like the embattled v.a. secretary david shoe kin and chris ruddy says the president will make even more personnel changes and soon. we have it all covered. let's start with sara sidner with the story. >> reporter: stephanie clifford aka stormy daniels breaking her silence to 60 mints" about her alleged affair with donald trump and the aftermath. >> he's like, wow, you are special. you remind me of my daughter. >> reporter: daniels telling anderson cooper saying that is what trump told her when they met for the first time in 2006. their only sexual encountered happened afterwards. >> he was showing you his own picture on the cover of a magazine. >> does this normally work for you? someone should take that magazine and spank you with it and i, you know, give me that

and, you wouldn't? hand it over. and so he did and i was like. turn around drop them. >> you told donald trump to turn around and take off his pants. >> yes. >> and did he? >> eventually the joking stopped and she and trump had sex for the first and only time during their relationship. the white house has denied the affair. >> did you want to have sex with him? >> no but i didn't say no. i'm not victim. >> it was entirely consensual? >> oh, yes. yes. >> you work in an industry where condom use was an issue. did he use a condom? >> melania trump had given birth to a few months before. did he mention his wife and child in all of this? >> i asked and he brushed it aside. don't worry about that. we have separate rooms and stuff. >> reporter: about four years after the relationship ended clifford talked about the alleged affair to the sister company of in touch magazine she

was offered $15,000 for the story but she says she never collected. clifford says the article didn't initial publish. trump's attorney reportedly threatened to sue the magazine. a few weeks after she did that interview, clifford says she was personal threatened in las vegas. >> i was in a parking lot going to a fitness class with my infant daughter and a guy walked up on me and said to me, leave trump alone, forget the story and he leaned around and looked at my daughter and said, a beautiful little girl, it would be a shame if something happened to her mom. >> reporter: she did not file a police report saying she was too afraid. now accusing daniels of defamation insisting cohen had absolutely nothing to do whatever to do with any such person or incident and does not believe that such a person exists or that such incident ever occurred.

cohen brokered a confidentiality agreement with clifford days before the presidential election paying her $130,000 to keep quiet, although clifford says she wanted to tell her story. >> was it hush money to stay silent? >> yes. the story was coming out again. i was concerned for my family and their safety. >> i think some people watching this are going to doubt that you entered into this negotiation because you feared for your safety, they'll think that you saw an opportunity. >> i think the fact that i didn't even negotiate, i just quickly said yes to this very, you know, strict contract and what most people will agree with me, extremely low number, is all the proof i need. >> reporter: but in 2018, clifford signed two letters, unequivocally denying the affair, one was sent by cohen the other by daniels former manager gina rodriguez saying i am not denying this affair

because of hush money, i am denying it because it never happened. clifford telling cooper she was pressuredpy her manager and attorney at the time, a claim her former lawyer denies. >> you signed and released a statement ta said i'm not denying this affair because i was paid in hush money, i'm denying it because it never happened. that's a lie. >> yes. >> if it was untruthful, why did you sign it? >> because they made it sound like i had no choice. >> no one was putting a gun to your head? >> not physical violence, no. >> you thought there would be a legal repercussion if you didn't sign it. >> they can make your life hell in many different ways. >> they being -- >> i'm not exactly sure who they were. i believe it to be michael cohen. >> all right. joining us with more on his interview with stormy daniels we have skoop. hi. great to have you here. >> what were your impressions of her? >> it was important for people to see her and hear her.

