courtroom today for the sentencing, it was a packed courtroom, wall to wall, but bill cosby had no one. he did not have a family member, his children, his wife was not there, but his publicist, andrew wyatt, that has stood by him every step of the way once again was there alone. >> thank you for the report. the news continue. i want to hand it over to chris. "cuomo primetime" starts now. >> thank you. i am chris cuomo and welcome to primetime. the president thought he was working the crowd but the crowd worked him. how our president unwittingly became the laughing stock of the world take at the united nations. republicans say senators get just 24 hours to think after thursday's testimony, and then they have to judge judge kavanaugh. does that sound like the right time to set a date, before a word is heard? time to test that notion. and democracy done wrong. senator ted cruz and his wife chased out of a restaurant by an angry mob of protesters.

even his bitter rival came to his defense. you know the drill. let's get after it. ♪ so the president stood in front of the world and delivered a campaign speech. the reaction he got though at the u.n. was very different than what he's used the hearing at his rallies. instead of cheering supporters, global leaders laughed at him. now, keep in mind these are the same folks who for years have sat stone faced for all sorts of bluster from murderers and desposdesp despots but trump made them laugh. here to help us sort it out are a couple of guys who know a thing or two about national security, phil mudd and mike rogers. gentlemen, thank you. >> thanks, chris. >> let's play the moment that has everybody wanting to figure out what it means. here it is. >> my administration has

accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america's -- so true. didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay. >> the president is trying to play it off as a laugh line, but, you know, we've all been in there. you have been around, you guys more than i have. that's usually a quiet crowd. they heard him exaggerate something that is obviously exaggerated and it seemed like they were mocking him. what is your take? >> i would agree with that. let's step back for a moment and look at a map of the world. in north korea the president got off a plane and said we're safer. talk to me about the progress on denuclearization in the korean peninsula. slow at best. the chinese showed up at mar-a-lago and the president thought they were partners. now not only are they not partners, we're engaged in a

tariff war with them. the president said he had a plan, his plan would be executed by his son-in-law jared kushner on the arab/israeli dispute. we have humiliated nato and the g-7. there's no defense with the mexicans who are sitting there after 20 months saying they will never build a fence. people who don't live in washington are looking across the world and saying, you talk about this, mr. president, you have alienated your allies and you have promised success with the russians who -- by the way -- are about ready to close the deal with bashar asad in his hold on syria, a deal with the russians and north koreans, a better relationship with the chinese. where is it, chris? where is it? >> is this, mike rogers, where's the beef coming home to roost? >> this is just completely trump not knowing his audience, which is a little bit unusual for him. normally he knows his audience. he can play to an audience. but i mean you think about it, he just said, i'm the best president we ever had and we've

done more in history. how about the emancipation proclamation by abraham lincoln? how about the marshall plan by truman? i mean these are big, major events that either held the country together and/or held europe together. these are big events. so you are sitting in a room, all of these countries who are trying to deal with real difficulties at home, either economic or in some cases terrorism or military. >> right. >> and you say that we've done more than anyone else. by the way, i have picked a fight with just about everybody in here except maybe the russians, that's why i think he got the reaction that he did. i think they were a little taken back that that would be his assessment of how he's doing with the rest of the world. >> you know, people who are in the base and other political actors here in the country, you know, they mistake criticism for just being empty negativity. you know, you pick on everything he says, you pick on everything he says. that's because he's the president of the united states. when he finally gets into a room like that where everybody takes

their role seriously, phil, they regard it the way critics do, which is don't say it, it is b.s. everything you are saying is b.s. we are going to laugh at you. then we saw what happened. >> i suppose, but i mean i think there's a different way to look at this, and that is the same thing we saw maybe with the kavanaugh interview last night. just be frontal with us. just tell us what the truth is. denuclearizing the north korean peninsula is not easy. >> you thought the kavanaugh interview was the judge telling us the truth? >> no, that's what i'm saying. just talk to us about what you think the truth -- kavanaugh could have said, look, i had too many beers in high school, i apologize, i don't remember an incident with the woman but i want to acknowledge i wasn't perfect in high school. he sold us as perfect or almost perfect. the president is sitting there saying in every circumstance, whether it is iran or north korea or the mexican wall, i have done a perfect job. i think people like me would be more willing to acknowledge the progress he made. i thought the meeting with kim jong-un was a good idea. if he just said, look, this is

