practice of the respecting first amendment rights of the press and added the actions were taken solely in response to an abrupt movement by an individual who identified themselves as media. all well and good. but he didn't in fact identify himself before he tried to ask anything. the news continues. for cuomo "prime time." >> i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." how hard is it to know what happened to jamal khashoggi? why are these two men smiling? isn't someone presumed murdered? is this about finding facts or buying time? something doesn't seem right. and a former cia chief says he can fill in the blanks and he's here to do that. 50 hours. that's a long time. and that's how long president trump former lawyer and close confidant michael cohen has been meeting with prosecutors. we know he's talking about more

than just paying off women. and we have a big discovery tonight. i often wonder why is the president so confident that the climate isn't changing. what does had know that refutes so much science? well now we know. and i 100% guarantee you will laugh your hump day off. when you hear. let's get after it. trump approach to the missing "washington post" journalist. we'll let the saudis tell us what the saudis did. it's been weeks. the turks are just now getting a chance to examine the consulate. where he was last seen alive. a source tells us despite the smiles that you see here. behind closed doors mike pomp was tough with the crowned prince saying mbs had to own the situation and get the investigation done quickly or his future role as king could be

in peril. it's under the saudis control. now trump will he per pursue his own answers? could the fbi get involved, should they? >> do you know whether or not we sent the fbi? i'm not going to tell you. >> why would he tell. the free press. trump seems unsure about the basis of what's goin on. or just playing us. playing cute? we don't know. take for example what is said to be an audio recording of to be khashoggi being tortured before he died. is it real? do we know? turkish officials say that recorded the audio recording evidence with u.s. authorities. just today trump said this. >> nope. im not sure yet it exists. probably does. possibly does. i'll have a report on that from

mike. that will be the first question i ask. >> he's unsure of the facts. despite the tough talk one thing was missing from pompeos meeting. >> i don't want to talk about the facts. they didn't want to it either. and they want to have the opportunity to complete the investigation in a thorough way. >> what was the point of going there if not to find out what happened? let's discuss. how this is working, what is means. maybe there's something we don't understand. this man does. former cia director under bush. general michael hayden. good to have you, sir. i don't get it. it's not a tough who done it. it happened in a place that's closely monitored. there's supposedly evidence. unless the turks are leading us wildly astray. as a plot to pit us against the saudis. this shouldn't be that hard to figure out. or what am i missing? >> so, a couple of points.

you have suggested i think the main plot line. the turks appear to know quite a bit. they have a dog in the fight. they're competitors with the saudis. and we have a phrase in the intelligence community, when we get information from a source like that. we actually say, this information maybe designed to influence as well as to inform. so you need to be a bit cautious. with what it is the turks have to offer. i agree. the main plot line i think is already well established. and so now we want simply the report. it's a little unusual. uncomfortable as you are. that we'll let the saudis do it. we want three or four vir views in the report. we want it to be accurate. we want it quick. number three, we want it to preserve the saudi american relationship. and if possible, we want it to

exonerate the crowned prince. chris, i don't think that report exists. i don't think you can get all four of those virtues together. we'll be faced with an incomplete report and misleading report. or a report that threatens the relationship or most likely a report that threatens our relation shi relationship with the crowned prince. >> you have to think, general, the president has given signal to the prince he has good cushion. he advanced the rogue actors thing. he advanced that salman had nothing to do with it. he put it out there that khashoggi is not a u.s. citizen. yes, he worked for a u.s. company, yes, he applied for permanent residency. but he wasn't one of us is the signalling there. i have one fact question and one policy question. the fact question is this. the turks say they have audiotape. wouldn't that be your first question? wouldn't we have already had that? shouldn't the u.s. have it if they have demonstrable evidence like that, of audio evidence of it?

