one student from new hampshire who wrote her a letter. she had no idea of the power she had to inspire. >> remember we said he wanted to swipe with us. can i introduce mr. colly sweeny from downtown youth boxing program in detroit, michigan. >> i'm so honored to meet him, meet someone who changes lives every day. >> to see the full story of the surprise or nominate someone you think should be a cnn hero, go to cnn heroes.com. that's it for us tonight. thanks for watching. >> good evening. quite a day. even more than most. keeping them honest, at the end of it, we are left even more than most days, with fresh evidence the white house is being neither truthful nor transparent with a country nor it seems concerned about transparency or the truth.

some of the key stories we've been told by the president and his people have now shifted. some of what we have been told we now know is untrue. many of those lives reveal how little we know about the president of the united states and how much was hidden from view when people elected him. last night you may remember the new attorney rudy guiliani and changed the official story on stormy daniels and the firing of fbi director comey. on daniels, he admitted the president had, in fact, repaid attorney michael cohen the money he used for a hush agreement with daniels. on comey, giuliani gave a brand-new justification for his firing. oh, he possibly exposed his clients and old friend to greater jeopardy. in addition he called jared kushner using his word disposable and ivanka trump untouchable. this morning he promised that three americans held captive in korea will be returning home today. even though he has no role today or necessarily the security clearance. at the same time, mayor guiliani doubled down on stormy daniels and tried to spin this as a new white house legal strategy, even

though we have new reporting tonight from our gloria borger than other people of the legal team are, and this is not a legal term, freaking out. the legal team felt blindsided by mayor guiliani. meantime the president weighed in with series of legalistic sounding and un-trump sounding, yet potentially self--damaging tweets on stormy daniels admitting for the first time he repaid michael cohen for making the hush agreement and more likely michael cohen's claim he did this all on his own without the president's knowledge, nothing to do about the election, could possibly be true. then at the white house briefing this afternoon, press secretary sarah sanders gave a series of non-responder answers she told little or nothing about. >> will you give the very best information we have at the time? again, we give the best information possible at the time and again i've given the best information i had at the time.

again i gave you the best information that i had. i gave you the best information that i had. again, i'm giving the best information i have, some information i am aware of and some i'm not. >> so she repeated that phrase as you see over and over instead of answering all the questions her boss and his new attorney prompted started last night about this about the $130,000 hush payment to stormy daniels that michael cohen allegedly made out of his pocket or facilitated in his own words, remember, until now we've been told by a variety of people that neither the trump organization nor the trump campaign had anything to do with it. here's what guiliani said last night on fox news, apparently to take the campaign off the table, even though it puts his clients deeper into the soup. see the look on sean hannity's face when rudy giuliani made those announcements on news. >> that money was not campaign money. sorry, i'm giving you a fact now that you don't know. it's not campaign money. no campaign finance violation.

>> so they funneled it through a law firm. >> funneled it through a law firm and the president repaid it. >> oh, i didn't know. >> he did. no campaign finance law, zero for the president. >> just like every -- sean, this was made by everybody? >> everybody was nervous about this from the very beginning. i wasn't. i knew how much money donald trump put into that campaign. i said $130,000? he can do a couple checks for $130,000. when i heard cohen's retainer of 35,000 when he was doing no work for the president. i said that's how he's repaying it, with a little profit and a little margin for paying taxes for michael. >> but do you know the president didn't know about this? i believe that's what michael had said. >> he didn't know about the specifics of it, as far as i know. but he did know about the general arrangement that michael would take care of things like this. >> notice, hannity didn't say, did the president know this? which is the kind of question

that the reporter would ask, now how he wanted the subject to answer. instead he said you know the president didn't know about this. guiliani doesn't say, of course the president didn't know about this, which is what cohen supporters have been saying all along. mr. guiliani says as far as he knew mr. trump didn't know about the specifics of it, but did know about the general arrangement that michael cohen would take care of things. a general arrangement to funnel money to cover up an alleged affair. the president knew about the general arrangement, for michael cohen, according to mr. giuliani, to take care of things. words that don't shout propriety, the word funnel in connection with financial wrong-doing is never a good choice. in any case, back in february, michael cohen denied any funneling took place. neither the trump organization nor the trump campaign was a party to the transaction with ms. clifford and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly. notice he never said anything about the president reimbursing him, even though the surrogates said he didn't know anything