it's one thing to read the went view she'd done back in 2011 in touch magazines published for the first time a short time ago. to see her sitting down and talking and viewers making up her mind. >> anything about the personal matters gets pushed to the side about anything you can glean about a pattern of behavior by then private citizen trump to keep people quiet, that takes us to the threat, was the big exposure last night. you say that threat wasn't something she kept to herself entirely. >> right. we did talk to one person who said that a friend of her who said she did tell him around that time about the threat and that she was very rattled by it. again, we can't confirm that that person is telling the truth but that person did say that she told him. she did go into this class afterward. we weren't able to track down the person who was leading that exercise class, but again, that's one with of those things. she did not file a police report but she's very specific, very

detailed on the person. she gives descriptions about that person, what that person was wearing and says she could recognize that person again. >> sitting down with stormy daniels that's a big get, as i was reading it was two years in the making. how did this interview come to past? >> to years in the making? >> surprised by your own success. >> behind the scenes you had been, apparently and your team, cultivating michael cohen -- >> oh, well no. two years ago michael avenatti did not know he would be taking this case, yes. i had a prior relationship, if you will with michael avenatti. i've interviewed him before for are "60 minutes." he sued -- was the lead attorney, trial attorney on a case that i did a profile of on "60 minutes." he won a huge judgment. it was the largest judgment in the state of california. suing a company about defective medical vests or medical suits.

>> because he trusted you from that reporting and trusted your "60 minutes" team. >> right. andy core was also the producer on that piece. mr. avenatti obviously felt comfortable with us, trusted us to do this. he came to us with this interview. >> avenatti is making a run of it here with this and he can come off like a hype man. but what's next? what's your best sense of where this goes? >> i'm not exactly sure. mr. avenatti is saying that, you know, he's hinted that he has more information obviously during the piece, you know, i pressed both him and stormy daniels on whether or not there are text messages or any pictures. they're not commenting at this point. as i said, he could be bluffing. there could be nothing. obviously -- it suits his interests and her interest for the president's team and mr. cohen to believe there's information, will there is or not, i don't know personally.

i think there's going to be a lot of focus -- certainly there's been a lot of focus on the alleged threat to stormy daniels that was made by somebody according to her in a parking lot in las vegas back in 11 some time in the month of may, and again, we're able to talk to one person who said around the time that she did, in fact, tell him about that. i think there's going to be a lot more focus on is that an m.o. of anybody in the trump world at that time or over the years. you're already seeing a lot of people talking about verbal threats. one reporter from the "the daily beast" had verbal threats that michael cohen made to that person, whether that means anything or not, you know, is really i think more to come. >> you also sat down with another woman, karen mcdougal who said she had a consensual relationship. >> she is saying a ten month long, much more involved affair, a love affair. she says that she loved him, that mr. trump told her that he

loved her. she saw him many dozens of times according to him she has detailed notes in her notebook over the course of that time and did span -- spent a lot of time with him at events. she and stormy daniels attended similar events at the same time. they both were invited to the trump vodka launch party. they both happened to be there at the same time. they've -- they crossed paths a few times even though they didn't know about one another. >> there was another weird commonality between them. >> there's a number of commonalities between their experiences. >> and what he told them. he told them both that you remind me of my daughter. >> here's that moment. let's play that. >> he -- he's very proud of ivanka, as he should be. she's a brilliant woman, beautiful, she's -- that's his daughter and he should be proud of her. he said i was beautiful like her

and, you know, you're a smart girl and there wasn't a lot of comparing but there was some, yeah. i heard a lot about her. >> he's like wow. you -- you are special. you remind me of my daughter. you're smart, beautiful and a woman to be reckoned with and i like you. i like you. >> you say that they had unprotected sex, both say that he compared them to yvonivanka trump. the line he used. you're different. you're smart. you're special. both say that they met him at a bungalow in the beverly hills hotel in los angeles and -- yeah. they're commonalities in the way they describe. >> it also makes their stories more convincing, you tape the stormy daniels interview before the karen mcdougal, so karen

couldn't have heard what stormy daniels's answers were so that lends credence. >> the thing that lends the most credence is he's not saying anything about it except from christopher ruddy his friend has put out in terms of his feeling that it's a hoax. the white house put out a statement rejecting the allegations from stormy daniels but we haven't heard him do what he does most often if not best, which is they say this. they're wrong, they're liars, they're back. he hasn't said that about either of these women at all. that's notable. >> mr. cohen paid $130,000 he says of his own money in the early days of this presidential campaign to stormy daniels and karen mcdualal was paid $150,000 by a parent company that owns the national inquire. large amounts of money were paid to keep both of these women quiet. >> sometimes you pay just to keep things quiet even if you

