the police chief for the apology, but if this was politically motivated, there will be hell to pay. anderson? >> all right. sara, thanks very much. the news continues. i'm going to hand it over to chris cuomo. "cuomo prime time" starts right now. chris? all right, anderson. thank you very much, my friend. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." so did the republicans make the case? did they show that fbi agent peter strzok did things that tainted the trump probe? that was the bar, and they took ten hours to try. early on, literally there are attacks going in all directions. take a look. >> where is the disgrace? >> you've been out of control since you've been on this committee. >> harassment of the witness. >> what is wrong with that? you need your medication? >> point of order is not well taken. >> it's right on point. >> no, it's not. >> so when lawmakers were actually asking questions of the witness, we saw republicans unload on peter strzok with both barrels.

>> if you want to represent what you said accurately, i'm happy to answer that question, but i don't appreciate what was originally said being changed. >> i don't give a damn what you appreciate, agent strzok. >> trey gowdy. i guess he went back to being captain benghazi. remember he said, these hearings are all about political partisanship. and huff and puff. this was more about making allegations than asking anything. and the result, frustration. >> sir, it is as frustrating to me as it is to you. i can tell you, sir, i would love -- >> you know what, agent strzok? >> mr. chairman, may the witness be permitted to answer? >> the gentleman will suspend. >> if it's so frustrating, answer the question. >> if you'll allow him to, i'm sure he will. >> he has never answered the question. >> stop interrupting him. >> we're showing you the highlights, but i have to tell you this was unique what we saw today, the level of disarray, the level of dysfunction on really all sides.

a standout moment, though. a republican made trump's case that the probe is a witch hunt by attacking strzok as a philanderer. not a trace of irony on his face. listen to this. >> i can't help but wonder when i see you looking there with a little smirk, how many times did you look so innocent into your wife's eye and lie to her about -- >> oh, mr. chairman. >> now, i just want to emphasize this. it was much more heat than light today, and literally you just heard that republican congressman from texas say, believe trump, not strzok, because strzok had an affair. and he did it with a straight face, and he never, ever has said anything like this about the president no matter what the allegation. put that in the hopper. all right. what about peter strzok? he didn't come out as might have been expected -- contrite, very sorry about what he did. and, remember, it was his texts that got him in all this trouble. instead he came out swinging.

>> this isn't just me sitting here telling you. you don't have to take my word for it. at every step, at every investigative decision, there are multiple layers of people above me, the assistant director, executive assistant director, deputy director and director of the fbi and multiple layers of people below me, all of whom who were involved in all of these decisions. they would not tolerate any improper behavior in me any more than i would tolerate it in them. that is who we are as the fbi, and the suggestion that i in some dark chamber in the fbi would somehow cast aside all of these procedures, all of these safeguards and somehow be able to do this is astounding to me. it simply couldn't happen, and the proposition that that is going on, that it might occur anywhere in the fbi deeply corrodes what the fbi is in american society, the effectiveness of their mission, and it is deeply destructive. [ applause ]

>> who's applauding? who's booing? this is all about what you see through your partisan lens. that's why the hearing was supposed to be different. they were supposed to establish facts that make their case in this showdown with strzok about the fact that his bias led to bad actions in this probe that make it a witch hunt. what did they find? really four things, okay? strzok screwed up by sending those texts. he exhibited bias against trump. that's true. it's really just one text, okay? this text came back to haunt him all day long. trump's never, ever going to become president, right, right? no, he won't. we'll stop it. he tried to explain it away by saying the american people would vote against him and he wouldn't win. it wasn't that compelling. and he admitted -- strzok -- the texting was wrong on several levels. one of them means that he arguably violated the fbi's code of conduct. strzok didn't have a great rebuttal for that either. now, because of that, they argue that strzok has no integrity.

that is relevant only if used to offset competing stories about what happened in the probe, and that is the problem for the gop after today. ten hours of today. no proof was offered that strzok did something acting on bias, okay? so is it over? no, because ultimately this isn't about strzok. it's about coming for mueller. how do we know? two examples. listen to florida congressman matt gaetz. certainly then when you were removed, was it clear to you mr. mueller was aware of these incendiary text messages? >> yes. >> so he knew of the text messages but never asked you whether you were biased or not? >> that's correct. >> exhibit a. exhibit b, this moment from jim jordan when he was getting after this connection of hillary clinton to the dossier. >> one more time. just say it. bruce orr gave the fbi documents

