aloud no. this jury taking it very seriously. we're just waiting to see what happens. >> jessica schneider, appreciate it. thank you. thanks to all of you for joining me this morning. "inside politics" with john king starts right now. thank you, erica. nice to see you. welcome to "ed in politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. the president lashing out at robert mueller, accusing him of trying to sway the midterm elections, but the true source of his anger, learning his white house counsel answered prosecutor questions for 30 hours. plus, rudy giuliani defines or redefines truth and collusion. is the president going to regret his choice of lawyers? and as the president bullies the special counsel on twitter, the first lady says cyber bullying is wrong. and she adds this priceless

twist. >> let's face it, most children are more aware of the benefits and pitfalls of social media than some adults, but we still need to do all we can to provide them with information and tools for successful and safe online habits. >> back to that in a bit. but we begin today in the dark with an angry president. president trump and all of us still have no comprehensive idea of what the special counsel robert mueller knows at this point. the president knows more than most, and he's very angry today, as he was throughout the weekend. he now knows his white house counsel don mcgahn has spent some 30 hours in interviews with mueller's team of investigators and prosecutors and, insert anger here, a source telling cnn the white house did not get a full briefing on what mcgahn discussed with investigators, nor we're told did they ask for one. another source insists mcgahn

provided no information that would be incriminating to the president. yet, friends tell cnn the president is mad, venting about having no control over an investigation with no end in sight. fresh twitter attacks on mueller today, accusing him, get this, of trying to hurt the president and his party in the midterm elections. mueller's a republican, by the way. those after weekend efforts to insist he's not worried about mcgahn's breathtaking cooperation. quote, i allowed white house counsel don mcgahn and all other requested members of the white house staff to fully cooperate with the special counsel. in addition, we gave over 1 million pages of documents, most transparent in history, no collusion, no obstruction, witch hunt, with an exclamation point from the president. the white house counsel for george w. bush says he gets the president's frustration. >> any time there's an ongoing investigation, particularly one of this magnitude, one that has generated so much publicity, it's human nature to be concerned about where the direction of the investigation,

even though you may feel you've done nothing wrong. from my perspective, it would be human nature. you want to know what's going on. >> cnn's kaitlan collins joins us from the white house. in the president's tweets, you see a lot of anger. is it really just human nature? >> reporter: john, the president seems rattled through his tweets today. we can see that from this report that the president was aware that don mcgahn did meet with the special counsel, but he wasn't aware of the extent of those conversations that the white house counsel had with the special counsel. that's coming through in the president's tweets today. now, of course they were aware, but they did not ask for a full debrief of everything the special counsel asked don mcgahn. that's stunning in and of itself. typically they would try to figure out everything the special counsel knew and what he was trying to get at during those conversations with the white house counsel. but that simply didn't happen. rudy giuliani made that quite clear in an interview yesterday when he said he was aware don mcgahn had spoken to a special counsel, but he was relying on

what john dowd had told him about those conversations. so making clear that the current legal team is not aware of what don mcgahn said to the special counsel during those interviews. now, of course don mcgahn is not the president's lawyer. he's here representing the presidency. that's something that hasn't always been clear to president trump himself. but john, what we're learning today is just how bothered the president is that he may not know every single thing don mcgahn revealed to the special counsel. don mcgahn, who's been at the center of a lot of these things, including when the president ordered him to have the special counsel fired several months ago. that's another episode that don mcgahn was involved in. the president doesn't seem to know everything he told robert mueller and his team. >> kaitlan collins live at the white house. got to give the president some credit at least for transparency. when he's mad about something, that's easy to figure that part out. before we have a conversation here, we typically don't see a lot of the white house counsel don mcgahn, but we saw him today on capitol hill.

