thank you for joining us. you can watch "outfront" any time anywhere just go to cnn go. anderson cooper with ac 360 starts right now. good evening. cap several days of combative tweets. one of them contained a newly published letter from two of his lawyers. put it go all together, paints a picture of a president perhaps getti getting ready to test the power of the law. declared he has the absolute right to pardon himself despite

doing nothing wrong. the spark might have come over the weekends with "the new york times," quote that would. about the trump tower meeting back in june 2016. the key passage reads you have all of the notes. communications and testimony indicating that the president dictated a short butt accurate response to "new york times" article. it was misleading as was the

story about the story. it aligned that jay sekulow repeatedly put out there. the president dictated a short but accurate response and watch what they said back then. >> that was written by donald trump jr. and i am sure in consolidation with his lawyer. the president didn't sign off on anything. the statement that was released on saturday was released by donald trump jr. and i am sure in consultation with his lawyers. the president wasn't involved in that. the president did not draft the response. the response came from donald trump jr. and i am sure in consultation with his lawyer. let me say th, the president, i do want to be clear, the president was not involved in the drafting of the statement and did not issue the statement, it came from donald trump jr. >> a couple of weeks later sarah

sanders obscured the president's role. >> he weighed in like any father would do. >> sent to robert mueller's team which would be the events. straight to the question rob bu bert mueller is seeking to answer. mr. mueller is not talking about it. neither was sarah sanders in her on role in misleading the public >> entirely defereifferent how e to know what to believe. >> once again i can't comment on a letter from the president's outside counsel and i direct you to them to answer them. >> you said he did not dictate.

and then you said he did, what is it? >> i can't respond to a letter. i would refer you to them for comment. >> she also had to answer, or tried to, with two other later tweets. here is the first tweet as has been stated as numerous legal dolla scholars, i have the right to pardon myself. then about an hour later, he tweeted quote, the appointment of the special counsel is totally unconstitutional. this was also sarah sanders here talking about it today. ews on the point clear.ad his i don't have anything to add. >> her answer was in response to

hypocrisy. >> if i win, i am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. there has never been so many lies, so much deception and we are going to have a special prosecutor and look into it because you know what, people, their lives have been destroyed for doing one-fifth of what you have done. >> it comes from a piece from the "wall street journal" who argues that mr. mueller could not conduct a broad investigation because he was never confirmed by the senate. we will take it up with jeff

toobin and allanshowitz. alexander hamilton in the federal pages said yes. >> when the president does it, that means it is not illegal. >> sarah sanders meantime had a lot to say about the president pardoning himself for doing nothing wrong. nothing whatsoever. >> thankfully the president hasn't done anything wrong and wouldn't have any need for a pardon. >> does he rule out ever issuing a pardon for himself. >> once again, thankfully the president hasn't done anything wrong and wouldn't need one. and once again, the president hasn't done anything wrong and

we feel comfortable in that front. >> does the presidentieve he is above the law. >> certainly no one is above the law. >> he said in his tweet that he has the right to pardon himself. does he assume that special counsel will find him guilty of something. >> because he hasn't done anything wrong. >> she said it again and again, what she did not do was rule out the president pardoning himself. some republican lawmakers seem to be unimpressed by that idea. ed states and i had a lawyer the that said i could pardon myself, i would hire a new lawyer. >> the framers of the constitution did not want a king. >> joining us is jeffrey toobin and professor allenershz.

di inact dictate that letter about the trump tower meeting. >> it is enormously significant for two reasons. first of all, by putting out a false statement, it is more evidence in an attempt to obstruct justice. perhaps even more significant is that it relates to the collusion investigation, you know, alan and others have spent a lot of time saying, if that is the case, why did the president feel obligated to lie about his campaign's relationship with russia if he thought it was all appropriate, he should have just told the truth. because he knew it was wrong, he showed consciousness of guilt by lying about what went on. >> professor dershowitz?

