democratic officials to an alleged child trafficking ring at a pizzeria in washington, d.c. but people believed it. leading to one man opening fire on the restaurant. no one was hurt, but some worry it could be a precursor of violence spawned by the group's outlandish claims. randi kaye, cnn, new york. >> weird. quick reminder, don't miss our daily interactive newscast on facebook. it's called full circle. you can see it weeknights 6:25 eastern at facebook.com/anderson cooper full circle. the news continues. i want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time." >> i love full circle, by the way. so does my 15-year-old. look at you breaking into a new generation. and thank you for randi's setup piece. it is the perfect transition to the case we're going to make. thank you, my friend. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." mueller wants to talk to trump about obstruction. this is a fact. believe nothing else. this is on the table. despite denials by the

president's legal team, trump's tweets are not just opinions. they are potential admissions and potential suggestions of intent. so tonight what we know about the probe and why the tweets may come back to haunt the president. what does the number two democrat in the senate think? dick durbin is here, and we're going to put him to the test. and the president does have this new group of fans showing up at rallies attacking his enemies, but they may not be the boost he seeks. the conspiracists that are trolling the internet chat rooms for trump rallies. q anonymous. there is a lot to test tonight. what do you say? let's get after it. i want to take you through this right off the top tonight before i get to anything else. we have new details on the mueller investigation. we're learning that mueller does want to talk about obstruction with trump, period. they've always wanted to. and there is an ongoing

negotiation about how much will be written, questions and answers, how much will be oral, how long it will be, what areas. all that is true. but the biggest news today we see in the president's apparent response to this latest volley from mueller. and it's this tweet right here. okay? you remember this tweet. this is a terrible situation. "the attorney general jeff sessions should stop." that's important why? because you're hearing from his attorneys and his defenders he would have said must stop if it were an order, this is just an opinion. that's for you to figure out. but it certainly matters for another reason. why? "rigged witch hunt." "before it continues to stain our country any further. bob mueller is totally conflicted and his 17 angry democrats that are doing his dirty work are a disgrace to the usa." is this an opinion or a dog whistle or both? i'm going make the case to you at the top of the show. to mueller, to you, to me these tweets matter. why?

he's the president of the united states. these are official communications from our government. even the white house was forced to agree with that. and it should tell you something, that the white house avoided owning trump's tweets as official statements for quite some time. but they are. and the latest spate has particular significance on two levels. he's calling for the a.g. to shut it down. opinion, admission, order, whatever. and he's disparaging all aspects of those doing the investigating. okay? both aspects of that pose problems. one in law, the other in politics. 17 angry democrats, part of a riff he's been on if you see this collage of tweets that we have here for you. the white house and his attorneys, again, they say oh no, this is just what the president thinks, it's first amendment. he's not you. he's not me. he's the president p he has control over these probes. he has controls over the institutions of government. so they're not just opinions. and when you say these kinds of

things, he's doing two things. he's discrediting the probe, rightly and wrongly, and he's doing something else i'm going get to in a second. now, what a president can and cannot do to influence an investigation that he is part of is up for debate. all right? there are different takes on it. but it's a real issue. and we know that these signals that he sends are relevant. his tweets show deceptions about what he knew and when he knew it about flynn, about why he moved on comey, about what his motivations were at the time. all of this could very well matter a lot to people looking for proof of corrupt intent that is the state of mind needed for obstruction of justice and to look for acts that were intentional to stop or hinder a probe. is that a crime? i don't know. but the tweets could be taken as admissions, proof of fact, proof of intent. and the president keeps making them. that's the legal side i wanted to lay out for you. but there's something else that

is potentially more important. they are a reflection of an ugly reality that trump has tried hard to create. the division, as you know, in this country is really raw. and it's not really partisan. you could argue it's not partisan at all, that democrats and republicans are just collateral damage in what's going on. both parties are on the wane as independents now outnumber both. and what we see are passions on the rise. trump gets this very well. he plays to it for better and worse. i think that doing what works for him and his base, stoking discontent, abusing the truth, stoking conspiracy theories, may come at a cost. he has lies have become so frequent. okay? when we look at these kinds of things. the "washington post" has the truth detector that they do on it. the fact checker says he now lies at a rate of more than 7 1/2 times a day to you. and that works.