relating to and supporting or part of the dossier, is that accurate? >> mr. orr gave the fbi documents which included material that i believe originated from mr. steele. >> all right. steele was working for orr. orr was working for fusion gps. gps was getting paid by the clinton campaign. so therefore she was funding the research that went into the dossier, except we knew that. we knew that hillary clinton's campaign had been funding the work of gps that went into developing the dossier, whether it's worthy or not. okay? and matt gaetz's eureka moment about he never asked you if you were biased? where was the time? as soon as mueller found out about the texts, what happened to strzok? he was gone. so he didn't need to have a conversation with him. he acted before he even asked him anything about it. if anything, i think that little back and forth may have worked against gaetz's interest but that's for you to decide. here is the big takeaway. there are three facts that work

against the gop, and i don't know they did anything to vitiate or get rid of them today. if strzok wanted to hurt trump, why didn't he leak? leaking would be illegal. it would be wrong. but if he's the no-integrity guy that the gop says he is, why didn't he do it, number one? number two, if he wanted to help hillary clinton, why did he keep pushing harder for more investigation into the probe on her and the e-mails with harsher tools like subpoenas and even calling for her to go before a grand jury? number three, if he wanted to hurt donald trump, wouldn't he be desperate to get on the mueller team? why would he drag his feet? he did. he texted lisa page, one of like a gazillion of them, right? that he wasn't sure that there was any "their" there with what mueller was looking at and maybe he should stay working on the clinton probe or whatever. why would he do that? as an aside, i believe that

"there" there text works for strzok, that he should have owned it today and says where's my bias? i didn't even know if i wanted to join the probe. i wasn't sure if there was anything there. he didn't do that. i'm not really sure why. so that's the take of what happened today if you didn't have ten hours to spend on it. let's get after the political implications with republican congressman from new york chris collins. good to see you, sir. >> good to be with you, chris. it's been a while. i like this time slot better than the 7:00 a.m. >> well, thank you. hopefully you will use it with me often. what do you make of the analysis? in your own view, what was accomplished in this hearing today? >> well, first of all, let's start by we have to remember as americans that the fbi does -- all the agents are not represented by peter strzok or lisa page. they're a stain on the fbi. and what we saw today, because there's no doubt about it. agent strzok had a very defiant, aggressive look about him and tone. we just have to remember that, you know, we should respect all

the other agents within the fbi and call out peter strzok and lisa page for what they are. >> you think your fellow party members did that today in that hearing? >> well, today it was about the divisive nature in congress. i was in a similar hearing in the energy and commerce committee about the children who have all been united, the kids under age 5. >> they've all been united now because the government doesn't confirm that? >> we have. all of the children that could be reunited with their parents in a safe environment -- >> that could be. we'll leave that for another day. we'll leave that for another day. so you were like that in another hearing. let's deal with one catastrophe at a time. you felt in that room today the republicans were respecting the fbi and only singling out strzok? it didn't sound like that. >> they were not after the fbi. they were after strzok and his bias, and his bias came through loud and clear in those texts. >> do you think he acted on the bias? >> oh, i believe you can't take the bias out of your actions. i mean i can't tell you at what step, but there's no two ways about it.

>> so you believe that every judge, every prosecutor, every cop, every investigator only does what they like to do in the course of their job? >> oh, no, of course not. they are professional. >> oh. >> agent strzok is anything but professional. he showed it today. this was a situation where it lined up on the democrats and republicans. it's a mid-year election year. the democrats were defending him at every turn. the republicans were attacking him at every turn. it's no different than the farm bill that we just tried to pass. >> but it is different. it's very different. in fact, you know what? come with me, we're going back to the white board. i want to show chris collins why it's different. here's why it's different. farm bill you can fight about the significance of it. tariffs, you can fight about significance. they're policy judgments. what's right, what's wrong. fair point? fair point. however, this is very different. this is about an investigation being tainted by one man's actions, not just his texts and his feelings.

the bar for you guys is show us that he acted on his bias because if that's not the bar, chris, then all of us are in trouble because all of us have feelings and opinions about one another, but we do the job. they didn't show me anything today. what did they show us today that proves he acted on the bias? that's the bar. >> well, it comes back to he was actually the agent in charge of both the clinton e-mail and the russian investigation. >> yes. >> he's been dismissed, you know, by mueller. it just goes back again to a lot of republicans feel the mueller investigation has gone -- >> they feel. they feel. >> on a tangent. >> they feel. >> that's correct. >> see, that's why i'm stopping you there, chris. i'm going to get to mueller because i agree with you. this is about mueller. we saw it with jordan. we saw it with gaetz. strzok is just a stepping stone to say whatever mueller comes up with can't be believed. we'll talk about whether they make the case. but here's what they had to deal with today and overcome. he didn't leak anything about the trump probe even though he's a no integrity guy.

