about this example? >> obviously, he's joking about their particular post. >> reporter: if that was a joke, their is a gutter ball. one twit earn person said this is the only bowling ball test i need. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> when in doubt, they say he's joking. thanks for joining us, ""ac 360"" begins right now. >> good evening. we begin with a development in the russia investigation that not only takes it one step closer to the president himself but also could take special counsel robert mueller one step closer to danger. he subpoenaed the trump organization itself. he subpoenaed russia-related documents related to the trump organization. it's first we've known involving president trump's businesses. the family finances are a touchy subject for the president.

he said sew in a conversation with maggie haberman. >> would that be a breach of what -- >> i would say, yeah, i would say yes. >> it's russia related. but can the personal be business related? that's sometimes blurred. for more we go to maggie haeberman. what can you tell us about this move by special counsel mueller? >> anderson, it's the first time we know of that there's been a subpoena for these kinds of document. that doesn't mean it is the first one. but this includes a number of trump firms that relates to russia. one person pointed out to me there could be all manner of thins th things that show up related to

russia. doesn't mean anything nefarious or financial. but what it does tell us is that this probe which the president's legal team had told him would be ending by december or soon after would he be cleared. not only is it not ending anytime in the next couple weeks, we're stretching into the summer here. the president being cleared is not coming anytime soon. this gets into his business. remember, he had told mike schmid, my colleague in the oval office july 17, that he would consider robert mueller going into his personal nnfinances toe a crossing of a red line, beyond the scope of what he is supposed to be looking at. again, we don't know exactly what this subpoena is searching for. but we do know that any subpoena donald trump's businesses, it's not going to make him happy. >> is there any reporting why his attorneys were telling him,

oh, it's going to be thanksgiving, the new year that this thing's going to get wrapped up? >> i think some of it was wishing to some extent. but some of it was about trying to keep the president from hopping off at mueller and reacting. trying to keep him calm, from making things worse on home self. it has worked by the way. he has not lashed out at mueller. but publicly, he has not done himself damage on that front, and that's what they were trying to avoid. >> do we know when the subpoena was issued? and why wouldn't the special counsel's office, you know, issue, why would they issue a subpoena rather than just asking for the documents directly? >> an exclenellent question. it was issued in the last couple weeks. they have asked for documents, and those documents have been supplied by all accounts. the trump organization has a

habit of complying with requests when they're just requests, this is a more forceful request by the mueller office. it means that the trump organization faces a greater legal problem if they are not fully comply yants. it does suggest that mueller's investigators think there needs to be an extra layer of force involved. >> you also had some reporting that there could be another administration shakeup as soon as tomorrow? >> that is true. because donald trump, if he sees all of us reporting that he's trying to change his mind, doing the opposite of what everyone said he would do. i've been told by several people in the white house that the president has clearly made up his mind about a number of cabinet officials that three will n -- they will not be with him for much longer.

there are the people who have caused him embarrassing headlines, which is ben carson and david shull kikin, with rep of using taxpayer money lavishly. then john kelly, the chief of staff who the president has been at odds with a bunch of times. but he was trying to keep him from firing rex tillerson. and then h.r. mcmaster. who the president has been frustrated for a period of sometime. it could be as soon as tomorrow. there was a desire to rip the band-aid off, by some, by some people in the white house. who think the president would be smart to get it all done with at once and have told him that. >> maggie haberman, thanks. >> thank you.

joining us now, two lawyers flanking a legendary lawyer, so how big a deal is this move by mueller? >> it's really hard to evaluate this without seeing the actual subpoena itself. but this is certainly an extremely relevant part of mueller's investigation. you know, one of the great mysteries of donald trump's performance, both as president, as a candidate, is why he has been so solicitous of vladimir putin. why did he change the platform of the republican party to make it more sympathetic to hem. one hypothesis is that he has some sort of business relationships with, with russia or russians. and that's what mueller appears to be looking for. looking for evidence of business connections between the trump organization and, and russia. that is a perfectly appropriate thing for mueller to look for. he's looked for it voluntarily,

apparently, in the past. it's unclear whether the subpoena reflect, you know, frustration that the trump organization is not being forthcoming, or simply a cleanup act. but this is well within mueller's jurisdiction. >> and why do you think he would issue subpoena rather than just asking for the documents? >> there are a lot of reasons to issue a subpoena. truthfully, it's very common in a criminal investigation to issue a subpoena for documents. first, pause ybecause you want official mandates that somebody turn over those documents. if you send a learn, ittter, ir voluntary. and the second thing is that they a there can be no question about what you're asking four. and the other thing is timing. it's usually very finite, asking for information within a certain period of time.