it's reduced the impact on you and the ability of the media to track the same types of data and make the case to you that it matters. this tweet about the -- the tweet about the 17 angry men and the mueller conflicts, if it smacks of alex jones junk that's because a lot of it is. remember, the president is privy to information that's way better than what i have and what you have very often. he knows that strzok didn't work the case against him in any real way. he knows comey and mueller and rosenstein are lifelong republicans that no one in our institutions have any real concerns about. he knows that mueller didn't simply pick democrats to be on his team as a lifelong republican. he picked experts in money laundering and financial crimes. he knows the fisa warrants to surveil carter page weren't solely based on the dossier. he knows this. he's in charge of the institutions of government. he knows mueller isn't conflicted out because of some golf membership or out to get him. he knows these things.

he knows what's going on. so why is he ignoring what's true and cultivating a base that anticipate conspiracies and dark mysteries of power? that takes us to the topic of qanon, q anonymous. internet conspiracy collective. you see them at trump rallies. they have their seth rich signs, "we are q," that's them. the seth rich things that you'll see come up here in a little bit. what is that about? seth rich was a young man who worked for the dnc. he was murdered. and they are ascribing it to a political plot that his family condemns and investigators dismiss. but they're with trump. why? because he tells them that feeling is as good as fact. he has his people at his rally that look for the number 17, the signs of truth. q is the 17th letter in the alphabet. not that that helps make any sense of its significance to them. and they see trump tweeting something like this.

17 angry democrats. they take value in the number 17. a potential sign. i hope he didn't use that number for them. he doesn't always use the number 17. i don't see that as being intentional. but who knows these days? but he has their interest. so what are they doing now? well, they join in support of him and attacks of others. you saw what happened with jim acosta. if we go back to this video, when it gets to where jim was, you'll see there were a lot of those q people who were in front of him. they're even stalking stormy daniels' attorney michael avenatti. why? why go after michael avenatti? because he's identified as one of trump's opponents. and they are now out to defend the presidential from their imagined array of opposition. and not a word from the white house about this. actually, that's not true. sarah sanders did say this today. >> unfortunately, it's now standard to abandon common sense ethical practices. this is a two-way street.

we certainly support a free press. we certainly condemn violence against anybody. but we also ask that people act responsibly and report accurately and fairly. we certainly support freedom of the press. we also support freedom of speech, and we think that those things go hand in hand. >> what did she avoid? she avoided saying to people don't shout at a free press, don't be that ugly, don't be that hostile, don't threaten violence like that, be better than that, the trump supporters are better than that. she didn't say that. why? you decide. and what speech do they support at the white house? they support speech like when sanders justified the president calling the free press scum, right? a stain on america. the enemy of the people. they support all that as free speech. but they don't support free speech when they don't like it. that's when they disinvite journalists and they shrink away from interviews and they won't put their people out on shows like this. so what does all this tell us tonight? the tweets matter. they could have significance to investigators who are digging for proof of intent which the

president seems all but too happy to supply. that could be dangerous. and so could feeding all these fringe groups that are finding comfort in a potential cause for action in trump's scorched earth attacks on american institutions. now, what is our job? it's to call it out, give the information to you, and let you make informed decisions. we are going to do that job no matter what the president encourages to stop us. in fact, i believe as deeply as anything that the president has made my job more important than ever. so what do you say? let's take a quick break and get back after it. let's do this job. we've got a senator here tonight who is at the center of two of the biggest problems we face, the russia probe and those captured kids on the border. he sees big developments coming on both fronts. the democratic whip, senator dick durbin, next. fruits and veggies are essential to your health,

but it's tough to get enough of their nutrients. new one a day with nature's medley is the only complete multivitamin with antioxidants from one total serving of fruits and veggies try new one a day with nature's medley. ♪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™ rewards me basically aeverywhere.om transitions™ so why am i sliding into this ski lodge with my mini horse? because hotels.com lets me do me. sorry, the cold makes him a little horse. hotels.com. you do you and get rewarded.