don't believe the underlying matters. >> true. >> but usually they come along with him protesting them. >> both women actually say they were happy to receive money to remain quiet. both women say they actually did not want this story out there. you can argue stormy daniels wanted -- was willing to except $15,000 back in 11 to tell a story to a magazine. she never received that money. that story according to two employees of the magazine that we talked to was killed because michael cohen threaten pedestrian to sue. she never received money and she has publicly denied the affair ever happened but she says and her attorney says, you have to look at that in context. >> that leads me to the bigger overarching question, what does stormy daniels want? is she looking for money? >> i'm not clear what happens next. is she going to try to get a book deal or try to tell her story some where else? "60 minutes" is not paying any money like cnn is not paying any money in the karen mcdougal

interview. no money for travel or hotel rooms for "60 minutes," no trickery of paying for photographs or anything like that. there was no money at all as stormy daniels said in the interview, we didn't even get her breakfast. i think -- look, are there -- does stormy daniels believe there's other opportunities? i'm getting paid more for appearances than i would, but it's not that much more money but are there other opportunities that may present themselves, she says she just wanted to set the record straight. she was fine keeping silent. she says she didn't like being lied about and when michael cohen threw her former attorney and business manager insisted that she sign statements that she says were lies and said certain things about her that's when she decided to talk. >> here's the new bargain for exchange is that she wants these opportunities and set the record

straight auz say, she has legal exposure here. this idea of avenatti selling that it's -- this was not a real deal because trump didn't sign. he's going to have a problem proving that in court and if he winds up being held as legitimate, she's got significant legal exposure. >> they're making a big threat kbaens her. she's liable for to million dollars. i'm not sure how they calculate that. they're saying it's a million dollars per violation of the contract. i don't know where they're getting 20 violations of contract. >> every time that they're on talking about this, him too, it could calculate, look, and a court could throw that out and say it was unconsciousable. if the deal is held up as legal she's got a problem. >> anderson, thank you. so as we all know, stormy daniels is out there and talking about president trump. the just as interesting aspect, the president is not talking about stormy daniels, but a source tells us he is paying

very close attention. why? what does he think? next. big idaho potato truck. but not any more. i am done with that. ooh, ooh hot - just gonna stay home on the farm, eat a beautiful idaho potato, and watch tv with my dog... tv anncr: the big idaho potato truck pulled into town today and it's really a sight to see. oh man...let's go.... (distant) you comin', boy? sfx: (dog) gulp! woof. with a $500,000 life insurance policy. how much do you think it cost him? $100 a month? $75? $50? actually,duncan got his $500,000 for under $28 a month. less than a dollar a day. his secret? selectquote. in just minutes, a selectquote agent will comparison shop nearly a dozen highly-rated life insurance companies,

and give you a choice of your five best rates. duncans wife cassie got a $750,000 policy for under $22 a month. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford.

we're on the move. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. terminix. defenders of home. stormy daniels answering questions from cnn anderson cooper about her alleged affair with president trump. the president ignoring questions from reporters as he returned to the white house about the same topic. >> mr. president, you going to watch "60 minutes"?

is stormy daniels a liar, sir? >> it sounded like the ghosts of decisions past. we don't know if the president watched the "60 minutes" interview but a source tells cnn he is definitely paying attention and that he's complaining about what he perceives at wall to wall coverage of what might be a hoax is the word that he used. let's bring in cnn political analyst john avalon and david drucker. we've heard from christopher ruddy, also a friend of the president, that he doesn't like it, he thinks it might be a hoax. we've had a statement from the white house that said that these allegations are jected. he has not said anything directly, but what do you make of this? >> i think he's trying to keep close counsel on this but the president's already implicated in the case the way it's gone forward. you can't call this a hoax. you may be can poke holes in