going to be a long path, it is difficult, previous presidents haven't made progress, that's all he's got to say. >> all right. so we have him being judged by those abroad, and then we have a situation that will be judged here at home i want both of your heads on, perfect guests for both. mike, rosenstein, do you fire him? do you push him to resign or do you have a talk with him on thursday and come out as the bigger man and he stays? >> well, i mean i'm an eternal optimist. i hope the president comes out a bigger man and he stays. my wife says it is a genetic defect that i have. really, i think by firing -- listen, if you step back for one moment and think this through, that investigation is going nowhere. you can fire rosenstein. you can fire mueller. you know, all of the weight of that investigation is still there, and then congress is going to be forced to do something. they're either going to go to the appeals court, like in "the star" investigation of the clintons, and they would appoint a special counselor the attorney general would have to appoint

another. there's no way that this thing is just going to go away. if you were smart, he would take a step back and say, all right, you know what, does he have the right to ask him, hey, did you really say that, i mean is that really appropriate you said that? >> he has the right to fire him because he thinks he said it. >> i wouldn't fire him but i would bring him in for what we call a counseling session and say, hey, you got to knock it off, go back to work and put bad guys in jail. >> no, i'm saying he has the right to do it. is it right to do it though. if he resigns, the president has the easy path to putting noel francisco in there, a man it is assumed would be more amenable to the president's point of view in certain things. do you go that way? >> no way. that's untrue. the law of unintended consequences will kill you. you fire james comey and obviously you will have an easier path to the russia investigation and you get robert mueller. you fire rosenstein, and i don't know whether someone that comes in temporarily will say something different. i could say them saying, my job

is to keep the seat warm until we have a serious person in this position. the easy solution is the president should call rosenstein in and say, explain to me what happened. if rosenstein, by the way, says, i said those things, he has to go. if he says, i didn't say those things, if i were the president i would look back at comey and say, i don't want to get kicked by that mule again, stick around. >> dose rosenstein say he didn't do it and then do the republicans in the house judiciary committee or the intelligence committee, as we heard suggested by congressman gates about him and congressman meadows, do they bring rosenstein before them and say, raise your hand and tell us you didn't say anything about the 25th amendment, tell us you didn't say anything about wiring? we heard goodlatte today wants to subpoena the memos from mccabe that were used in "the new york times" that the government has. they want access to them. what to you think about that route, mike rogers? do you think rosenstein should have to do that? >> i mean i do believe if congress does that, i would disagree with their decision to do it but they must comply.

i believe this notion that because we don't like who is sitting there or what they're doing, we shouldn't comply. i don't believe that. i think, matter of fact, that works to undermine all of our institutions. i don't care if you are republican or democrat, i don't think we ought to cotton that. but what i do believe is that they ought to just take a more measured tone about this. i understand, they sure have a bur under their saddle. they think they have something. there are better and more appropriate ways to handle this other than these big, public beatings. by the way, all of the negative press they get, it is because the president, like today, goes off script and he can't help himself, and then congress -- at least a few in congress seem to run to his aid and they go off script. they can't help themselves. >> contagious. >> it is not helpful to whatever they're trying to accomplish. i just don't think it is helpful. >> you guys are in washington. i will be down there for the hearing on thursday. let's bet dinner. what happens on thursday with rosenstein and the president? >> the president says, assuming rosenstein doesn't front it and

say, i did that. >> fire, resign or stay. pick one. >> stay. be quiet, stay. >> mike? >> stay. >> you guys are both stay? i argued stay last night but i don't like either of you so i'm going with one of the other two. the wager is dinner. the bur line was great. you win on that. unfortunately, mudd rides side saddle. >> what? >> thank you very much. move them away. the president picked the wrong venue to brag about his accomplishments today. you heard our two national security experts talking about why, why weren't the world leaders having it? it is so ironic that the president had always said, the world is laughing at us. for years he has said that. guess what? now he's the joke. we'll take you through it next. cuomo priek ti"cuomo primeto you by -- ♪ it is such a good time to kiss ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to

[ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there. ♪ your society was dearled by a woman, who governed thousands... commanded armies... yielded to no one. when i found you in my dna, i learned where my strength comes from. my name is courtney mckinney, and this is my ancestrydna story. now with 2 times more geographic detail than other dna tests. order your kit at ancestrydna.com

dad: oh, hey guys! mom (on speakerphone): hi! son (on speakerphone): dad, i scored two goals today! dad: oh, that's great! vo: getting to a comfortable retirement doesn't have to be an uncomfortable thought. see how lincoln can help you retire on your terms at lincolnfinancial.com i

intercontinental ballist welcome back. president trump proved he was right about something that others denied but i doubt he is taking satisfaction in it. for years donald trump has insisted other countries have been laughing at the united states. he has been out there as a recurring theme for literally years. tweets, speeches. take a listen to this. >> laughing stock. we're a laughing stock all over the world. >> we're a laughing stock all over the world, remember that. >> the world is laughing after us. >> believe me, folks, the world is laughing at us. they can't believe what's happening. >> we're the laughing stock of the world. >> and the world is laughing at us. >> and his argument goes that now the world respects the u.s. again because of him. he says it all the time. i wonder if he would say it after what happened to him and to all of us today at the u.n. when this happened. >> my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the

history of our country. america's -- so true. didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay. >> the trumpian, a/k/a, totally bogus claim that his administration has accomplished more than almost any other administration in the history of our country, like they gave the biggest tax cut ever. it is not true. everyone knows it. this is why we call out his truth abuse because it is not just about him. it diminishes the presidency. today that was laid bare. literally the world laughed in trump tower's face. they laughed at america. this scene that the president said he didn't expect reveals a truth he now has to accept. pugh data shows the reality.

this is before and after trump. it is a little confusing but you see the numbers and the trending. the average percentage of favorability. notice the up tick for russia. why are they so happy about the trump administration? one of the many questions we still must consider. consider this. that wasn't the only laugh line today. look at the german del fwaegati response when trump drops this exaggeration. >> germany will become totally dependent on russian energy if it does not immediately change course of expansionist foreign powers. it has been the formal policy of our country since president monroe. >> i just read that guys lips? so what does it mean? i don't know who wrote it, but when the president said it, it literally made the german

delegation laugh. some of our closest allies. so what happened here today? it looked like he mistook this pack arena for one of his rallies, but these people are not the base looking for a common enemy. they are reflective of the global desire for common decency. it would be nice if all his wildly false claims were meant as a joke, as he says. certainly he's closer to the bar of funny than factual. but his reaction and how taken aback he seemed in the moment makes it clear that that's not true. he may think what happened today was funny, but know this. it was no joke. those leaders were laughing at him, not with him. so another thing today that you have to think about. did you hear that republicans have set a date for kavanaugh to be voted on? when is it? friday morning, 24 hours after testimony, before you've heard a word you set a date to vote? chairman grassley says, we're

just following normal order, three days notice. is any of this normal? don't they want to do anything to show a semblance of concern about the gravity of the allegations? show some respect to it. that is the starting point for what should certainly be a great debate next. your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

exbut are you gettinglot 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. new from one a day.

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

the senate judiciary committee set its vote for approving judge brett kavanaugh's nomination today. when is it? as soon as friday morning. now, they say if we're not ready to vote we won't vote, but what is the move by the republicans on this committee show? before they've heard one word of official testimony from kavanaugh's accuser of sexual assault -- christine blasey ford -- they're ready to set a date to vote. what does that mean? do republicans really care about what ford will say or is this just about what seems obvious, getting brett kavanaugh through the process and getting a generation of injuries prudence secured? let's debate.