>> absolutely inappropriate. but there is a difference between inappropriate and criminal for something to be crimin criminal, it has to be in the criminal statute book. i don't think that a president necessarily has the power to pardon himself. it is clearly on a blank slate. nobody should be saying either that the president clearly has a power to pardon himself or the president don't have the power. we don't know the answer to the question and probably never find it out. >> what about the writing of the letter basically, not true or certainly misleading explanation of what that trump tower junior meeting was about. >> well, you know, i really do think that the president has to get his narrative straight and has to have his lawyers tell a

consistent and truthful story. i think lying is evidence of a crime. lying can be evidence of feelings of guilt. but lying itself is not a crime unless it is done to law enforcement official. it is dangerous that we have a statute on the books which i have disproved of over the years to make it lying. civil libertarians have been opposed to 10011. that would be a bridge too far. but it is evidence of consciousness of guilt and if there were a crime and i don't believe that the president can be charged for exercising his constitutional authority, of course the president can obstruct justice if he tells

under-lings to lie to the fbi. nobody says the president can't be charged with obstruction of justice. can he be charged for simply firing or pardoning people. i think the answer to that is no. >> why sarah sanders would come out and say somethi that is not true. either they wouldn't know it is untrue. or they knew and they lied. >> i think the former is much more likely than the later. i don't believe that jay sekulow just lied repeatedly on television because he felt like it. i think and alan knows this as a defense attorney. and clients lie to their lawyers all the time. it is embarrassing for jay sekulow to have those quotes out there. it is garbage in, garbage out.

he was told lies and he repeated them. other investigators have been interviewed about what went on in air force one in the preparation for that statement. they realize that their client has lied and they have to get r story out. >> it is more than embarrassing to the president's lawyers. if a president's lawyer lies to the fbi in a letter and does that knowingly and intentionally, that can be a crime in and of itself. so i am convinced that jeffrey toobin is rights that the president's lawyers did not know that the president dictated this statement if he dictated the statement. none of us know today what the reality is. we have conflicting stories and if i was a lawyer for a client, i would not tolerate conflicting stories being out there in this way. it makes the legal team and the client look terrible.

>> same thing coming from this president which is people in the white house who are defending what the president is doing and they don't know the full story either. sarah sanders either she lied or she wasn't informed just like the night comey was fired. >> it all comes from the client, it comes from the president. poor sarah sanders used the word dictate. i don't think sarah sanders went out there so she would be embarrassed months later. i think she was lied to and she is now stuck in an embarrassing position. >> i think the psident overstated it today when he said the appointment of special counsel is clearly unconstitutional. i don't see any basis. it may be constitutionally permissible for the president to fire somebody but he overstates

it when he says the appointment itself of the special counsel is unconstitutional. i think he was right the first time during th d saying he would appoint a special counsel. unconstitutional agains little bit stretched. >> that is gentle alan. >> steven calbrazzi thinks that. >> i appreciate it. both staying on the subject of pardons, dinesh d'souza, pardoned, his interview is next. also philadelphia eagles were

invited to the white house tomorrow. we'll tell you why the president changed his mind. i can do more to lower my a1c. and i can do it with what's already within me. becaus body can still make its ownnsulin. and once-weekly trulicity activates my body to release it. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen. it works trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults don't use it arstbetes when medicine teat diabetesxercise. or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, you're allergic to trulicity, or have multiple eocri neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms oaoualleic, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain.

serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney pro i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. if you have a garden, you know... weeds are low-down little scoundrels.

draw the line with roundup. the sure shot wand extends with a protective shield and target weeds more precisely, right down to the root. roundu trfor over 40 years. it's dead again. i need a new phone. and you deserve that new phone on the best network. verizon. oh, we're going? sure-- ehh, not my thing. (vo) noget t50% off our best phones. like the samsung galaxy s9 and google pixel 2. only on verizon. one second. barely enough time for this man to take a bite of turkey. but for cyber criminals it's plenty of time to launch thousands of attacks. luckily security analysts and watson are on his side. spotting threats faster and protectingata with the most securely encrypted main frame in the world. it's a smart way to eat lunch in peace. sweet, oblivious peace.

proven to protect street skaters and freestylers.o eat lunch in peace. stops up to 97% uv. lasts through heat. through sweat. coppertoneoven to protect. president trump made news this morning with the claim that he could pardon himself. he made news when he pardoned dinesh d'souza writing quote obama and his stooges tried to

distinguish my american dreams. he was found to be using straw donors to circumvent campaign laws. in a community confinement center. submit to drug testing and community service. and submit to counseling by a licensed therapist. thank you for being with us. i appreciate it. i want to ask you about the tweet that you wrote. what proof do you have that the obama administration tried, in your words to distinguish your . you said you knew what you were doing was against the law, correct? >> you have to lookt the context of this. just weeks before all of this