about it. here's what the president said on air force one. >> did you know about the $130,000 payment to stormy daniels? >> no. >> why did michael cohen make it. >> michael's my attorney, and you have to ask michael. >> do you know where he got the money? >> no. >> the last statement, press statement vonn sieger says another lie is no longer operative. the morning the president fired of off a spring string of tweets, which sounded lawyerly a lot of commas, not an explaim claimation mark in sight. mr. cohen, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or nda. these agreements are very common among celebrities and people of wealth. in this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in arbitration for damages against ms. clifford daniels and her attorney. the alleged tweet continues, the

agreement was used to stop the false accusations about an alleged affair. this was a private agreement. money from the campaign or campaign contributions played no role in this transaction. so there it is, in addition to saying that this is all about rich and famous people stuff, the president is admitting for the first time he repaid michael cohen for the $130,000 cohen spent, or facilitated, as he first said back in the closing days of the campaign to buy stormy daniels' silence. the payments he and mayor guiliani referred to back year. yet today he told fox news this. >> the president indicates he understood it. he didn't know the details of it until we knew the details a couple weeks ago, maybe not two weeks ago, maybe ten days ago. >> according to mayor guiliani the president has been making monthly payments to michael cohen for months and months, previously, mr. guiliani said he

wasn't really doing any other legal work for him, but did not know the details until ten days ago. something else mayor giuliani said about the hush money was paid stands out. >> imagine if that came out on october 15th, 2016, in the middle of the last debate, cohen didn't even ask. cohen made it go away. he did his job. >> his job. just days after the "access hollywood" tape came out was keeping voters from knowing about stormy daniels' allegations. here's what so kind of stunning about that statement. all this time, michael conand and husband surrogates on tv have been saying this actually had nothing to do with the election. zero. a pure coincidence they say the deal was done less than two weeks before the election day. michael cohen said it could have been done months before, which has always clearly been not true, but now rudy giuliani confirmed it. quote, imagine that came out october 16th, in the middle of the last debate.

cohen did his job, he made it go away. we asked one of those questions we alluded to a moment ago on seeming inconsistencies, even now the white house with the story. he joins us now. you pressed sarah sanders on whether or not she knew about the president's reimbursement of the stormy daniels' repayment, what did she say? >> reporter: that's right, march 7th, she said in the briefing room. i had conversations with the president about this as i outlined earlier that this case has already been won in arbitration and that there was no knowledge of any payments from the president. he's denied all of these allegations. i simply asked sarah whether she was lying to us when she made that comment. here's what happened. >> why can't you answer yes or no whether you were in the dark. i think it's a fairly simple question. >> i think it's a fairly simple answer i have given you actually several times now. i gave you the best information they had. i will continue to do my best to do that every single day. >> reporter: now, of course, she didn't really answer the question as to whether or not she was left in the dark, but clearly she was left in the dark, anderson, if you want to

believe that sarah sanders was not lying to us a month ago. but you know i talked to a source close to the white house earlier today, who is normally pretty defensive of sarah's performance in the briefing room. this person said look this was absolutely brutal. you don't need a source inside the white house or outside the white house to tell you this. you need your own eyes and ears. it was a performance that the president may not care about, because he may not care very much about whether or not we get the facts or the truth from the white house press secretary. but the rest of the country is relying on the white house press secretary to do just that. we didn't get that today or a month ago. >> at the very least if she wasn't actually lying or actually, you know, being untruthful, she's not very well informed or doesn't ask questions of the president or isn't able to ask direct questions of the president or thinks it's better not to. >> reporter: that's right. and this is my fourth press secretary i've dealt with.

