but that's an agency that we want to know. how much contact did they have with her? how much concern did they have? and so that's going to certainly be a big question here in this news conference. >> all right. we will be watching as there is that delay there in san bruno. kyung lah, thank you. and thank you for joining me. "inside politics" with john king starts right now. welcome to "inside politics." thank you for sharing your day with us. president trump tells his national security team he wants to get u.s. troops out of syria, but and it's a big but, he agrees to leave them there for now after being warned isis and iran would be the big winners if they leave too soon. plus, new tariffs in a growing u.s./china trade skirmish and new turmoil on a very nervous wall street. and is this glass half empty or half full? should the president now answer questions from the russia special counsel after being told he is not, at this moment, a

target. but, big but again, that his conduct as a candidate and president remains a subject of the investigation. >> i do think he should sit down with special counsel mueller. i think he's uniquely well positioned to answer some of the questions that not just special counsel but also the american people have. so i would tell you, if you did not rob the bank, there's no reason for you not to sit down and talk to the fbi about the bank robbery. >> want to let you know as we begin the hour, moments away from a police update on that shooting at youtube headquarters outside of san francisco. we will take you there live when that briefing begins. first, though, to the turmoil in washington and walltreet. a volatile day for stocks. the dow is down 144 points as we begin the noon hour here in washington. the slide was just shy of 500 points in early trading. investors clearly rattled by a growing trade fight between the united states and china. beijing is firing the latest salvo, slapping new tariffs on more american products, including airplanes, automobiles, and soybeans.

that was a second counterpunch. each following new tariffs announced by the trump administration. the president insists in a morning tweet, quote, we are not in a trade war with china, but that he has to make up for past, in his words, foolish or incompetent trade decisions by past administrations. the markets, though, clearly do see a disruptive trade war or at least the imminent threat of one. down on the trading floor, watching thissing in the pl anx. >> reporter: that's right. the markets clearly do not care about semantics, even though the administration and its officials are trying to tamp down any discussions of a technical trade war. the markets definitely perceive we could be heading for one. now we're paring some of the losses we saw earlier today. that's probably because the administration unleashed a couple of its officials to kind of talk about how this is a process. we had the head of the national

economic council out there talking about how this is a process and there's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. wilbur ross was out there talking about how shooting wars often end in negotiations. so they're clearly trying to mitigate the anxiety, but it's not really working. look, the u.s. at this point is picking a fight, mind you, with its largest creditor. we borrow a lot of money from china. this is something that many people don't talk about, but on the floor here, traders and smart investors see this as picking a fight with someone we need for our financial health. and that's really the issue here. so it's unintended consequences. it's the idea that we really don't know how this will play out, and that's what's causing the anxiety. we're probably going to see this volatility over the next couple weeks and even months, john. >> as we wait to see if we get over that rainbow, i guess. christina, thanks. and it's not just the markets

that are nervous. republicans worry the america-first impulses that helped the president to his big 2016 win will hurt them in 2018 by wiping out the market gaining, slowing economic growth, and disrupting industries in states and districts critical to the midterm election battlefield. team trump insists its critics on wall street and here in d.c. are overreacting. >> this 50 billion that they're talking about, amounts to tenths of a percent of our gdp. it's hardly a life-threatening activity. >> there's to trade war here. what you've got is the early stages of a process that will include tariffs, comments on the tariffs, then ultimate decisions and negotiations. there's already back-channel talks going on. >> with me to share their reports and insights today, cnn's dana bash, greg ip of the new york jurm, and cnn's abby philip. are we in a trade war, just

debating a trade war? i guess the bigger question is, i don't think there's anybody who doesn't view china as a china and a bully in the international marketplace. the president has every right, every reason -- he campaigned on getting tough and responding. is in the right way to do it? >> i think that's important. the action the president is threatening with china is a very different animal from what we saw with, for example, nafta, with korea, with the steel and aluminum tariffs. in those situations, congress, other countries, business, they were very much posed to what the president was doing. they saw this as unwarranted action against u.s. allys. by contrast, virtually all those same groups, congress, business, allies, believe china is a bad actor. maybe there's a trade war here, but china started it. is this the right way to approach it? the president campaigned on this. there are important nuances to keep in mind. first of all, it's not a trade war yet. we're at the stage of mobilizing the troops. both china and the united states have announced tariffs. they have in the implemented them. that's to allow time for the

