much. and thank you for joining me at this hour. wolf starts right now. hello, i'm wolf blitzer. it's 1:00 p.m. here in washington. from wherever you're watching around the world, thank you very much for joining us. there's breaking news. a judge denying stormy daniels' motion to force the president and his lawyer to testify under oath, at least for now. the big lie with stormy's lawyer just moments away. plus, did the president choose another cabinet member based on chemistry over qualifications. new questions about the new job and the news his personal doctor just received. and it's an american jewel with an owner that became the richest man in the world. the president is directly targeting amazon. is it personal or business? a federal judge in california has just given president trump a legal victory denying a motion that would have led to the president's having to answer questions under oath

about that $130,000 payment to stormy daniels. all that at least for now. we're going to talk to stormy daniels' attorney meeomentarily. stand by for that. for now we're going to talk to legal analyst jeff zeleny at the white house. jeff, what can you tell us about this and whether you've heard any reaction at all from white house officials? >> reporter: wolf, this is certainly an interesting development and one i would think the white house will welcome. this has been one of the concerns, will the president ultimately be deposed in this? will he be submitted to questions about the stormy daniels situation? this is only one step in all of this, this judge ruling that blocking this motion for now, this certainly will be appealed, and it's far from the end of this. but this is what the white house has been wondering and worrying about, will the president be drawn into some type of legal dispute here or having the president sit for questions.

the white house has not yet reacted to it. the president, in fact, is flying to ohio as we speak, so he's likely just seeing word of this while he's in the air on air force i. but certainly, wolf, the white house has been very reticent to talk about any of these matters. we've heard and seen in the white house briefing all week of white house press secretary sarah sanders not wanting to answer questions about this, in fact, saying the white house has answered all the questions already about this. the president has had another opportunity to decide if he would answer questions about stormy daniels and other accusers as he left the white house an hour and a half ago, wolf. he declined once again. >> jeff, we're going to get back to you. there's other news unfolding. right now i want to bring in stormy daniels' attorney, michael avenatti, to react to these latest developments. what's your reaction, michael? >> over the course of my lifetime, it hasn't happened a lot, but it turns out we were a little premature this time around. this is a procedural ruling.

it really means nothing. but i will tell you this, we're very, very encouraged by language in the order not just suggesting, but basically finding, that we're correct in the application of the law and the facts to this matter. this does not bode well for the president or mr. cohen, and all indications are that when this motion is heard on the merits, we're going to get the discovery and we're going to get the trial we've asked for. and i think that we've provided some portions of that order that are important for people to comprehend and understand. >> because the ruling from this federal judge says the court denies without prejudice plaintiff stephanie clifford's motion for expedited jury trial pursuant to the federal arbitration act and for limited expedited discovery. that's legal words that obviously hard to understand, but what you're saying is you're going to refile after the president or his attorney michael cohen have a chance to

weigh in, is that right? >> yeah, let me explain this to your viewers if i can. basically what the court has said is that we have to wait until the president and mr. cohen file their motion to compel arbitration. as soon as we do that, or as soon as they do that, we can refile this motion. that's exactly what we're going to do. we expect that could be filed today, it could be filed in the next couple days. all indications are they're going to file that motion. then we will in turn refile this motion, and then the court is going to make a determination. but wolf, there is language in this order that i am very, very pleased with, because the court appears to agree with our assessment of the law, and it shows that what david schwartz and others have said, that this motion had no merit, that that is baseless. they're in a lot of trouble, wolf. this is not good for the president, it is not good for mr. cohen. >> it's at least a temporary gain for them, although, as you pointed out, you're going to