could help them save money on car insurance? yea,that and homeowners, renters, motorcycle and boat insurance. huh.that's nice. what happens when you catch a fish? gecko: whoa. geico. more than just car insurance. see how much you could save at geico.com. i'm ok!

question. what does it mean when the president responds to more demands from the mueller probe by saying it should end? is that just an opinion or is it an admission that the president will stop this investigation? and if he were to stop it, is that obstruction of justice? weighty questions. so let's get after it with the senate minority whip, illinois democrat senator dick durbin. senator durbin, thank you for joining us on "prime time." what do you make of the president's tweet? i'll put it up for the audience. that seemed to be a call to the attorney general to stop the mueller probe.

his people are saying no, use the word should, not must, it's not an order, it's just his opinion. >> the president's playing games with words here. we know exactly what his opinion is in the mueller probe. he's called it a witch hunt and many other names. it's time for mitch mcconnell to finally let us pass the bipartisan legislation that once and for all protects the special counsel and lets him finish his business. >> that said, the president does have the right to say he thinks that the probe is a joke and that it should end, right? he still has his first amendment rights as well, no? >> well, he certainly does, but when he starts trying to influence a man that he appointed as attorney general, it gets dangerously close to obstruction of justice. >> what is the line for you? can a president obstruct justice? and if so, what would you need to see? >> well, of course he can obstruct justice. and in this situation an investigation which may or may not find him culpable if he

tries to stop it, if he tries to dismiss bob mueller before he's completed the investigation, all of these things i think are as they say prima facie evidence. >> what do you make of the notion that the law doesn't make it clear enough where a president is involved? because he has as the supreme court has held and i know you know this, almost absolute firing power. he can get rid of whomever he wants whenever he wants. in the absence of a law that says otherwise. and there is no statute that specifically does this. >> and coincidentally, his nominee for the supreme court, brett kavanaugh, has said he believes that a president should basically be immune from investigation and prosecution while in office. that is certainly a timely choice of a nominee. >> in absence of legislation he too -- kavanaugh argues as well because of the absence of a statute that says otherwise a president should be exempt. >> well, we can argue one way or the other. a statute would make it a lot clearer, but we're not going to get a statute through this republican congress and signed by this particular president.

>> so let's say that mueller either doesn't find the sufficiency or doesn't believe he can charge and indict a sitting president, which seems to be the case. do you believe that what you see as potential obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense under the high crimes and misdemeanors nebulous standard? >> well, i'm going to wait for mueller's conclusion. and i have a lot of faith in him. i'll stand by his conclusion. whether it exonerates the president or finds him guilty, or at least accuses him of being guilty of some misconduct. when it comes to the impeachment process i can just tell you i've been through that with president clinton. this is a very high standard under our constitution. i do not consider it lightly. and should it go forward i would be sitting on the jury in the united states senate. >> isn't that one of the best arguments in favor of wrapping this up? if mueller doesn't have really heavy-duty ammunition against the president and impeachment is

largely a political numbers game, why wouldn't he wrap it up? if he doesn't have something to actually indict and charge on and impeachment is all but impossible because of the numbers in congress right now, where is the progress in all of this? >> chris, let me tell you, i trust robert mueller. i've known him for 20 years. i have worked with him when he headed the fbi. he's a consummate professional. he is handling this professionally. the reason he's getting battered in the press by the president's constant tweets calling it a witch hunt is because he believes that a good professional prosecutor doesn't try his case in the press. i'm going to give him the timetable he needs to complete this. this is an historic undertaking. i want it done right. when it's all over, i want the american people to feel justice is being done. >> that's got to be the bar. people have to believe it's the truth. they have to believe that they understand the facts and the consequences. that should be everybody's priority. so in that vein i want to pivot with you because the judiciary committee that you're on is

going to have a role when it comes to dealing with what is happening on our border right now. this reunification process is pleasing to one of the judges in the litigations. but it's still a low standard. we know there's not a plan. and most importantly we know from an hhs official now that they knew what would happen if they did this and they did it anyway. what does that tell you and what can you do about that? >> well, it tells me that this idea, forcibly removing children from their parents, was a humanitarian disaster from start to finish. there was callous disregard for these children even though we took them under our custodial care as a government. we did not keep records on their parents or the children. clearly no one was even thinking ahead to the possibility of reunifying them at some point. now, this judge in southern california set deadlines which our government has met partially but failed to meet in many respects.