negotiation process to work its way out. at the end of the day, both china and the united states have very strong incentives not to allow the trade war to break out. >> and that's something that people who have known donald trump and worked with him and observed the way he operates for some time remind me all the time, which is he goes big, he has big threats, he -- whether it's a negotiation, he offers the moon, plus, plus, whether it's something like this, his m.o. is to scare the negotiating partner into coming to the table. the rhetoric now is part of that. the danger is this isn't just a real estate negotiation. this is a negotiation that moves markets in a very significant way. and so it's the most risky kind of donald trump m.o. >> let me flip to real estate. if you're mitch mcconnell, if

you're paul ryan, the republican leaders in an already very difficult election year, the president's first med term is always a bad year for the party in power. we've seen the special elections. the democratic intensity. so maybe in the end, maybe in four months or six months. the question is what turmoil does it cause in the short-term. let's look up here. soybean states, for example. china announced new tariffs on soybeans. look at where soybeans are produced in the united states of america. just on this map alone, that's the broad tariffs. you see all the tariffs. that's beef, airplanes, automobiles, pork, wine. you look here. that's soybean country. soybean producing areas in the united states. we have counted by cnn's count at least a dozen republican-held seats in that shaded area that are in place in this election year. so if you're a republican and you're not thinking about the economics, what it's going to look like a year from now, you're thinking about november. those are house districts. he said this back in kentucky yesterday. i'm not a fan of tariffs, and i'm nervous about what appears to be a growing trend in the administration to levy tariffs.

this is a slippery slope. my hope is this will stop before it gets into a broader tit-for-tat that can't be good for our country. he says our country. he also means his party. >> the chinese have someone who's a pretty good political analyst. that's an interesting place to pick to make their point, right. that part of america with the elections coming up. i agree that there's a lot of people in town who think china has asked for this, but there's going to be some pain involved. you know, the problem for the republicans right now is this election is seven or eight months away, and this is stepping all over their tax cut message. you know, the president has spent the last week or so on immigration. now he's in the middle of these -- this trade dispute. i think what you see from mitch mcconnell is a little bit of a concern that this is going to really come back and get them. everything that i'm hearing from republicans who are home right now and watching what's going on is the message is bad for them. this is not helping. >> the original fear that

republicans had was the slippery slope, as mcconnell noted, and president trump has injected so much volatility in the market, at least in the short-term. there's a fear that this economic moment that they're experiencing could be jeopardized by a series of rash economic decisions the president is making because he wants to say that he's fulfilling certain promises, but economists say it's bad policy. we're in a state now where we're looking at maybe a market correction at the moment, but people are actually losing money. people's 401(k) values are going down. people are starting to wonder again about what could happen to the money that they've -- the hard-earned money they've saved. they were going into november with tax cuts on their plate. now they have this wild card that president trump has thrown in there, and they don't want to continue with that risk where that may be the only great thing going for them this midterm. >> we have a chart of the dow jones over the past year. president trump loved to brag in 2017 about how the market was. he had every right to brag.

the market was going up and up. look at the volatility and the drop in recent years. that's the problem for republicans. they want to talk about tax cuts. they want to talk about economic growth. you have this happening. you may have industries in specific districts, whether it's beef, pork, soybeans or others. it's a test. one trademark of the president is he disrupts. he tweets. he scares people. he disrupts everything. politics, world markets. it's a test for his team. larry kudlow is new on the job as the president's chief economic adviser. he just talked about there's a rainbow out there. on the other side is a pot of gold. here's another way larry kudlow characterized where we are right now. >> any time you lower barriers, any time you lower barriers, and that's the key -- the president will say this -- lower barriers is the key. don't raise the barriers. any time you do that, it's good for growth. it's good for american growth and american workers. it's good for china growth. it's good for the rest of the world's growth. that's the intention here. >> if that's the intention, why are we raising barriers? when you impose tariffs, please help me if my language is wrong,

you're raising barriers. you're making it harder or having a tit-for-tat. does he think by raising them now, or threatening to raise them now that ultimately we're going to lower them? or is that just spin? >> no, but everybody knows in a negotiation you have to be prepared for your side to accept some pain to get what you want. if there is a consensus, and i believe there is one, that china's behavior needs to change, the united states has to express a willingness to accept some pain, such as a selloff in the market you're seeing today in order to get its way. once again, the theory of the case is that we don't actually get to that point. the chinese have a lot to lose here. the exports that they are being hit with tariffs on are more important to them than the exports they're hitting that are important to us. >> i need to interrupt you, unfortunately. i want to take you out to near san francisco. police giving an update on the shooting at youtube headquarters. >> three of four were suffering from gunshot wounds. following an initial search by san bruno officers to identify any immediate threats, a perimeter was established by responding allied agencies.