refile and see what happens down the road. as you know, michael cohen's attorney and his friend david schwartz, he was on cnn last night with erin burnett. he said that michael cohen was acting independently of the president when he set up that $130,000 hush agreement to stormy daniels. listen to this. >> the president was not aware of the agreement. at least, michael cohen never told him about the agreement, i can tell you that. >> not aware about the agreement. what about the money? >> he was not aware of any of it. he was not told about it. michael cohen left the option open. that's why he left that signature line. the option open to go to him. he chose not to. >> so what did you think when you heard that? >> what i think is that if we could drive david schwartz to more television appearances, we would do it ourselves, wolf. every time they go on television, our case gets better and better. they're in a world of hurt. that was very, very damaging to their position that this is a

valid agreement, very damaging. and that's going to come back -- >> why? >> well, because. now what happens is david schwartz claims the president knew nothing about this, had no involvement in it. if that's true the agreement is going to be thrown out because the president, and only the president, combinan bind himsel various provisions in that agreement. the agreement can be tossed out, wolf. >> also mr. schwartz says the president's attorney largely set up arrangements like that. >> so they happened frequently? >> michael is the fixer. it could be anything. it's not -- there were a ton of matters that took place that michael fixed and donald trump wasn't involved in every single

matter. >> so what's your reaction to that? >> well, wolf, i mean, this is legal buffoonery. these guys are making it up as it goes along. as a guy that has practiced law at a high level and against some really good attorneys around this country for 20 years, this is just amazing to me. david schwartz, if that's to be believed, there is significant ethical concerns now relating to michael cohen's conduct in supposedly settling cases without authority. that raises a whole host of additional issues for michael cohen. these guys just can't get it straight, wolf. >> does stor-- did stormy danie lawyer reach out to keith davidson about that payment? >> that's what they say, they

approached keith davidson, keith davidson came up with the $130,000 payment and michael cohen paid it. >> no. that's not true. that assertion is just as accurate as michael cohen paying the $130,000 from his own money and never talking to the president about it and the president knowing nothing about it. it's patently false. >> will your client, stormy daniels, release keith davidson, her first lawyer, from what he describes as attorney-client privilege that prevents him from discussing all this publicly? >> i don't know, wolf. we haven't discussed it. that's far more important in many instances than this particular finite issue. she may consider it and she'll make a determination, ultimately. >> but if your goal is for the american people, the american public, to know the entire truth and you're simply seeking transparency -- that's what she said in her interview on "60

minutes" with anderson cooper -- why not release him and let him tell everything publicly? >> if michael cohen and the president will lift this attorney-client privilege, my client will as well. how about that? >> you could release them even on your own if you're simply seeking transparency and letting the american people know exactly what happened. >> wolf, again, this has to be a two-way street. where is michael cohen? where is the president? we've gotten no information from them. zero. we continue to go on television. we're asked tough questions from you and others, we're answering those questions. these guys are nowhere to be found except for the legal buffoonery of david sha batteri -- schwartz. >> did keith davidson act

unethically with stormy daniels? >> i decline to answer that question. >> you said he needed to go to ethics class. what did you mean by that? >> i thought he needed an ethics class rather than prove disparity. i stand by that. >> two months before the hush agreement that was worked out with stormy daniels just a few days before the election, in august of 2016, kathy daveith d the same attorney, worked out an agreement with karen mcdougal, the playboy playmate. do you think mr. schwartz had anything to do with that deal? >> i don't know, it's pure speculation. i don't know a lot of the details between keith davidsonc.

do we have the order? >> we do have the order. it's a several-page document if there's something specific you want to read. let's wrap up with keith davidson. he got $150,000 for karen mcdougal. in exchange for that, she was supposed to do things for the national enquirer and not talk about her relationship with donald trump many years earlier, in 2006-2007 as a private citizen. i'm just wondering if this was normal for keith davidson to work out arrangements with clients who say they've had a relationship with donald trump. >> i don't know. >> he cites attorney-client privilege and says your client

stormy daniels won't let him out of that and therefore he can't speak publicly. >> wait a minute, wolf. my relationship with stormy daniels has nothing to do with the question you just posed, which is, does he do this on a regular basis with other people? my client is not permitted to answer questions to that or providing answer to that question. >> many of the conversations she presumably had with keith davidson may have come out, how much time he's done this, and there could be issues raised between the conversations the two of them had. >> based on my understanding, i would be very, very surprised if any of that type of discussion occurred between ms. davidson and ms. daniels? >> isn't that a normal thing a client would ask her lawyer, have you ever done this before? how good is this? i'm really worried. those would be normal questions.