went down i released a movie in the theater, 2,000 theaters about ama. i was in kenya at his family homestead, i interviewed his brother in a slum in nairobi. it was an emotionally damaging to the president and the president was upset about it. he was regularly denouncing me on his website. a few weeks later the fbi comes banging on your door. i admit that i broke the law, and i demand that i receive the same penalties as everybody else who did what i did. nobody in american history has been locked up for doing what i did. some quid pro quo or somebody

recommitti commit repeat offense. i did sometng upsetting to a narcissistic president. >> you said this was selective prosecution. in court you never argued that. your attorneys were arguing complex legal technicalities. you offered no evidence. i read you said i never even said i am being selectively prosecuted. i feared i was. isn't it cut to argue selective prosecution on tv but not in court when you had the opportunity to make that argument? >> the full story is this, my lawyer went to the judge and asked him if we could have the

fbi file that had been compiled on me as well as the government file. there had been collusion, it would be in that filing. the judge who i clinton appointee judge said absolutely not. how is one going to find selective prosecution if the very documents containing evidence -- >> the judge said the onus was on you to actually show any evidence at all of any kind of selective prosecution and you did not do that. >> well, let me offer some evidence now because actually we have information now. >> in court is when it mattered. >> on tv is one thing to do it. >> anderson, how would i show evidence of selective prosecution when the evidence is contained in documents that are in the possession of the fbi that i have no access of it. >> that didn't stop you from going on tv and talking about it

at the time. at the time youere criticized by the judge in doing tv interviews >> at that tamime, i said i suspected it and now i know it. a congressional oversight committee has my feeling and some of it is redacted. it highlights me as a conservative and prominent -- why are my politics highlighted in my fbi file? the reason i suspect -- >> that is your evidence? >> no, the fbi is signaling to the justice department. look, we got one for you. you may want to go after this guy. >> wouldn't any complete fbi file, you are a prominent conservative, wouldn't fbi file.

>> anderson, if someone is compiling a file on somebody and particularly a file of political sensitivity and you want to be careful not to target people politically, why put this information -- >> that is the only evidence you have. >> no, there is actually more. there is actually more. the fbi decides early on at the very beginning to allocate $100,000 to investigate my $20,000 case. reen recently, as you know rosie o'donnell has been in the public and admitting. rosie said if i gave too much, give me the money back. and that is how these cases are typically treated. >> you are an incredibly stamar guy, she did not set up straw

men. she gave five times a total of a thousand dollars here and there over the limit, a violation, but what you did, you conscious li, you consciously and intentionally went to friends of yours and got them to donate $10,000 each and said you would pay them back. a straw man is more than what rosie o'donnell is paying. >> she used four different spellings of her names and five different addresses why would she do that if she didn't want computers to collate. >> if she was a master mind, she

gave $3,700 or something like that. >> let's be fair. both these cases are similar. in a better america in the past, neither rosie nor i would be prosecuted. she obviously h no corrupt intent and neither did i am i didn't even tell the candidate wendy long that i did this. so i was not expecting any kind of a quid pro quo. in an earlier america jimmy carter would not have gone after me in this. and george w. bush would not go after michael moore and lock them up. we have seen a new phenomenon. my case is not unique in this. >> i am not saying this is not possible, i am saying you have not offered any other evidence. you said this crime that you were convinced is never

prosecuted. in the court case there were 20 examples of violations. a guy named jeffrey thompson, and there was a headline at gop at the height of the campaign that said clinton'segal donor got sentenced. you could have got ten to 15 months in prison and you got no prison time at all. if this was a conspiracy, the judge was also confirmed by republicans. why didn't you get any jail time? it seemsf this was, you were really an enemy of the state they would have gone after you, they gave you a plead deal. >> well, they did, they wanted me to go to prison and the judge said no, and gave me a different

sentence. >> you said the judge was part of this nefarious plot. >> this is a left wing state and left wing environment. here i am as a conservative. so one would think extra precaution is taken t make sure no kind of political hit is going on. >> isn't you getting a sweet plea deal where you got probation. and one day a week of community service. >> one day -- first of all, i was ordered. the court ordered mandatory psychiatr psychiatric treatment. am i jeffrey dahmer? the judge was acting as if i needed reeducation. i am sure if i started worshipping obama, and regularly

appeared on msnbc, maybe i would have been cured. >> if they thought your ideas were so dangerous, why would they have you doing community service and educating a class of people. they were putting you in front of people because of how intelligent you are. >> well the judge was afraid if i spoke to immigrants about america and issues, i would have a positive effect on them and might convert them to my way of thinking. so he said i will not approve any community service program where you are sharing your ideas. i merely wanted you to teach the american language. >> i appreciate you being on. thank you very much. big breaking news about the russia probe. also, a battle brewing about the

reasons why and one eagle just weighed in with quite an accura accusation, next.