i've dealt with jay carney, josh ernest, josh spicer. now sarah sanders. here's the problem, anderson, when you as a white house press secretary begin to lose the faith and trust of the reporters in that room, it is very difficult for you to continue to do that job. as i was watching sarah's performance today, it felt as if her credibility was crumbling right before our eyes. if the best answer she had today was well, i'm giving you the best information i have, i think our viewers are smart enough to figure out at home, that's not exactly telling us the truth. it calls into question this day forward and calls into question a lot of things she said in the past as to whether or not she's giving us the straight story. that is why, not only did she reveal this during the briefing today that she found out about this last night, this repayment last night. but we heard from a slew of white house officials all over the white house that they were simply blindsided by all of this. they didn't see this coming. they didn't know what rudy guiliani was up to. >> this wasn't something that

the white house approved in advance? rudy giuliani is going to go out, this is the new strategy? >> reporter: there were some indications that rudy designed this rollout with the president. he has been saying things of that nature with our own reporters, including our own dana bash. here's the question, anderson, why would giuliani, in addition to rolling out that information refer to agents as storm troopers? why would he describe jared kushner the president's son-in-law as disposable. there were a lot of things he said no communications expert, or white house press secretary would ever want the president's lawyer to say. so, of course, this is obviously another situation where the gang can't shoot straight and they certainly weren't shooting straight with us earlier today. >> jim acosta. thanks very much. more now on the legal ramifications of the daniel case, and a lot more, full docket. stormy daniels' attorney,

michael avenatti will be joining us shortly. joining us jeffrey toobin and former white house lawyer jim schultz. jeff, first of all the thing that rudy giuliani said that surprised me besides the president did repay, which we all kind of knew he must have. although, that's not something that went public and michael cohen seemed to indicate that wasn't the case, is that rudy giuliani clearly said, imagine the damage this would have done -- he didn't say this. it was 11 days before the campaign if it happened in the middle of the debate, rudy giuliani says that flies in the face exactly what michael cohen and his supporters said all along. it had nothing to do with the campaign. >> this is extremely incriminating what giuliani said about this payment. because the issue. the legal issue surrounding this, putting aside the moral issue of the entire white house lying about this for weeks. the legal issue is whether this was a campaign expenditure. and the article, the argument that's been put out so far is that even though this sexual encounter took place ten years earlier and had been released in a tabloid five years earlier,

it's just a big coincidence that in october before the election, that's when it was -- >> michael cohen said that all along, i could have done this months ago, years ago. >> exactly. giuliani put the lie to that. giuliani made the mistake of telling the truth about that, which is of course this was designed to help the trump campaign. that's legally significant. because that money then becomes campaign expenditure, which was neither reported by donald trump on his own personal expenditures, which he is required to do or by michael cohen, who is also obliged to report campaign contributions. so rudy giuliani, by mistakenly telling the truth about the timing here, put both trump and cohen in bigger trouble. >> but can't the president argue cleverly that, well, look, i wasn't paying michael cohen this $130,000 for this deal, i was giving him a retainer for unspecified legal work.

he has a wide portfolio to deal with i guess unsavory stuff that i don't want to know about. so i give him this monthly retainer. >> you can argue that. it's not credible. if it's also innocent, why did they set up this, you know, this after the fact retainer? why didn't he just write him a check? the atmosphere of suspicion and the fact that they've lied about it for weeks and weeks certainly suggests that they knew they were doing something wrong and they were. >> jim, do you have any doubt that this was done with the election in mind? this agreement was signed 11 days before, rudy giuliani said. >> there is no indication the outcome may have been it kept it out of the public realm out of the election season. >> you think that's just a coincidence? >> in the legal sense of this, the outcome might have been that. this was a personal expenditure. this is no different -- i go

back to this all the time. the john edwards case, where payments were made to take care of a campaign staffer whose child john edwards had fathered. the fec took a pass on that. said these aren't the type of gifts that need to be reported because they're personal in nature, right? >> right. >> then it went to the doj. >> there are two differences with that. i believe, if memory serves me correct, john edwards payment was done about a year before the election and also there was a child involved who needed support and you could make the argument that that's what that money was for. it was not, and that's probably what the jury believed, it was not to influence the election. >> or to keep it away from his wife or his other family members. no different than here. and rudy giuliani said, these types of -- are the types of things that michael cohen does and gets paid for. kind of alluding to the fact this is something he does when accusations happen, he takes care of them. that's a part of his job.