i'm sure your clients ask you those kinds of questions all the time. >> well, there's a lot of things that, in normal chances that don't appear to be in your car, but i'm here to opine my opinion based on his conduct. >> you've made a lot of tv appearances, and some of the critics are suggesting your real aim is the debate with the president of the united states in breaking his silence on this and speaking out. he's remained totally silent. he likes to tweet, he likes to counterpunch when someone is going after him, but on this he's remained totally silent. is that your goal, to bait him to breaking that silence? >> no, wolf, our goal is to get simple, straight answers as to some very finite questions that the american people deserve to have answers to. i don't know why some are calling that baiting. >> you want the president to speak out, though, don't you? >> we want to hear what the

president has to say as to the following, very basic questions, wolf. did he know anything about the agreement? was he aware of the negotiation of the agreement? did he sign the agreement? and what did he know, if anything, about the $130,000? and i guess lastly, did he reimburse the $130,000 or arrange for someone else to do so? i mean, these are five very basic questions. i don't understand why we can't get answers from people on them. >> he clearly didn't sign the agreement. that line with d.d. on it was part of the pseudonym. we don't need to ask questions we have the answer to, right? >> wolf, nothing else would surprise me in this case. and based on what i've seen in the last three weeks and the publications, nothing would surprise me anymore in this case. >> i want to get kbrour reaction

of what we've heard from criminal attorney. he had this to say about your client's "60 minutes" interview with anderson. listen to this. >> there was nothing there. >> i was -- we haven't talked since then. did you think it was a nothing burger? what did you think? >> i mean, look, this supposed threat in the parking lot seven years ago, give me a break. >> i'll give you a chance to respond to mark geragos. >> i know him personally. he's a good guy and a good lawyer. i couldn't disagree with him more about his assessment, but that's okay. we disagree 90% of the time, and the other 10 we vehemently disagree. it doesn't mean i'm right or wrong or vice versa. >> so what's the next step?

>> we're going to wait for the president or mr. cohen to file their motion to compel arbitration, and we'll immediately refile our motion. again, wolf, based on the language of the order that came down today, they are in a world of hurt. they are not in a good place. we told them what the law was before we filed the motion. they didn't seem to understand it. maybe they're going to understand it now, but i think we're going to get the discovery that we've asked for and i think we're going to get the trial we've asked for, and i think the court's order indicates that based on the citation to the law that we initially provided in our papers. >> so you see this federal judge's order as a temporary setback, but it's going take a few extra weeks to see what happens down the road. it's not going to be solved in the next 30 days. april 30 was the original date, right? >> it can still be resolved on that date because there is a notice period that has to be provided, and we're still within that period.

i don't see this as a temporary setback at all. it's not even a gnat. the court has denied this on procedural grounds. we know they're going to file ii it, we're going to refile it. i'm more confident than ever before because of the order. >> thank you for being with us. >> thank you. david schwartz, the attorney representing michael cohen, will be a guest later today on "the lead." that's at 4:00 p.m. eastern. we'll get a very different perspective at that time. other news we're following. it's an american jewel with an owner who has become the richest man in the world. now the president directly targeting amazon. is this personal or business? kellyanne conway may be one of the president's advisers, but the president not a fan.

why he's been traveling to unravel without hope hicks who is leading the white house. duncan just protected his family 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.

i no wondering, "what if?" uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings.