we have as of this week 711 children who have not been reunited. 91 of those children they say they just can't even identify who their parents might be. that is reckless disregard for the well-being of these children. someone ought to accept responsibility. and that's why i called for the resignation of the department of homeland security secretary, nielsen, this week. >> the criticism of that poll, though, or did garner a lot of headlines, is too low on the totem pole, senator. you know she's not calling the shots. she's doing what she's told to do. you have attorney general sessions out there saying that basically the point of this was deterrence. he's a big shot. you have the president who's been campaigning on this since the moment he came down those fateful stairs in one of his buildings. why go after her? >> the president will face his day of reckoning on this decision and so many others in due time under our constitution. as far as the attorney general is concerned i know exactly where he stands on this issue and so many others and he is

culpable in the process. but she is the one who was the architect and engineered the process start to finish. she needs to accept personal responsibility for making a disastrous decision which reflects so badly on our country. >> senator grassley says it's on you, it's on congress, the system stinks and you haven't designed any better laws and you basically boxed in the executive and the law enforcement officials to have to make bad choices. >> my response to my friend chuck grassley is that five years i sat down with seven senators, four democrats, four republicans, all together, we put together a comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed the united states senate with 65 votes. it didn't include his vote, i might add. but it passed and was sent to the republican house which even refused to consider it. we need comprehensive immigration reform. there is no evidence this president supports that. >> well, here's what we know. if nothing changes, the situation will stay the same. the courts can only do so much. and we're going to need legal action and we're going to need enforcement priorities, and you're going to be part of that equation.

senator, thank you for joining us. we'll be talking about that again. you're always welcome on this show. >> thanks, chris. and with democrats like durbin and the republicans what they do will be weighed and measured in the midterm elections. fast approaching. less than 97 days now. president trump's already furiously campaigning. and someone else is getting back in the political game. president obama. who will be the biggest influence at the polls? the making of a great debate. and look at those two punims to get after it. next.

man: are unpredictable crohn's symptoms following you everywhere? it's time to take back control with stelara®. for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission with dosing every 8 weeks. woman: stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections

and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. man: are you fed up with crohn's symptoms following you? talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. cost support options. ♪ ♪ let your perfect drive

come together at the lincoln summer invitation sales event. get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus $1,000 bonus cash. 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 online today. the president repeated his threat today to shut down the government if he doesn't get the money for his border wall before the mid-terms. he even argues it would be good for the gop if there were a shutdown. what do you think? let's have a great debate with ana navarro and steve cortes. here is some of the sound of the president saying it today. he was on with rush limbaugh, who's celebrating 30 years in the business. here's what he said.

>> here you are, suggesting that you'd be willing to maybe -- you talk about shutting down the government if that's what it took to get this wall built. >> it's like pulling teeth. getting these guys to get it done is -- and you have no idea how tough i've been. and i say hey, if you have a shutdown you have a shutdown. but whether it's before or after. but i actually think it's a great campaign issue. i think it would be great before. >> steve cortes, shutdown good. why? >> i totally agree. look, i think it's both good policy and good politics. good policy because the president ran on this as his signature issue. it is perhaps the foremost reason that he won the presidency, and it's a promise he made to the american people. in terms of policy, for weeks, chris, we've been talking about the terrible situation we've had down at the border particularly as it regards children and families entering illegally. guess what? a wall solves 95% of those problems at the border if we only have guarded accessible points of entry where we can control what happens down there.