wouldn't we have that already at this point? >> it would be my assumption that would be one of our earliest demands. if we had not gotten it by our own technical means previously, that we would ask the turks to volunteer that information to us. and if it's anywhere near what the turks claim it to be, it supports the turkish case and turkish interests. so one would expect that we would be, a, aware, be certain that it exists. and three, now having had access, if not actual possession of it, chris. >> the policy question is, is what we're seeing here deliberateness because the united states needs saudi arabia? and that this is really, while a horrible act, somewhat media-made, and that this is what saudi arabia does? this is what a lot of other regimes do, and the united states has to have strategic relationships and alliances with a lot of people who do a lot of bad things? and that the media is making something of this, but that the

united states can't cut ties with saudi arabia, even if the worst is true here? fair assessment in >> so, elements of truth here. number one, it is a horrible act. number two, i don't think this is media hype. i think the world, america, was genuinely shocked by what it is we've learned has gone on in the saudi consulate in turkey. now, chris, absolutely the saudi/american relationship is absolutely critical. and i understand why we want to preserve that, but, you know, the circumstances we're in is a little bit of our own making. and bear with me just a minute. >> uh-huh. >> we have made this state to state absolutely critical relationship dependent upon a personal relationship between family and friends around the president. the president himself and mr. kushner, and the saudi crown prince. that is not the critical relationship. it's the state to state relationship.

let me just point out something, chris, that i think your viewers might want to know. muhammad bin salman is the third crown prince in saudi arabia in the last four years. >> right. >> this is not a hereditary position in the sense of direct lineage from the king. it is now, but that's only because of a vote by the royal family. it might be that the only way to stabilize the saudi/american relationship is to distance ourselves from the america, mohammed bin salman relationship. >> that's complicated to see how quickly and how much work they've done reportedly with mbs -- >> chris, but that's -- might be the unforced error that rather than relying on the institutions -- remember, we don't even have an ambassador in saudi arabia. >> fair point. >> rather than relying on the institutions, we've relied on a personal relationship, which, frankly, the president has done on three key foreign policy

issues. russia, north korea, and saudi arabia. >> and he has an interestingly similar disposition in all three. he is meek in the face of these strong men, even though he is so strong in the face of the meek with issues back home. general michael hayden, thank you for helping us understand this a little bit better. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> all right. it's a scary idea for republicans to lose control of congress. of course it is. but what is their strategy to turnout their vote? that's scary as well. we're going lay it out for you on the magic awl of fear campaign like none other, next. here we go. discover. i like your card, but i'm absolutely not paying an annual fee. discover has no annual fees. really? yeah. we just don't believe in them. oh nice. you would not believe how long i've been rehearsing that. no annual fee on any card. only from discover.

(woman) we'd been counting down it was our tresiba® reason. he needs insulin to control his high blood sugar and, at his age, he's at greater risk for lows. tresiba® releases slow and steady and works all day and night like the body's insulin. (vo) tresiba® is a long-acting insulin used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur.

tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness or confusion. (woman) we found our tresiba® reason. find yours. (vo) ask your health care provider about tresiba®. instead, he's the tallest guy in his office.l basketball player. yeah, eric's had to compromise a lot in life. ah yes, you need travel insurance when you travel. so, should i set some... hello? but not when it comes to cutting the cord. fubo gives him all the sports he needs as well as all the shows his family loves.

don't compromise. get over 100 channels plus showtime and cloud dvr included. visit fubotv.com. that last place was pretty nice. i don't like this whole thing. i think we can do better. change is hard. try to keep an open mind. come on, dad. this is for me, son? principal. we can help you plan for that. if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants

than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today. all right. look, mid terms are about a lot of things, but at the end of the day, midterms are about turnout. so, what is the gop strategy? we see it at this point as to push fear and loathing. will it work? well, we're going to see. but here's what we know right now. we know how it works. here's step one. if you don't vote, the scary people from the south are coming for you. that's what people like fox folk host laura ingraham says. listen to this. >> your views on immigration will have zero impact and zero influence on a house dominated by democrats who want to replace you, the american voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever increasing number of chain migrants. >> you see that picture? that's what they want you to

think all immigrants look like, people laying on the floor, not as civilized as you. splaed on the floor, different from you. amnesty and chain migration, called family reunification when it's used by good people like melania trump and that's how she got her parents here. it's okay for her, but not anybody else. that's how you will be taken out if you don't vote. example, too. there is an anger, there is a rage on the far left that is really frightening. >> they have encouraged mob rule. >> mob behavior that we're seeing all over the country. >> you don't hand matches to an arsonist, and you don't give power to an angry left wing mob. and that's what the democrats have become. >> you get what the main word there was? mob, right? now, you could think this is silly, no one is going to go for the idea there is a mob of democrats. listen to senator mcconnell, the gop senate leader. >> our base is fired up.

