saying it's easy to get from guatemala to mexico, but what about mexico to the u.s.? [ speaking foreign language ] he says that one's a little more difficult. he noticed the flow of immigrants slowed down when president trump took office. but numbers on the u.s.-mexico border have shown an uptick since may. mexico's southern border has seen a similar trend. business for smugglers has picked up again. >> [ speaking foreign language ] >> reporter: immigration, he says, is unstoppable. it doesn't matter what president trump says. some people are just determined to get to the united states. so when you get to the u.s.-mexico border, will you be using a smuggler there?

>> yes, that's correct. >> reporter: we found darby -- we aren't using his last name for his safety -- outside one of mexico's immigration offices, where so many are waiting for permission to be in mexico as they travel north. >> it's a just a hole, a fulfilling of loneliness. >> reporter: darby tells us he was deported from the u.s. in may. he's worried about the dangerous trek back where he has no defense against cartels that extort vulnerable immigrants. many are robbed, kidnapped, killed, and still he says it's worth the risk. staying in honduras could mean gangs will carry out threats to kill him and his family. >> so the only other choice that i have at this time is to go back to the u.s. and try to make an entry, an illegal entry again. >> so you know this is illegal? >> i know it is illegal. >> why not do it the legal way? >> it's very, very difficult. >> reporter: he doesn't have enough time or money to get back to the u.s. legally, he says. he's desperate.

>> i still have a dream. >> reporter: no matter what the u.s. president may say or build -- >> [ speaking foreign language ]. >> reporter: he said trump can't build a wall in the ocean. they all agree they will find a way north. leyla santiago, cnn, chiapas, mexico. stay with us. next, the latest from the white house as the differing timelines collide over who exactly knew what over the rob porter resignation. family. new year, new phone 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.

can start in the colon constiand may be signs of an imbalance of good bacteria. only phillips' colon health has this unique combination of probiotics. it provides four-in-one symptom defense. it's your daily probiotic. ♪ ♪ wake up early, o. ♪ slap on some cologne ♪ i'm 85 and i wanna go home ♪ ♪ just got a job ♪ as a lifeguard in savannah ♪ ♪ i'm 85 and i wanna go home ♪ ♪ dropping sick beats, they call me dj nana ♪ ♪ 85 and i wanna go don't get mad. get e*trade, kiddo. with advil's fast relief, you'll ask,

"what pulled muscle?" "what headache?" nothing works faster to make pain a distant memory. advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. what pain? aethat's the height ofs and advmount everest.minis. because each day she chooses to take the stairs. at work, at home... even on the escalator. that can be hard on her lower body, so now she does it with dr. scholl's orthotics. clinically proven to relieve and prevent foot, knee or lower back pain, by reducing the shock and stress that travel up her body with every step she takes. so keep on climbing, sarah. you're killing it. dr. scholl's. born to move.

thanks for joining us in the second hour of "360." on the table tonight, day eight of the white house cover-up of the rob porter scandal. the white house changes its story and tries to blame a new office. russia threat ignored. the country's intelligence chiefs agree russia is targeting