but secondly, and this is on the political side, i think quite frankly the republicans are in trouble. the democrats are clearly favored to take the house right now. history argues that. present polling argues that. one way, though, to crystallize the president's coalition, the deplorables, and get them excited that president trump is back on the ballot is to give the congress an up or down choice. the congress loves to equivocate and bloviate. we need to make it very simple for them. you either fund this wall that the american people voted for or we're going to shut government down. >> ana, what happens if there's a shutdown politically? >> first of all, the republicans take the blame. i mean, i'm almost tempted to say great, go ahead, do a government shutdown because i think it will be so politically costly. it's impossible to think that anybody other than the republicans would take the blame when you have a republican house, a republican senate, and a republican president. look, i remember back when there was -- the entire shutdown debate and shutdown when obama was president. and it was the republicans who

took the blame. so it's not a good look for a republican party that has the entire power and the entire package to not be able to function properly. also, chris, it's so -- look, donald trump likes to flex his muscle. right? he likes to do things that he can do on his own. he likes to impose tariffs. he likes to give out pardons. he likes to show that he is a powerful macho man that's got all this political power and policy power and can make changes and there's all these republicans in congress begging him and he's being the magnanimous guy. but listen, it is very cavalier i think for a very rich guy who spends so much time at his golf clubs and jetting around to his own properties to throw out the idea of a government shutdown so carelessly. the people who get hurt in a government shutdown are the government workers, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck.

the first ones that start getting furloughed are people like park rangers, people who are low on the totem pole, on the bureaucratic totem pole, and it inflicts a lot of pain on a lot of people in america including a lot of families. >> forgive me if i don't feel sorry for government workers. the five richest counties in america by income are all in the washington, d.c. metro area. there's a reason for that. it's because washington, d.c. and the establishment crony swamp has siphoned the wealth and prosperity of the american people for its own benefits and it's done that for decades. that's the reason donald trump was elected. and if the government non-essential services need to be shut down, it's already happened twice this year, it wasn't armageddon, if that needs to happen again so they can finally get it through their thick heads on capitol hill that the american people vote ford a wall and demand a wall -- >> steve. >> -- then that's what we need to do. >> steve, what did it cost -- >> nothing looks more like a swamp than donald trump's cabinet. okay? if you want to talk about people siphoning off money.

do you think that park rangers who work around the country are making six figures? do you think they are making what betsy devos or wilbur ross make? on one day? they're not. and they're going to suffer. and they've got to feed their families. so it's very cavalier and it's very nice, you know, to throw out the entire drain the swamp line and all of this stuff. but there's very real people. some of whom, by the way, are probably trump supporters. who are going to feel a lot of pain in their pocketbook. >> steve, what do you think the 2013 shutdown cost? >> i don't know the number. >> and neither does the president, i would guess. right? $20 billion. .3 percentage points in gross domestic product. federal government had to pay additional interest on payments that were late because of the shutdown. hundreds of patients were prevented from enrolling in clinical trials at the national institutes of health. $4 billion in tax refunds were delayed. you really think this comes for free? >> chris, do you think a porous

border comes for free? do you think that's cheap? >> i think you're conflating two things. if you don't like one thing, why would you hurt me with something else? and the number i let go of before i wanted to wait for ana to speak first. 95%? why don't you say jiggagillion percent? because it's as accurate as saying 95%. you don't know at all what percentage difference a border wall would make on who comes across and what kind of problems we would have. you don't have any basis for that number that you said. >> what we know right now -- >> yeah. >> -- is that what we're doing isn't working. >> no, 95% better? that's like where is that coming from? >> yes, i believe that. >> oh, that's what you believe. oh, i'm sorry. i didn't know that. >> it's not as though i just pulled it out of thin air. >> yeah, you did. >> look at where walls work. places like israel. >> like what, china? like the great wall of china? most of the drugs -- >> i'm not talking about that. >> -- that we're worried about in this country come either from overseas shipments and the cartel, which i had the

misfortune to spend all this time with doing this el chapo documentary. they did the majority of it through tunnels. you know, you guys make up this b.s. to make people think that the wall -- we're a wall away from no one ever getting in again. this isn't "game of thrones," steve. why talk that nonsense? >> chris, it will -- >> not to mention that he's not going to -- >> by the way, you don't have to take my word for it. you can take my experts' word for it. >> 95%. nobody says 95%. i was there with them. watching them. humanely deal with people who come across. dealing with body after body of desperate people trying to make it across because the process doesn't allow them in. they can't make it their legal way. nobody says 95%. >> that's not true. tom holman -- >> it's a waste. >> tom holman who is the former head of i.c.e., said again and again what a difference a border wall would make. the border patrol officers association -- >> nobody said 95%, period. ana, make your final point. >> obviously, that's my educated