we finally discovered the one thing that would fire up the republican base. it was a virtual mob that's assaulted all of us in the course of this process, has turned our base on fire. >> wow, he's really embracing something this deceptive and divisive. it goes further than democrats. in true us versus them fashion, it's not just about parties, it's about people. it's about the rabid left, okay? like who? like these women. like the vicious women who came out to share their stories of sexual harassment and trauma during the brett kavanaugh proceedings. these women, the same ones that confronted jeff flake on that elevator and made a difference, if you remember. now, according to the gop, these women are part of the liberal mob. now, they're not as endearing as, let's say, the proud boys, or the confederacy kin that republicans like to cotton to.

and a mob? if you're in let's say a really tight race, okay, it seems like the tactic is just go straight terrorist, like indicted congressman dunk an hunter, indicted, somehow believing he has high ground because according to him, the man opposing him is a national security risk. how does it make sense? well, here's how it makes sense, all right. hunter has a letter signed by three retired marine corps generals, and that letter says that his opponent, a mar comp in a jar, is a security risk. now, this is part of dunkin's apparent effort to paint come poe najjar as a terrorist by referencing a relative of his opponent that was a terrorist. but that doesn't mean najjar is. he's not even muslim if you're one of those people who are thinking, sounds like a muslim name. maybe he is. he's not a muslim and you shouldn't seen think that way. but no matter, as most of the terror threats in this country

are, they're not from muslims either. so it's just not a way to think. what should you think? campa najjar is a 29-year-old christian, he was born and raised here. he held a security clearance while working in the obama administration. he responded to this by calling the letter "pathological." fear and loathing and arguably lying. strategy. in a period of turbo charged toxicity, is it the way to get gop faithful to the polls? we will see. and we're already getting data back. why? early voting already underway. is this going to work? we have the political prognosticators here, and what a great debate we'll have next.

hdelicious 100% real chocolates only one winner. crunch. embracing the lightness of crispy rice. crunch. the chocolate bar all americans love.

fear has long been a political weapon used to get voters out to the polls. no surprise there. as president nixon once famously said, people react to fear, not love. but will instilling the same type of fear that laura ingraham used last night when she told viewers, vote republican or be replaced by immigrants, is that a winning strategy for the gop in november? let's put it to the debateers. simone sanders and steve cortez. brother cortez, do you agree and why? >> with what, with what laura ingraham said? >> yes. >> look, i think it's interesting, by the way, chris, that you begin by saying we're being motivated by fear because when i look in america right now, what i see is the exact opposite of fear. there is an optimism in the land

that is palpable. that's not just my opinion. you see it in every survey of consumer confidence of small business. this country is soaring in every way, particularly economically. so your idea that we are fear-based i think is wrong on its premise, first of all. >> i'm not saying the country is scared. i'm saying that some of the most identifiable tactics that the gop is using to get people out to the polls are based on fear. for example, ingram saying, go vote, steve, or some immigrant is going to take your place. go vote, steve, or the mob is going to get you. that's what they're saying. that's fear based. >> sure, let's be careful about our terms. first of all, i'm saying we're not fear based, we're optimism based. the optimism in the land is palpable. regarding what laura said, regarding what -- you can laugh, but it's the reality. >> go ahead. >> she's not talking about immigrants. she's talking about illegal aliens who are here -- >> she actually said newly

amnestied citizens. >> right, exactly, newly amnestied. meaning they didn't belong here in the first place, chris. so they got amnesty because the democrats had their way, they would give amnesty to illegal aliens who don't belong here. this is a crucial difference. and you and others on the left constantly try to -- >> why do i get brushed with being on the left back, because i test you? >> you're on the left, let's be honest. >> what am i wrong about? because i don't think that what you're saying is accurate, that means i'm on the left? >> no. >> are you telling me that you're fair with the president? are you telling me -- >> 100%. 100%. i test what comes out of his mouth. when he does something that's right, we talk about it. when he does something that's we talk about it. >> i've heard very little about that. listen, regarding immigration, here's the thing. the left -- let's excuse you for the moment. the left continually tries to conflate illegal immigration which is a scourge upon this country with legal immigration which is a great gift to this country. and they have nothing to do with