you see him there behind brett kavanaugh. mcgahn intimately involved in the judicial nomination process. i make the point about transparency because it's true. when this president is mad, you don't have to call your sources. you can call them for a little back fill, but the president does it on twitter. the new thing was don mcgahn spent 30 hours with the investigators. the president's tweets go after bob mueller, go after democrats, go after the news media. but they came after he learned don mcgahn spent 30 hours with mueller's team. >> and one of the most interesting bits of "the new york times" reporting on this piece, i thought, was the notion that part of the reason why mcgahn decided to spend so much time and be so cooperative was that he was concerned if he didn't, he might imperil himself because the president might set him up. it gives you a sense of the

climate internally that many officials are facing as they make these decisions about what would a traditional white house counsel do and what should the current white house counsel do. >> and i want top get into some of the president's tweets. he goes after the failing "new york times," which is what he does. he attacks the organization. "the new york times" wrote a fake piece, he calls it, implying white house counsel don mcgahn must be a john dean type rat, rat in all capitals. the president says they have nothing to hide. then he goes on to the rigged and disgusting witch hunt. this one is rich, i guess. the president of the united states calling robert mueller mccarthyism at its worst. again, rich. then another one, the failing "new york times" goes at it again, implying he turned on the president when, in fact, it's just the opposite. again, when the president's mad, we know. >> we do know. i think that sort of this notion the president doesn't know everything about what don mcganh

said, i'm sure that drives the president crazy. should he know everything? no, absolutely not. this is an ongoing investigation. the president shouldn't be hauling witnesses in who just went to talk to mueller and saying, please report back to me everything you just said. i think one of the other things that's interesting in the case of mcgahn is the guy who's representing him is representing a bunch of other people from the white house, which means either all these people are telling essentially the same story about what went down in these key moments or this lawyer has a very big problem on his hands when it comes to his clients. in many ways, the president was going to -- once they decided this was their strategy to not invoke privilege, to let all these officials from the white house go in, they were setting themselves up for this. maybe it will ultimately protect the president because everyone will share the very same version of events and it will fall short of obstruction of justice. but maybe not. >> to this point, you saw don mcgahn up on capitol hill. reporters tried to shout questions at him. they did shout questions at him as he left the meeting, asking him if it was a mistake to have

you speak without limits to the special counsel, meaning that they did not assert privilege. there are some areas of don mcgahn's job that are not privileged. he's the white house lawyer. he's the institution's lawyer, the presidency's lawyer, not the president's lawyer. it's an important distinction. but his conversations with the president, if he's in a meeting about a personnel matter, that has executive privilege. so they could have asserted privilege. they decided not to. that was the president's first legal team. here's chris christie, former prosecutor, saying big mistake. >> put don mcgahn in an impossible situation. once you waive that privilege and turn over those documents, don mcgahn has no choice but to go in and answer everything, every question. it's bad legal advice, bad lawyering, and this is the result of it. >> is it bad legal advice, bad

lawyering? if that's true, it's a bad decision by the president. >> do you remember that overheard lunch and blt where one of the president's large legal team suggested that don mcgahn was withholding documents in a safe at the white house? i'm guessing that had something to do with don mcgahn's decision to go the other route and share as much as humanly possible. i don't know whether this is good lawyering or bad lawyering, but i'm also unclear as to what the president learns from his legal team. they've been assuring him it'll all be over soon. that's not true. you've got rudy giuliani acting more politically than legally and getting himself all messed up there too. >> in fairness to the president's legal team, though, the information they had going in from their client and his key advisers also changed. >> and there are two potential things the president may be angry or worried about here. the obvious thing is the truth. there is something he wanted to get out there or didn't want to get out there. mcgahn is a seasoned lawyer.

he's not going to lie to the special counsel, as the "times" report suggests he was worried about being set up as the fall guy. >> i think that gets to the question of, is this good lawyering or is it bad lawyering? maybe it's good lawyering in the sense that you made everyone available to recount anything the special counsel might want to know about potentially collusion, about potentially obstruction of justice. so we are going to use that as a fire wall to insist you cannot speak to the president. that's certainly an argument some of the president's previous lawyers have made. on the flip side, everyone has now been in. they've now shared their version of events. the special counsel may have a better case than we think about obstruction. they may know what the president did, what the president lied about, what motivated his actions, and they may be using all of that for an interview, just waiting to catch the