it's more forceful, more formal and the common way that a prosecutor would get information like this in a case. >> carl, i miean regard loss of w -- regard loless of why he's dg this, it's going further than the house. >> he would be derelict if he did not do this. if there is nothing there as donald trump and his family maintain. if there are no business activities that cross a line into which donald trump might have been manipulated by the russians wittingly or unwittingly, if there are no business dealings there that look like some kind of collusion or some attempt by the russians to get something on trump and make him act in a same way, he's got nothing to worry about, and he ought to welcome this and say here are the books, open them up. but it is known by other lawyers

in this procedure that for a while mueller has been very focussed on trump's russian dealings and with russians. and taking a hard and critical look at trump's attempt to build a trump tower in moscow. his consigliere, michael cohen, his fixer is deep lly involved trying to make that happen and was suddenly withdrawn and didn't happen. that's a focus. mueller has had, as the fbi before hem aim and comey before, the tax returns. and they figure into this investigation, and they ought it to, because they provide a partial road map. >> jeff, what we don't know is how far back mueller would want documents relating to russia and the trump organization. >> that's true.

the scope of the subpoena is very important. in his interview with the "new york times," he said that the red line was any questions or inquiries to his relationships, business relationships, except with russia. what's unclear is that whether this subpoena deals with countries other than russia. and, as you point out, the issue of duration is extremely important. i just did a piece for "the new yorker" about trump and russia. trump has been involved with russia, trying to build there, since it was the soviet union. he first went there in 1987. so, you know, how far back to go in his relationship with russia is a very complicated and difficult question, and, you know, and i don't mean to fault the reporting. it's very hard it to get this reporting, but we don't know if this just relates to the 2015 attempt to build a trump tower in moscow, or if it goes much

further back or even back to the '80s. >> and ann, do you agree, what we were talking about with maggie before, that this certainly does indicate that the special counsel investigation is not coming to a close anytime soon? >> i do agree very strongly. i think if you were to imagine the special counsel's office, you would think about, there's a whiteboard with lots of different lines that are different parts of the investigation. and russia remains a central part of the investigation. there is this question, was there a quid pro quo. remember, we still have not seen charges brought in relation to the computer hacking and release of the e-mails, so there are number of issues still outstanding, and i would suspect another line would be financial involvement and connection to the president and his organization. so there are a lot of pieces that are still out there, that we have reason to believe this will go on for some time. >> let me add one thing. >> go ahead. >> go ahead. that numerous witnesses and their lawyers have been telling

journalists about how shaken they and their clients have been coming out of the interviews with mueller's investigators because of the depth of mueller's investigators' knowledge, because of the documents he has, and because of the questions they've been asking in which the clients are asked to finger other people and tell everything they know about other people. and they indeed know about other people, partly because mueller's people have perhaps a million pages of e-mails and documents provided by the white house, but more than that, by the government services administration. and it gives mueller's investigators great knowledge in which to question these witnesses and tell them, look, you tell us about x, y, or z, because we have in our hand an e-mail from somebody else saying something that you better let us know what's happening here. and this is particularly relevant to dealings with russia, trump's income and what

the trump business organization does in terms of whether or not it operates above board in that part of the world. >> jeff, i mean, to carl's point about all the documents they have. would the white house be aware of the full scope of the documents that mueller already has in possession? >> absolutely not. i mean, one of the cardinal rules of doing a white collar investigation is you don't tell one person what, what you have seen from produced from other people. i mean, the white house obviously knows what documents it has produced. and certainly, the white house witnesses who have gone in to testify would be prepared and shown those documents. there's nothing wrong with that. i mean all of us get hundreds of e-mails. there's nothing wrong with refreshing your recollection with, you know, seeing e-mails that you may not have seen for a year. but the white house witnesses certainly would not be told by