breaking news at the white house. president trump cancelling the visit by the eagles. jim acosta joins us. >> reporter: the philadelphia eagles were supposed to come here tomorrow for their white house super bowl win celebration have been disinvited. we spoke to a white house

official. disinvites the champions from a celebration with the president because of the ongoing iss about standing up for the national anthem. we can show you what the white house is saying. and here it is, it is saying the philadelphia eagles are unable to come to the white house with their full team to be celebrated tomorrow. they disagree with their president because he insists that they proudly stand for the national anthem hand on heart, in honor of the great men. they both have a patriotism test. in the view of the president and the view of the white house, and the philadelphia eagles. they are not coming.

instead the white house is having some celebration on the lawn with the eagles fan. >> in the past athletes have not decided to go to the white house but those events have not been canceled. >> reporter: the golden state warriors were supposed to come, but in solidarity, the president referred to football players who kne don't kneel for the national anthems as sons of bitches. it appears at this point this is not being sorted out. as you just said, there is a long standing tradition of these sports teams coming to the white house and the president appears to be abruptly cutting that off

and saying if sports teams don't pass this patriotism test, they are not coming to the whie. >> breaking news. he concluded with this, the president continues to spread the false narrative. have you heard, is there any case like this? >> this is again, unprecedented. and it is sad for the country, because these ceremonies have often not had teams that didn't come. the president had the event and it was good. the people came and celebrated and we went on about our business. this suggests, anderson, i must

say, it has a whiff of more politics and trying to divert us from other serious matters. he has known for days a bunch were not coming. last minute? the night before? >> a convenient thing for the president, when thens get slow, or he needs a boost or trying to divert attention, goes to this well. >> that's right. it was no surprise. no breaking news on the eagles side of thing. the white house decided to make a different decision right now because it allows us to take our attention from all of the other things that we could be talking about. it is strategic.bu also, anders disappointing. this shows that when you cave to

bullies, it doesn't change anything. much of the policy change was to appease people like donald trump. >> it comes on the heels essentially appeasing the president. >> so much of this, there are a lot of conservatives, especially on the libertarian side, protesting has been part of the american fabric. and suddenly to make these kinds of divisions and it has this racial tone to it which is very unfortunate. the people who are protesting are essentially african americans, criminal justice towards african americans andth have taken something that is not just that big a deal and blown it up. you have to believe it is for political purposes for his own good. >> mark, it is difficult to gloss over any racial undertones

this this. >> absolutely. it is interesting that the patriots, when some of them don't want to participate in the white house festivities they still do it. when the eagles don't do trk it is a very different story. it is disturbing. but it also reinforces this idea that he can be the var ber rater. so he is prioritizing his values of a player. >> i want to get david's take on the breaking news of paul

manafort. new information ahead. pace in your own backyard... or get pumped up for your grand entrance. only t-mobile lets you watch your favorite movies and shows in more places, without paying more. get an unlimited family plan with netflix on us. and right now at t-mobile, buy one samsung galaxy s9 and get one free.

who's already won three cars, two motorcycles, a boat, and an r.v. i would not want to pay that insurance bill. [ ding ] -oh, i have progressive, so i just bundled everything with my home insurance. saved me a ton of money. -love you, gary! -you don't have to buzz in. it's not a question, gary. on march 1, 1810 -- [ ding ] -frédéric chopin. -collapsing in 226 -- [ ding ] -the colossus of rhodes. -[ sighs ] louise dustmann -- [ ding ] -brahms' "lullaby," or "wiegenlied." -when will it end? [ ding ] -not today, ron.