president in a lie, waiting to confront him with the evidence they have. we just don't know what all of these witnesses shared. >> and to that point, now they have this from don mcgahn, who's with the president, either in some of these meetings or just after some of these meetings or when the president is mad about things asking don mcgahn, fire the special counsel, get jeff sessions, talking about the comey firing. you're right, if you clear it all up, you can make the case you don't need to talk to the president. if he raised questions or contradicted other white house officials, then mueller says i need to talk to the president. he's the only one who can resolve this. more of this conversation as we go. before we go to break, there's been a lot of talk in recent days about john dean, white house lawyers, watergate, tapes. here we go. flashback, 1973, watergate testimony from the man president trump referred to over the weekend as the rat, white house counsel john dean, who flipped on richard nixon and helped bring down the presidency. >> it is my honest belief that while the president was involved

that he did not realize or appreciate at any time the implicatio implicatio implications of his involvement. i think when the facts come out, i hope the president is forgiven. if you have psoriasis, ...

little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats moderate to severe plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla . it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have  a history of depression or suicidal thoughts,... ...or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be.

otezla. show more of you. what i just introduced you worto my parents.g? psst! craig and sheila broke up. what, really? craig and shelia broke up!? no, craig!? what happened? i don't know. is she okay? ♪ craig and sheila broke up! craig and sheila!? ♪ as long as office gossip travels fast, you can count on geico saving folks money. craig and sheila broke up! what!? fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from an allergy pill? flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which most pills don't. it's more complete allergy relief. flonase.

at priceline, to save you money.ways like mixing and matching airlines to get lower prices on flights. oh, that's how i saved on my trip! oh, for your wedding?! no, my ex-boyfriend's wedding, he's confused. jason! mix and match airlines to save more. welcome back. we learn true and false about the same time we're taught right and wrong, but in this age of trump, can even truth be redefined? >> no, it isn't truth. truth isn't truth. the president of the united states says i didn't -- don't do this to me. >> don't do truth isn't truth to me. >> donald trump says i didn't talk about flynn with comey. comey says you did talk about it. so tell me what the truth is. >> today rudy giuliani trying to explain just what he meant there. the question was in the context

of whether president trump will or should do an interview with the special counsel. giuliani tweeting this morning, my statement was not meant as a pontiff kags on moral theology but referring to the classic he said, she said puzzle. sometimes further inquiry can reveal the truth. other times it doesn't. i hope that cleared it up. cnn legal analyst shan wu joins our panel. i get the point there. rudy giuliani is trying to say if james comey says i was fired because i wouldn't go easy on mike flynn and the president says that's not kwlwhy i fired james comey, who's telling the truth? >> the jeopardy really only arises if you're under oath. if trump does go in to be interviewed, then he's creating jeopardy for himself. i think the problem -- well, it's not really a problem. rudy has been working at this model for a while. he wants to set up the situation

where if there's anybody who could contradict the president, then he has ammunition to say this is a perjury trap, i'm not walking him into that. that's what he's been working on for a while. i think he's been a little successful at that, especially now that he claims the president never said anything about -- to comey. >> but he's on television talking to the president, right? he's not talking to us. >> exactly. >> he's talking to the president, trying to convince the president. another thing he said yesterday that was interesting -- and if you look up collusion in the dictionary, you get one definition. in the legal context, you need the conspiracy, the nefarious, the plotting. but here's rudy giuliani, the latest explanation, june 2016 trump power meeting led by donald trump jr., several other campaign officials involved. they think there are a bunch of russians coming in with dirt on hillary clinton. rudy says -- >> the meeting was originally for the purpose of getting information about clinton. the meeting turned into a meeting -- >> which in itself is attempted

collusion. you just said it. meeting was intended to get dirt on hillary clinton from a kremlin lawyer. >> no, no. >> that was the intention of the meeting. you just said it. >> that was the original intention of the meeting. it turned out to be a meeting about another subject, and it was not pursued at all. of course, any meeting with regard to getting information on your opponent is something any candidate's staff would take. >> okay. i'm going to stick with the lawyer for a second here. did he not just say right there that it was attempted collusion? now, the question is the conspiracy part of it. but donald trump jr., other top campaign officials, meeting with known russians, can't take any contribution in a campaign, financial or any other goods, material goods from a foreign national, period. never mind a foreign national from russia who most people would think of as not having the united states' interests at mind. isn't that what he just said there? if that was the truth, that this was attempted collusion, the russians didn't bring the dirt maybe but they went into it

