greeng. thanks for joining pups rod rosenstein under nearly constant fire by the white house and now capitol hill where they're reportedly preparing articles of impeachment against him, firing back, saying of those articles of imimpeachment, we will not be extorted. the president's first reaction on twitter on was on this, imseems impossible to obstruct justice for a crime that didn't happen. that's not true. you can be charged with it, even if no one else is charged with another crime. we'll get deeper into the

issues. there was also another presidential tweet that followed that that deserves some attention as well. there's a lot to unpack there. we have to get this out of the way. as long as he continues to say no collusion, we're going to continue to say the investigation isn't over. we don't know if the special counsel has found anything or will find collusion or obstruction for that matter. but this tweet is a new spin on the president's of the repeated refra refrain. for the record, there are multiple questions on collusion. here's some of the question that deal with collusion. when did you become aware of the trump tower meeting. what involvement diyou have in the communication strategy including the release of donald trump jr.'s e-mails. during a 2013 trip to russia,

what communication and relationships did you have with the agalarovs and russian officials? what discussions did you have during the campaign? what did you know about russian hacking, use of social media or other hacks into the campaign. what knowledge did you have including by paul manafort to russia about to pential assistance to the campaign. what did you know about communication between roger stone, asang or wikileaks. what did you know about the transition. now that is not even all of the questions that deal potentially whether there was collusion between the trump campaign and russia. there are more. to say there were no questions about collusion is false. laughingly false. and there do seem to be people who trust the president's misstatement of facts more than their own eyes and more than reality itself. as for the white house at the press briefing today, sarah sanders was asked about this and the obstruction question multiple time >> is the white house concerned

as congressman adam schiff has said, that so many of the questions point to the obstruction of justice. >> we at the white house try not to be concerned dealing with anything adam schiff. >> but the president has tweeted about it. he's talked about how none of these questions lead to collusion, but that's not true. over a dozen of them do. we've talked about accuracy from the president in the past. why is he mischaracterizing these reports. >> i am not going to get into the back and forth on matters involving the special counsel. >> it's not involving the special counsel. >> it certainly has implications with the special counsel and i'm not going to get into a back and forth. i'll refer you to the president's personal attorney. >> he said there is no question on collusion. when you look at these specific questions about outreach by the campaign to russia, aren't these questions about collusion? >> once again, i'm not going to get into a back and forth about questions leaked or anything having to do with the special counsel and i would refer you to the president's attorney. >> with the exception a swipe at

congressman schiff, a pretty standard repeat performance. the white house passes the buck. while the president says the buck doesn't even exist. keeping them honest, the buck may not stop there, but neither will the questions. joining us now, jim acosta. >> the president didn't wait long to weigh in on these possible mueller questions. >> that's right. it's interesting to note that while the president tweeted about these things this morn, he did not answer the question. i was in the oval office with him earlier today and asked him if he wanted to comment on these questions. and he declined to do so. sit appears that the white house and the president prefer to have these comments put out in a tweet in writing so they essentially can't be questioned and when he is asked in person he doesn't want to talk about it. and that is an interesting distinction to make there. getting back to the tweets the one you talked about earlier

when the president said no questions on collusion, that is obviously not the case. you mentioned several there as you went down the list, anderson, these are obviously questions that have to deal with collusion and when the white house was asked about this earlier today, they simply didn't want to talk about it. i will tell you there is a real and practical implication in all of this and that is whether or not it affects, whether the president will sit down ultimately with the special counsel robert mueller. i was told by a source close to all of these discussions who said this could possibly complicate the potential for sitting down with robert mueller. they are not happy that these questions were leaked out, but at the same time, they do give you a big insight into what the mueller investigation is going for.

they are looking at questions of collusion. >> this is another example from the president denying things that are reality that are in fact true. >> reporter: that's right, just because the president says or tweets it doesn't make it true. there was a tweet this morning, that said no question on collusion. multiple misstatements about barack obama's birth or tweets about wiretapping at trump tower. or repeated statements or tweets that millions of people voted illegally. he just said this weeks ago saying this wasn't a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy theory and the president continues to twist facts and misstates truths. the thinking is, i think inside the president's inner circle and perhaps with the president himself, if he continues to work reality, the public's sense of reality, he can convince enough people this is not an issue. as you said, anderson, the investigation continues and those investigations have not come to a conclusion on this issue of collusion. >> thanks very much. new reporting by a group of washington republicans drafting articles of impeachment against

deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. a move being described as a last reso resort. today rosenstein responded. manu raju has information on that. deputy attorney general rosenstein had strong words today. >> reporter: rod rosenstein has come under enormous pressure. thousands of documents as the house gop targets the fbi. from house republicans who have been backed by speaker paul ryan, turned over documents giving the republicans access. there are thousands of other documents that the gop wants to see. we have learned in a private meeting last month, congressmen

mark meadows and jim jordan both asked to see an unredacted copy of a memo rod rosen steen wrote about bob mueller and what they could investigate in the russian probe. prosen stein resisted and told the republicans no. meadows and other conservatives have discussed the possibility of impeaching rosenstein if he doesn't comply. they've put together draft articles of impeachment. when rosenstein was asked about this by our colleague laura jarrett, he pushed back. >> there have been people who are making threats privately and publicly for quite some time. i think they should be aware that the justice department will not be extorted. >> reporter: responding that

rosenstein should step down if he believes he's been eck tort d -- extorted for doing his job. and that is exactly what democrats say the republicans are up to by these tactics. they believe the gop wants to give trump cover to fire him. he was careful in his remarks saying he didn't want to answer this in the context of any current situation that is going on meaning the mueller investigation. but he said to the justice department has in the past reached an opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. it was in 1973, an opinion reached then and later affirmed in 2000 saying such an indictment would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to carry out its constitutional obligations. but rosenstein said that decision was reached by someone in the department at that time and you shouldn't draw any inference in his discussion of

that opinion now. >> joining me now allen dershowitz, also chief legal analyst jeffrey toobin. the fact that the president said there's november questions about collusion in the leaked questions, that is blatantly false, isn't it? there are at least a dozen questions in there. >> it is not just blatantly false about the questions because as you have pointed out several times, there are many questions in the mueller list that deal with collusion. but the fact that the president keeps saying over and over again, there was no collusion, there was no collusion, that has not been established and in fact there is lots of evidence that collusion did take place. you know, starting with the infamous meeting in trump tower where donald trump jr. sought to get dirt on hillary clinton from the russian government. that is collusion right there and that is just the beginning. and i think patience is not a

virtue that we all have, but this is an investigation about collusion. there is already some evidence of collusion and we will see if mueller finds more. >> but the key is to distinguish between illegal aspects of collusion and lawful aspects. meeting someone to get dirt on a presidential candidate may be a terrible thing to do, but it's not unlawful. to distinguish between lawful but maybe bad, unlawful and criminal. that's true of the obstruction of justice as well. >> when the president says it is hard to obstruct justice, that is wrong. if there's no underlying crime. >> martha stewart went to jail for talking to agents about something that wasn't a crime. of course you can be convicted of that. i think he was making a slightly different point. he was saying why would anybody obstruct justice if there wasn't even an underlying crime. it's a slightly different point. >> can i answer that question? >> i understand the answer. people will do that because they have no idea whether it is an

underlying crime. >> also -- >> let him finish. >> just one more point. the emphasis in the questions on why the president fired comey strengthens the case for rod rosenstein recusing himself because there is absolutely no doubt that he will be called as a witness if there is an indictment. if there is charges, if there is impeachment. any kind of legal proceedings relating to why the president fired comey, the first witness has to be the man who wrote the memo justifying the firing. >> if i could just get to the point if why would someone lie if there wasn't an underlying crime. here's the reason. because they're liars. liars lie. regardless of the precise legal setting in which they find themselves. people who are compulsive liars, they lie. and as allen pointed out

correctly, there doesn't have to be an underlying crime. >> lying is not a crime. lying to the fbi is a crime. there's another interesting point. "the new york times" has a lead editorial today in which it says every question that mueller is going to ask trump, he knows the answer to. they reiterated what comey said. the way investigation works you get all the information, you know what you are going to do, and you ask the question of the subject in order to give them a chance to lie and that is a perjury trap. i think both "the new york times" editorial and comey's book raises an argument, a legal argument that trump's people can make saying you're not allowed to ask him a question to which you know the answer. the object of the grand jury is to find out information you don't know, not to ask somebody a question, the answer to which you know simply to see if he's going to commit perjury. >> but a perjury trap makes it

sound like this is somebody who can't help themselves and lies just comes out of their mouth. and so they commit perch riff. a perjury trap, you only fall into a perjury trap if you are actually lying. >> of course. that's right. but it is an improper function of the grand jury to set a perjury trap, even for a guilty person. >> do you agree with that? >> i completely disagree with that. donald trump is a key witness in the investigation. perhaps the key witness. the idea that he somehow is excused from testifying because the grand jury already knows some of the information about which he will testify is just a preposterous idea. >> that is not my argument. for example, if they have a witness who says, i was on a call with trump and here i have my notes and i have a tape recording. you cannot ask him a question were you on a call with that person. i won a case like that a few years ago in massachusetts.