tactical teams conducted an extensive search of the entire campus located at 901 cherry avenue. no other suspects were located, nor are there believed to be any additional suspects involved in this crime. early on the morning of april 3rd, she was removed from the state's missing persons system. currently, there is no evidence linking aghdam to any individuals at the scene of this incident. a handgun registered to the suspect was recovered at the scene. investigators also learned the suspect went to a local gun range yesterday morning prior to visiting youtube. the processing of the crime scene has been concluded up there on cherry avenue. san bruno investigators with the assistance of atf are in the process of executing search

warrants at two residences in southern california believed to be associated with our suspect. the suspect is believed to have parked her vehicle to the rear of a neighboring business and accessed the canmpus via a parking garage. the suspect's vehicle has been secured and is expected to be processed over the course of the next few days. investigators will also be working to gain access to and review all social media related posts associated with the suspect in an effort to further comprehend the motive for this crime. at this point in the investigation, it is believed that the suspect was upset with policies and practices of youtube. this appears to be the motive for this incident. i'd very much like to thank and recognize the numerous local and federal agencies who provided assistance in managing this incident. youtube's response to this critical incident was also extraordinary. they were extremely prepared to offer services to all of their employees in a swift and timely manner. this would have been much more challenging for us without all of their assistance. finally, i'd like to mention how

proud i am of the san bruno police officers, especially those first on scene. not only the timeliness of their response but the actions they took as they responded significantly limited the window of time available to the suspect to cause harm to additional victims. our department has worked to be as open and transparent as possible in sharing information regarding this incident and will continue to strive to do that. however, from this point forward, the investigation is expected to be very deliberate and methodical. i do not anticipate having additional information in the immediate future to share. when we do develop additional information, we'll let you know, and we we'll distribute that. so with that, before addressing any questions, i'd like to introduce the fire chief to summarize and describe the fire and ems response to this incident. chief? >> good morning. as the chief said -- >> just listening there to chief ed barberini, the san bruno california police department, talking about his agency's response yesterday to the shooting at youtube headquarters. the shooter was killed in that.

three people were injured, one in critical condition. let's bring in cnn law enforcement analyst. james, as you listen to that, they say the crime scene has been resolved and processed. what was your biggest takeaway and biggest question as we go forward? >> john, there wasn't really any new news there, other than describing the type of pistol she had and the fact she'd gone to a range that morning to ostensibly practice. i think what's striking, we assume that there was some type of grudge there. often workplace violence involves somebody with some type of grievous feeling like they've had something done to them. in this instance, she felt like youtube had not been properly congressm compensating her or manipulating the number of views. i'm sure the fbi and locals are going through that. i think what stands out to me here, and i did a deep dive into active shooters and the statistics related to them that

the fbi compiles from 2000 to 2016. over the course of that 17 years, john, just think about these numbers. there have been 220 of these type of attacks. women make up 50% of our population, and they generally commit about 6% or 7% of the murders. when it comes to mass shootings, it drops even lower than that. there are only 3% of the mass shooters. so this was truly an anomaly in the sense that, yes, we understand she had some grievances against youtube. her background, as you try to put the pieces together, she just didn't fit into any of the typical kind of slots that you would have put her into. so i think the investigators will continue doing a deep dive. the biggest concern is were there anybody involved in this as an accomplice, whether witting or unwitting, and how was she able to purchase the handgun. >> that's a fascinating statistic. james, appreciate your insights. smart insights there. up next for us, the president publicly is clamoring to get u.s. troops out of syria,

but in a private meeting with his national security team, he says they can stay, for now. yoe 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. you wouldn't accept 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. when heartburn hits... fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue... and neutralizes stomach acid at the source.