as you and the party members say. why not? he pushed harder to investigate hillary clinton, subpoena the people around her, subpoena more materials, put her in front of a grand jury. does that sound like a guy who is trying to help donald trump and hurt hillary clinton? and then when asked to be on the probe team, he writes his girlfriend, well, i'm not sure there's any "there" there in the mueller probe. maybe i shouldn't go. where is the proof of acting on the bias? >> well, it comes back to the bias speaks for itself. again, he and lisa page are a stain on the fbi's reputation. i'm sure fbi agents across the country shudder when they say the body language and the facial expressions he had today. not really apologizing for anything he did. it was somewhat absurd. >> but we're talking about his behavior, his demeanor, the texting, the affair. all bad. let's assume it's all bad. it's not the bar. the bar is, i shouldn't believe as an american citizen what comes out of the mueller probe because this guy's dirty, and

everything he did was dirty because he was out to get my president. how can i think that after today? what did they give me to go on? >> well, again, the bias speaks for itself. as comey said -- >> it doesn't. you have to show it to me. where did it manifest itself? was he biased when he wanted to push harder on hillary clinton and get her to be in front of a grand jury? i don't get it. why was he doing these competing things, then? >> well, i mean, even go back to comey, who said he reopened the clinton probe because he wanted to make sure after she was elected president, that they didn't feel like it was a whitewash. he did that to protect hillary clinton, not to go after hillary clinton. >> ask hillary clinton if she feels like that, chris collins. you let me know if i'm helping you if i came out with one of the worst pieces of dirty laundry before your election -- >> it certainly did not play out well, but he did not think there was any chance, nor did -- >> i know this isn't over because jim jordan was talking

about connecting that the mueller probe is only about the dossier. and saying mueller is not doing his job. he didn't ask he he was bias or not. and -- but to me, i don't know that they made a great case, and this is going to go on. i want a promise from you, sir, please. when we learn more, please come back so we can chew on it for the audience. >> oh, absolutely. >> we've got a good audience here. they like to think and are open minded. appreciate it. we're going to have congressman luis gutierrez. he was in that room today and throwing some haymakers of his own. a lot of them against his republican colleagues. but up next, we've got some good folks waiting to get in on this. perfect people to debate the impact of today. a former fbi agent and a former federal prosecutor. they're here, and they're ready to get it on, next. ♪ it is such a good time to kiss ♪

♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to [ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there.

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.

but let me be clear unequivocally and under oath. not once in my 26 years of defending our nation did my personal opinions impact any official action i took. >> let's debate that statement, its impact, and the outcome of a ten-hour hearing today. former u.s. attorney laura coates, former supervisory special agent james gagliano. i know you both have professional and personal attachments to the different parts of the department of justice that are under scrutiny right now, and i like that. so laura coates, do you believe that the republicans met their burden today that we can show that peter strzok adversely affected and impacted the probe of donald trump because of his bias? >> absolutely not.

i think they failed in their effort to do just that because they were trying to grandstand more than they were trying to do what the american people wanted, which is to hear the explanations of peter strzok. and when they tried to use the questioning process to simply further a particular narrative, whether it was favorable or not favorable to him -- had i been it's a to get the information. in a trial and i had done this very same thing, there would have been so many objections. let the witness actually answer the question. it wasn't an opportunity for me to simply give my closing or my opening argument. it was an opportunity for him to actually speak. now, whether he carried his own burden of proof is a very different story, chris. >> right. okay. we're going to get to that as well. let's be fair. it's not a trial, all right? these politicians, they can't even agree on what time it is if they had a big digital clock in front of their faces, and there was certainly a hell of a lot more heat then there was light. gags, what do you think came out today that is worthy criticism of peter strzok? >> chris, looking at it from the perspective of what we endured today, it was political theater of the highest order.

you had a gop congressman who, you know, brought the witnesses' family into it. then you had a democratic congressman that actually offered to get a purple heart for what mr. strzok endured. i'm going to stipulate something here. i've been a cautious skeptic, as you know, of the russia investigation from its onset. but i also desperately, desperately believe that it's not a witch hunt, that the people that are working the investigation, to mr. strzok's point, there are so many layers of redundancies. they're doing their job. let it commence. let it be completed. however, i do believe that the i.g. did a great job in putting together his report. and in his report, he stated that there was no material acts conducted that they could determine throughout the investigation of mr. strzok, mr. mccabe, mr. comey, and all the upper echelon senior exclusives related to the hillary clinton case as well as the russia collusion case -- >> and the gop said that's bunk, jimmy, and they'll prove it. did they do it today. >> here's the other thing. everything that happened today was rehearsed.