guess -- >> the final point is not only will it put -- >> 95% is not an educated guess. it's nonsense. it's hyperbole. >> yes, it is. >> ana, go ahead. >> why is your opinion more valid than my opinion? >> i'll tell you why in a second. >> go ahead. >> oh, jesus -- >> i'm saying go ahead. >> not only will it put pain on the people of america, it will put a hell of a lot of pain on republicans who are in purple districts like the one i live in. that's the reason that a paul ryan and a mitch mcconnell don't want this to happen before the election or after the elections, because they are going to look like a bunch of dysfunctional boobs incapable of getting anything done and they are going to lose even more seats because people in ileana ros-lehtinen's district who are going to have vote for a new candidate, people in carlos corbello's district and so many purple districts are going to make someone pay for the dysfunction in washington. >> last word to you. and the reason that i get to check it that way is because the burden of proof is on you. you said the number. i don't have to justify it's wrong. you have to justify it's right. >> your opinion my number is

wrong is no better than my -- >> 100%. because you have no basis for it. send me proof of 95%. >> you sending me a basis -- >> dinner's on me. i don't need a basis because -- >> i hope we find out because if we get the wall we'll find out. >> i hope we find out if i'm right, not on my watch. we deal with facts here. you send me the number dinner's on me. >> i'm saying i hope because i want the wall. >> everybody wants the border to be more secure. i'm saying you don't have to lie about facts to get it. and i'm out of time. ana, i'll always buy you dinner. steve, you have to prove the 95 first. robert mueller, let's turn to him. he has been scouring president trump's tweets for possible proof of a pattern, proof of intent. now, some will say oh, tweets, dismiss them. no. it's never been the case. they matter. now, did the president just hand him some damaging evidence? we're going to get back to our top story with a former senior aid to the president's campaign.

michael caputo. you know a wall isn't going to be a 95% improvement to who comes across the border. come on. ♪[upbeat music] ♪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™ so chances are, you've seen us around the house. transitions™ or... around the yard. on the shelf... or even... out in the field. your mom knew she could always count on us... and your grandma did too. because for over 150 years, we've been right by your side.

advancing the health of the people, plants and pets you love. so, from all of us at bayer... thank you for trusting in us. then... and now. with tripadvisor, finding your perfect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all the hotels for your stay! tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to show you the lowest prices... so you can get the best deal on the right hotel for you.

dates, deals, done! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com i knew at that exact moment ... i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors. it's not just picking a surgeon, it's picking the care team and feeling secure in where you are. visit cancercenter.com/breast chicken! that's right, chicken?! candace-- new chicken creations from starkist. buffalo style chicken in a pouch-- bold choice, charlie! just tear, eat... mmmmm. and go! try all of my chicken creations! chicken!

obstruction versus opinion. let's dig into the president's tweets with michael caputo, former aide to the trump presidential campaign. always good to see you. thank you for joining us. >> hey, thanks for having me, chris. >> all right. so make the case. they're just opinions. they shouldn't really matter to anybody. why? >> i think words have consequences, words really do matter. that's why when the president used the word should instead of the word must i think anybody examining his tweets for evidence of obstruction will have just as much luck as they are having trying to find collusion on the campaign. it's not there. it's the president's opinion. he doesn't suspend his first amendment rights when he takes the oath of office. >> but it is different when he says something like that than if you or i do. would you agree with that? >> no, the word should has a meaning. for the president or for you, chris. it's should, not must. >> i understand the difference

between the words. thank you for pointing it out, mr. strunk & white. what i'm saying is this is one tweet that is one among many that has shown a clear intention by this president to want the probe ended. and when you look at the tweets as a suggestion of a state of mind of his intentions and you put it into context with the things that he has done, is it any surprise that the mueller investigators want to talk to the president about obstruction of justice? >> i'm not surprised at all. i also won't be surprised if they'll find no proof of obstruction in his tweets just like they've found zero proof of collusion in his campaign. you know what? all along, chris, i've thought that the mueller investigation should, you know, work its way out and find its way to an end. but i'm with the president now. this thing needs to be shut down. it's been two years. we know that paul manafort in a very questionable fisa warrant, were going on even before that