expecting it. >> absolutely. it doesn't have to bear fruit for the attempt or conspiracy aspect of it. >> if you were bob mueller, what would you do with that? >> i wouldn't want rudy to be testifying, but i would be asking questions about that. that would pique my interest. i think their interest is already piqued on that front. >> nonlawyers at the table, help me. we've talked about this before, that a lot of what he's doing is political, not legal. he's trying to convince the trump base and convince all americans, frankly, don't believe anything you hear from the media, from bob mueller, from the justice department, from any institution that might file some charges against anybody in trump land or might question the conduct of the president. what purpose is he serving there? he's not helping his client. >> no, the thing that makes me bang my head against the wall every time anyone related to this case and to this campaign has said it is that, well, any campaign would go and get dirt on their opponent. yes, that is true. any campaign would seek out dirt on their opponent, but not from a foreign government and not

from someone from the government of russia. that is not how that works. when you talk to other campaign aides who worked on any other campaign, it really makes them want to set their hair on fire. they're like, in any campaign, there are always people coming from outside governments trying to be helpful. you either rebuff those or sent them to the fbi or certainly send them to the counsel for your campaign. it's the trump people who thought, wow, what a good idea, we should take the meeting. >> and to that point, here's rudy giuliani again, yesterday, on that meeting trying to say, well, they didn't know. >> she didn't represent the russian government. she's a private citizen. i don't even know if they knew she was russian at the time. all they had was her name. >> they knew she was russian. i think they knew she was russian. >> they knew it when they met with her, not when they set up the meeting. >> that's not true. donald trump jr. himself released some e-mails when he got caught in a lie about this, making clear he knew she was russian. they have this thing called the internet. you can look up her name if you do any due diligence.

plus, we know from testimony during the congressional investigations that they knew they were russians and knew those russians were promising dirt on hillary clinton. how can he say that? >> and then there's the matter of what the president did or didn't dictate as a response, which is also -- >> but is the president's lead attorney just uninformed or deliberately lying on television? >> does it matter? >> that's a sad question. it's the right question, but that's a sad question. >> the story has changed so many times, and it is now -- well, like 75% republican consumption, 25% for potus consumption. the derivative is mueller and his team can watch all of it. if they find it's useful, fold it back into what they're actually doing. but none of this helps on the legal side. >> you're thinking in the end the president is going to wish he had different lawyers? >> he'll never admit that. but i think that's -- >> i didn't ask if he'd admit it. >> he may think that. i think the strategy has been

pretty disorganized. to sara's point, giuliani would never have take than meeting. never. >> no. >> he would know better. >> one would hope. that's a little segue here. jurors in the paul manafort trial now in their third day of deliberations after being allowed to go home over the weekend. 18 charges in all. bank fraud, tax evasion, other charges he faces. manafort's attorney appearing upbeat on his way into court this morning. >> good morning, everyone. >> how is your client doing today? >> he's doing really good. >> not sure what he's supposed to say. cnn crime and justice reporter shimon prokupecz following the trial. any hints about where the jury is, how far along they are? >> reporter: no, we have no hints. we've heard nothing from the jury today. usually, you know, if there was some kind of movement, we'd get a request, a note would be sent to the judge. we've had no notes from the jury so far today. of course, they came in promptly this morning 9:30. they started their deliberation. now almost three hours they've

been working. of course, they went home early on friday. they asked to go home at 5:00 because one of the jurors had an event. since then, we have not heard anything from the jurors. also in the court today, there was some strange activity with the judge. he had two bench conferences with all of the lawyers. manafort was present in court for that. we don't know what that was about. that's been sealed. the judge, like he's done with other bench conferences, said he'll release the transcripts, john, once the trial is over. so there's been some mystery in the court. of course, we all continue to wait. >> more than any trial i can remember. i think those sealed transcripts are i think go to be as informative as the verdict itself. we'll see how this plays out. shimon, appreciate it. up next, new signs new york prosecutors closing in on charging the former trump attorney and fixer michael cohen. i'm captain obvious and hotels.com rewards me basically everywhere. 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. mom: okay we need to get all your school supplies today. school... grade... done. done. hit the snooze button and get low prices on school supplies all summer long. like these for only $2 or less at office depot officemax. like these for only $2 or less i'm a fighter. always have been. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.