we did this behind closed doors. >> but they wouldn't release the transcript. no we know why. >> now we have it out in open form. you and i talked about this earlier. it's not that there's a criminal act. it's the fact that mr. strzok, in my mind, damaged the fbi, damaged the brand, and reduced the confidence of the american people in the fbi as an institution. why? because as you pointed out on the whiteboard, poor judgment decisions. people can say, if you exhibited poor judgment here, how can we trust you in these other instances? >> all right. is that good enough for you, laura coates? then i have a second point i want to make about whether strzok helped or hurt his situation today. but in terms of what we found out about him, what we now know about what his impact was and what that means overall in the legitimacy of the probe, where do we come out on it after ten hours? >> it seems as though people would like to allow only certain people to be able to compartmentalize their professional and their personal life. it seems pretty hypocritical to

suggest this particular agent, unlike anybody else in congress or in the executive branch of government or anywhere else, are incapable of doing just that, of separating their personal life from their professional life. now, he did himself no great favors, but there's two big points here. while he is asking everyone to be able to compartmentalize and give everyone the benefit of the doubt, the republicans in the hearing seemed to have asked the american people to conflate two very separate investigations and also two very separate points in time. remember, chris, the mueller probe began, and when they learned about the strzok e-mails or strzok text messages, they asked no questions. they simply said, just like the court of law, any hint of impropriety would be enough to make you go away, and they did just that. so asking people to conflate the two, the mueller probe with his conduct while he was investigating hillary clinton, is actually very farfetched, as farfetched it would be to say no one is able to compartmentalize their professional and personal lives, especially in congress. >> first of all, that point couldn't be more true. for instance, the man sharing the screen with you on the other

side of me right now once tried to beat me to death with a car antenna when we were standing at a shoot, and yet we conducts himself very professionally when we're here. peter strzok, how did he comfort himself today? did he help or hurt his cause? >> i think he damage the his cause. here's where i'll take issue with what laura said. i agree as an fbi agent for 25 years, i was allowed to have political adherences, if i wanted to put up a political sign in my front yard, that's okay. if i wanted to stand around the water cooler during a break and say who do you think is going to win or this is who i'd like to win, that's okay. the fact that there were damning text messages -- and i'll give it to strzok and his attorneys. they were very crafty and skilled here because you had plenty of time to prepare for this. so he had an answer to everything. he had an answer to the insurance policy. he had an answer to we'll stop it. we'll is not lisa page and peter strzok. no, no, no. that's the american electorate. well, of course that's an easy way to parse those out, and i'm

not suggesting that maybe that's not true. but he did himself no good service today, and he's made a lot of folks, people that have worn that badge proudly for years, very upset with the way he carried on today. not because he had a right to be indignant about things. he had to endure, you know, congressmen and congresswomen shouting at each other, and it was political theater. but he should have risen above it. he's an fbi agent. and if you have experience in testifying, when you're confronted with a criminal defense attorney, their job is to get you riled up. so the smug look, so the barking back, so the self-righteous, pious indignation i don't think was a good look, chris. >> give me a quick final thought, laura. >> i was going to say, i understand that the fbi certainly is damaged reputation-wise, and i don't think that strzok or lisa page did any favors to the justice system overall. to be an objective unit. however, there is a totem pole you must recognize. it's if one person could make a

decision about such a comprehensive investigation, then we would really have no need to have subordinates or superiors. >> yes. >> he did do an effective job of laying out that one person, even if the bias demonstrated in their text messages is not the sole person who can make the decisions to do so. in that vein, he wasn't allowed to explain further about that point. i as an american person and former member of the justice department, would like to have heard his response. >> in truth, he put himself in that seat today. if it weren't for the texts, we wouldn't be here. he opened the door. now we'll see if he can shut it. laura coates, thank you very much. gagliano, be well. major news overseas in the uk. huge state dinner with president trump and prime minister may. huge protests. huge fallout. we have a trump insider who was at the palace where the state dinner was. he is a trump confidant and friend. newsmax ceo chris ruddy in a tux, next. it's the ford summer sales event

and now is the best time to buy. preparing classic campfire trout. say what? trout. trout. all right. you don't think i need both? why does he have that axe? make summer go right with ford america's best selling brand. now get 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash on a great selection of suv's. during the ford summer sales event, get our best offer of the season 0% financing for 72 months plus $1,000 ford credit bonus cash. 0% financing for 72 months plus (dnice, candace, but this time bold. did someone say "bold?" (gasping) starkist jalapeo tuna in a pouch! loaded with bold flavor. just tear, eat... mmmmm. and go bold! try all of my bold creations pouches! the kayak explore tool shows you the places you can fly on your budget. so you can be confident you're getting the most bang for your buck. alo-ha. kayak. search one and done.

it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life. now there's armor all wash wipes with lift and clean technology. extra large wipes that lift and remove dust, dirt and grime. no hose, no bucket, no problem. just wipe, to spot clean bird and bug splatters in seconds or to wash and wax the entire car in minutes. also try new armor all ultra shine wax wipes. for a brilliant shine with that same wipe and walk away convenience. clean, shine and protect, anytime anywhere with armor all ultra shine exterior wash and wax wipes.

does it look like i'm done?yet? shouldn't you be at work? [ mockingly ] "shouldn't you be at work?" todd. hold on. [ engine revs ] arcade game: fist pump! your real bike's all fixed. man, you guys are good! well, we are the number-one motorcycle insurer in the country. -wait. you have a real motorcycle? and real insurance, with 24-hour customer support. arcade game: wipeout! oh! well... i retire as champion. game hog! champion.