angela rai and mike shields. angela, can i get an amen? >> what am i amenning, chris? >> i'll take an amen on anything. the notion that the setting of the date, 24 hours after the testimony, before the testimony has been had, not just what chairman grassley says, which is us following the normal course. it is following the course of their consideration, which is what they want, to get him through, not get to the truth. >> yeah, i think that the real challenge that they have here is republicans have demonstrated a pattern and practice of not caring about women and not demonstrating any policy agenda that is supportive of women, pay practices that are supportive of women, and overwhelmingly and i think this is a bipartisan issue, women being treated as objects and toys. whether or not they call mark judge as a character witness, i

will call him forth and say if you look at his facebook posts about women, they're clearly chattel to him. that's the issue republicans have. they have decided and made a calculated consideration here that we are willing to potentially forsake the midterm election results, potentially lose the senate majority because we'll have a lifetime appointment with this particular supreme court nominee. i think what makes matters worse is there are some democrats who have demonstrated fecklessness, and that is john kester, john manchin of west virginia. west virginia and montana i can understand a little bit. i have no idea why doug jones, who was elected by 98% of black women -- doug jones, the same question i asked on the panel a week and a half ago. i also don't understand bill nelson who has to ride andrew gillum's coattails into victory in florida during this general election. why would he make this decision?

republican-like is not acceptable. you have to be all blue everything to really win, and i think they're going to struggle with it. >> there's a lot there for you to unpack, mike shields. how do you want to deal with it? >> first of all, because -- i don't understand why it is such a big deal they scheduled a vote. anyone understands the senate knows you can also move a vote. >> you can. >> you can also lose a vote. >> fair point. >> they scheduled a vote because the democrats have been pretty open and clear that their entire tactic is to delay. they're saying, look, we are respecting this process. we are actually having a hear. we even moved the hearing. we invited the person to the hearing and then delayed it so we can have a hearing. chris, let's have an intellectually honest conversation here. what is this is about on the left is that they are pro choice. the largest base of the democratic party, the most active and now becoming borderline militant base of the democratic party are pro-choice activists. they are demanding the democrats create a circus. they're demanding that they delay. during the hearing for judge

kavanaugh they were not interested -- they've already made up their minds. there's at least 45 democrats that are 100% "no" before kavanaugh was announced by the president. the idea, let's have the vote before we hear the testimony -- >> i'll give you that. the whole thing is about partisan politics, it is true, full stop. these processes we call the confirmation process are a sham. they're not about disclosure. they're about non-disclosure, both sides play the game with nominees as they get their turn. all accepted and stipulated to. however, if we want to be intellectually honest there's one addendum the what you said, shields. this for the left is all about not voting for him. yes, they disagree with his jurisprudence. >> right. >> they disagree where he's coming from. >> this is not about victims or the treatment, this is about stopping someone. that's what it is about. >> no, hold on. i take it to you, angela, here is the addendum.

that's not all it is about. that was before the allegations came up. >> why would the deputy chair of the dnc being thrown out by the democrats who is accused of sexually assaulting someone running for attorney general in minnesota. democrats don't want to talk about that. >> i want to talk about the hearing on thursday. >> hold on a second. mike, you cannot deflect -- i hear you on ellison. we are trying to get his accuser on the show. i don't hide, but i can't force people on the show. >> good. >> here is the thing. i shy away from nothing but you can't shy away from what is happening at the hearing by deflecting to another attempt allegation. >> he's right. it is like that's ridiculous. >> i'm asking what really matters to democrats. >> ellison should be investigated and they say it is ongoing but it has nothing to do with this hearing. angela, don't the allegations stand apart from just the discussion about jurisprudence? >> not only do they stand apart, there's potentially a third accuser. here is the other issue that we have. if the yale law professor who

caught judge kavanaugh is saying this deserves an investigation, if three of his classmates are saying this deserves an investigation, what is the harm in really playing this out and seeing if this is accurate? i don't have any issue with someone saying, you know what? we looked all through this, we can't find anything, this woman made it up. you're not even allowing that to take place. so i'm saying the benefit of doubt, of the doubt should be given to her, particularly with the record that republicans have on women's issues. you just called women having the right to choose and reproductive rights militants. i mean if that's militant, you know, i mean come on. you can't -- >> what i'm saying is there are militant activists in your party that are demanding that these democratic senators act this way or they will be primaried. you watch what happens in the presidential nomination primary. >> there will be women in your party who primary the cowards who will not allow this woman to have her day before -- >> you're almost agreeing with me. you are pointing out that it is not about a victim. there's going to be a hearing. >> no, it is absolutely about