because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who've have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. mitzi: psoriatic arthritis tries to get in my way? watch me. ( ♪ )

mike: i've tried lots of things for my joint pain. now? watch me. ( ♪ ) joni: think i'd give up showing these guys how it's done? please. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are changing the way they fight it. they're moving forward with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. it's proven to help people find less joint pain and clearer skin. don't use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms of an infection. or if you have received a vaccine, or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. mitzi: with less joint pain, watch me. for less joint pain and clearer skin, ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.

there's breaking news. russian soviet minister sergei lavrov has said he will close the st. petersburg consulate and expel u.s. diplomats, as the president did expelling 60 diplomats and closing a consulate. it's all part of the poisoning of a former soviet spy and his daughter. not a huge surprise. we always anticipated the russians would retaliate, tit

for tat, and they just did. >> that's right. not surprising at all, wolf. it was very important that we stand with our allies, the u.k. and others, sending a strong signal after the poisoning we saw in england. i hope -- the main thing i hope is that the russian action doesn't discourage this president in the white house from continuing to fight back against russian interference in certain places around the world where they've been a very counterproductive influence, but also we don't let down our guard in preparing for potential russian attacks on our elections. we need to push back really hard. >> how serious is that fear that the russians could affect the midterm elections in november. >> it's a very real fear. top intelligence folks, whether from the nsa or cia, that they expect the russian to see try to do that again. this is why senator rubio and i have introduced the deter act. the deter act is to discourage

putin and others from interfering by creating very tough automatic penalties if they get caught in 2018. >> in expelling those 30 russian diplomats from the united states, u.s. officials said most of them were really intelligence or spies, intelligence operatives or spies. presumably the russians do the same thing to the american diplomats who are now being expelled over the next few days whether cia or other intelligence agents working as diplomats. how difficult will it be to gather intelligence capability in russia? >> how many of these are really intelligence folks? i can assure you the majority of folks say they're actually diplomats doing their work. i'm not on the intelligence committee, but the reality is that the russians are known to populate their embassy and consulates with a lot more of their intelligence folks than other countries.

>> but they're overseas as well. >> obviously we have intelligence folks overseas, including russia. but the idea that 100% of our folks in st. petersburg would be -- >> no, nobody says 100%. there are some who work undercover. >> again, i don't know about this particular site, but the russians have been known to spend a lot more of their assets investing in the intelligence area. >> should the u.s. now further retaliate, or is it over, at least this chapter? we expel 60, they expel 60. is it over or is this going to escalate into more tension? >> i would have to actually look at all the specifics with respect to this particular russian action. what we should make sure we do not do is say, oh, boy, every time we do something, the russians are going to respond, so we shouldn't do things going forward. we should take action going forward. the president finally, after

congressm mandated that he do i, recognize aid number of oligarchs who partially interfered our elections before. that was a minimum of what we should have done, so we should send a very clear signal -- >> you want more action. >> through legislation. we need to make clear that it's automatic and very tough. for example, the legislation we've introduced would say if they get caught interfering in our election again, then we're going to penalize not just a few oligarchs. we're going to go after their banking sector, their oil sector. we're going to make it hurt because we want putin to know it's not worth it to him to interfere in our lives. >> this is a tough moment for u.s.-russian relations. i ask you this because you're the chair of the democratic senatorial campaign committee. one of your responsibilities is to help democrats get elected. you would like to see a democratic majority in the u.s. senate. the new poll we just had has

republicans close ing the gap o the generic question, who do you want to see in control? your party's candidate you would vote for if midterms were held today. back in february, democrats had a 4% lead, and now republicans have 44 over 38%. >> where we're up consistently, including in this month's cnn poll, is the enthusiasm and energy of voters. and in midterms, that's the thing to keep an eye on because that determines who actually comes out to the polls, not just who is answering the question at the other end of a telephone. if you loobk at that measure, democratic enthusiasm has gone up, including matching last month whereas republican enthusiasm has been flat. >> i notice that as well. republicans have a majority