-when will it end? [ ding ] 3 toddlers won't stop him.. and neither will lower back pain. because at a dr. scholl's kiosk he got a recommendation for our custom fit orthotic to relieve his foot, knee, or lower back pain, from being on his feet. dr. scholl's. born to move. ithe race for governort. has turned into a scam. gavin newsom's trying to elect a republican who was endorsed by trump. and villaraigosa's being bankrolled by a handful of billionaires. it's everything that's wrong with politics. and none of it is helping struggling families. here's my pledge to you. i'll keep our budget balanced. invest in affordable housing. fight for universal healthcare. and stand up to donald trump. as governor, you can trust me to do what's right- because i always have.

i thought after sandy hook, where 20 six and seven year olds were slain, this would never happen again. it has happened more than 200 times in 5 years. dianne feinstein and a new generation are leading the fight to pass a new assault weapons ban. say no to the nra and yes to common-sense gun laws. california values senator dianne feinstein could be big indeed new word coming in. a motion concerning paul manafort. mueller's office is accusing manafort with tampering with witnesses and asking to revoke

his bound. she is going through it now, and sara what is the headline. >> the special counsel's office not happy with paul manafort. a special counsel prosecutors. now remember paul manafort has been on house arrest as part of this, the special counsel's office is basically seeking to pull back his house arrest and send him to jail. in this filing they are calling for the court to have a hearing on this issue as soon as possible. we are looking through this failing to glean any details about what paul manafort did. we are going to dig through this more and obviously this is a huge allegation from the special counsel's office when it comes to his case. he has insisted over and over again that he is not guilty.

he has resisted any kind of effort to strike a plea deal like his partner ric gates did. >> we have the filing here and i think it is 90 pages so you have a lot to go through. we will continue to check in with you throughout the night and let you get back to reading the documents and also is david gergen and carrie cordero. we just got this filing, but if mueller is asking for manafort to revoke his bail, that is significant. >> it is not only about him revoking his bail, the allegations and we have only had a chance to scan pages of this 90 page report briefing. after being charged with federal crimes he has committed new crimes that is the allegation and that is a serious charge. you go to jail for a long time and if it is witness tampering,

it suggests there is a huge cover up. we don't know if this touches on the president. way too early to tell. >> gates, who is manafort's right-hand person has already made a deal. his former son-in-law has also made a deal. certainly a lot of folks lined up against manafort who are cooperating with mueller. >> there are. and he has been under pressure to cooperate as well. and i haven't had a chance to look at this document as well, but we have to look at it in the context of everything we are seeing play out in the public domain. in other words, if behind the scenes, the special counsel h has -- there is a significant

possibility and i am extrapolating from what we are hearing so far, but there is significant possibility that the president's legal team has gotten wind of this as well and some of the activity that we have been hearing about pardons, about sort of the general, statements that are coming out of the president, his twitter feed, i think we have to take it all in context together that there is a lot goingn behind the scenes that insiders know about that are feeding into some of the public activity that we have been seeing. >> so you are saying it is possible that the president's legal team was aware in advance of these allegations by mueller? >> i am just saying, i don't know what they would have none in advance. but what i am trying to say is that it is possible if this ongoing investigation was going on, that they could get wind of fferent activities that are going on. for example, if manafort is reaching out to different people in the trump campaign, we don't

know who, i don't know who he has alleged to have been tampering with, but possible that different pieces of the investigation can crush on other parts and some of this may end up on being connected >> we don't know who he may have been tampering with according to the government may have not been anybody in the administration, might have been people in his business past. hard to imagine he had as much access to anybody now in the administration or formally in the campaign. >> and be the charges against manafort do not relate to his involvement in the 2016 campaign. he is, he is charged in relation to his lobbying effort on behalf

of ukrainian interest who are aligned with russia but not directly related to the campaign. >> jeff, i am just getting word that there is more information out of this. what have you learned? >> we are looking through these filings and it says manafort has contacted two people. according to the filing, manafort sought to secure false testimony concerning the activity of this of the influential group of european leaders, this has to do with ukrainian lobbying, this seems to be what they are alleging. saying he is continually in contact with these folks. again, this seems to have to do with his work with ukrainian

lobbying, more so with anything directly involved with the campaign. >> thanks very much. more news to get to. >> thank you very much, i'm getting my pocket square ready. we'll take apart this breaking news that sara murray is bringing you. adam schiff, the democrat from california, ranking member of the house judiciary committee, so intimately involved in the russia probe. what does this mean about manafort? and the headliner tonight, rudy giuliani is here. he has a lot to answer for. we'll put him to the test on the big headlines. >> no doubt about that. chris, thanks very much. "cuomo prime time" premiers in just a few minutes at the top of the hour. up next, an exclusive interview with apple's tim cook. how apple is trying to stop phone addiction. >> vo: they're getting more out of life

by starting with miracle-gro potting mix and plant food. together, guaranteed to produce three times the harvest. more to enjoy... to share. three times the harvest. one powerful guarantee. miracle-gro. feeclaritin and relief fromwsy 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.