if he has a pattern and practice of dealing with those types of issues in the past, outside of the election cycle, i think it lends to the credibility of a legal argument that these are just personal expenditures. period. >> a, what does it say if have you to have a full time lawyer whose portfolio is non-disclosure agreements, hush payments to porn stars? >> like rudy said last night, he said last night, the celebrities do this all the time. right. they have a -- >> they have full time lawyers -- >> to deal with this when accusations are made. >> they are on retainer? >> that's what giuliani said. to the extent that that's a necessary thing for someone to have and the payments need to be made, that doesn't mean, i'm dealing with the fec issue here. i don't believe there is an fec case here. >> you don't think it benefitted the campaign?

it may have had the benefit of the company, and i think that's what giuliani is getting at. but the fact of the matter is, it was a personal payment for a personal issue. >> if this was just an innocent expenditure that celebrities do, why did trump lie about it? why did cohen lie about it? why did sarah sanders, who presumably was just told false information, why was everybody lying about something if the whole thing was so innocent? >> because people don't want this in the public domain, the reason is you have reputational issues. it doesn't have to be a campaign expenditures. >> the reputational issue had already been awe nouns -- announced. everybody knew that she had been paid this money. so the reputational issue was already out there. the question was who paid the money. so why didn't they say immediately? well, we reimbursed them. instead they engaged in this incredible series of lies. >> if the reputational damage was so much, why didn't you know eight years ago michael cohen

said i should arrange for this nondisclosure agreement with stormy daniels and lock that down so that this never gets out in the public realm? it just so happens it's like 11 days before the election? oh, yeah, i had forgotten about that. >> she had threatened to come forward at that time. i'm sure other people threatened in the past. from what rudy giuliani said. if that's the case, solely the fec issue here. certainly there are credibility issues here that need to be repaired. as it relates to the fec issue, i don't think the legal jeopardy question that you're talking about exists. >> let's leave it there. i appreciate it. coming up next, stormy daniels attorney michael avenatti weighs in. later the reality of three americans still helped e held captive in north america as we await shortly for their release. heartburn!

no one burns on 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. with expedia, you can book a flight, hotel, car, and activity... ...all in one place.

everything you need to go. expedia [ 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. handcrafted layers of clean food you can give your kids. tomatoes. even the picky ones. panera. food as it should be. now delivered. 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. our next guest tonight, safe to say watched rudy giuliani with more than a little interest. michael avenatti, as you know represents stormy daniels. he squared off against michael cohen. and so far has had plenty to say about each new development in the case, including mayor giuliani's statement about the president repaying michael cohen for the hush money to miss daniels. avenatti joins us now. how in your penalties, we were talking about whether it was damaging for rudy giuliani to say that michael cohen did this because can you imagine if the attack would have been in the last date before the election. >> well, i think it's incredibly

damaging. i think it's a shocking admission by rudy giuliani, namely that he has admitted the exact opposite of what has been said time and time again over the last four months. the american people, whether it be by michael cohen, david schwartz on this show many times, individuals associated with the white house, the president, himself, there is no question this was done in connection with the campaign. no question about it. >> does it make sense to you -- i mean, we don't know, what is not clear from the white house or from rudy giuliani is when mr. trump allegedly knew about this agreement. they're saying, essentially, he was paying a retainer on an ongoing basis for months to michael cohen, but may not have known about the details until ten days ago. >> well, that doesn't make any sense, anderson, because we filed our case in the first week

of march. so there is no question that he would have had to have known about the allegation or the payment as of that date. let's back up even before that. the "wall street journal" did their article i think in late january or sometime in february, relating to the disclosure of the agreement and the $130,000. so i can't imagine he didn't know about it at that time. then you also look at the statement by and i think you put it up for your audience earlier the statement by michael cohen about facilitating the payment where he denied being reimbursed by the trump organization. >> or the campaign. >> or the campaign. we've talked about that before. i pointed out i thought it was interesting at the time it did not include mr. trump. it appears that at the time that statement was drafted, there was an agreement in place relating to reimbursement or reimbursement had already occurred, because otherwise it's just too, it's too much of a coincidence to allow that carve out. >> giuliani is essentially arguing the president has given his attorney, michael cohen, kind of an extended general authorization just to deal with