51-49. do you think you could be the majority of the senate after midterm elections? >> we're fighting every fight here. we need to defend 26 seats and try to pick up an additional two. we're working very hard to try to accomplish that goal. more to the point, our senators who are out there fighting every day for the people in their states are out there doing that. but look, if you had asked me a year ago whether we would be in as strong a position as we are today, i would have said no. so we're feeling good about where we are because the public is watching what's coming out of this white house and they do not like what they see. >> senator chris van hollen, thank you very much. >> thank you. coming up, the president announces the ouster of his secretary of veteran affairs, look to go fill his position. is he adding more yes men? a judge just now denying

stormy daniels' motion to depose michael cohen and his lawyer. there's new details.

internet providers promise business owners a lot. let's see who delivers more. comcast business offers fast gig-speeds across our network. at&t doesn't. we offer more complete reliability with up to 8 hours of 4g wireless network backup. at&t, no way. we offer 35 voice features and solutions that grow with your business. at&t, not so much. we give you 75 mbps for $59.95. that's more speed than at&t's comparable bundle, for less.

call today. amazon shares are slumping once again thanks in part to president trump's twitter attacks on the retail giant. the latest one saying, and i'm quoting, i have stated my concerns with amazon long before the election. unlike others they pay little or no taxes to state and local governments, use our postal system as their delivery boy, causing tremendous loss to the u.s., and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business. i'm joined now by cnn political commentator and "washington post" columnist katherine nampella. katherine, why does the president have so much animosity toward amazon? >> there are a few possible explanations. trump has the reputation of

putting down their work and jeff bazo happens to be the richest man in the world. i think his amazon bashing is just an extension of his media bashing. jeff bazos owns the "washington post." amazon doesn't, but jeff bazos does. and president trump has very confusing ideas about the relationship between amazon and the "washington post," and if you look back at all the times he has attacked amazon, and there's been maybe a dozen tweets in the last year and a half, couple years, they've often been prompted by what he sees as political coverage in the "washington post." he's lashing out at amazon because he's angry about media ko coverage, essentially. >> i want to point out, the recent forbes billionaire is jeff bezos, $112 billion net

worth. he's gone up in the past several years dramatically. look at president trump, on the other hand. his net worth is 3.1 billion, which is obviously very good. not 10 billion as he's claimed. he's now 776th in the world. his spot has gone down significantly in the world, about 26 points, since 2016. is there something personal going on here? do you think these numbers feed the president's personal anger toward jeff bezos? >> i think that's possible. we don't exactly know what the motivations are here. i think we need to pause for a moment and just reflect on how crazy it is that the sitting president of the united states appears to be taking actions to try to drive down the stock price of what he perceives to be a political enemy. or the net worth of what he perceives to be a political enemy, which is mr. bezos here. we haven't even talked about the precise criticisms the president has made against amazon. you showed the tweet earlier

where trump was claiming amazon wasn't paying state and local taxes, which is wrong. amazon does pay state and federal taxes. also that they're stewing a scandal is also backwards. yeah, amazon is using the postal service, which mainly is what keeps the postal service afloat. packaging and mail is doing well. whether it's criticism about bezos, about the "washington post," whatever the motivation, it's very confused. >> i dropped one word when i was reading his tweet earlier. he said, using the postal system as their delivery boy, i didn't use the word boy, causing tremendous loss to the u.s.