each other. and you're trying to do that right now. what laura ingraham was talking about -- >> can i jump in? >> legalizing people who didn't belong here in the first place. that is an affront to american sovereignty. it is an affront to our security, and to our economy, by the way. >> we had numbers come out that show there is an unprecedented number of unskilled unfilled. opportunities. you need laborers. they need to come from somewhere. as we all know, immigrant -- >> how about putting americans back in the work force? coming back into the work force which they're doing like crazy, chris. that's the thing. >> if they were you wouldn't have the openings. simone, what's your take on this? wages are rising, incrementally. what's rising much faster is the deficit. go ahead, simone. >> the fact of the matter is if the picture was so rosy as steve would like to paint it, if that was actually true, republicans would be running on that. instead, they are running around

the country talking about mob rule and mob tactics and using fear mongering. i'm very concerned about the rhetoric that both laura ingraham and steve just used concerning immigration. democrats are not confused about immigration policy. what folks are asking for -- and frankly what i think a lot of republicans in congress would like is a family-based humane immigration policy in this country, that we will never get to, we cannot have an honest conversation when folks are using dehumanizing language such as that that steve cortez just used. the facts of the matter are this. >> what language did i use that's dehumanizing? >> you called folks illegal. you said they never belong here in the first place. and my question to you is -- >> they don't belong here in the first place. >> steve, if it was -- >> put it to to the side, i'm glad you asked. american citizens get to decide. we can decide. that's not racist and it's not xenophobe i can.

i'm an immigrant son. i'm an hispanic. we get to decide who belongs in this country, who will add to the prosperity and security of our country. if you call that racist and if you call that small minded -- >> you're putting -- steve, stop. you're putting words in my mouth. >> what are you saying? we have a right to determine who -- >> what i'm saying to you is that the language -- what i'm saying to you is that the language you previously used and laura ingraham has used is, in fact, racially tinged and it is fear mongering. it is not, it is an acumen. your penchant to pivot to calling people racist, to accusing folks of wanting open borders and -- a number of other things you -- >> simone, democrats want to get rid of i.c.e., okay. >> stop it. demonstrate that you all have nothing to run on. i am so excited, chris, that i am a member of a party that is going out there in these midterm elections and we are talking about health care.

we are talking about working for the small guy in america again. we're talking about what democrats plan to do and will do in congress and have done, frankly, when republicans have failed to act on behalf of hard working american people. i wish republicans wanted to have that conversation. and the closing argument of these midterm elections. what we are hearing, what we are hearing is, in fact, fear mongering. i think the flailing, if you willst of the republican party because they do not think they can win this november. >> fair point. fair point. the gop argument on immigration isn't one that's optimism based, it's fear based. if the democrats win, they will do this, this and this, and you will be in bad shape. that's not optimism based. >> for american workers, yes, it is. one of the key reasons, chris, that workers are rising, particularly for blue collar americans, many of whom are black and brown, one of the key reasons that they're rising is because we're finally getting control of our immigration system. what do the democrats want to do? they want open borders and they won't say that. they won't use that term.

>> you think illegal immigrants are taking the jobs that are here? >> chris, where you are in new york, your mayor and your governor, who happens to be your brother, both of them want to get rid of i.c.e. >> that's not true. >> if that's not open borders, i don't know what is. that is true. your brother called i.c.e. a bunch of thugs. he called them a bunch of thugs. >> some democrats do want to get rid of i.c.e.. the governor is not one of them. he may have other problems. that's not one of them. >> he called them a bunch of thugs. regardless, there are prominent democratic politicians who want to get rid of immigration enforcement, who want to -- by the way, there is a caravan right now -- >> people on your side of the fence, steve, that invite the proud boys to political speeches and have them come in as a bunch of bigots and you invite them to your clubs to speak. each side has fringe elements that have to be dealt with. >> i have no room for bigots. america is not a race. >> what does that mean, america is not a race?