investigation, even before paul was on the campaign. this has been going on long enough. there's zero proof of any collusion. we're not going to have any. and looking at his tweets for obstruction is not what this is about. this is about collusion on the campaign. we are not finding anything -- >> why -- >> -- of the sort and we're never going to find it. >> let's just step through this stuff a little bit. manafort is what it is. we have to see what they have. they're going to trial right now. so always there was a sufficiency met legally there. in terms of duration, by what standard is this too long? i can tell you as somebody who's been in and around many federal investigations, they take a long time. and sometimes they never end. so i don't know that duration is indicative of anything in this case. but then oh, the tweets, as if the tweets are somehow inconsequential -- >> how long is long enough, chris? >> i'm saying all i know is we don't know that duration has a certain scale when it comes to investigations. they looked at clinton much longer than this -- >> is five years long enough, chris?

is ten years long enough? >> did you complain about the length of the probe against bill clinton? no. why? you liked it. now you don't like it. >> looking back on that now -- >> now. of course you do now. >> sitting where i sit now i look back on it, i never supported the investigation of bill clinton over his personal life. and i think the special counsel law itself needs to be changed -- >> well, there is none now. >> people's lives being destroyed by this. >> we don't have that statute in place right now, which is why so much is unclear about what a president can and cannot do. but dismissing the tweets, michael, i don't get it. i've always been a big buyer of the president's tweets. they are statements, official statements from the president of the united states. how he decides to speak, what language and forethought he decides to use is up to him. but they matter, michael. >> no doubt words matter, chris. and nobody knows that better than the president of the united states. i'll tell you what, if the

president offends the delicate sensibilities of the liberal left -- >> no, it's about the truth. it's not about liberal -- it's about saying it's free speech what he says, he can give his opinion whenever he wants, this is america we heard from sarah sanders. but not when you're an official who he doesn't like. then you accuse him of politicizing a process, which is exactly what the president's doing. and you want to pull their clearances. so when he does it, the president, it's okay -- >> no, no. not at all, chris. >> -- it's just free speech. but whenever these intel guys do it, pull their clearances they're politicizing it, they're a disgrace. talk about a double standard. give me a break, michael. >> well, i'll tell you what. the same men who we are all on the trump side supporting we pull their clearances are the ones who were trying to stop the president from winning the election and then now people who were involved in the intelligence agencies, the intelligence community are trying to get rid of the president. these people who have these top secret security clearances

should have them pulled because the administration is never going to ask their opinion on anything. anything. >> that is on -- >> at the end of the day the president's tweet says the word should, not must. >> i understand it says should. but it's about context -- >> lint in our navels here. >> hold on, i'm not saying the tweet is dispositive of anything. i'm saying it's suggestive of something and that's why they want to look at it. and if the president didn't tweet this way and were more careful with his words you and i would be spending more time personally and not professionally. i've got to go. i'm out of time. michael caputo -- >> i'm wonder field goal you're going to buy me dinner too, chris. >> well, you say something as dumb as 95% safer if we build the wall you'll get the dinner too. because i'm as tight as two coats of paint and i know i'm not paying on that bet. but i'll always take you to dinner. you're a good man and be well. there were only three white house briefings last month. why? because they don't like dealing with the media and dealing with the tough questions. they prefer their rallies. but sarah sanders was at the podium today just in time to

answer questions about her boss's eye-popping tweet. we're going to show you how that went and what it means to you, next. my car smells good. it's these new fresh-fx car air fresheners from armor all. each scent can create a different mood in my car. like tranquil skies. armor all, it's easy to smell good.