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. president trump is in london after two days of scolding allies for not carrying their weight at the nato summit.

he claimed victory after that even though we don't see any proof that anything is any different in a good way because of what he said. but let's get some perspective from someone who knows the president, spends a lot of time with him, and is a confidant and close adviser. he attended the black tie dinner tonight with president trump in the united kingdom, so let's get his take. christopher ruddy, ceo of newsmax, thank you so much for joining us. i know you didn't put that tuxedo on for me. good for you, being at such a big and momentous occasion with the prime minister and the president of the united states and many other somebodies. what was it like in the room? >> chris, i wear a tuxedo every time i go on cnn. you know that. >> demonstrably false. >> actually it was a state dinner, so i did dress up for the state dinner. it was a great night. i would describe it as a love fest between the president of the united states and the british prime minister in terms of their two countries. they may disagree on certain policy issues.

they didn't get into that at this dinner. it was, i think, a celebration of the very special relationship the united states -- >> the united states wants to spend a lot of money on defense. it is the most powerful and richest country in the world. so it winds up spending most. >> right. >> it's always been that way in nato as you know. >> well, it's unfair, and we've always said and complained about it. and as we're seeing today and in the past two days. and i think the brits basically -- look, they're very simpatico. of all the countries in europe, they're the most simpatico with us. this president likes the interpersonal connection with people. he's a very people person, right? and he seems to do very well. i was just with him tonight, and i saw him with the prime minister sitting there. prime minister may. and i said to him, this special relationship is better than ever. and he said, it is. and i could see the body -- the chemistry between them was very good. >> look, that's -- >> i think there was friction initially in that relationship. >> well, of course there was

because of the things that he says. that's why you have thousands and thousands of people protesting a u.s. president in the uk. when is the last time we saw that? he even said himself, they're not being nice to me. i don't know why i would stay here. >> i think the coverage that you folks at cnn -- you have an international reach and an international arm. >> ah, the coverage. >> "the washington post," "the new york times," there's no balance when it goes internationally. in the united states, you have the newsmaxes, the fox news and others giving some -- internationally, they're just taking what the new york times and -- and the "washington post". >> chris, that's just unfair to the international press. these are his words. they're his words, chris. they're what he says. >> chris, i've been here in britain, and i ask people why do they hate donald trump so much? why do people here -- and they never have any specific reason. >> the signs tell you why. they don't like that he's separating the kids. >> i supports brexit. >> they don't like the travel ban.

they don't like the way he talks about his partnership with the rest of the world. don't put this on us, chris. we are a mirror of what trump says for the rest of the world. >> let's peel the -- there were 12,000 kids that came to that border, 10,000 of them starts in the obama years came. they were sent without parents. >> desperate people in many cases who want their children to have a better life. >> well, who is so desperate they would send their own child hundreds of miles to a foreign country with no money, no food, and they leave them on our border. it was obviously a setup to embarrass the united states. nobody talks about that. >> chris -- because we don't -- because there's no "there" there. who does it? how about thousands and thousands -- >> you can't blame donald trump. >> i'm not blaming donald trump. i'm saying you want to know why they send them to the border, chris. you know why. because they're persecuted. because they're desperate for a better life for their kid -- instead of living in the dirt. so they risk it all

>> let me say -- >> so they risk it all for something better. >> let me say for the record i did not support the child separation policy. i do not believe that crossing the border is a crime equivalent to a capital crime or a serious crime, a felony, that would deserve somebody to be separated from their child. not all -- it is a crime to cross the border illegally. >> it's a misdemeanor. you do it a second time, it's a felony. but the reason the bush administration and the obama administration didn't do it this way, chris -- and this is an important point. i'll see if you want to own your understanding on this as well. they didn't do it because they knew if they did, they would be overwhelmed. and even though bush built facilities -- i had chertoff on the other night talking about it. they knew they'd be over capacity. they knew it was too harsh. they knew it was a message they didn't want to send to the world. donald trump took a different tack. he wanted the harshness. he didn't have the administration prepared for it, and we got a catastrophe. >> chris, i don't think donald