the victim. >> no, it is not. >> yes, it is about an investigation that you all would not allow to take place. i know, mike, you're one of the reasonable ones. i know you all see finally donald trump is doing something for conservatives that you like, but that does not mean that a process where you have the opportunity to highlight an issue of sexual harassment and assault by this man should not be addressed. the fact that 27 years after anita hill, the senate still does not have protocol and procedures in place for handling sexual harassment is something that should give them pause and make them -- >> no who is deflecting, chris? we're talking about protocol. >> this is exactly what it is about. >> angela, let him get in. go ahead. >> brian fallon, hillary clinton's com director who is running a super pac dedicated to stopping judge kavanaugh. he was honest. he said, here is what our mission is, stop judge kavanaugh by any means necessary, stop donald trump from putting people

on the supreme court and win the senate. >> but you are assuming that it is part of a plot to stop. >> what i'm saying is she is going to have a hearing. they bent over backwards to give her a hearing. >> they didn't bend over backwards. come on. >> they did. >> they tried to force her to testify on monday? can you imagine? >> just to keep the record clear because i don't understand it from two perspectives, mike. help me with this. >> okay. >> i respect your take on it. one is i think it is bad for kavanaugh what you guys are doing. if he wasn't there, if he did nothing wrong as he said in that friendly interview last night, then he should want all of the boxes checked so nobody can speculate on him. >> chris, i can answer that. >> the second thing is you know that some of the digging on the corroboration that ford offered up hasn't borne any fruit yet. >> right. >> why wouldn't you go town the path of vetting him. >> because we know that. >> so people can't say your lack of effort leads them to a conclusion? >> two reasons. both of these accusers -- first of all, the first accuser came

out. feinstein did not decide to go to the fbi but make it public. >> we don't know she had anything to do with making it public. >> that's not fair. >> continue. >> she received a letter and it somehow became public and her name became public. every democratic lawyer and investigator on the judiciary committee on this and every reporter in this country, and the only thing they were able to come back with was a very weak second person who -- who has had every single witness she named say this is not true and i know nothing about it. >> wow. >> so the point is the judiciary committee has seen all of this stuff. they don't need to know any more information because it is obviously a smear and someone who is coming forward for political reasons. >> that's -- >> they're going to give her a hearing. >> you're saying the accuser is lying. >> angela, last word. >> it is fascinating to me that mike is saying the accuser is lying when there's no dna evidence to exonerate him, there's no -- i mean you have nothing to bank that on. >> in this country the burden of

proof is on the accuser. when you are accused of something you are innocent until proven guilty. >> this is exactly the problem with your party, the fact you think you deserve to speak over a woman when he said i have the last word. that's why you're going to lose the midterm election. >> i treat you the way they treat every man on the show. >> you just had it. angela. you got the last word. i tell you what, this is a hard conversation. >> yes. >> we don't know what the standards are. we are figuring it out. i respect you guys, you disagree but the right way. i appreciate you for it. it is not a cliche. we need to reinforce it in the way the debate is going right now. mike, thank you. angela, thank you. >> thank you. >> thursday, anyway you look at it, takes big day and not just for kavanaugh. that's the day they decided at the white house to make the big rosenstein showdown. both of those things are less than 48 hours away. there's zero chance that what happens on that day doesn't matter to all of us. all right. now the secondary question after kavanaugh is with rosenstein. does the man in charge of the

russia investigation get thrown out or does he want out and will he have to testify? our next guest will have better insight than the rest of us, a friend and former boss of the deputy attorney general is here. next. - at afor the financialt's time world to stop acting the same old way. you need a partner that is willing to break free from conventional thinking. we are a different kind of financial company. we are athene, and we are driven to do more. 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. [kno♪king] ♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering.

with pg&e in the sierras. and i'm an arborist since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees can't impact power lines. and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future.