when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey! oh, that's my robe. is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance. and still get great coverage for you and your family. call for a free quote today. you could save $782. liberty mutual insurance. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network.

welcome back. today fresh evidence the president needs to worry about another potential source of legal exposure. sources saying prosecutors in new york could soon charge michael cohen with blank fraud, possibly by the end of the month. "the new york times" first to report last night investigators in the southern district of new york zeroing in now on $20 million or so in loans cohen secured from two banks. this morning cnn producers spotted mr. cohen entering the offices of his attorneys in new york. he's been under investigation for some time.

"the new york times" story, some follow-up reporting by cnn leading to believe that both from the prosecution's standpoint and mr. cohen's legal team, i think this is reaching the charging point, which tells you what? >> well, bigger picture, i'll say the politics of this are unpleasant. there's a whiff of swampiness here. it's not nice for the president's party going into a midterm election with the cohen charges potentially percolating, the paul manafort trial and jury deliberation phase, and the president consumed with the special counsel investigation. it's a tough moment for the drain the swamp president when all this is happening. it's understandable why he's so angry about it all. >> without a doubt. one of the key questions is we know these taxi medallion companies that cohen owns and apparently was using to make the cases on the loans, if it's all about that, it's embarrassing to the president because this is somebody he mired, somebody he had close in, somebody close to him for years, somebody involved in his efforts. that's embarrassing for the president. but also, "the new york times" reports they're looking into whether there are any campaign

finance violations in the case of these mcdougal and stormy da danie daniels. that would make it more than embarrassing. that would bring it into the president. >> i think yet again this is one of those cases where we don't know what they know. what is true in michael cohen's case is that there are his dealings with the president in the context of the campaign and also his dealings in terms of representing the president and all of his business best ises dating back quite a long time. a lot of times in these types of investigations, there's the core thing that you begin looking at, russian interference in elections. then there's whatever comes out of it. so we've seen mr. manafort's case, now mr. cohen's case that the sort of tentacles have spread to them. i think the question for the president is not just in politics but in his entire previous life in business. does michael cohen have information that he wishes to

share with those investigators that could alleviate the burden on him that could be dangerous to mr. trump's business empire? >> to that point, this is how they put it in the "new york times" article. it is still possible mr. cohen may plead guilty rather than face an indictment. he's hinted publicly he's eager to tell prosecutor what is he knows in exchange for leniency. a cooperation agreement would likely include a provision that mr. cohen also provide information to the special counsel, who's investigating possible involvement by the trump campaign in russia's meddling. this is the southern district of new york case, not a mueller case. if he becomes a cooperating witness in exchange for leniency, the feds writ large have access to him. >> right. when you're cooperating with the feds, you're cooperating with the feds. that means that you're cooperating in the various ongoing investigations and certainly if he knew anything that would be relevant to mueller's investigation, he would be required to share that, i would think, as part of this agreement. we still don't know if prosecutors in southern district of new york or if anyone on mueller's team actually want

this guy to be a cooperating witness. we don't have an indication of whether they need anything from him, whether they think he knows anything relevant that they don't already know. i think there's still a question whether wh y when you get in the case of people like michael cohen, is this a credible witness? is this someone you can really use going forward in any case you want to make anyway? >> to the point we talked earlier, sometimes rudy giuliani when he speaks for the president is trying to make a legal argument. sometimes he's definitely making a political argument. michael cohen is also playing this game a little bit too. he's brought lanny davis, who helped spin in the clinton white house back during the lewinsky investigation. lanny davis is now a legal adviser but more a political adviser to michael cohen, who says this in politico today. i reached out to my old friend john dean because of what he went through with watergate. i saw some parallels to what michael cohen is experiencing. i certainly didn't want to raise expectations that mr. cohen has anything like the level of deep involvement and detail john dean had to nixon's crimes, but i saw