trump decided and made a decision to do this. i think the decision was made lower level. >> john kelly was talking about it a year ago as his understanding with the president. >> he signed the order -- do you agree that the president signed the order to end the policy that had been in existence before? >> no, i do not. are you talking about the executive order? >> okay. >> are you talking about the executive order? >> well, yes, his order saying that -- right. he said they should not separate the families. >> he didn't say that. you know what it says on the top of that piece of paper? this executive order is affording congress a chance to stop the separation of families. he said he was stopping the separation, but the executive order didn't do it. it gave congress a chance, and what he meant by a chance, is let me keep kids longer. it was a ruse. i said it on the show then, and it has proven true every day since. fugazi is the word we use. >> why do you think when you have this litany of criticisms of president trump, why do you think he's up 20% in the polls?

his poll numbers are in the mid-40s. this is pretty close to where he was when he started and when he came in as president. >> true. >> despite the huge media criticism. don't you think it's backfiring, the constant -- let me finish this one point. 1.5% average gdp growth for eight years. it was 3%. he increased that by 100% the first year. the estimate is this -- in the last quarter that just closed, it's going to be over 4%, somewhere between 4.2% and 4.5%. that's a 300% increase of the gdp rate in a year. now, that wasn't obama's policies. that wasn't hillary clinton's policies or barack obama. that was donald trump doing that. why doesn't cnn give him any credit? >> we say all the time. >> we have the lowest black unemployment. >> we say it all the time. >> we have the lowest -- >> listen, when the numbers come out, we talk about them all the

time. every time economic data comes out, we do it, and we do it in context. now, you have the wrong numbers about obama, and i don't think you want to compare yourself to the obama administration because he was coming out of such a deep hole because of what happened under bush, that once the ship was righted and we can argue about whether it was done the right way, there was tremendous growth, but we were in such a deep hole. does he deserve credit for a strong economy? let me answer you. does trump deserve credit for the economy? 100%. could you argue that it's an extension of certain economic growth trends that were happening already? yes, but every president has to own the up or down of their own term. and he gets the up right now. >> can we -- i'm going to send a message to the trump campaign and use that. he gets 100% credit for the economy. chris cuomo, cnn, says -- >> every president does, whatever happens on their watch -- >> i'm going to quote you on that. that is great. thank you. >> they get to gloat about the positive. why are his numbers where they are?

>> i think in this case, this president really has driven the economy. i don't agree with everything he does, but i think that on the major issues, illegal immigration is down very significantly. regulations are way down. he's holding accountable these countries on their tariff policies, and i think it's the nato spending. i think it's fine what he's doing. it's a very confrontational approach. it's not the approach you would use or i necessarily would use. >> i don't know what i would do. >> but let's see how it works. >> i don't know what i would do because i'm not in that mindset. i just test the impact, chris. what i'm saying is this. does the president deserve credit for things? 100%. 100% he does. does he deserve criticism for things? 100%. are those two things mutually exclusive? never have been. but everybody plays games on the partisan side. that's okay. if you want to know where his poll -- why they are where they are, i'll tell you right now, but i like at it in the reverse from you. they should be higher. with the economy that we have and the lack of terror that

we've seen in the country in recent history -- god forbid it changes -- >> i have an explanation for it. >> the reason it isn't is he does not expand the tent. he doesn't reach out. he doesn't try to make people better or sweeter. he plays to anger and hostility, and that is going to keep him small. >> well, i think he could do a better job reaching out to the middle. i agree with you on some of these issues like immigration and things like that. i think there have been some dark angels in the administration pushing policies that i think are not in keeping and consistent with the populism that donald trump enunciated in the campaign. >> populism doesn't have to be angry by the way. >> but, look, you know, this is a president that's come in. i remember watching networks, more so msnbc than cnn, but the day he was inaugurated, the days around that time, they were calling for his impeachment then. they haven't given him a moment to breathe. there's a major investigation under way by robert mueller. he is being probed.

there's been in two years no evidence of russian collusion, but if you watch cnn and other networks, you would think there was russian collusion. >> and if you listen to the president of the united states, you would think that russia didn't do anything in the election. and one of his bases for that opinion is that putin says he didn't do it. now, is that an acceptable basis for, for denying everything your intelligence community -- >> i think the russians didn't interfere in the election. >> then why won't he say it? >> i think he has made a statement to the effect that he did agree with the intelligence agencies after he made some of the initial comments. but you've got to ask the white house. i don't represent -- >> i have many times. so many times i'm losing hairline. i'm also losing time. i know it's late where you are. you're a busy man, and you took the time. skbh and make the time for the administration. and i appreciate it. you're always welcome on this show. >> i want to make a case for fairness.