>> why not? why can't you ask him that? >> the grand jury's purpose is to get information not to give people an opportunity to commit perjury. that is not an appropriate function of a grand jury. >> we got to get a quick break. when we come back breaking news from the "washington post" that the special counsel robert mueller raised the possibility of a subpoena in a meeting with the president's legal team. the latest on that next. nts: it's got potential. -i think it'll look really good without the str margo and sam had a vision, brought to life in one coat. whatever your home may hand you, behr through it, in one coat. behr marquee, #1 rated interior paint. guaranteed in 1,000 plus colors. find it exclusively at the home depot.

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. the commute is worth it.me, the more you know you and that john deere tractor... you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive. but just like a john deere, it's worth it.

a hilton getaway means you get more because... you get another day in paradise. get a sunset on a sunday. get more stories to share. get more from your summer getaway with exclusive hilton offers. book yours, only at hilton.com 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.

breaking news from the "washington post" about a meeting between mueller and his lawyers back in march. the "is" word came up -- subpoena. josh this is fascinating reporting. how the prospect of special counsel mueller come up between the president's legal team and mueller. >> a lot of rankling in this interview. couple of months ago, there was a break down in negotiations. and at one meeting, special counsel team raised the idea of a subpoena provoking an angry reply who said you can't screw

around with the president of the united states this is serious business and kind of talks broke down. obviously now we know rudy giuliani is now taking over the legal team and as we started the talk, the president has been reticent to do an interview after two things, first being the raid of michael cohen. and two, seeing the number of questions they want to ask that are not about so-called russian collusion potential obstruction and other business deals. a host of issues. doing interview with the special counsel. >> another interesting detail in this article is that when this meeting broke down or got contentious, the mueller team or mueller himself said look, we can give you more information about some of the topics and it

was jay sekulow who wrote out those 49 questions in which were leaked. i assume those were the questions leaked last night. >> correct. and to be clear, that is not in totality everything they can ask the president. legal team is saying we want to know what you can ask us. basically tell us why a presidential interview is compelled. this is the leader of the free will. they provided those 49 questions. what our experts have told us is they are likely to deal down deeper in those projects. showing e-mails and asking questions what he remembers in meeting. that is what some of his advisers feel, can trip him up in an interview with the special counsel. >> the 49 questions that first broke last night, those were actually written down by jay sekulow according to your reporting correct? >> chronicled in writing in that side after having a conversation with special counsel mueller and his team.

>> it wouldn't seem possible it was a leak from the mueller team if those questions were written by jay k -- sekulow, it would be by someone in the trump's legal team or someone with access. >> obviously we can't discuss our sourcing on stories. but clear to say the questions have been reported by the new york times and the "washington post." but the questions are the president's legal's team interpretation of what they seem to be. >> the president himself tweeted about it this morning complaining about the leak itself which now seems obvious in terms of what direction it is coming from. >> i think special counsel has taken some pride in this investigation having a spokesperson who does not comment or have been even critical of the president's legal team over time to what they perceive as speaking to the press inartfully. obviously as reporters we welcome everyone to speak to us. we take all leaks from all sides.

>> appreciate your reporting as always. back with professor allen dershowitz and jeffrey toobin. fascinating reporting. does it surprise you? >> i think where we are going is to a subpoena. the president's legal team should have no interest in answering these enormously broad questions voluntarily. they will get the same broad questions artfully asked at a grand jury but at least they will be able to challenge a, the entire process of subpoenaing the president. they will lose on that. i think they will win on some areas of questioning. for example, why did you fire. what was your motive. for example, business dealings

before he was president. no court is going to deny them those. the irony is the most important questions, whereas the one he has no legal right to prevent are the most damaging questions. >> based on this reporting, do you believe what the presser just said, that subpoena is where we're heading? this article talks about where the president is fuming about the michael cohen raid. doesn't want to sit down. talks about it 20 times a day, i think it says at some point in this article. >> i agree with allen that a subpoena is coming and agree that ultimately the president will lose. i disagree that the courts will limit mueller much in what he can ask. i think he will be allowed to ask about motive because i think it is relevant. but the larger point is, i think the president has a way of short