similarities and wanted to learn from what john went through. >> that's amazing. >> that is lanny davis messing with the president's head. >> i'm totally not making this case i'm making. lower tier gaslighting. i want to grab something margaret said. you talked about representing donald trump. one interesting thing here is when was he acting as a lawyer, which might entail some protections, and when was he acting as a fixer? that's something we have to watch closely. right now his argument that he was acting as a lawyer has not held up well in new york. so let's see what comes out. we also know he taped the president. >> this is the $20 million question with the plea deal as well. that's a lot of money to be potentially looking at in terms of financial fraud for his taxi companies. and does michael come hhen have enough information to be able to skate on charges if he is indicted? that's where the trump organization comes in. there are people who have studied that company closely and believe they would be legally vulnerable with the southern district of new york if some of this information were to get out there. michael cohen is clearly in fool

cooperation mode. >> we'll watch this one play out. often when these things hit the newspapers, it's a signal from prosecutors, if you're going to cooperate, clock's ticking. up next, former cia chief gaining support as he feuds with the president, but at least one backer of john brennan's says he does go too far at times. so you have, your headphones, chair, new laptop, 24/7 tech support. yep, thanks guys. i think he might need some support. yes. start them off right, with the school supplies they need at low prices all summer long. like these for only $2 or less at office depot officemax. 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 now t-mobile has unlimited for the rest of us. unlimited ways to be you. unlimited ways share with others. unlimited ways to live for the moment. all for as low as 30 bucks a line. unlimited for you. for them. for all. get unlimited for as low at 30 bucks per line for four lines at t-mobile.

gimme one minute... and i'll tell you some important things to know about medicare. first, it doesn't pay for everything. say this pizza is your part b medical expenses. this much - about 80% - medicare will pay for. what's left is on you. that's where an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company comes in. this type of plan helps pay some of what medicare doesn't. these are the only plans to carry the aarp endorsement for meeting their high standards of quality and service. so call unitedhealthcare insurance company today and ask for your free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll have the freedom to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and when you travel, your plan will go with you - anywhere in the country. whew! call unitedhealthcare today

and ask for your free decision guide.

topping our political radar today, brett kavanaugh just moments ago meeting with the top democrat on the committee that oversees the confirmation process. senator diane feinstein among

those demanding the release of documents from kavanaugh's tenure in the george bush white house. a speech writer for president trump who went to a white nationalist event two years ago no longer works for the white house. that word comes after an inquiry last week by cnn's kfile team about darren beatty's attendance at the event. and the feud between president trump and the former cia director john brennan escalating by the hour it seems. the president tweeting just a short time ago he hopes brennan sues. that in the wake of having his security clearance revoked by the president. but the president predicting he won't sue. meanwhile, 175 former u.s. officials have added their names to letters denouncing the president's actions, his decision to revoke brennan's security clearance. james clapper is among those who say it is wrong for a president to punish free speech, but

director clapper offered this caveat. >> i think, you know, john is sort of like a freight train, and he's going to say what's on his mind. i think, though, that the common denominator among all of us that have been speaking up is genuine concern about the jeopardy or threats to our institutions and values. although we may express that in different ways, and i think that's what this really is about, but john and his rhetoric have become, i think, an issue in an of itself. >> it is a fascinating subplot to all of this. the big question is should a president, any president, punish somebody exercising their first amendment right to free speech, unless they have evidence he's using classified information inappropriately. you get a lot of cringing from john brennan's former colleagues who think as a paid msnbc contributor, he's gone too far. >> yeah, you definitely do. you get a lot of anxiety, especially the contrast between