mueller what documents had been produced from the general services administration or from the trump organization. and, you know, what is most effective in examining witnesses is showing them documents that they may not know that you've seen. and, you know, that is what makes a good white collar investigation. these, it's very complicated. it's an enormous number of documents often but distilling them on to the ones that really matter, that's what good prosecutors do. >> thanks very much. coming up, the confrontation president trump says he had with canada as prime minister which might not actually have happened whoever a trade deficit which doesn't really exist, plus his complaint about japanese dropping bowling balls on american cars. it's either a trip down the rabbit hole or another thursday around here. also late updates from south florida where a bridge collapsed. a tragedy emerging from the

rubble tonight. ♪ get into my car ♪ get into my car ♪ ♪ get outta... applebee's to go. order online and get $10 off $30. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. and get $10 off $30. allergies with sinus you won't find relief here. go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d... while the leading allergy spray relieves six symptoms, claritin-d relieves eight, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. sarge, i just got a tip. that'll crack this case wide open! turns out the prints at the crime scene- awwwww...did mcgruffy wuffy get a tippy wippy? i'm serious! we gotta move fast before- who's a good boy? is him a good boy?

erg...i'm just gonna go. oh, you wanna go outside? you gotta go tinky poo-poo? i already went, ok? in the bathroom! as long as people talk baby-talk to dogs, you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

keeping in mind we intended to report on the white house on a claim the president made at a fund raiser about a conversation he had with justin trudeau. it gets stranger, because about an hour ago, the white house continued their damage control and said the face-to-face meeting the president talks about was not face-to-face but instead was a phone call. that followed a canadian journalist citing his source saying they don't remember any conversation taking place. like i said, weird, but it's important to keep that in mine -- mind as we talk about it. because we don't know who said what and when. we could be tracking a fundraiser speech of the president's own making.

>> he came to see me, i said justin, he said no, no, we have no trade deficit with you. we have none. donald, please, nice guy, good-looking guy comes in. donald, we have no trade problem, because you know everyone is getting killed. i said justin, you knew. i didn't even know. josh, i had no idea. i said you're wrong. you know why? because we're so stupid. [ laughter ] and i thought that was smart. >> the president is saying i didn't know, i had no idea. but i just said you're wrong. in order, he didn't know the facts so he made them up. keeping him honest, it's not like talk trade with the prime minister should have take president trump by surprise or anything else. when president obama and trudeau met for the so-called bromance summit two years ago, they

talked trade. george w. bush and his canadian counterpart wrangled over timber export the. they have argued over one trade issue or another, because canada is one of america's biggest trading partners and one of the few countries with which the united states has a trade surplus. not only is that a fact, but a fact the president himself put his signature to. this is an economic report of the president, 562 pages long. the money quote as it were is on page 228. figure 5.6, all countries show an offset of goods deficit with the u.s. running a net bilateral surplus with canada and the united kingdom. and there is the president's signature. so, when he spoke with prime minister true doi, he was apparently unaware of the facts inside the report that he himself signed a few weeks

before. justin trudeau is right. the u.s. does not have a trade deficit with canada. here's what the president tweeted it th tweeted this morning. trudeau doesn't like saying that canada has a surplus versus the u.s. negotiating. but they do. they almost all do, and that's how i know. the president's own facts say no. but it's possible the president's defending statements he never made, despite him telling an audience he did. press secretary sanders was fielding questions on this topic. >> are there other times the presidents has had conversations with his counterparts around the world in which he is not accurate in terms of a conversation that he's having with them? >> well, the president was accurate, because there is trade deficit. and that is the point that he was making, that he didn't have to look at the specific figures, because he knew there was a

trade deficit. weath whether they got down a, i don' have that number in front of me. >> as for ms. sanders having the information and providing it, she later tweeted that there is a deficit in goods only, not overall trade. you count everything, especially if talking to another world leader and making it clear you're counting everything. but that is if that conversation even actually took place as the president claimed. and since we're now fully in the weeds and perhaps down a rabbit hole, it's worth noting something else the president said, talking about the difficulty of selling american cars in japan, he talked about one vehicle that met all requirements except for one. and he said they were ready to prove it. and they said, no, no. we have to do one more test. it's called the bowling ball test. the president explained.