♪ tum tum tum tum... smoothies... only from tums

welcome back. president trump making a big concession on syria. a senior administration official telling cnn the president told his national security team he's willing to keep u.s. troops in syria on a short-term basis. now, the official says the president did tell his advisers he wants a withdrawal plan asap but agreeing to stay for now is a startling turn, especially if you listen to the strong public statements yesterday that caused a big stir at the pentagon. >> as far as syria's concerned, our primary mission in terms of that was getting rid of isis. we've almost completed that task, and we'll be making a decision very quickly. i want to get out. i want to bring our troops back home. i want to start rebuilding our nation. >> in terms of our campaign in syria, we're in syria to fight isis. that is our mission.

that mission isn't over. and we're going to complete that mission. >> molly ball joins the discussion. that was brett mcgurk. that was within three minutes of each other. the president of the united states saying i want to get out. his adviser saying we need to stay in. the president has agreed, we're told in this private meeting, to stay for now. there's this tension between his sort of america-first, noninterventionist instincts and what the generals are telling him. if you leave too soon, we'll pay a price. >> that's right. i think this is one of many areas in which trump as president has found the reality much more complicated than his very simplistic promises on the campaign trail, whether you're talking about tariffs or health care or anything else. and what we've also seen is especially in the national security arena, his advisers have tended to rule the day. he has been surrounded by pretty much conventional republicans who are continuing the sort of national security strategy i think you would have seen under a president ted cruz or a

president jeb bush and trying to temper some of his more extreme instincts, saying you can't just jerk the troops out like that, even getting him to bomb syria at one point, which is something he really decried on the campaign trail. in all of these areas, in every area of policy, even the border, trump's lack of focus means it's pretty easy to sort of distract him and implement whatever you actually want to do if you're in the administration. so you know, he sort of tweets all he wants, and i think people around him don't necessarily take the tweets as definitive policy statements because they know that they can sort of maneuver him. >> and yet it's clearly his impulse and his instinct. if you remember during the campaign, he criticized president obama. he repeatedly criticized candidate hillary clinton, saying, you know, you guys created isis because you left iraq too early. you pulled out and look what happened. marco rubio tweeting at the president, trying to remind him of that, essentially saying cautioning of leaving syria too

soon is not about being hawkish. it's about the fact that if we leave too soon, we leave behind a vacuum that will either make iran and hezbollah stronger or lead to a resurgence of isis. the question is will the president listen. >> i think the best analogy to this is afghanistan, which is another place where he said he wanted to bring troops it out. it was too long. it's an endless war. it's an unwinnable situation there. and he agreed to add troops to afghanistan. it was an early indication that he was willing to listen to the hawks that tend to rule the republican party. >> will that continue under this alleged new trump, where he's alleged making his own decisions, no the listening to advisers so much. >> it's unclear because the idea that you just mentioned of pulling out of iraq too early can definitely be said for afghanistan. i mean, that's where -- you know, that's where bin laden was. you can say that about a lot of these hot spots, which is why you have the lindsey grahams and john mccains and that wing of the party begging the president

not to pull out of all of these areas. >> they think he needs help because you have tillerson gone, mcmaster on his way out. so the marco rubios and lindsey grahams think he needs a little reinforcement. >> the reality of trump has always been inconsistent about this issue. he on one hand will often say we need to get out of foreign wars and on the other hand say we need to toughen up and dig deep and be tougher on isis than obama and hillary clinton were. those two things do not always work together. we're seeing that right now in syria. for the president in the syria situation, he is being pulled back in part because he kind of impulsively announced these things when his administration infor was in no position to act on them or deal with them. at one point he said i'm not going to telegraph what i'm going to do when it comes to military action, and that's exactly what he did. in this case, it made it much easier for his advisers to say, hey, mr. president, it's too

soon to do this. you had turkey calling, france calling, everybody calling him trying to get him back on the straight and narrow. >> just yesterday we were going to send troops to the border. the pentagon koncouldn't explai that. we're getting out of syria as soon as possible. the pentagon couldn't explain that. then the president at the press conference with the three leaders from the baltic nations saying as he considers his decision in syria, he's talking a lot to saudi arabia. >> saudi arabia is very interested in our decision, and i said, well, you know, you want us to say, maybe you're going to have to pay. a lot of people, we do a lot of things in this country. we do them for -- we do them for a lot of reasons, but it's very costly for our country. it helps other countries a hell of a lot more than it helps us. >> let me just say as a se semi-student of the region, is there anybody in the world who thinks saudi arabia is, a, going to pay, b, maybe put its own

troops at risk? is there anything in the history of the last 30 years to suggest that's even remotely a possibility? >> no, i don't think so. i think, you know, that the president seems to me, he's sort of satisfied just to express what he would do. he's reassuring his base. you know, here's what i really want to do. i'm being held back by all these experts around town, even though he once said i know more than the generals. he finds himself having to listen to them. i think this is a reflection of the feedback that republicans are getting. you know, there's real unhappiness at home with signing that big spending bill. so trump's trying to send these signals. well, this is what i would do. this is what i would do. then of course, he kind of looks weak when it turns around and he can't do it and his own people are overruling him. pretty dismissively. >> this is what i would do if i were president, except he's -- >> if i were these people's bosses. >> i admit it's a strange theory, but i see that.