>> we're not a race. there is nothing racial -- >> who said you are? you are not a banana. you are not a banana, steve. >> chris, this network calls the president a racist just about every single night. >> that is so not true. the network, the network -- steve, steve -- >> when the president says things about a specific group of people that is unfair or untrue, it gets called out. how people decide to judge that is up to them. but that's not about me. that's about what comes out of his mouth. talking about securing our borders and talking about -- by the way, even restrictions -- who says they don't want secure borders? name somebody. >> the governor of new york. the mayor of new york city. >> no one -- >> senator gillibrand from new york. you want know keep going? pelosi. gavin newsom. do you want me to keep going? >> those are lies. >> the soon to be possible governor of florida, gillum.

>> optimism is not a lie. is that what optimism means, steve? you're making stuff up. simone, who is a major candidate in your races right now who is saying, i want open borders, there should be no -- quiet now. you said -- you said open borders -- you said that's what you're saying. pick your poison. simone, who on the democratic side, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt, steve. i'm in a charitable mood. who on this side has been saying we should have the least restrictions possible, i want as much flow into the country as possible, no matter who they are or where they're from? what democrats are pushing for that? >> no democrats are pushing for that, chris. none, because that is not our policy. i think across the board in general, democrats are saying that we have to fix america's broken immigration system. that is going to take a bipartisan effort. but we have to do it humanely. we cannot do it dehumanizing people. we cannot do it to referring to folks as illegal.

>> if you're illegal, you're illegal. are we supposed to say two legs is four? >> what worked, we have to do it in a way that will work for generations to come. and unfortunately, many of my conservative friends, many of my friends on the right are not interested in having a real conversation about immigration in this country. and that's why. >> it's obviously not working. we all agree on that. the question is how to fix it. steve, you want to poke at the left and say they don't want the right things. you're okay with a 5-year-old signing away your rights? are you okay with that? >> what i'm not okay with -- >> no, no, no, are you okay with a 5-year-old signing away her rights? >> is the adult who brought that 5-year-old? no, i'm not okay with the adult who brought that 5-year-old taking them to a sovereign border and demanding that they can come into the united states. >> they were asking for asylum. you process those people. her mother lives here.

>> asylum seekers have a correct method to approach united states. >> is it okay to have a 5-year-old sign away her rights? steve, are you a father? >> yes, i am, and it's not okay -- >> how do you feel about that? >> her parents -- >> how do you feel about a system that lets a 5-year-old sign away her rights? >> you can ask the question anyway you want. i'm not answering. >> why won't you answering? >> no, i am answering. i just don't answer the way you like. >> you won't answer the specific question. you're blaming it on her family. >> or whomever, whatever adult brings a child to our border and tries to break our laws and breaks and enters -- >> we should then punish the child and allow them to sign a contract which is illegal under every law in every state? >> they are the ones who are abusing the child, not the united states. >> so what about the system that allows a 5-year-old to sign away her rights? what does it mean about you, that you'll ignore something so obvious in the interest of this political advantage? >> here's the answer, by the way. this humanitarian crises on the border -- and they're awful. >> now it's awful.

you won't answer the question but you think it's awful. >> no, here's the solution. a wall. we need -- >> yeah, right. this is what happens in israel or egypt. >> putting them in cages, that's okay? >> that's exactly right. we're americans. we're very capable of having a real border. this caravan which is forming right now in central america which is going to demand entry into the united states, as if it's somehow their right, as if we don't have rights, as if hispanic americans don't have rights. >> is it illegal to come here and ask for asylum? simone, is it illegal to come to the united states and ask for asylum? >> absolutely not, chris. it's not. and the fact of the matter is under the trump administration, asylum seekers are actually being turned away. they're being turned away and being told to come back tomorrow. come back next week. come back a month from now. these are folks that are fleeing unimaginable circumstances. i don't have children, but i can't imagine what it must feel like to have to leave my

homeland where i am from to pack up and go on a treacherous journey because i believe that that is the only way to save my family. >> if that's true, simone, if that's true -- >> that is what's true. perhaps we could inject -- perhaps we could inject a little more humanity into the conversation, steve. >> if they're leaving treachery, they would ask for asylum in mexico. they would not cross an enormous country of mexico to get to the united states border if it were all about fleeing immediate danger and treachery. let's just be honest. >> they want a better life. how do they know they don't face the same things in parts of mexico? >> the point is -- listen, i don't besmir ch them for wanting a better life. >> i'm talking about asylum. you process them. that's the system. my point is asylum. >> if they need asylum, if they're truly in danger, they should do it in mexico immediately the second they get to mexico.