that's where they take a bowling ball from 20 feet up in the air and drop it on the hood of the car. if the hood dents it doesn't qualify. you know where he's going with this, i think. guess what, the roof dented an a little bit and they said no, this car doesn't qualify. it's horrible the way we're treated, yes, it's horrible. keeping him honest, nobody can figure out what the president was referring to. there is apparently no bowling ball test many there are countless standards in japan, here and elsewhere on emissions, pedestrian safety, you name it. nothing involved bowling balls and dented hoods. here's howsa sarah sanders deal with that. >> it illustrates the ways some countries are able to keep american goods out of their markets. >> she was reading that directly from a page, you can till. who knows what tomorrow may

bridge. crist je christia christiane amanpour joins us. don't the leaders believe what the president of the united states says? es person when i itally when pn it's one of our closest allies, canada. >> this is that feeling from the gut policy. we do deal in facts and we deal in empirical evidence. and so should world leaders expect that when they have conversations with the president of the united states or his advisers. they expect him to be fully briefed on major issues of trade as you just mentioned and the like. as we move into potential, really hard negotiations, north korea for instance, iran, the decision as to whether to pull out of the nuclear deal, you know, you really have to know

the facts in order to make the wisest decisions. >> well, it's also one thing for the president to make up facts in some sort of negotiating discussion with the canadian prime minister, but then and essentially lie about the facts, but then to go in front of an audience and talk about how you've lied to the canadian prime minister just seems doubly odd. >> i mean look, look, who knows, who really mows why if you're not the person saying it. but it does sort of bring you again back to this situation we seem to be living in, whether it's tweets. whether it's these kinds of conversations and recorded conversation and transcripts we hear that the president has had conversation outside the range of cameras and the like. and it does sort of kind of sum it up, conjure up an alternative universe, whatever tass, it is, a flouting of the rules of 9 road of competent, working

governance. and that's thing that's quite dangerous and mystifying, because then vut white house press spokesman having to go out and repeat these things. because that's who she works for, and she's going to repeat them. as you notice, actually reading from a page on the last one. so people around the world have kind of factored in the trump factor, and they say, you know, what he says, what he tweets, we're just going to really focus on what he actually does. but it's getting more complicated at issues become much, much more complicated. even on trade, ten days ago he decided to slap huge tariffs on who? on canada, his closest ally. on south korea who he needs for the north korea negotiations. on europe and the others. the ones he's trying to hurt, china, bear lay sell any steel to the united states, some 2%. then it's the next day, we have

their unraveling of maybe we won't put these tariffs on our allies. so then you ask who are you going to put them on? what's point? it is the sort of rabbit hole. but's say in this moment where rex tillerson has been fired. for all his failings, the world and the allies worried about war and peace and nuclear proliferation and the like. >> it comes as the u.s. is gearing up for this meeting with north korea. so if kim jong un doesn't believe what president trump is saying or south korean allies don't, we're talking about the country's nuclear program, >> they just don't have the officials to properly engage in this major negotiation, you know. they've got hundreds and hundreds of people should be engaged from the state department, energy department, to make this work. it's going to take a long time.

but more to the point, it's not only if kim jong un doesn't believe it. it's what might the president say to kim jong un? give away, suggest that could be on the table? and by the way, where's kim jong un's answer as yet to this invitation to a meeting? so all these unknowns. and by the way, what happens now that you have mike pompeo more like-minded who might be secretary of state after a confirmation process, who doesn't like the iran deal, is much more close to donald trump and is very hawkish on north korea. you know, how do you navigate these very, very important and delicate and consequential international negotiations? coming up, whether you want to call it executive time or spending hours in front of the television, by most accounts, the president spends a lot of time watching and tweeting about tv and the people on it. some of them, including himself, make it all the way to the white house. who were sure of it.

others who felt a connection. many more who never saw it coming. but now they know... they descend from the people of ireland. in fact, more than half of our community have discovered their irish roots... which means your smiling eyes might be irish too. order ancestrydna and find the surprises in you. just $69 through monday. get your kit today. but he hasoke up wwork to do.in. 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. ♪

with expedia one click gives you access to discounts on thousands of hotels, cars and things to do. like the avalon hotel beverly hills for 40% off. everything you need to go. expedia.