and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) becausome we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide. proven to protect street skaters and freestylers. stops up to 97% uv. lasts through heat. through sweat. coppertone. proven to protect.

apple is close to becoming the first company worth more than $1 trillion. with that valuation, the company says, comes responsibilities, privacy responsibilities, social responsibilities. and, they say, people are spending too much money on their products.

cnn's laurie segall just finished an interview with apple's ceo tim cook. >> you guys announced a tech addiction tool that will help us limit our scree time. >> you know, we've never been focused on usage as a key parameter. and we're rolling out great tools to both make people aware of how much time they're spending and the apps they're spending them in, but also how many times they pick up their phone, how many notifications they get. empowering people with the facts will allow them to decide themselves how they want to come back. >> tell us how you use it. >> i thought i was fairly disciplined about this, and i was wrong. when i began to get the data, i found i was spending a lot more time than i should. >> like where? >> i don't want to give you all

the apps, but just too much. and ask themselves if they're picking up their phone ten time maybe they could do it less. >> there's this idea, who is in control, man or machine. you believe that we as human beings can control? >> i absolutely do. i don't subscribe to the machines taking over the world. and i don't worry about that. i worry much more about people thinking like machines. >> do you think that tech companies are in a position right now where they can self-regulate some of these more sticky issues? >> well, that's a big topic. generally for me, i'm not a big fan of regulation. i think self-regulation is the best but when it's not working, and in some cases it's not working, you have to ask yourself, so what form of regulation might be good. and i think it's a fair question that many people are asking at

this point. >> what kind do you think isn't working? >> i think the privacy thing has gotten totally out of control. most people are not aware of who is tracking them, how much they're being tracked,nd sort of the large amounts of detailed data that are out there about them. >> do we as users just have to reenvision the idea of privacy? >> no. to me, we think privacy is a fundamental human right. privacy from an american point of of view is one of the key it is to be american.define what >> it's a fundamental human right. do you think the last year has shown that fundamental human right could be under attack? >> i think it has been under attack, and we've been saying that quite some time. >> this morning the supreme court ruled in favor of a colorado baker who refused to bake a cake in celebration of a

same sex couple. apple has continuously stood for lgbtq rights. what's your reaction? >> i haven't read the opinion and i reserve the right to deeply read that before i comment on it. in terms of the general topic, we believe everybody should treat everybody else with dignity and respect. that's how we run our company. that's what we expect of each other. that pertains to all communities including the lgbtq community. >> you said today there are people from over 70 different countries here. are you concerned at all with a lot of the stricter immigration policies? >> my view on daca is the congress needs to fix daca. and fix daca to me means allow everyone to stay in the country and stop this ridiculous discussion that people brought here as kids shouldn't be allowed to stay here. >> i know there is this fear of the impact on consumers and will iphone prices go up if there is an escalated trade war. i know you said you were

optimistic before. are you still optimistic? >> i am very optimistic, because no one will win from that. it will be a lose/lose. and i think that when the facts are so clear like that, i think that both parties will see that and be able to work things out. >> do you think that if that were to occur, that iphone prices could go up? >> i don't think that iphone will get a tariff on it, is my belief. >> apple announced the ability to limit apps for social media tracking. how will that work? >> a bit of a swipe at facebook, facebook to track users on ios and mac. it's interesting moment for technology and humanity, something that tim cook has spoken quite a bit about. you see it here at the

developers conference. you have 5,000 developers from all around the world, 70 different countries. so a lot of very serious questions but also a lot of interesting features we'll see roll occupy over the next couple of months. >> thank you, laurie. time to hand it over to chris cuomo for the premier of "cuomo prime time." thank you very much, anderson. welcome to "prime time." the man of the moment, rudy giuliani, is here to be tested. plus breaking in just the last half hour, former trump campaign chair paul manafort accused of witness tampering. that is a potential felony, by the way. i've got the filing right here. 30 pages of argument, twice as many pages and exhibits. this could be very bad for the former chair. top democrat adam schiff is here ahead. and the philadelphia eagles, disinvited the day before the