what they're doing, as you correctly pointed out, all these deliveries are giving the u.s. postal service a lot more money as a result of all the work that amazon does. when he says they're putting many thousands of retailers out of business, a lot of smaller retailers are in business because of the opportunities they now have to go on line and sell their products, right? >> yeah, there are a lot of third party sellers on amazon. i know i used them. i'm sure a number of other viewers watching this have used them. it's true that amazon is a fierce competitor and a lot of shops that don't participate in their platform may suffer from that. but the thing you have to keep in mind is if you're looking at u.s. antitrust law, which it seems like trump is interested in levying against, again, a perceived political enemy, generally the way that our antitrust system works is that you have to show there is harm to the consumer. it's not clear that having low prices and having effects on potential competitors is

necessarily hurting consumers. so, again, these criticisms seem to have very impure motives and are confused to boot. >> katherine, thank you very much for that explanation. >> thank you, wolf. did president trump choose another cabinet member based on chemistry over qualifications? there are new questions about the new job his personal physician just received. also a judge denying stormy daniels' motion to depose trump and his lawyer. we're waiting for the president in ohio. stand by. it's time to get your glow on!

aveeno® positively radiant body lotion... with the moisture-rich power of soy. it transforms dull, dry skin to leave you glowing. positively radiant® body collection from aveeno®. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve

both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

is the husband and white house communications senior adviser kellyanne conway

trolling president trump? it appears that wayme. take a look at what george conway tweeted after it broke that president trump had tweeted three words. the consulate to the president said critiques have become more frequent, which is odd considering his wife works for the trump white house and devotes her days to defending the president of the united states. let's bring in cnn white house reporter jeremy diamond. jeremy, what else did george conway have to say? >> listen, george conway is a long-time conservative attorney, and of course he's kellyanne conway's husband. not just a member of the trump administration but one of the prominent defenders of the president. a number of his tweets, beyond the flabbergasted, he's been trying to weigh in on topics

he's trying to avoid. here's the tweets from recent weeks. and you have stormy daniels, of course, who the white house has repeatedly rebuffed. here's george conway retweeting a tweet that brings attention to the fact that that $130,000 payment may have been an illegal campaign contribution. this is one that george conway retweeted from chuck todd, saying, every day a tantrum. every day more enabling. this is no way to run a pta let alone the largest organization in the world. >> and this is in reference to a tweet about the fact that the president repeatedly denies reports that reportedly turn out to be true. why is this most interesting? first of all, george conway has

since deleting this tweet and he's been deleting a series of recent tweets. i reached him today and asked him why he's deleting these tweets. he said, nothing to add. when i asked him why, he said no. david shulkin is now out. the president's personal physician will replace him after he's confirmed by the united states senate. did he choose chemistry over management qualifications?

president trump has made another change to his cabinet, firing veterans affair secretary

david shulkin. he has nominated his white house physician, rear admiral ronnie jackson as shulkin's replacement. it may be this performance in front of cameras that certainly caught the president's eye. >> there's no indication whatsoever that he has any cognitive issues. the president, you know, he's very sharp, very articulate. lot of stamina. look at his vision. he's 75 years old and can drive if he wants to without glasses. he washes his hands frequently. he uses purell. his overall health is excellent. he has really good genes. i assume he will remain healthy for this term and the remainder of another term if he is elected. >> national director of amvets, one of the leading veteran organizations. let's talk about this shift yesterday. what was your reaction when you heard shulkin was fired and dr. jackson was coming in? >> certainly disappointed to hear about the firing.

not exactly surprised but very disappointed. thought secretary shulkin had been doing a great job and we have concern about the nomination. >> what is your concern about dr. jacks snen he is navy and will be leaving active duty if confirm bid the senate but he is an admiral. >> we don't know much about him. that's part of the concern. we looked into his background, official navy bio, wikipedia page. some of the things that we can find out, we don't see much there as far as experience to run a $200 billion agency with 350,000 employees, veterans lives depend on this decision being right. so, we're very eager to start this confirmation process and hope that a lot of these answers or a lot of these questions are answered. >> i'm sure there will be a lot of questions for him during the senate confirmation. so much of the work has to do with the physical, health, mental health, physical health of veterans here in the you state.