anything, i guess, in this realm. is that standard operating procedure for some wealthy clients? >> i've never heard of such a thing. as you know, i practice in los angeles, i've been involved in a number of celebrity cases on both sides, plaintiff and defendant. i'm not aware of another high profile individual that had an attorney on retainer and provided that attorney with a slush fund to pay women that come out of the woodwork that accuse that individual of extramarital affairs. this, the whole idea of this story, namely, that you have somebody that came out of the woodwork a couple weeks before the election, according to them, that was not credible, that was a complete liar, and they just threw $130,000 at her to make her go away so that he could win the election, even though they knew she wasn't telling the truth is a bunch of nonsense. >> you said all along regarding the non-disclosure agreement, the hush agreement that it would

have been unethical for michael cohen to have entered into that with the llc he set up without the president being informed at the very least about it. even though the president didn't sign. if you believe that, do you believe it would have been unethical for michael cohen to be in charge of this, you know, to have this portfolio to deal with these kind of cases without ever informing donald trump like, oh, you know, that stormy daniels thing told you about. i settled it. it was done, it was $130,000. >> i'm going to call it what it is, if it's true, which is a slush fund. i believe it would be unethical for michael cohen to be administering the extra marital affairs slush fund and not telling donald trump on a consistent basis as to how those moneys were being paid and what they were being paid for. >> earlier today, there was a report, nbc saying federal investigators have wiretapped the phone lines of michael

cohen. they issued a correction saying they had a phone log for phones associated with michael con. you were on nbc. you said it wasn't just wiretaps, also, they were reading mr. cohen's text messages? do you know for a fact that they were reading mr. cohen's text messages? >> i know that separate and apart independently from the reporting. i want to be clear. >> nbc says they were not wiretapping the phones. do you still believe they were? >> there is a difference. when you conduct electronic monitoring of communication, you have to get authorization to do e-mail. a separate authorization for text message. a third authorization in order to conduct a wiretap of audio communications the nbc reporting dealt with audio communications. i already had knowledge to the first two. the e-mail and the text messages. i know that was going on for a fact. >> earlier, you said you were getting closer to the revelations coming out. we still haven't gotten to the bottom of this. can you elaborate? >> well, i want to be careful on what i say. there is a considerable amount of evidence that will come to light in connection with this case. i think that's one of the reasons why you saw mr. giuliani

appear on a very friendly show, on a very friendly network to get out in front of some of this, because they knew it was only a matter of time that either we were going to reveal it or the u.s. attorneys or investigators from sdny were going to reveal details relating to this. i mean, this was a bombshell. i know i've used that term a number of times, but it continues to be the dropping of bombshells in this case. i mean, i could not imagine, i was shocked when mr. giuliani made these admissions last night. i was doubly shocked when he followed it up this morning and did himself and mr. trump more harm this morning. >> why do you think he did more harm this morning? >> he tightened this up as it relates to the election. last night on sean hannity, he did not tie it up as clearly some would hope. this morning, lo and behold he gave the reference to the last debate in the october time frame of the election. he tightened it up better than we probably ever could. >> michael avenatti. thank you very much. will the special counsel call

ivanka trump in for questioning? she's the president's adviser and daughter and executive in his company. she no doubt knows a lot, but a new report says that the mueller team may be holding off her questioning for now the strange thing that rudy giuliani said about it. connected. litary families then momma ninja asked her littlest baby ninja, did you finish your dinner? so in honor of military appreciation month... active duty and veterans get half off select samsung galaxy phones. you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray relieves 6 symptoms... claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. -i think it'll look really: good without the stripes. whatever your home may hand you, behr through it, in one coat. behr marquee, #1 rated interior paint. find it exclusively at the home depot.