circuiting this entire process. and i think that is what he is going to do ultimately, take the fifth. >> no. no. >> can i finish allen. which is the president will denounce the process. it is a witch hunt. he doesn't want anything to do with this. there is nothing mueller can do if the president -- >> of course there is. he gives him immunity. >> never going to get the president immunity. >> let me tell you why. because an immunity doesn't apply in the impeachment proceeding. and no matter what rosenstein you are not going to get a reversal. now you can indict him, now you can prosecute him. if he foolishly takes the fifth, he gets to be asked all of these same questions under immunity and all the answers can be used against him in an impeachment proceeding, you are an a plus student but boy on this one, taking the fifth, i am not going to give you your grade. it won't happen. >> watch it happen. he is going to denounce. >> come back. >> jeff, to the professor's point if he takes the fifth, i'm not a lawyer --

>> give him immunity. >> so jeff, why would he take the fifth if that is the case? >> because the mueller's office will never give him immunity. they are not going to give him the opportunity to excuse from any criminal prosecution down the road. that is what immunity means, never be used against you. the idea that this central figure is going to be excused from any kind of criminal liability. >> if the department of justice believes that a president cannot be indicted then why would they, did the mueller team somehow fight that? >> more over it is not transaction immunity, it is use immunity. they can't use the fruits of the evidence in the criminal prosecution.

>> i think the odds of mueller giving the president of the united states immunity are infinitesimal. it is not going to happen and the president can end this process overnight if he decides to take the fifth. >> bad judgment. bad judgment as the lawyers who told president clinton to testify. >> he shouldn't have taken the fifth. >> he should have paid the money. no president has taken the fifth and i don't believe any president will take the fifth. although we know the fifth is not an admission of guilt to the american public. and that would just be something that i don't think this president will ever do. >> we shall see. >> stay with us after a quick break. or a lasting impression without it. ♪ ♪ don't turn your house into a home without it. ♪ ♪

don't go live... or even share a moment without it. and don't watch her dance like nobody's watching without it. whatever you do, don't forget that the more you live forward, the more you need someone at your back. ♪ ♪ the powerful backing of american express. don't live life without it. is the fact that it's very, very tough on bacteria, yet it's very gentle on the denture itself. polident consists of 4 powerful ingredients that work together to deep clean your denture in hard to reach places. that work together a peaceful night sleep without only imagine... frequent heartburn waking him up. now that dream is a reality. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn?

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. now more businesses in more places can afford to dream gig. it's hard to get all the daily that's why i love fiber choice. it has the fiber found in many fruits and vegetables, all in a tasty, chewable tablet. fiber choice... the smart choice. breaking news tonight from "the washington post." a meeting between the special counsel and the president's lawyers back in march, the lawyers insisted the president wasn't obligated to speak with investigators. mueller had a different take. saying he could offer a subpoena. this according to the "washington post" and four people familiar with the

meeting. back now with allen dershowitz and jeffrey toobin and gloria borger. >> we are learning is it really now you have his new legal team in place and they are trying to figure out what to do and there is a sense among a lot of his attorneys that the president ought to stay away from this. ought to fight this, and the president's state of mind particularly after the raid of his personal attorney, michael cohen's office is i'm not going to sit for an interview. whereas the president initially was sort of all for it. i am going to sit with mueller, and i can do this. right now his state of mind is no way i'm going to do this. >> professor, how long a fight could the president put up through courts to try to resist a subpoena? >> in general, since he is the president, the courts will allow him to defer and ultimately the

take it up through the supreme court awhich is at least a year with expedited appeals and that gets him into a time when of course the congress could be controlled by democrats. we may disagree on how much he could win or lose, but he'll lose enough that he will have to give some testimony under the worst of circumstances, without his lawyer being there, with no restrictions. and he will have to at least provide some answers. >> so jeffrey, do you agree that is one possible incentive for the president to not wait until the subpoena but agree to cooperate, if he can get some sort of interaction with his attorneys? >> my information is similar to gloria's. they are just not going to put donald trump in front of robert mueller's team voluntarily. they think it is a bad idea. and i think it is right that it is a bad idea. and they are going to wait for the subpoena to play out.