some parts of the story, but you can't dismiss it as a witch hunt. it goes to the heart of his home and that's something you can't underestimate is the human cost of this on the first lady. >> how about the political cost, david drucker? >> it's very interesting to watch this because the president is usually very quick to denounce what he thinks are witch hunts and hoaxes. he has so far said nothing about this. i think to the extent it could be a political problem for his party, you need to look at the two dozen or so battleground districts where you have upscale educated white women that tend to vote republican, tend to be fiscal hawks and conservative on national security matters and they have soured on the president from the beginning. he was able to get them and keep them in the republican voting coalition in 2016 but they have not been happy with him and there's a chance they vote democratic in the midterms are they sit out entirely. that would really bust up the republican coalition that was

successful in 2016 and create an opening for the democrats. you have to watch female voters and this kind of noise is what can cause a problem that is actually lasting once you get past the headlines. >> how much of it is also baked in? my concern here as an analyst would be do people have hard formed opinions about trump? yes. have they had them a long time? yes he beat clinton with certain part of the female population, how much more would it take to -- >> i would just say baked in is one thing but hearing the dirty laundry and seeing it and knowing details is different. knowing that his wife was, you know, had just had a baby. >> that's a bad fact. >> hearing from the women. somehow the details do sometimes change things. >> you have to look at this like death by a thousand cuts, is this particular situation a deal

breaker? no. if you add this to everything else with the particular voting -- part of the voting coalition that's where it becomes -- >> part of the calculus on election day, we're sending a message, we're going to shake things up, we're uncomfortable with the clintons, maybe the office will ennoble and maybe he can shake things up, survey says, not so much. there's a couldn't thut and the ugliness of this is going to erode support form. republicans used to be able to say and they played the card during the 1990s. that they had a certain moral authorities. the democrats were naive, amoral, that moral high ground the evangelicals could claim, that's gone, folks. you can't support this president and say you care about personal conduct of the president. >> you're 100% right on that. many republican voters made a calculation that holding the moral high ground didn't help them win elections and they've abandoned that and they think

that it helped democrats and hurt them and so they've made -- they've rationally had a change of heart when it comes to supporting candidates that have the moral high ground and valuing that as something that's important when they vote, and all of this and i think you're right, john. sometimes we disagree on this stuff. all of this is why you have to look at the president's standing in the districts that are going to be contested. in the heartland where the president is strong, he is still strong and, in fact, republicans might win some senate races because of how voters in red states feel about president trump. >> they're going to vote on their pocket books. it almost always winds up that way, not on his personal life. i'm no fan of reporting on private lives of politicians. i think it's a distraction and i think often it's done because it's easier to cover than these hard policy things. but if they can establish that there is a pattern of bullying tactics to keep women quiet over

time, that ronan feral were trying to track down that's an issue and, if any, of these litigations go to a deposition and he has to speak on the record under oath about them, that could be a big problem. that's how we got into the clinton cascading debacle in the first place. >> absolutely right. that's where the legal jeopardy comes in. i think we also shouldn't just blindly dismiss the idea that character counts in the white house. history shows that it does. before he start to say that it doesn't matter and voters don't care, let's not lose site of that. >> i'm saying they didn't care and he benefits from a very low bar of how people feel about public servants right thousand. >> not this low. >> we'll see. i just haven't seen it change a poll yet, that's all. >> part of it is that nobody expects donald trump to be in the paradigm of moral living and so the expectations are low and he can get away with a lot. one thing that theoretically

could be a problem is if it was ever determined that he was not telling the truth when it comes to his many denials that could be the thing that depresses a republican turnout -- >> if him being proved to be untruthful would be the difference, he'd be back if trump tower right now. that can't be it. they just decide to accept what they want to believe. >> politicians are people and people aren't perfect. we expect a modicum of decency from the moral office of the presidency and that's what we haven't seen. that's why it does matter when we cover all these things to hus historic perspectives. it matters. when trump talks about not having a chief-of-staff. we've done that before. it was a disaster. >> so very quickly. david, yes or no, v.a. secretary shulkin is fired? >> i don't know if it happens today. he's out and so is ben carson. once we know these things are happening, it's how he pulls the

trigger. >> if it's a bad move it won't happen today. >> they can say it was fake news and then it happens. >> we saw what happened just last week, they said dowd wasn't going anywhere. they were lying to people. >> thank you very much. we'll speak to two parkland survivors. they took part in the march for our lives rally in washington. what's next for this movement? do they think their message was heard by the right people?