does your business internet provider promise a lot? let's see who delivers more. comcast business gives you gig-speed in more places. the others don't. we offer up to 6 hours of 4g wireless network backup. everyone else, no way. we let calls from any of your devices come from your business number. them, not so much. we let you keep an eye on your business from anywhere. the others? nope! get internet on our gig-speed network and add voice and tv for $34.90 more per month. call or go on line today. as the special counsel's investigation continues, there is a name that hasn't come up much, which is ivanka trump. she's not just the president's

daughter, she's his adviser and played a key role in the trump organization. an article in politico suggests the mueller team may be holding back on calling her in for questioning for now because they're waiting for the last possible moment, knowing the president will not take it well if they called her in as a witness. rudy giuliani was asked about the idea of the mueller team targeting ivanka trump in any way, and here's what he said. >> if they do do ivanka, which i doubt they will, the whole country will turn on him. >> what about his son-in-law? they talked about him? >> jared is a fine man. you know that. but men are you know disposable. but a fine woman like ivanka, c'mon. >> with me is jennifer rogers and michael d'antonio. do you think hearing rudy giuliani saying that, do you think that's a warning to special counsel mueller or a statement of his belief in. >> i think it's a little of both.

i think they want to get this notion out there that it's beyond bounds to go after the family and you know i think hannity said something like i fear for our country or something like that. i think they are starting this narrative this is out of bounds and they shouldn't go there. i think they are trying to lay things down for what they want to happen. >> michael d'antonio, ivanka trump's role in the organization can't be overstated. right? >> no, she knows just about everything that's been on for at least ten years, maybe 20. this is a person who has been closer to donald trump i think than anyone for longer. she knows far more than the president's wife knows about his activities of all sorts. so this is a huge step for the special counsel to consider. it's also an example of how the president likes to have everything every which way. so he will have someone be in his administration sort of in the trump organization sort of, but also in his family. >> you think ivanka trump knows

more than the first lady knows? >> by far, by far, yes. she's had an office in the trump organization her whole adult life. and has been involved in projects abroad, projects in the united states, her own businesses, the furnishings and fashion lines. so this is someone who knows everything. >> jennifer, michael talks about the president wanting to have it both ways. on the one hand, ivanka is his daughter, and, you know, family members, children, usually would not be sort of discussed in the media as ivanka trump is, but she also has a role in the white house. she has an office. she's moved there along with jared kushner. so she is a player in the political life of the president. >> she is. i mean, you know, an adult child who was present for important matters might actually be called as a witness. she's not necessarily off limits just because she, you know, if she didn't have a role. but the fact that she does have a role means a couple things.

one she's more within bounds of what people would think it's reasonable for the special counsel to do. it means she's more likely to have actually been a participant in these meetings. we know she was present for some of the pont matters here. they have a reason to call her to hear what she has to say. >> do you think she is vulnerable in that sense? >> well, i think she is. i think it's interesting to notice the complex role that she has played. she was sent to korea for the olympics. she was in europe for the diplomatic meetings. this is a person who has almost been a cover for the president. she emerges when he needs someone to make him look good. look softer. and what mr. giuliani was talking about, how she's sort of untouchable because the american people love her is sort of the intent all along. i wonder now if this wasn't part of the reason why the president wanted to keep her close. >> jennifer, does it make sense to you that rudy giuliani called

jared kushner disposable? >> i do not know what that means at all. blood relatives, are your closest relatives of course. there are reasons he can expect ivanka to be more loyal than jared would be. one thing is of course they are related the other is jared has legal exposure that ivanka doesn't have, at least as far as we know. i can see why jared would be more disposable than ivanka, but to say men are more disposable than women, i can't say i know what that was about. >> thank you, coming up, some conservative lawmakers are seeking access to the files in the russia investigation. in order to share that with the white house. i'll talk with members of the white house intelligence committee next. ry thing. your out with the old in with the new, onto bigger and better thing. get the live tv you love. no bulky hardware.

no satellite. no annual contract. try directv now for $10/mo for 3 months. more for your thing. that's our thing. visit directvnow dot com broccabbage! beans! get your vegetables without a side of gas. the activated charcoal in charcocaps adsorbs gas for fast gas relief, without passing the gas. charcocaps. put less boom in the room. 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.