so just before we started tonight we learned that house republicans are starting the process of subpoenaing the justice department for memos written by former fbi deputy attorney general andrew mccabe. why? they want the memos that were reportedly included about deputy attorney general rod rosenstein in that "new york times" story with the alleged comments about secretly taping the president and trying to invoke the 25th amendment. rosenstein emphatically denies those comments and he's going to make his case before the president at the white house thursday. yes, the same day as the kavanaugh hearing. now, in the lead-up to this rendezvous we're joined by mark tuohy, former federal prosecutor, friend and former supervisor of rod rosenstein. thank you for taking this opportunity. we need the help.

i'll take silence as acceptance. can you hear me, mark? >> i can hear you. >> good. so what do you think is true? do you think rosenstein offered his resignation? do you think he was just talking about it because he heard that they were going to fire him? you know, help us. we have heard everything. now we hear that, you know, that there's an anticipation that he might resign or maybe there isn't. what do you know? >> my sense, chris, is that rod went over to see the chief of staff to the president after newspaper reports of comments by the president about the department of justice and he wanted to tell the chief of staff, as i understand it, that he did not at any time offer to wear a wire, wire somebody up, try to use the 25th amendment, and i believe rod rosenstein. i have known him and worked with him over the last 24 years. so i don't know exactly what he and general kelly talked about, but the impression i have is

that he said, if the president wants my resignation i will give it, but i want him to know very firmly that i did not do these things. >> all right. so he says he didn't do it. he says -- he doesn't say he wants to resign. he says he would resign if asked, and you don't know that he did resign at any point already? >> i do not know, and i suspect he did not. i think he offered, as the papers have suggested, but i think more importantly he wanted to convey to general kelly and to the president that the reports are inaccurate, that he did not do these things. i believe him. >> what to you think the relationship is between the president and rosenstein? the recording is, the sourcing is it had gotten pretty good, that they were in somewhat of a good place. what was your take before this? >> my take is that rod rosenstein, one of the most respected and admired former federal prosecutors from his days in the independent counsel's office at the department of justice and the united states attorney for two

presidents -- >> right. >> he's an honest broker, was doing the job that he was statutorily required to do, and that he honored that -- those statutory regulations in supervising another outstanding former federal prosecutor, bob mueller. so the relationship between the president and rod rosenstein, it appears that there was a working relationship. but rod rosenstein is committed to do his job to the best of his ability, and i believe he was doing it. >> how can the president -- how can they ever get past the fact that he made a decision to bring in a special counsel that the president hates? you know, he hates that decision, and that he picked bob mueller, who the president now hates. how do you get past that? how could rod rosenstein convince the president that it was a legitimate move when so many around the president are telling him it was illegitimate? >> well, first of all, it is not the president's call and it is not the attorney general's call. because of the recusal, rod

rosenstein as deputy attorney general was vested with the responsibility by statute to select a special counsel. >> you think he had to do it? >> yes, i? >> even though people will criticize him and say there was no apparent crime to be investigated. i did the legal research, i don't see it as a legal premise but a lot of better legal minds than mine are making the case. what do you say? >> i say that the purpose of the special counsel statute, not unlike the former statute i was involved with, is to investigate whether allegations of wrong doing. the allegations of wrong doing were -- involved potentially a number of people and it may have included the president at the beginning, it may not have. but the point is he has to do the job that the statute and the law requires and that's what he was doing. the fact that somebody doesn't like it is not relevant. >> do you think -- so what we're seeing right now is an indication that rosenstein doesn't want to resign, because if he wanted to he would.