>> it's exactly right. you talk about there being a new trump. i don't think there's any new trump. he's behaving exactly as he has throughout his term so far. what would be a new trump is somebody who focused and enforced the things that he had expressed that he wanted to do. >> stay tuned. when we come back, robert mueller tells the trump team that the president is not a target of his probe, but at least one report says he is a subject. is that really much better?

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. welcome back. so here's a question. if the feds told you, yes, your conduct is being investigated, but at the moment we don't have sufficient evidence to bring charges, would that be good news or bad news? well, that's what cnn is told president trump is hearing from the russia special counsel. he is not at the moment the target of the special counsel investigation. now, target is a word prosecutors use when there is no

doubt they see criminal activity. instead, the president's lawyers left their recent conversations with the special counsel believing the president is a subject. that's according to "the washington post." again, that word, subject, has a specific meaning in law enforcement parlance. a subject is someone whose actions are being looked at but the feds don't have the evidence to go as far as attaching that target label. so on the right today is a bit of a bizarre celebration. red state puts it this way. wow, robert mueller delivers some good news to president trump. well, it certainly isn't the worst news, but is it good news for the president and his party? here's republican congressman trey gowdy. he says hold the champagne. >> the only word that matters to me in the criminal justice system is defendant. if you're not a defendant, whether you're the target or whether you're the subject, i know the fbi gets really caught up in those two words. as a former federal prosecutor, they're meaningless to me because one witness can take you from being a subject to a

target. >> cnn legal analyst michael zeldin joins us. is this glass half full or half empty? is being a subject, not a target, good news for the president or potential quick sand for the president? >> certainly being a subject is better than being a target. you can migrate from being a subject to become a target, especially if you are interviewed and you lie in the course of that interview. i don't think this is really big news in the sense i think the president has always been a subject from the outset of this investigation as someone whose evidence the grand jury was interested in receiving. what he has to deliver will determine what his ultimate status is. >> what his ultimate status is. one more quick one. if you were the president now, do you sit down? >> i don't think he has a choice. i think he has to sit down because legal precedent requires him to. but i think he has to be very disciplined in his preparation for that interview, knowing how

well mueller will be prepared for it on his side. >> the legal answer there from michael zeldin. appreciate your help. now the political question for the panel. do you agree? the president of the united states, we know he thinks he's persuasive. we know there's no evidence. he says he has done nothing wrong. he has three former campaign aides who have cut plea deals already. he has another, his campaign chairman, who is under indictment and who his deputy attorney general has said the special counsel should investigate possible collusion with the russians. if you're the president, you sit down? >> he thinks he can. but anybody who is close to him and knows his m.o. in these situations will tell you privately that's a terrible idea. because you don't know where the questions are really going to go. more importantly, in the case of this client, you don't any where the answers are going to go. that could get him in a whole lot more trouble than he is. it could change, as trey gowdy said, from subject to target like this.

>> here's how saul put it. i think he would do much better than people think, meaning the president answering questions. but there are plenty of instances where a guy walks into a grand jury as a subject, he gets out and is told, guess what, you're a target now. >> i mean, i think this is one of those rare instances in which the president not being a lawyer himself, a rare thing for a politician, is walking into a situation where he is probably not fully equipped to evaluate the legal situation he might put himself in. he's also not that careful with facts. i think that's pretty much true -- >> very polite of you. >> he does not -- he's not careful with facts and also not with detail. in a situation like that, it's hard to protect yourself. it can be both true that both the president and his lawyers believe that he has nothing to hide and also that his lawyers would be smart to warn him against putting himself in that situation. >> that's exactly the situation. >> can i ask a broader question about the climate we live in where some interpret this as good news. the president of the united