>> we have to leave it there. we've got to leave it there. >> mexico will do it. the fact they go all the way through to the united states tells me there is a very different -- >> i would venture to say folks are in trouble. >> bring us your tired, your poor, those -- >> we need to build the wall. >> yearning for a better life if mexico won't have you. >> legal immigration is fantastic. build the wall. legal immigration only. >> steve, thank you very much. simone, appreciate it. all right. that's a hot topic and i'll tell you what, it's not about policy, it's not really just about law. why doesn't steve want to talk about the 5-year-old? why? bad optics. this is about culture, okay. that's what the immigration issue is about. it's not just about the law. don't make it so simplistic. nobody wants illegal immigration to be the main way into this country. everybody thinks if you break the law you have to be dealt with. the system is broken, it has to be better, but it's about culture, not just policy. now, you know who may be helping democrats get out the vote soon? this is what he says he wants to do.

trump loyalist turned an tag nist michael cohen. he's not on the president's team any more. he has been meeting with prosecutors for an amount of time that is eye popping, and he's not just talking about money given to women. details next. ahoyy! [excited squeal, giggling, panting] gotcha! ah! nooooo... noooooo... nooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand. bounty, the quicker picker upper. on a budget? try bounty essentials. rewards me basicallyaptain everywhere i stay.bvious and hotels.com so why am i stomping grapes with aerobics enthusiasts near this b&b? or doing goat yoga at this mountain resort? or treating a destination wedding to the

sweet sound of pug bongos? because hotels.com lets me do me. where my dogs at? oh, here they are. hotels.com. you do you and get rewarded. take it away henry. don't forget that the past can speak to the future. ♪ ♪ i'm going to be your substitute teacher. don't assume the substitute teacher has nothing to offer... same goes for a neighborhood. don't forget that friendships last longer than any broadway run. mr. president. (laughing) don't settle for your first draft. or your 10th draft. ♪ ♪ you get to create the room where it happens. ♪ ♪ just don't think you have to do it alone. ♪ ♪ the powerful backing of american express. don't live life without it.

minutes can mean the difference between life and death. proposition 11 saves lives by ensuring medical care is not delayed in an emergency. proposition 11 establishes into law the longstanding industry practice of paying emts and paramedics to remain on-call during breaks and requires they receive fema level training and active shooters and natural disasters. vote yes on 11 to ensure 911 emergency care is there when you or your love one need it. california had the worst wildfire season on record. scientists say, our weather is becoming more extreme and we all have to be better prepared. that's why pg&e is adopting new and additional safety precautions to help us monitor and respond

to dangerous weather. hi, i'm allison bagley, a meteorologist with pg&e's community wildfire safety program. we're working now, to enhance our weather forecasting capabilities, building a network of new weather stations to identify when and where extreme wildfire conditions may occur, so we can respond faster and better. we're installing cutting edge technology to provide real-time mapping and tracking of weather patterns. and we use this information in partnership with first responders and california's emergency response systems. to learn more about the community wildfire safety program and how you can help keep your home and community safe, visit pge.com/wildfiresafety here we are at the muro blanco, the white wall here.

people are reporting people around trump are expecting more indictments in the mueller probe. if that would happen, it would probably happen by general guidance in these investigations after midterms. and that the reporting is that supposedly there is somewhat of a pressure for this to wind up sooner rather than later. so what could be happening? are there explosive findings coming? are there going to be incremental ones? will there be more investigation going on after all of this? those are political questions. but michael cohen now looms large. we have new information about this. you know him, trump's long-time fixer. really his lawyer and confidant, now foe. he was spotted just today leaving his attorney's office after reportedly sitting down with a group of state and federal officials investigating trump's family business. what does it mean? well, it must mean something because the president is coming at him anew saying he was just a p.r. guy and that he was lying when he said that trump told him to do things. we know with the tape he wasn't