so the fact that he hasn't seems to indicate he doesn't want to, right? there's simple logic. there's going to be pressure on thursday. we don't know what is going to happen in that room. i want your sense of what you think happens on thursday and whether or not rosenstein is willing to weather going in before congress, raising his hand and testifying about what he did and did not say with respect to that "new york times" story, what do you think happens thursday and do you think he would do that? >> well, thursday, of course, is the day he is meeting with the president, and i expect that rod as the fine lawyer and experienced prosecutor that he is, is going to explain to the president the job he's doing and that he, the department of justice and the american people expect the job to be completed in a highly professional manner. he doesn't believe that these allegations that have been made offhanded have any credibility or any basis in fact, and i would expect the president of

the united states to accept the statement of his deputy attorney general given his reputation and integrity and allow him to finish the job that the american people expect him to do. that's what i expect to happen. >> quickly, do you think rosenstein would raise his hand under oath and answer questions for congress? >> i have no doubt, chris, if he is subpoenaed to appear, he will do so, he will raise his hand and tell the truth, and that should be the end of it. >> mark tuohy. i don't know if they would subpoena him, they would probably ask him first, but what great insights. you couched it very well in terms of how you know, and i appreciate you giving us your sense of the situation. very helpful. >> thank you, chris. it is nice to have one fordham lawyer talk to another. >> one real one and one on tv, but i'll take it. one thing is for sure, tensions are high over politics in this country. anger is palpable. voters have a right to be heard, but decency, people.

they should not harass politicians having dinner with their family. there's a time and place and manner. we will show you what happened to ted cruz that outraged his sharpest critic. be open minded, next. ♪ i don't care where we go ♪ and i don't care what we do ♪ just take me with you there are roadside attractions. and then there's our world-famous on-road attraction. the 2019 glc. lease the glc300 for just $469 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go.

at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere. ♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door... ♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby! ♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere. ♪

all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ on table ten. ♪ he'd be proud of us. a family business should stay in the family. see how lincoln's insurance solutions can help protect your family, your business and everyone who counts on you, at lincolnfinancial.com

your business and everyone who counts on you, 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

all right. it is monday night, right? senator cruz is out having dinner with his wife heidi and this happens. >> i'd love to talk to you about brett kavanaugh tonight. >> we believe survivors. we believe survivors. >> senator, i have a right to know what your position is on brett kavanaugh! >> we believe survivors. >> i'm a survivor of sexual assault, ma'am. >> excuse me. let me wife through. >> liberal activists swarmed the senator. you heard what they were doing, chants demanding to know his position on brett kavanaugh. beto o'rourke tweeted this. it is not right that senator cruz and his wife heidi were sur rounded and forced to leave a restaurant last night because of protesters. the cruz family should be treated with respect. let's bring in don lemon. what is your take? >> it is a tough one, chris, because, one, it is survivors,

right, of sexual abuse. i'm one. as a person of color, i know that especially during the civil rights movement and now, sometimes the only agency you have is to protest and to get in someone's face. you don't have any power when it comes to government and in society. i don't like it, but it is one reason i'm not a public official, that i'm not running for office. in a way, i think it goes with the territory. i don't like they were blocking his wife. but that's what -- that's what he signed up for. as a strict constitutionalist, which ted cruz is, he knows it is protected under the first amendment. again, i don't like it. i wouldn't want it to happen to me. >> that's the point. >> i don't like it happened to his wife, but that's what he signed up for. that's part of the deal. >> i don't know that's what he signed up for, but that may be what the price is of being in public service, that there's a different standard for him -- >> semantics. we're saying the same thing. >> i'm saying -- no, no, i hear

you. i don't think it is purely semantic al. i think this is wrong. do they have the right to do it? 100%. you don't have to be ted cruz to know that. is it right they do it this way? what did they achieve by doing it this way? do you think they changed ted cruz's mind? did they raise that making their effort look bad. >> i think it's semantics. you don't. i wouldn't want it to happen to me. i don't like that it happens to his wife or any family member or someone who did not run for office and became a public official. no, i would not like that but if you run for office and you propose policies that are detrimental to people as americans, you have the right to tell your public officials that you don't like it and if you are a in a space where you're allowed to do that, then you can do it. just think -- >> that was a private restaurant by the way. >> a private restaurant, but just remember it happened in the chamber when president obama was giving the first state of the union. "you lie." someone got in his face.