it's a presidency that was essentially born on reality tv,

and now the lines between reality and tv may be blurring even further. the president has chosen a tv personality to be his top economic adviser. but he is not the only one running from tv to the white house. >> reporter: minutes after his hiring became public, larry kudlow shared what the president told him. >> he said you're on the air. he said i'm looking at a picture of you. he said very handsome. so trumpian. >> reporter: david roth cup tweeting only a president who views everything through the lens of tv could think larry kudlow would be suitable to be national economic adviser, because he's not an economist in any sense of the word. he just plays one on television. but kudlow is not the only tv personality to see their profile rise. fox tv personality heather noart

was bumped up to fourth in line at the state department have being no prior experience in diplomatic affairs. pete hegseth is currently a fox morning show host but is being considered for the veterans affairs which employs just under 400,000 people. hegseth has into experience in health care or management but is an iraq war veteran. president trump doesn't just hire media types but consults them. he's dined with jesse waters and h geraldo rivera. afterwards, watters tweeting a picture of the menu. >> i spoke to him about it. this is something very much so on his mind.

>> take a good long look in the mirror. >> reporter: and it as widely known the president leans on sean hannity for device. hannity had also reportedly advised the president to release a controversial gop memo alleging appoint trump bias by fbi officials investigating the campaign. hannity painted it to be a massive political scandal. >> this makes water get a like stealing a snickers bar. >> reporter: randi kaye, cnn, new york. >> dana milbank is an opinion writer and wrote a piece with the headline, larry kudlow may have been more wrong about the economy than anyone alive. first of all, before we get to kudlow. does it come as any surprise that trump wants to hire tv personalities, given cable ones, given how much he consumes?

>> not at all. it's not just people on the news he admires. think about it. when asked during the campaign where he got his foreign policy advice, he said generals. the generals he's watching on television. we often wonder which direction we've been sent on by a presidential tweet, and we find out he's watching one of the morning shows, and he's reacting to that in real time. so he gets validation from cable news, from news in general, and i think the idea of having some of these people like kudlow in the white house, in the administration means he can have that validation in real time. and he feels that these people will be able to go out there and sing his praises and everybody will believe him. >> i mean, obviously, there are people who appear on television who are qualified to do certain jobs. it does become a problem for the president when they're on television and it may outweigh any lack of credentials they may have. they may be able to communicate things for the white house but

not necessarily have a back ground in it. >> not everybody on television is an expert. and larry kudlow, as was mentioned earlier, he plays an economist very well on tv. he's not trained as an economist. and if you look at what he has done over the years, he's not just been wrong, but he's been wrong so consistently and so spectacularly, so much so, that if people had followed his advice, say, six weeks before the economic crash, when he says he sees the beginning of a recovery, you would have lost everything. that's one thing. that's on you if you're watching cnbc and you took larry kudlow's advice and lost everything. it's different when he's the top economic adviser to the president of the united states. we all go down if he's giving wrong advice. >> so you're saying before the collapse he was basically saying nothing to see here. things are looking like they're

turning around? >> it was spectacular. december 2007, he says there's not going to be any recession. he's buying in. it's going to be a goldilocks, just-right economy. even though it was clear the economy was leaking, was declining, he was talking about bubble heads talking about the housing bubble. and then literally in july, before it was the september crash, he said you know, nothing to see here. he's really beginning to see the signs of recovery in housing. it wasn't just, i mean, that's the most spectacular, because that was the most spectacular economic failure of our time, but if you look back at his record, 1 is 993shs -- 1993, 2002, 2009,he said the trump tax

cut is going to increase government revenues and be a huge boon to the economy, which is the exact thing he said about government revenues about the bush tax cut in 2001. >> it is interesting that the president would replace one economic adviser who disagreed with him with another who disagrees with his trade agenda. >> that's true, and had some disagreements with a secretary of state on a variety of subjects and brought in a secretary of state who may be more sim pat coe. he says he likes the disagreement and different diff opinions. he is conflicted about this. but he does like the appeal of celebrity. >> coming up as we've reported on this program, new documents

showing despite what michael cohen says, the trump administration did have a role in keeping stormy daniels quiet. i'll speak with cohen's attorney next. ? we're voya. we stay with you to and through retirement. so you'll still be here to help me make smart choices? well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement. fthere's flonase sensimist.f up around pets. it relieves all your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. at&t gives you more for your thing. your me-time thing. that sunday night date night with hbo allllllll night thing. that island without men or children would be nice to visit thing.