i'm not here to represent them, but i think on balance, i think your viewers on cnn, and i think you're ultimately a fair minded guy. i think the president thinks that you can be. and i think that -- >> he called me a boiler waiting to explode, a chained lunatic. but every diamond has many facets, i suppose. chris ruddy, you're always welcome here. i'm happy to be relevant. i'll see you soon. thank you for spending a late night with us. >> cool. glad to be on. thank you. >> he really did call me those things by the way. you can look it up for yourself. now, our top story is without question what happened for ten hours in this house committee hearing this morning, into this day, and then into this night. let's get the other side of the ball. a democrat who took a wrecking ball to the republican pileup on peter strzok today. congressman luis gutierrez is on "prime time" next. you like to be in control.

especially when it comes to important stuff. like, say... your car. well, good news. the esurance app lets you keep an eye on your repairs when your car is in the shop. it's kinda like being there, without being there. which is probably better for everyone. that's insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. sometimes a day at the ballpark is more than just a day at the ballpark. [park announcer] all military members stand and be recognized. sometimes fans cheer for those who wear a different uniform. no matter where or when you served, t-mobile stands ready to serve you. that's why we're providing half off family lines to all military.

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.

while republicans hammered peter strzok and strzok hammered right back, there were lawmakers with a "d" next to their name who took their own opportunity to play for the cameras.

there were those who came with posters like this and props, and those who used their time to apologize. >> we should be honoring you for the work that you have done over the last 22 years to keep this nation safe. >> i thank you, and i'm so sorry for the treatment you've received here today. >> if i could give you a purple heart, i would. you deserve one. >> really? and then there was luis gutierrez. >> so what we're to believe from our republican majority that you're so biased, you're such a democrat, that you can't hold back from trying to destroy donald trump. yet you never told anybody that there was an investigation into donald trump's campaign on collusion with the russians. you never told anybody about that? >> no, sir. >> you never talked to a reporter about that? >> never. >> but you did have almost a magical bullet in your hand to derail the donald trump investigation, and did you use it? >> no, sir. >> the illinois congressman

joins us now. thank you for joining us, sir. i know it has been a long day. >> that's an understatement, but it's going to be with you, chris. happy to be with you. >> what was achieved today in your estimation? >> i think the republicans acted like the defense team of donald trump, and i'm sure the kremlin is very, very happy with their performance today. we know from our intelligence community that they intervened, right, in our electoral process in order to derail the hillary clinton campaign and elect donald trump. and what they want to ultimately accomplish, i believe -- and many members of the intelligence community and certainly in the senate -- is to destroy our democratic institution. so if you destroy the fbi, so what they do is they say, mr. strzok, you said inappropriate, unprofessional things you shouldn't have said. you shouldn't have been texting around, right? now they say all the fbi agents. well, that's to believe that the fbi agents who are average 45

years and mostly white males, 45 years -- that's the only demographic group that isn't for donald trump. look, the vast majority of fbi agents are just like the rest of americans. they're republicans, independents. they're of all stripes and all colors, and i'm sure that they all have different views, which they share probably at the family table. >> right. listen, i hear you on that. i mean if you take everybody who has a personal opinion about the job that they do out of that job, we're going to have a much bigger unemployment rate. >> sure. >> but strzok put himself in that chair. >> absolutely. >> these texts weren't about the ball game. they were about trump. they were ugly. they showed a bias. >> terrible. >> against him. and there were a lot of them. and some of them don't sound good, especially the one we all looked at a million time of her saying trump isn't going to be president, right? and he said, no, we'll stop it. >> i agree with all of those things. yet the report that was issued -- >> by the inspector general. >> by the inspector general.

what does it say, chris? i brought it here with me because i think it is important that we look at the report. now, this is an exhaustive report, and here's what it says. it says at a minimum we found the employee's use of to be systems and devices to send messages demonstrated extremely poor judgment and gross lack. we found no documentary or testimonial evidence directly connecting the political views of these employees expressed in their text messages and instants messages to the specific mid-year investigation. in other words, what they're saying at this very exhaustive inspector general's report is that although he expressed these opinions, he never used them, nor did any of the other agents involved use them in order to gain the final results of the investigation. >> they say that's impossible because if you are biased, it bleeds through into everything that you do. you have to also include the i.g. did say he couldn't conclude that there wasn't bias

in the prioritization. >> sure. >> of the trump probe before the clinton one. >> sure. and that eviscerates the fact that mueller has five guilty pleas, right, already. he's indicted six people. mr. cohen. >> a lot of people. not because of collusion "cnn t the chief policy, foreign policy adviser to the president was indicted because he lied about russians, right? his contact with the russian ambassador. his senior policy foreign affairs adviser lied about the russians. there are a lot of russians that were also indicted, and there are others that are indicted. so, look, let's give this an opportunity, right, to see where it goes. what's the rush? the rush is that i believe the