it can power your apps with public services without starting from scratch. it brings your business up to speed, doing more with systems you have in place.

it can bring all your apps to life and run them within your data center. it is... the ibm cloud private. the cloud that's built for all your apps. ai ready. secure to the core. the ibm cloud is the cloud for smarter business. survivors of the florida high school massacre keeping up their momentum. five weeks after a gunman killed 17 of their fellow students and teachers, hundreds of thousands of people turned out in more than 800 marches around the globe. the students shaking washington with their empassioned speeches pushing for stricter gun control laws. >> when politicians say that your voice doesn't matter because the nra owns them, we say, no more!

when politicians send our thoughts and prayers with no action, we say no more! and to those politicians supported by the nra that allow the continued slaughter of our children and our future, i say, get your resumes ready. >> let's bring in that student you just saw there david hogg and his sister lauren, great to see you guys. >> nice to see you too. >> tell me about saturday, david. had a do you think the outcome was? >> i think the outcome was a great start. what we witnessed on saturday was really the birth of a revolution. this is just the beginning. nobody should be thinking this is the end especially the politicians that are out there supported by the gun lobbying nra. it shows the materialization perform what support we have online. >> and do you have evidence that politicians are listening, lauren? >> definitely. just seeing the stuff on twitter that they've been talking about, rubio posting his thoughts on what happened. i just think it's definitely

working and we're getting politicians attention. >> i want to talk to you about senator marco rubio because my eyes were open when i was there. you guys have targeted him as somebody who you don't think is doing enough and who you sort of depict as being callus. i had a chance to talk to scott beagle's mom. he of course is your geography teacher who was killed in the massacre and she said that marco rubio behind the scenes has reached out to her, had all sorts of conversations with her, talked about how what they've done so far on capitol hill in terms of the fix niks act, yes these are low-hanging fruit, yes you want more but should be giving credit for these incremental steps, david? >> it's good we've having these incremental steps, where we rows the age to 21, you can still purchase a gun at 18 if it's a private sale. they didn't give any more funding.

what they did is you officially can do research but we just aren't going to fund it and they're leaving a lot of loopholes in there to seem like they are doing things when they're not. >> i understand. my point is that if you're trying to get everybody together, if you're trying to have solutions, do you think it is helpful when you say things like, marco rubio is putting, you know, for a dollar and five cents or whatever your coupon said, that's how much he values students? do you think that's unnecessarily provocative? >> no. it's not enough -- i don't think it's even provocative enough. marco rubio is still supported by the nra which works to ensure not the safety of gun owners and the safety of americans everywhere but to ensure they sell more guns. so long as he is being paid by the nra he's not going to work to fix anything that's going to be concrete change. he's going to make laws that get him reelecpedestrian but don't have any major effect. >> i'm not a marco rubio

spokesperson but now i've heard what he's doing behind the scenes, he is sponsoring all of these various bills, two of which were part of the omnibus so things are happening and all i'm suggesting is that maybe you're ire is misplaced since he's actually trying to work across the aisle? >> i think it's a great step that he's trying to work across the aisle, so long that he's supported by the nra, no matter what he does there's always going to be loopholes in anything he does. we've seen it again and again. he can pass as many laws if you want but if those laws are not strong and they have so many loopholes, they aren't going to be strong enough. >> lauren, one of our fox news contributors is rick santorum. he's a former pennsylvania senator. he had a suggestion instead of marching for what he thinks that you kids should do. listen to this. >> how about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve

their problem, do something about maybe taking cpr classes or trying to deal with situations that where there is a -- >> how are they looking to other people? i would ask you, they took action. >> they took action and asked someone to pass a law how would i as an individual deal with this problem. how am i going to do something about stopping bullying within my own community? how can i respond to a shooter? those are the kinds of things that you can take an internally and hear how i'm going to deal with this and here's how i'll help the situation -- >> what's your response to that? >> it's completely absurd that he's even thinking about teaching us cpr when with we're having gun vol all across america and even in our schools. the fact that he's saying cpr when my friends are dying on my floor and nothing's being done about it. he's just using it as a distraction away from guns. >> it's important to realize there are many programs out there that work to ensure especially in communities that

are heavily affected by gun violence, i saw it last night on the news, students are able to respond and minister whatever first aid they can assuming the person's still alive. at the end of the day, if you take a bullet from an ar-15 to the head to am of cpr is going to save you because you're dead. >> he's a cnn contributor. last, how you guys are going after the nra? the intro that we just played there, the nra is responsible -- is allowing the slaughter of kids. look, again, i don't want to be an nra spokesperson, but obviously they don't want the slaughter of children. nra members have children themselves. people who work at the nra have their own children. do you think that you are polarizing in saying things like that maybe it would be to get the nra on board? >> if the nra was on board they

would implement safety and give people grants to these schools and not -- their programs to actually ensure just school safety alone have not been enough. what they do, what the nra does from my perspective, they don't teach enough gun safety. many members of the nra are safe responsible people. most members of the nra are safe responsible gun owners that just want to protect their second amendment rights to own a weapon. when the people at the top are paid by the gun industry to ensure that they scare american citizens and that they're able to sell more guns and scare more people as a result they don't get people enough training to own these guns. we are not trying to take your guns. we understand that you have a right to the second amendment and to pone a firearm. if you have a criminal history, a history of mental illness or history of domestic violence ta you should be able to get a weapon. i think that's something we can all get behind. people construe us and ma nim

late us saying we're trying to take your guns. i think that's just plain wrong. >> i completely agree with david. the main problem is that the people at the top of the nra are not showing what most of the members of the nra want and that's to be responsible gun owner. they're whole agenda is just selling more guns. i think that's wrong that they're not representing the people they're supposed to be representing. >> it sounds like you all are going to try to find common gound. i know you have another event plan, a school walkout. >> we have town halls on april 7th that we're calling for right now in every congressional district. if the congressman doesn't show up, if they can't reschedule and they just refuse to show up, invite their opponent. go to town hall project.org and creatively your event there. >> thank you both for being with us. >> thank you. >> chris? in just hours the antitrust battle between justice department and at&t is set to resume.

what will play out today in court. we have a preview next. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.

[girl 1] perfect! you can send a digital payment. [man] uhh, i don't have one of those payment apps. [girl 2] perfect! you have a us-based bank account, right? [man] i have wells fargo. [girl 3] perfect! then you should have zelle! [man] perfect. [girls] perfect! [vo] the number one mobile banking app just got better. [man] does your coach use zelle, too? [boy] of course! [vo] another way we're building better every day. you've probably seen me running all over the country in search of our big idaho potato truck. but not any more. i am done with that. ooh, ooh hot - just gonna stay home on the farm, eat a beautiful idaho potato, and watch tv with my dog... tv anncr: the big idaho potato truck pulled into town today and it's really a sight to see. oh man...let's go.... (distant) you comin', boy? sfx: (dog) gulp! woof.

all right. in just hours the high stakes

antitrust trial between at&t and the department of justice is set to resume p. what can we expected to as both sides make the case about the proposed merger deal with time warner which of course owns cnn. let's bring in cnn politics media and business reporter hadask gold and brian stelter. what are we looking for? >> today we'll hear from more witnesses including our boss john martin and he's actually one of the government witnesses which means he'll probably be what's called a hostile direct which means it is not going to be the typical witness from a certain side where there are a little bit more friendlier and on the same terms. that's going to be an interesting witness today. we're also expecting in the near future other witnesses such as representatives from youtube as well as from sling tv, the new over-the-top services that people are using. they'll try to make the case that this merger will hurt them whereas at&t will try to make