what he said earlier that he had seen no evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and the russian, and now he's gone the opposite direction. but it's outweighed by far with concern about this kind of retaliation. this is part of a thread, the president calling senior intelligence officials nazis in a speech in early 2017. the president regularly attacking the intelligence community, refusing to accept its findings or vacillating between accepting and not accepting findings. this final act of retaliation against john brennan has unsettled a lot of people inside the intelligence community now. that's part of the message here. part of the message from some of these senior figures is designed to reach people within the intelligence community to say we're standing with you. >> that's why you see this letter out now today from 175 people and the sort of preface says specifically, we're not saying we all agree with all or even part of the sort of things john brennan has been saying, but it's the principle that

matters. these folks are saying one day, whether it's two years from now or six years from now, there will be a different president of the united states, and what systems, what orders, what processes are left after that? how do we draw the line between politics and public service, between national security and political leverage? >> in this environment, that question seems to change by the day. up next, first lady melania trump fights cyber bullying as the president slams his critics online. t this guy is little, cat really clean? heck yeah it can! it's concentrated detergent plus stain fighters plus odor flighers that fight for clean. boom! even this entire bottle can't beat tide pods. and now a word from future gronk: ugh... tide pods.

if it's clean, it's got to be tide. the nation's largest senior-living referral service. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care. best of all, it's a free service.

there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. you know your family, we know senior living. booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline.

itthat's why i lovel the daily fiber wfiber choice,ood alone. with the fiber found in many fruits and vegetables. fiber choice. the number one ge recommended chewable prebiotic fiber. welcome back. children often know better than adults. that telling take from the first lady today as melania trump again highlighted her campaign against cyber bullying, well aware, of course, that it would also draw attention to her husband's cyber bullying.

the first lady here at a summit in maryland. >> social media is a part of our children's daily lives. it can be used in many positive ways but can also be distractive and harmful when used incorrectly. let's face it, most children are more aware of the benefits and pitfalls of social media than some adults, but we still need to do all we can to provide them with information and tools for successful and safe online habits. >> the irony here. you don't need my help. beyond obvious. new tweets just today slamming ex-cia director john brennan, calling special counsel robert mueller disgraced and discredited. in recent days, calling democrats thugs and omarosa a dog. i could go on, but i think the point is well made.

now, the first lady is a very smart woman, a successful woman. before a model and businesswoman. she knows every time she talks about this subject, a, some people are going to mock her, but, b, everyone is going to bring up her husband's history in the cyberspace. yet, she continues to do it. why? >> there are two brands of criticism with what the first lady is doing that i've heard. one is the sincerity of it. people are asking, really, you're going to be mad at cyber bullying when you're married to president trump. and second, how can she be effective without making the influence in her own home. >> maybe she's trying to ask the children to be better examples. and he's a mother. we get involved in this sometimes. by all accounts, she's fiercely defensive and protective of her son, and she deserves credit for that. she knows that this is going to happen every time she does this. but she thinks it's important to keep doing.

>> yes, she chose the topic. it's not like you get assigned a topic when you're first lady. she could be talking about literacy. she could be talking about health and physical fitness. this is her topic by choice. i think you got to respect that and take it for face value. she is not only a defender of her son, but she's integrally involved in his life, in his schooling. she believes in this message. what you're asking, what many americans may be asking is, why is she married to president trump? how does that marriage work? a great political question asked of many presidential couples and never completely answered, but in this case, i think you have to see it for what it is. it is her sort of trolling her husband on this subject, which she obviously feels strongly about. >> this is important to me, so i'm going to do it. and guess what, you're going to get thumped for it. >> look, just because you're first lady doesn't mean you abdicate being your own person. melania trump is very much her own person. she's made that very clear in their short tenure in the white

house so far. so i think that she decided on this topic, knowing that she was going to get blowback. she continues to do events knowing she's going to get blowback. it's something that's important to her. i think that's fine. i think you're right, there's a question about the credibility of the messenger, sort of why would people feel like they need to listen to you on this, why would they feel like you have any credibility on this when she's also been a defender of her husband many times over the course of the campaign and now. >> she's always fascinating to keep in touch with. up next, arizona all conservative endorsements not created equal. a republican candidate for senate gets some help from some very controversial characters. for your heart... g or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. so you have, your headphones, chair, new laptop, 24/7 tech support. yep, thanks guys. i think he might need some support. yes.