i do agree with allen that ultimately the president will lose in court and i also agree that it will take some number of months. that is a mixed blessing. i don't know the political calculation on that. it is good because it kicks the can down the road past the midterm elections. it's bad because it just means the mueller investigation goes on and on and on, including into a time when the democrats may control the house of representatives. i think ultimately, he is going to lose about whether he has to answer questions. >> and then there is a question can he plead the fifth. >> of course. >> he clearly can. >> and how will that look politically after he has been on the record saying only guilty people plead the fifth. would he be able to get away with that? his attorneys believe, quite frankly -- and they don't even want to talk about pleading the fifth at this point. they say we're nowhere near that. but his attorneys believe

politically the president has succeeded in making the case that the investigation itself is not credible and the investigators are not credible and that he can take that argument and run with it through the midterm elections and at least get him through that and hopefully keep his control of the house. >> professor? >> well, that might help him in the court of public opinion among his people, it is not going to help him in the courts of law. the courts of law will compel him to answer some questions, and perhaps the questions he may be most vulnerable on. i don't know, he may have no vulnerabilities at all. but he has no legal claim, no constitutional claim about his business relations, what he did before he was president. there is some possible argument that he has some executive privilege claim. by the way, he may have waived some executive privilege. if you tweet and go public and you say things, and then say, oh, i won't answer questions about that, because i have

executive privilege, there is a concept of waiver. and the president may have in advertently waived some of his executive privilege by tweeting and speaking about same issues in the public. so that could come back to bike him. >> thanks very much. coming up, remember that strange letter that candidate trump's doctor put out during the campaign about his extraordinary lab results and extraordinary stamina and positive test results. you're never going to guess who actually wrote that letter. according to the doctor. i know, you can guess. but we will tell you ahead. you get the one-on-one partnership you need to grow your business. the dell vostro 15 laptop. contact a dell advisor today.

[ drum roll ] ...emily lapier from ames, iowa. this is emily's third nomination and first win. um...so, just...wow! um, first of all, to my fellow nominees, it is an honor sharing the road with you. and of course, to the progressive snapshot app for giving good drivers the discounts -- no, i have to say it -- for giving good drivers the discounts they deserve. safe driving! for giving good drivers the discounts they deserve. when it comes to travel, i sweat the details.

late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun transitions™ light under control™

transitions™ we can now use a blood sample toh care, target lung cancer more precisely. if we can do that, imagine what we can do for asthma. and if we can stop seizures in epilepsy patients with a small pacemaker for the brain, imagine what we can do for multiple sclerosis, even migraines. if we can use patients' genes

to predict heart disease in their families, imagine what we can do for the conditions that affect us all. imagine what we can do for you. >> the strapgest -- one of the strangest letters ever written by dr. bornstein. saying the president had extraordinary physical strength. and if elected he would be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency. cnn's alex mark joins us now. what have you learned about that letter? >> reporter: i know you'll be shocked to learn that he was not

the creative force behind this letter. he was now saying it was donald trump who essentially put the words in his mouth and dictated that famous letter from december 2015. the actual quote from doctor bornstein, he dictated that whole letter. i didn't write the letter. donald trump told him what to put in the letter and he wrote it up. he is admitting to some creative license. contributed it to dark humor and refers to the movie "fargo." it moves the truth in a different direction. he got the call from donald trump on that day. crossing in a car with his wife. and trump was telling him, dictating to him the words that he was used in the letter. and bornstein was telling him, you can use this you can't use this.

and they got to the office and trump signed it. and there was the letter that we have all then read. >> that is bizarre, number one. it seems odd that a doctor would agree to be dictated a letter by his patient. i'm not sure what it says about the doctor or the power mr. trump had over the doctor. has the white house responded to the doctor's claim at all? >> well, they had a very close relationship. and certainly bornstein who is no longer the president's doctor feels betrayed by the president saying he was loyal to him and over those 35 years that he didn't reveal to his closest friends or neighbor that he was the president's, the then candidate's doctor. so he was loyal. no, we have reached out to the white house and they have chosen not to respond. >> i don't understand what does he feel betrayed about? >> reporter: well he is saying

in essence, yeah, comes down to this raid that was carried out here over the medical records. >> which we are about -- >> we are about to get into that. i jumped the horse on that. i do want to bring in dr. bornstein saying his office was raided by the former body guard and a third quote large man. he tells nbc news that the raid happened. the doctor used extreme language to describe said raid. listen. >> i feel raped. that's how i feel, raped, frightened and sad. >> and what exactly were they looking for? >> medical records, pictures, anything they could find. they must have been here for 25