states is the subject, not a target, but is the subject of a criminal investigation about something pretty heinous. did a foreign government interact, interfere in our elections, and did his people somehow collude with them? maybe the president did nothing, but again, you have three, including a former national security adviser and former deputy campaign chairman, a guy with years of experience in republican politics, who pled guilty to lying and are now cooperating. you have the campaign chairman under indictment. so the president's a subject, and a whole bunch of people around him have admitted committing crimes. >> the importance of this development is going to be how trump interprets it. >> thank you. >> that's going to direct his behavior. that's going to determine whether he feels so confident that he decides he can walk into that interview room. most of these developments -- i always say, it doesn't matter, we don't know. it's up to mueller. this actually matters because if trump, who we know is very attuned to conservative media, very attuned to what his base is thinking, if he is reading in

the conservative media this is great for trump, trump is scott free, then the way he internalizes that -- if that goes to his confidence, if that affects the way he makes this decision, but then again, when it comes to sitting down with mueller, he may not have a choice. >> you make a great point in part that the president makes these decisions. who is he getting input from right now? this is a former u.s. attorney quoted by bloomberg. the president has lost members of his legal team. it's a very dangerous situation for the president, not to have top-flight, white-collar representation. it's a specialty. you wouldn't go to your throat doctor for brain surgery. now, that's a reference to the president's top attorney right now, who is a religious freedom activist, works for christian conservative organizations, has had great success on those issues, and is a very good public spokesman for the president. but he's not a white-collar criminal defense attorney. is that who the president's taking his lead advice from right now? >> he's got other people who he has worked with who do this kind of thing for a lot of years, who he's still talking to. whether or not they're going to go on the payroll, that's an open question.

>> i have heard this is a real concern, that he does not have a top-flight criminal defense lawyer. to molly's point, i think he has this confidence and he's sat in depositions over some real estate issues, but this is nothing like that. >> in a lot of those cases, it turned out a lot of what he said was simply nowhere near the truth. >> multiple fabrications. >> we'll watch this as we go. before we go to break, we want to pause to mark a sad piece of history, tragedy 50 years ago today. >> good evening. dr. martin luther king, the apostle of nonviolence in the civil rights movement, has been shot to death in memphis, tennessee. police have issued an all-points bulletin for a white man seen running from the scene. >> i ask every citizen to reject the blind violence that has struck dr. king, who lived by nonviolence. i pray that his family can find

comfort in the memory of all he tried to do for the land he loved so well. david. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪ we know that when you're >> tspending time with thelass grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosing safelite. >> grandpa: thank you!

>> child: bye! >> tech: bye! saving you time... so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

checking our political radar now, h.r. mcmaster taking direct aim at moscow, pulling no punches in his last public remarks as national security adviser. during a speech here in washington, mcmaster said the united states has failed to impose significant costs on russia and that the kremlin's confidence is growing. >> russia has used old and new forms of aggression to undermine

our open societies and the foundations of international peace and stability. russia brazenly and implausibly denies its actions. and we have failed to impose sufficient costs. >> mcmaster did, however, praise the trump administration's recent response to russia, mentioning specifically that expulsion of russian diplomats after the nerve gas attack in britain. the wisconsin governor scott walker the latest republican to sound an alarm. last night a democrat-backed candidate in his state won a state supreme court election. that's notable because it's the first time in two decades a nonincumbent liberal has won a seat on wisconsin's high court. that prompted this tweet from governor walker. quote, want to's results show we are at risk of a blue wave. walker himself, worth noting, up for re-election this november. and we're learning more about cynthia nixon's platform as she ramps up her campaign for governor in new york.

she's for legalizing marijuana and taxing it to boost state revenue. a short time ago, nixon talked about that during her first tv interview for the campaign, talking with wendy williams. >> a 7-year-old, a 15-year-old, and a 21-year-old. >> a 21-year-old is going to be like, mom, even though i don't smoke pot, i can't be around other kids who smoke pot? i'm not catching a contact. >> if we legalize it in new york, you know. [ cheers and applause ] >> i want to ask, governor -- i was just asking. so you're for the legalization of marijuana. >> i am absolutely -- >> for the good, not the evil. >> absolutely for the legalization of marijuana. let's capture some of that revenue. >> let's talk, at least not first about the legalization of marijuana in new york, but about scott walker and what happened in wisconsin. we look for clues everywhere. often you would say, what is a state supreme court race tell us about a midterm election? it can tell us a lot. you're scott walker running for re-election. we just had a special election in pennsylvania.