the case that this is necessary to bring more efficient services to people and also that they need this to compete with places like youtube, like a facebook, like a netflix. >> hadas, let me -- so if martin is there as a hostile direct, what will be the main argument of this -- of the doj here, what will they try to establish with him? >> what's interesting is that the government is trying to argue that time warner content are what's called must-haves. they're so necessary for viewers to watch that if they somehow get more leverage in terms of negotiating that's going to harm other competitors. they might be trying to ask from martin, for example, couldn't you get more money out of this, couldn't you use it as a tool against your competitors, what kind of discussions have you been having with the other executives, at&t in terms of how this could hurt or help your competitors, that's what they're trying to get at. >> very intelligent, sophisticated guy. we'll see how that goes.

brian, in terms of had a this could mean this trial to the overall media industry, what's the range? >> there's always this debate that people is have about how much of a hand the government should have in the media business but more broadly in the business world, how often of a hand should the government have in regulating and trying to control how the marketplace evolves? normally, people would expect a republican administration to have a pretty much handoff approach, that's what would be predicted in the past. what we're seeing here is different and that's why it's so curious and interesting and potentially important for the rest of the business world. the trump administration, the doj taking a hands on approach trying to guide the marketplace. more media consolidation is not inevitable. these companies don't have to keep getting bigger and bigger. there's been this political shadow of whether the trump administration's trying to punish cnn. to take that to the side because that's not being debated at the trial and just look at this

marketplace competition, it's so interesting to see a republican administration try to make the argument that we do need to manage this marketplace, not let these mergers keep happening and happening and this will of course effect others down the road. there's a domino effect here of other countries trying to merge, looking to merge, interested in getting bigger and depending on what the judge decides in this case that could effect all of them as well. >> key considerations, not a jury trial, it's a bench trial, a judge will make this decision. thank you very much. >> thank you. president trump could expel russian diplomats in retaliation for the poisoning off that former russian double agent. will that have any effect? will it happen? that's next. brad's about to find out if his denture can cope with... a steak. luckily for him,

he uses super poligrip. it helps give him 65% more chewing power. leaving brad to dig in and enjoy. super poligrip. -oh! -very nice. now i'm turning into my dad. i text in full sentences. i refer to every child as chief. this hat was free. what am i supposed to do, not wear it? next thing you know, i'm telling strangers defense wins championships. -well, it does. -right? why is the door open? are we trying to air condition the whole neighborhood? at least i bundled home and auto on an internet website, progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto. i mean, why would i replace this? it's not broken. ♪ can i get some help. why would i replace this? watch his head. ♪ i'm so happy. ♪

whatever they went through, they went through together. welcome guys. life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.

president trump could announce today whether or not he plans to expel a group of russian diplomats. the president's national security council making that recommendation in retaliation for the nerve agent poisoning of a former double agent and his

daughter in england. let's discuss with cnn military analyst and former state department spokesperson john kirby. good to have you. >> thanks, john. >> is this the right move? yes, we saw you guys in the obama administration expel some russians, not under these circumstances, but again, retaliation for bad behavior. is this a legitimate move? >> i think it is, chris. i think it will be even more legitimate and more powerful if as we think will happen, other european nations may also kick out russian diplomats as well. if you have 20 nations in europe plus the united states all doing this together on the same day, it is symbolic but the symbolgy matters to try to show the west is in disarray and disunity and it can act at will with whatever he wants to do. >> there are two sides as to whether or not to move the

embassy to jerusalem or do tariffs. on those other two, trump moved right away. on this one there's a hole conjoelg campaign going on, is that a meaningful distinction in your mind? >> i don't know. he was slow to implement the sanctions that congress had passed in an overwhelming bipartisan matter. that was troublesome to me. if they're trying to coordinate this with other european nations so that this all lays out on one day, i think that makes sense. there's a logic there. it shows unity with the west and that's important. >> does russia care? i get they'll care about the optics. you seem to be saying we did something wrong. trump has been pretty light on us and now this is tough. does it matter? >> yeah. does it change vladimir putin counterintelligence efforts, or stop him from interfering in elections, no, probably won't. we need to look at how many diplomats are expelled. that would be really interesting to see the number and the larger