buy an at&t unlimited plan, and get hbo included. more for your thing that's our thing. we the people... are defined by the things we share. and the ones we love. who never stop wondering what we'll do or where we'll go next. we the people who are better together than we are alone... are unstoppable. welcome to the entirely new expedition. that i served. of the fact i was a c130 mechanic in the corps,

so i'm not happy unless my hands are dirty. between running a business and four kids, we're busy. auto insurance, homeowner's insurance, life insurance policies. knowing that usaa will always have my back... that's just one less thing you have to worry about. i couldn't imagine going anywhere else. they're like a friend of the family. we are the cochran family, and we'll be usaa members for life. save by bundling usaa home and auto insurance. get a quote today. narrator: public education has been valued for centuries. man: the direction in which education starts a person will determine their future in life. woman: the highest result of education is tolerance. woman: it's the road to equality and citizenship. man: education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.

narrator: brought to you by the california teachers association. woman: because we know quality public schools make a better california for all of us. with pg&e in the sierras.ow qand i'm an arboristls since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees can't impact power lines. and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future. . new information continues to come out about the president's

alleged affair request with an film actress and the efforts to silence her. it's more about following the money. our interests is whether the president or his company were involved in trying to keep someone quiet, where that money came from and if it violated any campaign finance rules. there is now more evidence of a connection between the trump organization and that effort. documents show that a trump organization lawyer was involved last month in a legal effort to silence stormy daniels on behalf of ecllc which was formed by michael cohen and which paid ms. daniels, $130,000 to allegedly keep her quiet 11 days before the election. initially they said neither the trump organization or the campaign were involved. in a statement, think said they didn't have anything to do with the matter. joining me now with david

schwartz, and jeffrey toobin. i want to ask you a couple of things. would it be, michael cohen says he did this all on his own. he entered into an agreement through the llc that he set up. apparently for donald trump under the name david denison for a financial contract. isn't is unethical for michael cohen to enter into an agreement on behalf of david denison without actually informing president trump? >> let's get to the agreement itself. the agreement is between stormy and ec l.l.c. >> and david denison. >> and it says and/or. that's a key "or."

he was representing the llc. it was a valid agreement. and donald trump -- >> why have david denison's name in there at all? >> because it's third party beneficiary that nobody's talking about. there could be a third party beneficiary to every contract. so michael cohen was act beiing the best interest of his client. >> doesn't he have to tell the third party, his beneficiary that he's entering into an agreement for their benefit? >> he doesn't have to. because he's inside counsel. he was general counsel to that organization. so he could enter -- >> so you're saying, but wait, right, but you're saying he's general counsel for the trump organization, so he's therefore representing donald trump. >> well, he was representing ec,

l.l.c. the l.l.c. was created to enter into this agreement. there was a quid pro quo. consideration on both sides, and now she's going to break that agreement, sn agreement, okay? >> pardon me. i'm not a lawyer. i don't understand. if he's entering into this agreement for this llc, why have david denison on there at all. if david denison is not involved in this llc, and clearly he is involved some way. he's representing the llc and david denison and that's ethically a problem, isn't it? >> no, he's a third party beneficiary to this deal. >> so somebody can make a contract for me, in my name without informing me? >> if there's a logical third party beneficiary. and by the way -- >> so my agent, my tv agent, who

has an llc ask makecan make a c with my name on it and not tell me about it? >> this is not a general rule. every set of circumstances is different. in this particular set of circumstances, there was nothing wrong. by the way, the only person who should be complaining about their this is dd. if there's anything unethical, it would be dd bringing that action. >> it's unethical whether dd decides they want to come forward, it's still judunethica. jeff, how do you see this? >> well, i think dana's clearly right. there's something illegal that went on here. the question is, what did donald trump know, and whether this is a valid, legal agreement. let's look at a different blow visi -- provision. this agreement, when signed by all parties is a valid and

binding agreement enforceable in accordance with its terms. dd did not sign the agreement. this is the argument that stormy daniels' lawyer says that's why it's not legitimate under that provision. >> jeffrey, it's an argument. but it's not a valid argument. it's a frivolous argument. because dd is not a party. it said and/or. that or is a key distinction. it's a valid contract, as long as ec, llc signed that contract. these non-disclosure agreements are signed every single day. they're signed by ceos, by legisla legislators, doctors, lawyers, tv personalities. >> i'm not here as stormy daniels' lawyer. what we have here obviously is a disagreement about the terms of a contract which happens all the