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. there was a remarkable story tucked away in the "new york times" last night about deputy attorney general rod rosenstein,

as you know he and members of the house freedom caucus are reportedly squaring off. some want to impeach him. they say he and the justice department refused to turn of key information on a timely basis. they suggest a motive for mr. rosenstein's reluctance and its pure hard-ball politics. according to "time's" rosenstein and officials suspect some lawmakers are using oversight authority to gain information about the investigation and funneling it, that verb again, to the white house. joining me to talk about this is democratic congressman, eric swalwell, a member of the house intelligence committee. congressman, are you aware of house republicans sharing information they received from the department of justice regarding the russia probe with the white house? >> good evening, anderson. this is certainly something we have seen in the past. you know, the origin of it was when devin nunes went to the white house, of course, the day after comey testified. the memo that they wrote was

asking the justice department for information to sign off on information about an ongoing investigation. the fisa warrant for carter page. the concern i had there was you were reading in individuals who were subject to an investigation and giving them the authority to sign off on what would be released. when we were interviewing steve bannon, we were very concerned that steve bannon's lawyer had been receiving the transcript of his testimony and then taking it back to the white house, because he also represents don mcgahn, the white house counsel. now you see the republicans in congress who are essentially acting as mr. trump's fixers in congress by trying to obstruct mr. rosenstein's investigation by asking for information about an ongoing investigation. anderson, you know it is long standing protocol in our country, you do not tell anyone about the details about an ongoing investigation because you don't want to jeopardize it. >> do you think it's appropriate to who would -- with hold documents from congress, but not

necessarily hard evidence? >> yes. i think it's appropriate that only the investigators know about the evidence in the case. i would say that whether it was a republican or democratic investigation. you don't want witnesses to have information about the case. so they kind of cook up a story or tailor their answers to what they know is already out there. you saw this with rudy giuliani coming forward last night on hannity. it looks like they knew that a wiretap was out in place. so they started being more forthcoming about why donald trump was so involved with the stormy daniels' payoff. so when witnesses know the information that investigates have, then they start to either destroy evidence or change their stories. >> the "new york times" has also reported the democrats fear that the question for documents is a trap. either rosenstein hands over everything, and allies, or he denies the request and that can be used as cover to fire him. do you believe that? >> i do think the effort is to get information in the hands of the president and his team.

who are under investigation. or to just do all they kind to give donald trump the cover to fire rod rosenstein. both are obstructive behavior the best thing is to put in place the bipartisan legislation just passed in the judiciary committee in the senate that would protect bob mueller and his team so we can get to the bottom of this. and the whole country can move past this russia mess that the president has gotten us in. >> congress is supposed to provide oversight of the justice. is the relationship salvageable? >> it is. it's not salvageable, though, with devin nunes as the house intelligence committee and it won't be salvageable if he continues to undermine the investigation. anderson, this is about the rule of law. of course we want to have oversight on privacy as it relates to fisa warrants. of course we want to know the department of justice is not violating anyone's rights. but we never have done this during an ongoing investigation.

so i can only view it as just an effort to undermine his work and if republicans care about the rule of law, they will step back and understand that there are greater principles at stake here than the president at the white house. >> you talk about rudy giuliani, on "hannity" last night, his exposure that he paid back stormy daniels -- michael cohen on the stormy daniels. what's the one thing this jump a -- jumps out. today he seemed to indicate this was to do with the election. >> well, one, it shows me donald trump is not being straight with the american people. two, that he's willing to act as a shadowy operator. i don't give a rip about what happened with ms. daniels, the real involvement around the russians, whether, personally, politically or financially f. he wasn't straight, i think we can conclude he's probably acted in a shadowy way, in an operative way in payoffs with other individuals around what's happened with russia.

so he should sit down in bob mueller's chair, come straight with the american people, so we can move beyond. >> thank you so much. just ahead, three americans detained in north korea, will actually be released. there were conflicting messages coming from the president's team. we'll tell you about that and get a reality check from the region. heartburn! no one burns on 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.

gacan start in the colon, n, and diarrhea 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. ♪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™

the fate of the three americans detained in north korea remains in question. freedom was close at hand. today in fact he said. >> and we got kim jong-un impressed enough to release three prisoners today. >> when sarah sanders was asked about it at the press briefing. they can't confirm the validity of the reports. he doesn't have a white house job.