democrats win. election in wisconsin, democrats win. you think the president will notice? he likes to tell us about wisconsin, pennsylvania, and michigan. >> it's a canary in a coal mine, wisconsin, for the republicans. walker has been sounding the alarm because he's lost some special state legislative elections. in fact, it was so bad they wouldn't schedule other special elections and now are being forced to by the court. i think that wisconsin, you're going to see a lot of money and attention focused there. they think there's real trump remorse. however, the senate race there, tammy baldwin, the incumbent, democrats are worried about her. there's some counterforces at work. but i think that walker's trying to fire up the rest of the republican governors, certainly around the country. >> the question is whether there's anything that can be done to stop if this wave is indeed coming. if there's a tsunami, no wall is big enough to contain that. there's a chorus of canaries at this point.

there's a senate election in alabama. there have been other special elections. the virginia election last year. so you know, if this is indeed a blue wave, no one will have failed to see it coming. the question is just is there anything republicans can do. what they're really nervous about is that not only are conditions already like this, but the economy gets worse. >> it's a great point. you go back to red wave years, blue wave years. there are candidates on the other side who run perfect campaigns and still get washed away. when we come back, john kasich back in new hampshire. that's not about 2018. it's about 2020. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,

it could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. see why millions of people have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now.

john kasich is back in new hampshire, which of course puts him back in the head lines. here's today's "concord monitor." kasich returns to new hampshire, 2016 hopeful wavers on 2020. is the ohio governor ready to

commit? most definitely not. >> so this is an insurance policy. is that fair? >> well, no, it's an options policy that i don't know what i'm going to do. and in politic, i'm still a young person, a young man. and i don't know. i know it's so hard for people to believe that, that i'm not plotting and scheming. of course i want to do some things to keep my options open, but where it's going to lead, i just don't know. >> now kasich does have a strong base in new hampshire. one recent poll up there, if you believe that poll, he's within striking distance of the president. but one state does not a successful primary challenge make. a lot of republicans have a very different reaction. >> i am not living in anger towards donald trump. if he does a good job, i'll praise him, you know. if he does something i don't like, i'll criticize him. i have that opportunity now. how long it lasts, i don't know.

>> but you said some people drive by and give you the finger. metaphorically. >> yeah, no, i don't see much of that, but i know. i'm aware of the fact that there's people, particularly in my party, who are angry at me. i know that. and it's okay. that's america. you have a right to be angry. i just -- i don't even -- it doesn't bother me. it just doesn't bother me. >> he says it doesn't bother him. so will he or won't he? >> i truly think he doesn't know yet. that he is making trips like the one i was with him on yesterday to new hampshire. he met with reporters. he met with supporters who were there for him in 2016 who really helped him just to make sure they knew he was still with them and that it was a two-way street. look, the two options, neither one is good when you have an incumbent president in your own party. one, challenge him. and this is a guy who lost to donald trump by 20 points last time. the president is still very,

very popular among the republican base. number two, run as an independent, which you need a lot of money and a real plan to do. he and his supporters agree that's why these are very tough options. he's just going to keep on going, keep talking, he says, until he says the lord tells him to stop doing that. >> is it the lord or more bob mueller? is there some implosion of trump where trump is not a viable candidate? one of the things he told you was the answer for our country's, in my opinion, lead in the middle. soft republicans and soft democrats. he might be right that's what the country wants, a centrist, but there's no political path for a centrist. you can't win a primary in the democratic party or republican primary as a centrist. >> the only political path for a centrist right now is to run as an independent. he admits that. he understands that. the people around him understand that. doing that requires a lot of money. he needs to find a big benefactor to get him on the ballot in all 50 states and to have a credible plan to do that. so that is why this is a big question mark, whether he will

ultimately run. is the desire there? you bet. >> he needs to work on the response to the middle finger thing. remember what george w. bush used to say? every time i traveled country, people are telling me i'm number one. see how that plays out. thanks for joining us. see you back here this time tomorrow. wolf starts after a quick break. patrick woke up with back pain.

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

aleve. all day strong.

hello. i'm wolf blitzer. it's 1:00 p.m. here in washington. 1:00 a.m. thursday in beijing. wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. we begin with breaking news. information uncovered by cnn's k file raises new questions about long-time trump confidant roger stone and his links to wikileaks. on the same day he sent an e-mail claiming he had dinner with wikileaks founder julian assange, stone warned that, quote, devastating information from wikileaks would soon be released. he said the information involved wrongdoing by