was it right to do it? no. but did he have the right to do it? absolutely. so it does happen. it doesn't mean that i like it, but i kind of think if you're a public official, then you need to stand by what you say, and that's part of the deal. >> don lemon, appreciate your take. tweet don if you don't like it. all right. i know it's been a crazy week in the news, but what happens when we get so focused on that one big story in front of us? we'll have the conversation about who leads and who follows a different day, whether i set the agenda and you have to watch it or i give you what i think you want to watch. we'll talk about that another day, maybe online. but there's a story going on now that's going to blow your mind, and it's getting almost no attention. our argument, next. or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable,

with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. 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. exbut are you gettinglot 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. new from one a day.

have you heard? there is a desperate search going on. hundreds of kids have been taken

and moved all over the country. parents are in a panic. we're told for 100 families, they may never get their kids back. i'm talking about the border crisis. it's still a crisis. 300 kids are still in situations you wouldn't want your kids in for 300 seconds. and of that remaining 300, from close to 3,000 that were originally stripped from families, 182 are on track for reunification. for 100 more, it may never happen. at least six of the kids still waiting are under 5 years of age. my 8-year-old still sleeps with us every night. imagine at that tender age not knowing where mom and dad are sleeping. remember, the original deadline was in july. homeland security secretary kirstjen nielsen said this. >> this administration did not create a policy of separating families at the border. >> this. we do not have a policy of separating families at the

border, period. then why is her signature on documents that say otherwise? a dhs memo to secretary nielsen presenting her with options on how to implement a zero tolerance policy at the border has two key parts. one, dhs could also permissibly direct the separation of parents or legal guardians and minors held in immigration detention so that the parent or legal guardian can be prosecuted. now, much of the document is redacted, but at the end it reads, we recommend option three as the most effective method. this initiative would pursue prosecution of all amenable adults who cross our border illegally, including those presenting with a family unit. if you do not have a plan on how to deal with those families that are arrested, you will necessarily, automatically separate kids from parents whenever you arrest those parents. that's what dhs plans to do every time.

so why did secretary nielsen choose this option if she doesn't want a policy of separation, period? like i say, we've only seen a redacted version of the memo, but open the government, one of the groups that filed the request to get the document, they've seen an unredacted version. they say the memo does not contain a plan for reuniting separated families, a study of the potential harm to kids, or input -- listen to this -- from the agencies who would be caring for the kids. so your plan doesn't include a plan for the kids, doesn't even talk to the people who will take care of the kids, but then you tell the american people to their face you're not about separation. listen, being hardline on immigration is fine. you want to be about the law, that's fine. but to see kids as collateral damage is wrong. to write off what you do to kids as the price of their parents' entry is wrong. today you heard the world laugh at our president because of his obnoxious lies.

they're not laughing now. imagine how this looks to the world. what is america? it is the beacon. e.b. white wrote the line, america -- he was talking about the church spire in the community, but the metaphor extends. america is the white plume showing this is the way up. policies like this bring us down. secretary nielsen, take my invitation. come on the show. make the case for why this is okay. and for the rest of us, remember that the kids are still there and be aware that if you don't pay attention -- and this policy is what happens -- it will happen again. that's all for us tonight. thank you for watching. thank you for listening to the sirius xm radio show, channel 124. i take your calls. we get at it. i love it. "cnn tonight with don lemon" starts right now. you don't call. you don't care. >> you're on the comedy channel

over there on sirius, right? >> you see my face? this is my look that says, i can take you whenever i want, but i don't feel one way or the other about it. >> okay. serious stuff. i know you and i joke around a lot. >> yes. >> i like your optimism. i like what you just said there about separating kids. but do you remember, you're more optimistic than i am. i used to think i was an optimist. i haven't been recently. when i said, hey, we're going to move on to something else, this problem will not be solved, some of these children may never be returned to their families. remember i said that to you. >> yeah. >> and we moved on. you said we weren't going to move on. but it's sad that we did, and i like that you are putting the focus back on this, and i hope that he responds to you. >> i will not move on. the secretary should take the invitation. what she said about the policy is not true, about what the intentions of the policy are in the memo. look, news is always going to get in the way, don. we get that. but as long as we get back to it, we're going to be okay. we'll do that here, and i know you do it as well. >> i feel that our conversation about what happened with senator