start them off right, with the school supplies they need at low prices all summer long. like these for only $2 or less at office depot officemax. like these for only $2 or less no matter how much you clean, does your house still smell stuffy? that's because your home is filled with soft surfaces that trap odors and release them back into the room. so, try febreze fabric refresher. febreze finds odors trapped in fabrics and cleans them away as it dries. use febreze every time you tidy up to keep your whole house smelling fresh air clean. fabric refresher even works for clothes you want

to wear another day. make febreze part of your clean routine for whole home freshness.

tap one little bumper and up go your rates. what good is your insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today.

liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

you might call this a republican senate hopeful going the extra mile to prove her conservative bona fides with a week left before her arizona primary. or you might call it reprehensible. kelly ward launching a bus tour that includes some controversial figure, including congressman steve king of iowa, notorious for racist remarks he's made, congressman paul gosar of arizona, controversial commentators eric bolling and tomi lahren. cernovich claimed democrats were running a child trafficking ring out of a d.c. area pizza place. when pressed on his views, ward

deflected. >> i don't really know what mike cernovich's views are. i know he's got an audience, and we want to serve everyone. mike cernovich has an audience we want to reach. that includes republicans, conservatives, liberals, democrats, people of all ilks. so if he's coming on the bus tour, i think that he'll have a voice and he'll have something that he wants to say. but i know that my campaign is about faith, family, and freedom. >> when you give someone a spot on your bus, isn't your campaign about faith, family, freedom, but also about wild, reckless, harmful conspiracy theories? >> this is very mercenary, right. he's got an audience, and i want that audience. the only quibble i would have here is it's not about conservative bona fides. it's about trumpian bona fides. >> well put. >> it has very little to do with traditional conservative values, which are more reflected by her slogan than by her guests on the

bus. >> let's remember trump also went on the alex jones show when he was running for president. they have decided that they're going to go where the audience is, and everyone just look the other way and pretend like we don't really know the audience here might be conspiracy theorists and might be racists and full-on crazy people because it's an audience and we can get those votes. it is the lowest common denominator in american politics. trump did a good job of it. >> there used to be a day where people would say, if that's your view, i don't want your vote. i certainly don't want you on my bus. thank you for that. is that where we are in today's trump party? >> precisely the opposite for her. she seems to have calculated this is her likeliest path to victory in the republican primary. she's running against martha mcsally, the favorite in that, got the establishment support. if she's going to win, she's going to have to find a far-right path, trumpier than trump, if you will. arizona is absolutely critical for democrats taking back the house. >> democrats are praying kelly ward wins.

here's martha mcsally, who has had her own issues with president trump. but listen to this ad. >> who will stand with president trump? not former democrat kelly ward. ward supports amnesty. >> people who are here should not have to live in fear. >> kelly ward, wrong on illegal immigration, wrong on president trump. >> i'm martha mcsally, and i approve this message. >> we live in interesting times. >> yeah. and if you're a democrat, you are kind of -- if you're the democrat, you're looking at this going, okay, i've got a plausible path in what is really a swing state and what is a region where democrats in other states have been gaining ground. >> if kelli ward wins that primary, you'll see republican-leaning groups like the chamber of commerce and others endorse the democratic candidate. >> the democrats are already probably the favorites to win this arizona seat in a very democratic year in a state that's been tilting more and more purple. and yes, the polls have shown that kelli ward polls are worse

than the democrat. >> one of the many fascinating races to watch. we'll do more trying to get you out there on the campaign trail in the days ahead. 11 weeks now. thanks for joining us on "inside politics" today. see you back here this time tomorrow. wolf is back from a little break. he starts right now. have a great day. hello. i'm wolf blitzer. it's 1:00 p.m. here in washington, 8:00 p.m. in syria, 9:00 p.m. in tehran. wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. fury and paranoia as the president erupts over reports that the white house counsel has cooperated extensively with the mueller team. question is, what has don mcgahn revealed? plus, as president trump threatens to revoke more security clearances, he's now daring the former cia director john brennan to sue. this as dozens and dozens of former intelligence officials unite against the president's