to 30 minutes and it created a lot of chaos. >> drew, this whole thing is business czar to say the least. according to your source, this was not a raid. >> this took place more than a year ago. a source familiar with the hand off of these records saying this was nowhere near a raid. completely has a different opinion of what happened. what it was was the president shortly after being sworn in saw or heard dr. bornstein talking about his public, his health publicly. and the decision was made to get the president's medical records

and bring them back to the white house. the president or the president's staff assigned keith schiller to do that. according to my source he presented or brought a letter to the doctor's house. accompanied by a trump organization attorney. and they came in person because they wanted to collect the records then. they requested a copy of the records. in no way did they say this was a raid of any kind. they stayed for about 20 minutes. that seems to match what the doctor says. but they just have a completely different interpretation. this was a request for the president's medical records and those records were handed over. >> so according to your reporting, dr. bornstein willingly handed over the records at the end of this meeting? >> yeah. now, the source says the doctor -- i'll read you the quote. bornstein was making a big deal about the request and seemed flustered and couldn't operate

his copy machine. bornstein couldn't work the copy machine. the the request was for a copy of the medical records. in fact he had trouble finding all the records. the office was described to me as being disheveled. and finally keith schiller said give me the hard copy and we'll go. and that is eventually what took place. those personal medical records of president trump were given to him. the hard copies and the two of them left. it was in the doctor's right and he was right that he should have retained the original copies but he couldn't get the copy machine to work and that is why they were taken. this person, keith schiller, the presidential aide and the attorney did not rifle through any records or do any raids. this is according to my source. they just went to get the records and that's what they did.

>> bringing in alex back and dr. sanjay gupta. have you ever heard of such a thing? is that even legal for a doctor to release something that was written by a patient? can i call up my doctor and dictate a letter to him? >> no. i mean, never heard of such a thing. i don't know about the legality of it. it is certainly unprofessional. it is unethical. i haven't heard of it. and we kind of anticipated or expected or not surprised by this. not only because of the hyper bollic exaggerated nature of the letter. but but because the letter says everything was positive, which is a bad thing in medicine. the other thing i want to point out, ander rer son, what i immediately thought of, besides

what was in the letter and the types of terms that were used, it also makes me now question even more what was not in the letter. if specific things are being told to say put in the letter then what was not in the letter. not only with dr. bornstein, but with dr. ronny jackson. i was at that press briefing that he gave. there was a lot of hyperbolic language used there as well and that is concerning. because the language aside, you need to know everything. what do we know about the president's health right now? it is hard to say based on this new reporting. >> and alex, i understand dr. bornstein told then candidate trump what he couldn't put in the letter as he was dictating it, right? >> that's right. what we understand from dr. bornstein, then candidate trump in 2015, was calling him up and giving him this grandiose language with lots of superlatives.

anderson, you read a couple of quotes there. and it sounds like something the president would say. what bornstein said is trump was dictating these words and bornstein was saying you can say this, you cannot say this. and he definitely incorporated some of the language that the candidate wanted to include. and then he sort of put it into his own wording. so he got dictation in terms of the gist and some of the terminology, some of the phrasing and then he took some creative license and used as a mentioned, some of his dark humor infused it into that letter. so we have this amalgamation of both of these gentlemen. but certainly the force behind it, the feeling behind it is coming from donald trump, according to dr. bornstein. >> what is the procedure for a president to obtain medical records from a former doctor. how would that work exactly? or frankly anybody obtaining

former medical records. can you just take your medical records? >> it is pretty interesting and it depends from state to state. the original copies are owned by the doctor, the hospital where the testing was performed. and patients can get copies of those medical records and they can correct inaccuracies, if but for you a period time, in new york, for example, the hospital or the doctor's office owns those records for six years. then after that they can give the entire, including the originals to the patient. but in this case, going with an authorization, requesting medical records, getting copies of those medical records, having them then for the patient, that's -- that's normal. whether you're the president or any other patient, you are entitled to those copies of the medical records, but you have to give the authorization. >> fascinating. thank you very much. on the u.s. border with mexico tonight. more central american migrants

were brought in for asylum processing, hoping, of course, to be admitted to the united states. cnn has been following the so-called caravan. we'll have the very latest on what's going on next. hey! this'll help. rocket mortgage® by quicken loans® makes the complex simple. there's also origination fees and... this takes care of it, thank you. yeah. understand the details and get approved in as few as eight minutes. and it's time to get outside. pack in even more adventure with audible.