news is really tig noose is really tightening around the president's neck. what the republicans want to do is say let's destroy the fbi. there was one member of congress who basically extrapolates, saying, mr. strzok, you did terrible, unprofessional things, and you showed bias. therefore, prove to me that the whole rest of the fbi didn't follow lockstep with you. well, you know, mueller's a republican. the fbi director's a republican. >> he was a big shot too, though. >> i'm not saying he wasn't a big shot. i never said that. but here's what the inspector general -- i mean they investigated it more exhaustively than i'm sure even cnn has or i possibly can. and what conclusion? look, chris, you remember when the president and the republicans kept telling us and heralding, just wait for the inspector general's report. >> right. >> well, we waited for it. >> they got that text out of it, though, that they beat him over the head with all day. >> they got the text out of it, and that was terrible, and that was unprofessional. and that's in the report. but that doesn't mean there weren't many, many layers,

right, that were independent of mr. strzok. >> right. >> and the other thing the inspector general's report -- so, look, let's set that aside. let's just set that aside. here's what they want us to do. they want us to forget that the russians undermined our electoral system. and, look, there's a lot of good hearings we could have. why have a hearing on this? why don't we have a hearing on the 3,000 kids that are separated? >> because this is playing to advantage of the party that's in power right now. >> that's exactly right. so all i'm trying to say is there are many things the american people are concerned about. >> right. >> how women are treated in the workforce. we had a member of the judiciary committee that had to resign because he offered, right, one of his employees a million dollars in order to carry a baby for him. look, let's talk about women in the workplace and make it a better place for them to work in. i think that's the job of the judiciary committee. >> you have the time and the resources to do it altogethl.

how you spend your time is what the votes will be about. thank you for spending some time with me. >> always a pleasure. >> thanks. even bigger pleasure, don lemon standing by with a preview of "cnn tonight." did you see my white board? >> i'm going to get a blackboard. >> you always have to make it about that. the white board lays out what happened today in erms it of whether they met their burden of showing that strzok tainted this probe by his actions, not just by his texts, and i don't know that he made it. >> i was just watching your whiteboard last night. i don't want to do the same thing, so get a blackboard. but, yes, your point is taken. we're going to talk about that. i mean is it a show? was it just for the cameras? what was going on? more than half the time, i'd say 80% or 90% of the time the guy that was asked questions, he got out one word, and was not allowed to answer. and what was the whole point of today? we're going to have two dem congresswomen from the house judiciary committee who were

inside the room, had some contentious talks with the people in charge of that meeting and with peter strzok, and we're going to see what they have to say about it. >> i like the balance. be well. a lot of noise today on capitol hill, but did we learn anything new? the answer is yes, next. ohhh. ooh ohh here we go, here we go. you got cut off there, what were you saying? oooo. oh no no. maybe that geico has been proudly serving the military for over 75 years? is that what you wanted to say? mhmmm. i have to say, you seemed a lot chattier on tv. geico. proudly serving the military for over 75 years. you ok back there, buddy?

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. a book that you're ready to share with the world? get published now, call for your free publisher kit today! that hearing today was ten hours of trav esty wrapped in a sham wrapped in a mockery. you have the angry republicans that didn't make the case, the high dudgeon democrats. but it is paul go czar who takes the prize for showing this situation at its best, and by that i mean at its worst.

>> this morning i watched. by the way, i'm a dentist, so i read body language very, very well. and i watched you comment and actions with mr. gowdy. you got very angry in regards to the gold star father. that shows me that it's innately a part of you and a bias. >> sir, i disagree. i don't know if you're saying this experience is like being at the dentist if that's what you're suggesting. but i would tell you, sir, what you see in my response, what you see in my response is a genuine passion for the united states of america. >> i'm a dentist, so i read body language very, very well. is that in the same vein as i'm not a dentist, but i stayed at a holiday inn last night, and i can gladly do your dentures. crazy. anyway, he followed it up with this. >> we are not a democracy. we are a constitutional republic. that is why we have two ways

both from a democracy voting and then from -- where we have the electoral college. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> what say? first of all, a representative -- a constitutional republic is a form of democracy. and, yes, we have the popular vote, and we have the electoral vote. my 12-year-old knows all of that even if it stumped the congressman there for a second. what we don't know is why these sides can't come together for you. they work for you. we asked all the big republicans to come on who were big at the hearing today. none of them came on. they all went on fox, all right? thank you for watching. "cnn tonight with don lemon" will start right now. we asked them all. we gave them the opportunity to make the case. >> certainly did. >> they all went to the mother ship. and as long as it continues that way, there can't be common ground. >> well, that wasn't supposed