so, isn't it good that a physician will be atop that administration? >> we are pleased with his medical background but the health care side of the va is really only one-third of the va. there's claims, appeals. we have an appeals backlog, veterans are waiting seven to ten years for their appeals to be adjudicated. very serious stuff. we don't know that this secretary has that type of experience to be able to oversee that. the va has experienced a leadership vacuum for a while in addition to the carousel at the top of the va, there's no va undersecretary. >> is there deputy secretary number two? >> no. that's an appointment point here, someone we also have a lot of confidence in. we being amvets and other organizations, we have a lot of confidence in that deputy but he was leapfrogged and they brought in somebody from the pentagon. >> to be acting secretary? >> yes. we're puzzled by that and have put inquiries into the white house and administration to why that would be. >> what's the answer you're getting? >> we're not getting any answer. >> this pentagon, undersecretary

will be the acting secretary of veterans affairs until dr. jackson is confirmed? >> right. that could take months. >> the process could take months, indeed. but your conce're concerned abo. what was your biggest opposition to shulkin being fired? there were all these stories of the trip he took, he was opposed to privatization. those are sensitive issues in the department of veterans affairs. >> it's not sensitive as far as veterans organization go. we stood united, major legitimate veterans' organizations very opposed to privatization. veterans lose out on that and taxpayers lose on that as well, at least $500 billion more. >> he wrote in "the new york times" today, shulkin, they saw me as an obstacle to privatization that had to be removed because i'm convinced privatization is a political issue, aimed at rewarding select people and companies with profits even if it undermines care for veterans.

do you think that's why he was forced snout. >> absolutely. we need to be focused as a nation when talking about veterans' issues. >> on another matter, joe, the secretary of defense, james mattis, moments ago, receive d john bolton, the president's new national security adviser. let me play this little clip, what we just heard. >> mr. secretary, so good to see you. thank you for inviting me over. >> thank you for coming. nice to finally meet you. >> absolutely. >> i heard that you're absolutely the devil incarnate and i wanted to meet. >> you in case you didn't hear, secretary mattis saying i heard you're the devil incarnate and i wanted to meet you. bolton laughed and secretary mattis laughed.

i don't know if you wanted to react on that, joe. you served in iraq and afghanistan. >> i actually served under general mattis in both iraq and afghanistan with great deal of respect for him. what he's doing over at the pentagon is very much on track. that comment, i'm guessing that was something off the cuff there. >> a joke. tried to say devil incarnate. it will get some pickup, as you know. are you pleased that john bolton will be the national security adviser? he does not need senate confirmation. >> we're looking forward to hearing what his update in a more modern, present-day stances are on, obviously, a lot of important national defense issues and national security issue. >> that would affect the veterans and we're grateful to you and all the veterans for the service they've done to our country. thank you for joining us. >> thank you, wolf. breaking news in the case of the president versus the porn star. judge denying stormy daniels' motion to depose president trump and his lawyer, michael cohen.

stand by for details. plus, russia retaliates, closing the u.s. consulate in st. petersburg, russia, expeling 60 american diplomats after action taken by the united states. we'll get a live report. the president getting ready to speak live moments from now. will he address any of these controversies? stick around. we'll have coverage. we're about to move. karate helps... relieve some of the house-buying... stress. at least you don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. call geico. geico... helps with... homeowners insurance? been doing it for years. i'm calling geico right now. good idea! get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats psoriasis differently.

with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.

if you'd have told me three years ago... that we'd be downloading in seconds, what used to take... minutes. that guests would compliment our wifi. that we could video conference... and do it like that. (snaps) if you'd have told me that i could afford... a gig-speed. a gig-speed network.

it's like 20 times faster than what most people have. i'd of said... i'd of said you're dreaming. dreaming! definitely dreaming. then again, dreaming is how i got this far. now more businesses in more places can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. hi there, i'm brooke baldwin. you are watching cnn. richfield, ohio. first time in six days we'll see him speaking publicly. as we wait for that, we are following breaking news on the president, the porn star and the hush money. a judge just ruled that the presiden