♪ hawaii is in the middle of the pacific ocean. we're the most isolated population on the planet. ♪ hawaii is the first state in the u.s. to have 100% renewable energy goal. we're a very small electric utility. but, if we don't make this move

we're going to have changes in our environment, and have a negative impact to hawaii's economy. ♪ verizon provided us a solution using smart sensors on their network that lets us collect near real time data on our power grid. (colton) this technology is helping us integrate rooftop solar, which is a very important element of getting us to our renewable energy goals. ♪ (shelee) if we can create our own energy, we can take care of this beautiful place that i grew up in. ♪

only remfresh usesody's ion-powered melatonin to deliver up to 7 hours of sleep support. number one sleep doctor recommended remfresh-your nightly sleep companion.

let's bring in don lemon for a second here. i want to get his take on something. >> what do you have for me? >> he was on last night. he's a gamer. he supports the president. he brings it. hear something he said >> we've been talking about the terrible situation we've had at the border particularly as it regards children and families entering illegally. a wall solves 95% of the problems. >> you know where he gets that number? >> yes. >> well, i'm glad you used your ear. because some people would say somewhere else. i was looking down as i was listening to that. trying to do a little bit of research here, one of the bigger problems where immigration is

people who overstay their visas. in 2016, i think it was 629,000 people overstayed their visas. those countries are mostly european countries. this whole thing about the border is in crisis, there are a lot of europeans who are here illegally, they shouldn't be here. >> what's the point? we know we have problems they're going to have to deal with that with these calls to abolish iris and everything else our whole deal is because of instances like this. no personal disrespect to steve i understand what he's doing but they just throw stuff out there, and the president is the master of it, and then it becomes true because it feels right. if we can't get straight on the facts, we'll never get straight on what to do.

>> that sort of behavior led to this whole qanon movement. conspiracy theorists, the president picks up on that they get riled up, and facts don't really matter any more. we'll be discussing that. >> why did the president change from 13 angry democrats to 17. 17 is the qanon number. >> he talks about the democrats on the mueller investigation mueller's a republican. >> i'll be watching you and i'll tee you up for that now and see you about it later. >> see you. >> be well, don. >> don't want you to forget about a story, black man left dead last month in florida. a new development part of our closing argument next. remember this video?

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. man: are unpredictable crohn's symptoms following you everywhere? it's time to take back control with stelara®. for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently.

studies showed relief and remission with dosing every 8 weeks. woman: stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. man: are you fed up with crohn's symptoms following you? talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. cost support options. ♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express.

be the readiest.

marquis mclaughlin was shot and killed after shoving a man to the ground in florida.

it didn't warrant an arrest. deadly violence doesn't have to be the last resort. and fairness under the law goes from light to dark as skin shade does the same. here are the basic facts. michael was upset that brittany parked in a disabled spot. her boyfriend came outside and this happened. you're going to see him -- a moment later, we don't know what was said. he's shot in the chest and dies from the wound. here's the pinellas county sheriff explaining his reasoning yesterday. >> my decision not to arrest, is because florida law creates a situation where someone is immune from arrest if their conduct is arguably within the parameters of stand your ground, look at the law, the law says

the law enforcement may not arrest. look at florida statute 776.032. >> he's leaving out the part of the statute that says probable cause is still a standard for law enforcement like that sheriff. the burden of proof shifts to the prosecutor to show self-defense wasn't in play. of this law may be the crown jewel of the nra efforts. now you've got two dozen states with some various form of this. but the bar for an arrest, that's the point i want you to get here, it didn't change, that's in the law too. there was probable cause -- the sheriff didn't think that that standard was met, why? the law is not color-blind, even with this ridiculously low

standard. the system is still harder on blacks. the good news is, the state is new looking at this case, so should you here's why. everything about the situation is too casual. prosecutors have a higher burden, that's what the state law says, he's not the prosecutor. this assumption and standard that it's okay has to be examined. if we reach a point where a shove results in a gunshot death. it just so happens that the shooter is white and the victim is black, and the law makes it so easy to justify. so much so, that the sheriff doesn't think an arrest is worth it. is that justice defined as fairness under the law? is that who we want to be.

we will stay on this case, i ask that you do the same. cnn tonight with don lemon is going to start right now. >> i saw that video, and that story has haunted me. there's so many stories that don't rise to the level or get on air because of what's happening in washington, that is certainly one of them. you and i talk about, is that who we are and who we want -- >> not even an arrest? >> right. i don't think it's who we want to be. as i say, to you, that's who we are right now. stand your ground was on a big run in the early 2000s, not any more, why? people are seeing, it's a social instruction that's very dangerous. >> people got a big lesson with trayvon martin. >> here we are in the same state, this time they don't make an arrest. >> very to get to breaking news, i'll see you soon. thank you very much.