with the largest selection of audiobooks. audible lets you follow plot twists off the beaten track. or discover magic when you hit the open road. with the free audible app, your stories go wherever you do. and for just $14.95 a month you get a credit, good for any audiobook. if you don't like it exchange it any time. no questions asked. you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. so take audible with you this summer... on the road... on the trail... or to the beach. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. no matter where you go this summer make it better with audible. text summer5 to 500500 to start listening today. 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.

we need to help more tocalifornians get ahead.d, that's why antonio villaraigosa brought both parties together to balance the state budget with record investments in public schools... and new career training programs. as mayor of la, he brought police and residents together to get illegal guns off the streets and keep kids out of gangs, and on the right path. that's antonio villaraigosa. a governor for all of california. organizers say 17 more central american moigts have been selected for asylum processing after being part of the so-called caravan of migrants on the u.s. border with mexico.

most say the organizers are mothers and their children. cnn's leyla santiago has been with the marchers practically from the beginning. she joins us now. what kind of movement is happening in the line for processing these asylum seekers? >> reporter: we've certainly seen more movement today than we did yesterday or the previous days as they stood in line right up to the door before they were stopped by customs and border patrol, claiming they did not have capacity to process these asylum claims. so today -- yesterday, rather, they took in a small group. today they've taken a few small groups. we believe the total to be around 28 total migrants from this caravan now being processed. when i say processed, that means they will now have a series of interviews in which they will have to prove credible fear before they move forward in the process to seek asylum in the united states of america, a process that can take weeks in many cases, months before they have any sort of conclusion. >> you've been with this caravan

now for, i think, nearly a month now. has anyone that you've been talking to made it into processing? >> reporter: we actually do know several of the people who have made it. in particular, we have been following one mother, she is a pregnant mother of two. she's got a 2-year-old as well as a 6-year-old. her name is gabriella. i have seen her as she's been on a bus for more than 50 hours, as she has climbed her way up onto a freight train on a mound of scrap metal where her children have even had cuts as a result. i've seen her sleep on shelter floors at night, had problems of sickness for herself as a pregnant woman as well as her two children. she was actually one of the first to make it in. what i was told is that the border patrol officer came out, said, we can take eight people. the organizers said, can you give us a little more clarification as to who you want?

and he said in order to avoid chaos, women and children. that's when the migrants themselves chose the first eight that would go in. and from what some of the migrants told me, they said, gabriella, go. so she was among the first to go inside to seek asylum. she said she is fleeing honduras because of violence. i have spoken to her relatives today. they have not heard from her yet, so chances are -- it's a bit difficult to track for right now, but she's likely still in detention waiting for her moment to speak to an asylum officer and make her claims. >> leyla santiago, thank you very much. up next, more on the breaking news that the special counsel robert mueller raised the possibility of a subpoena in a tense meeting with the president's legal team. details ahead. (baby crying) ♪ ♪ don't juggle your home life and work life without it. ♪ ♪ and don't forget who you're really working for without it.

♪ ♪ funding to help grow your business... ♪ ♪ another way we have your back. ♪ ♪ the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. gacan start in the colon, n, and diarrhea the powerful backing of american express. and may be signs of an imbalance of good bacteria. only phillips' colon health has this unique combination of probiotics. it helps replenish good bacteria. get four-in-one symptom defense.

no one burns heon my watch! try alka seltzer... ultra strength heartburn relief chews. with more acid-fighting power than tums chewy bites. mmmmm...amazing. i have heartburn. heartburn relief from alka-seltzer. enjoy the relief. ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun transitions™

light under control™ ♪ he eats a bowl of hammers at every meal ♪ ♪ he holds your house in the palm of his hand ♪ ♪ he's your home and auto man ♪ big jim, he's got you covered ♪ ♪ great big jim, there ain't no other ♪ -so, this is covered, right? -yes, ma'am. take care of it for you right now. giddyup! hi! this is jamie. we need some help. "i have antivirus, but my computer's still slow..." "i think it's time for the fixmestick." fixmestick is a plug-in virus removal device. it's the smart, simple way to clean an infected computer, with a whole lot going on inside the stick... [computers sound] "this one got around the antivirus software!" "not a problem." "we're on it." and because it connects to the internet, fixmestick it's always up to date.