the number, obviously the stronger the signal that transmits to him. also it matters to him because he is -- he's paranoid about russia's placement in the world and he wants to project power and strength. if so many nation, european and the united states all expel these diplomats, that's definitely a middle finger right to him and that image, that matters to him. >> let me ask you something, you have experience understanding the comings and goings in the white house. we've never seen anything like this and the latest we think the v.a. secretary could be on his way out. he's had his issues recently in terms of fa deutschry arguable breech. do you think that move would make sense? >> if the president has lost confidence in any of his officials he has every right to change them out. if he's lost confidence in shulkin's ability to lead the v.a., then absolutely he needs to make a change. the american people elected him to do. i'm troubled by mr. shulkin's

travel habits and the way he spent taxpayer dollars. that bothers me a lot. you need to give him credit for some of the things he has done. he has made it easier for whistle-blowers to call out bad practices. he has made it easier to hire people that work at the -- easier to fire people that work at the v.a. that aren't doing their jobs and he deserves credit for this recent provision that was in the omnibus bill that the president signed last week that allows people with other than honorable discharges to get free mental health care going forward. that's really important and will help save i think thousands of lives. it's a mixed pictured. i'm worried about his practice in terms of his travel. you can't just chalk up his entire administration as a failure. >> there was a reform package that was being hammered out. there's a lot that needs to be done there still. we will stay on that. the reason i wanted your insight

into turnover is, there's this assumption that, you know, he changes the secretary out, he puts one in he likes that's all good. like nothing happens below that man or woman that requires consistency and continuity and that's my concern. when you change someone at the top, how much of a wrench does that throw into the works? how much of a recalibration and a restarting and a slowdown as a result of that adjustment happens? >> it does. it depends on the leader and what kind of reforms or changes that leader was trying to put in place. it can definitely throw wrenches into the normal daily grind. you have to remember if shulkin leaves, there will be people around shulkin and his inner staff that will leave too. when heigl left, i left. that definitely causes churn. that said, and this is important for the american people to understand, most of these bureaucracies are managed on a day-to-day basis by mid-level

civil servants, career military officers, people in the civil service that do this job day in and day out regardless of who is in the oval office and very dedicated to that task. we need -- yes, they'll be some changes but the daily grind of the bureaucracy and the major policies and programs that they implement and execute will go on and i think that's really important for people to understand. >> every time we see them, they aren't going on and there is a problem, the vetting is done by people underneath, makes people wonder why throwing this blanket deep state all over everything may be more trouble than its worth. john, i appreciate your perspective. be well. >> thanks chris. cnn "newsroom" with john berman begins right after this break. please, stay with cnn and have a good monday. vents every day. ddos campaigns, ransomware, malware attacks... actually, we just handled all the priority threats. you did that? we did that. really. we analyzed millions of articles and reports.

we can identify threats 50% faster. you can do that? we can do that. then do that. ♪ ♪ can we do that? we can do that. it wi called usaarst and the first thing they asked was 'are you ok?' they always thank you for your service, which is nice because as a spouse you serve too. we're the hayles and we're usaa members for life. you've probably seen me running all over the country in search of our big idaho potato truck. but not any more. i am done with that. ooh, ooh hot - just gonna stay home on the farm, eat a beautiful idaho potato, and watch tv with my dog... tv anncr: the big idaho potato truck pulled into town today

and it's really a sight to see. oh man...let's go.... (distant) you comin', boy? sfx: (dog) gulp! woof.

this is cnn breaking news. good morning, everyone. i'm john berman. we do have breaking news from the white house. we learned just moments ago the trump administration is expelling 60 russian diplomats in response to the poisoning of a former double agent and his daughter in england. the russians who will be leaving include 48 members from the russian embassy and 12 from the united nations. joining me now michelle kosinski with the details. >> reporter: this is a tough response this morning to russia. in fact, tougher tha