the how and why mr. giuliani was talking about north korea at all came up in today's press briefing. >> watching us talking with giuliani about the north korean prisoners, given that he doesn't have a high level clearance? >> i'm not aware they spoke about that. so no. >> was he aware that giuliani was going to be talking about it on tv? >> again, i'm not aware of that. >> what the president himself tweeted last night about three americans. as everyone is aware, the past administration has been asking for three hostages to be released from a north korean labor camp to no avail. stay tuned. it sounds good, but it doesn't make a lot of sense. two hostages were taken during this president's administration. >> we talked about the prisoners in north korea, you said the previous administration had failed to get them out. two of them were taken prisoner

while donald trump was president. >> when it comes to north korea, i think could you also look at otto warmbier who was detained during a previous administration, as was one of the current detainees, that would reflect the president's comments that he made. >> otto warmbier, who returned to the u.s. in a vegetative state and died weeks later. where does that leave things with the current american prisoners. that is the most important thing after all. paula, do we know anything concrete about the current status of the three americans in north korea? >> anderson, what we know is from officials who are actually dealing with this ongoing negotiation, and they say that the release of the three detainees is imminent. they don't give any more specific timing than that. the word they use is imminent. they also say this has been months in the making. the north korean foreign minister went to sweden back in march.

sweden handles all the diplomatic issues for the u.s. with north korea. he proposed they release these three detainees. at that point officials said they didn't want to be linked to denuclearization. but beyond that, the official says they can't confirm these reports. these three have been moved from labor correctional facilities, closer to the capitol, ready for release, it's difficult to get any kind of clarification on that. >> do we know, have their families been notified of anything happening? >> the families know nothing at this point, we've been in touch with them, and they have said that they've heard nothing new. in recent days and weeks they've been hopeful thinking if this summit between president donald trump and kim jong-un is going to go ahead. there is a very good chance that these three detainees could be released as what the white house and the state department have called a potential good will gesture.

they're hopeful, but they have heard nothing today. nothing specific about timing. and clearly this would be very difficult for them. >> has there been any more clarification of where rudy giuliani got the information that kim jong-un was releasing three prisoners today. >> there's no clarification from the korean peninsula. this information did not come from here, but the fact is, even the white house and the state department say they couldn't clarify or confirm that statement as well. so there are some heads being scratched at the moment, trying to figure out what kind of timing that was. usually in this situation, you would get more of an indication and more of a word of mouth that something was about to happen, which we simply haven't had today. >> has there been any reaction from the north korean regime, publicly? >> there's been no reaction whatsoever. we did hear from kim jong-un on thursday. he met with the chinese foreign minister and talking about his firm position is

denuclearization. this was all through the foreign ministry in china. he didn't mention detainees at all. we've heard nothing from the north korean side. and it's unknown how they would take this kind of speculation as well. >> paula, thanks very much. back in washington, an update to a story we brought you last week. the house chaplin is getting to keep his job after all. he rescinded his resignation house speaker paul ryan says he can stay. ryan asked him to step down last month for reasons that are still a mystery aside some type of feedback. lawmakers questioned the request for him to step down. ryan sent his chief of staff to ask for his resignation. and the chief of staff said maybe we have a chaplin that wasn't a catholic. the chief of staff disagrees with conroy's recollection of the decision. he says he'll sit down with conroy earlier this week so we can move forward for the good of the whole house. giuliani throws the rest of

president trump's legal team into some disarray. more on the hush money from michael cohen when we continue. delivery should look like this. crisp leaves of lettuce, freshly-made dressing. clean food that looks this good, eaten at your desk. panera. food as it should be. now delivered.

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? -i think it'll look really: good without the stripes. whatever your home may hand you, behr through it, in one coat.

behr marquee, #1 rated interior paint. find it exclusively at the home depot. claritin and relief from of non-drowsy symptoms caused by over 200 allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity and live claritin clear. if you have moderate to severe or psoriatic arthritis, 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 differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. 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. ♪ 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. the president's new lawyer