time. and when you have a situation where there's a disagreement, you go to court. and what stormy tadaniels danies want is to go to court. then they'll take her deposition and his deposition and find out who's right. if that's something they think is a good idea, god mess. -- bless. >> if they don't think it's a valid contract, don't abide by it. this is a valid contract. and i can guarantee you one thing, that michael cohen will not rest, when this is all said and done, michael cohen will not rest until he recovers every penny, a million dollars per breach, plus punitive damages from stormy. >> while we're on the subject, can we talk about the fact that michael cohen says he paid his own money on this contract? have you ever heard of something like that happening in the history of american law? because i haven't. >> okay, no. that is unusual.

and i have not heard of that. but there's nothing illegal about it. >> we got to get a quick break in. i want to continue this discussion. you can stick around. more on this when we come back. we'll be right back. feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin 24 hour relief when allergies occur. day after day, after day. because life should have more wishes and less worries. feel the clarity and live claritin clear. ♪ ♪ i can do more to lower my a1c. and i can do it with what's already within me. because my body can still make its own insulin. and once-weekly trulicity activates my body to release it. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen.

it works 24/7, and you don't have to see or handle a needle. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, if you have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you're allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or symptoms like itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems.

i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

we're continuing discussion about stormy daniels and michael cohen's involvement in paying

her $130,000, analysis he created in order to keep her quiet. joining me, david schwartz, michael cohen's friend, attorney in a separate legal matter. cnn chief legal analyst jeffrey toobin. so mr. schwartz, just before the break jeffrey toobin was saying have you ever heard of another attorney paying $130,000 taking his loan, allegedly, out of his home equity line of credit in order to pay for somebody in order, for a friend? >> right, i've never heard of an outside attorney doing that. i've never heard of it but it's certainly not an illegal act. that should be something that's clear. it's not an illegal act to do such a thing, and there are no violations of federal election law here. we have the irrespective test that you apply, and, again, this happens every single day, so if you're doing it -- >> what happens every single day 1234. >> -- to protect someone's reputation -- what happens everybody single day? >> a lawyer spend $130,000 of their own money every day? >> no, these nondisclosure

agreements are signed into. why are they signed into? to avoid litigation and avoid the embarrassment of the accusation because many times for high-profile people, whether it's ceos or anyone else, the accusation, alone, is devastating. >> so let me ask you, mr. schwartz, michael cohen has said that he did this not as part of the trump organization, even though e-mails he used were from his trump organization e-mail account, which he then would -- in one case forwarded then to his personal account in order to send an e-mail to the then-attorney for stormy daniels then also just yesterday, michael avenanti, attorney for stormy daniels, relace erelease e-mail, basically a signed -- this thing about jill martin, another trump attorney, trump organization attorney, getting involved in setting up this arbitration hearing in los angeles. if michael cohen, why after michael cohen releases a statement saying the trump

organization had nothing to do with this, i did this solely, you know, in my -- you know, because i'm a friend of donald trump, would he reach out to a trump organization attorney in los angeles to get involved in the arbitration? >> right. i mean, we have to make very clear the timeline here. so the timeline, as you said, was before the 2016 election when this whole contract was signed. the jill marten arbitration came way after. so this is -- this is a year, you know, more than a year later. so it doesn't matter what -- >> was it smart to reach out to a trump organization attorney if you're saying it has nothing to do with trump organization, there are plenty of lawyers in l.a. >> you know what, so what, though. so they reached out to jill martin because they needed a local attorney. so they reached out to jill martin. you know, it's a -- also the e-mails, anderson, michael cohen used that e-mail address for every single thing he did. now, a lot of people do that. a lot of people don't realize. on hindsight, you know, should you separate it, it is a better

way to go? absolutely. to use the same e-mail, it's not evidence of anything. >> okay. david schwartz, i appreciate you being on. jeff toobin as well. we'll hear from -- >> thank you. >> -- michael avanati, stormy daniel's attorney in the next hour. more breaking news ahead, robert mueller subpoenaed the trump organization. the question is, has the special counsel crossed the president's red line? more ahead.

i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do.

talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424.