lying about that. let's bring in two people who can help us piece together the direction of this investigation. phil mud, former fbi senior intelligence advisor and barrett berger, former prosecutor for the southern district of new york. it's great to have you both here. you can see my wall, yes, guys? >> yes. >> good. so, time talking, that's a relevant metric here. 50 hours. what does 50 hours mean to you, barrett? >> that's incredibly significant. prosecutors don't waste their time with somebody that doesn't have important information. for prosecutors to have spent 50 hours talking to somebody, that information would have to be both substantial and more importantly useful for the prosecutors. they have to be able to do something with the information that michael cohen would be giving them. >> now, three pieces of context. bannon was in there for a dozen hours or so. priebus was in there for about 20 hours. neither of those guys want to be a witness. mudd, we are also told this isn't just with one group, it's with various groups. and there is a possibility that

a big part of this time is assessing credibility for cohen. but how do you see this number? >> i see it from one angle. remember what happened to paul manafort when the jurors came out of the manafort judgment? they said, you know, manafort's deputy rick gates, nice. we follow documents. we believe documents. remember, we had fbi raids not only on cohen's office, but also on his hotel room and home. i suspect some of what's happening here is the feds are going through a ton of documents like they did in the manafort case and telling cohen, hey, what does this mean, what does that mean, where did this money come from, where is this russian money from, ukrainian money? i think a lot of this is detail on documents. >> barrett, what's the top thing cohen could mean to mull er? >> look, i think cohen could give mueller information about the campaign. i mean, he certainly played a role in that. i think his most significant role, though, could be talking about that infamous trump tower meeting. we've heard reporting on that and obviously he could tell us who was there, who knew about it ahead of time, and most

importantly, what the president knew about it. >> all right. and then we have the other category, phil, that he could be talking to state and federal authorities about taxes and the foundation. on the foundation, what we understand is that the trump foundation is a very small universe of people who control it. cohen did have access to what was going on in that foundation. what's relevant to you here? what could come up on these things? >> one bottom line, and that is we've already seen from the mueller team that if they see something that is potentially illegal, that they think is outside their area of responsibility, they're going to pass that off to other prosecutors. if i'm the trump team, i may be more worried about what gets passed off to the southern district of new york than what the mueller team actually brings over to rosenstein for pro tension prosecution. in particular, whether the southern district of new york gets information from the mueller team about financial improprieties. bottom line, did the trump guys do dirty stuff with money, especially money from russia? >> barrett, taxes, criminal statute of limitations from the stuff that came up in that big

article about the estate planning for trump's father? probably all have run, but fines have not run. civil penalties have not run. could that be something? >> certainly. and i think the reporting said that in this meeting today they were also meeting with members of the new york state attorney general's office. we know that they filed a civil suit dealing with the misuse of charitable funds from the trump foundation. so michael cohen can certainly be providing information that is relevant to that. >> wrongful conduct maybe. collusion, only remote possibilities. things that are relevant to russia and all that, those are still maybes and it will be an interesting political consideration, guys, if it's not about illegality, is it important enough to the american people to have warranted everything that's come before it? let me ask you both before i let you go. who thinks there are going to be more indictments? barrett? mudd? speak up. >> guarantee it. i'll give you a thousand bucks if there's not. a thousand bucks in your pocket.

>> you don't have a thousand bucks. >> barrett? >> 100. >> i don't think he has a thousand bucks either. i think we're likely to see more indictments as well. >> how about this report. who thinks the report is going to have something that can create political cataclysm, who thinks it meets that bar? >> yes. >> i agree. >> i'm on the inside of both of those. who knows. who thinks the most likely action here would be impeachment? who thinks there will be something of that level? >> not me. >> absolutely not, no. >> so you think it's significant enough to say, yeah, it's going to be a big deal in the report but not enough to impeach? so where does that leave us? >> i think it leaves us where we are with a lot of these things. there's news, there's smoke, there's fire, but nothing actually happens. i think this is what we keep seeing time and again. trump seems to be kind of made of teflon. a lot of things come up with any other administration or any other time period would have been, you know, absolutely catastrophic. just simply bounce off of him. >> phil, barrett, you did a very god job. i'm not saying that because you kind of bringing us to the place

where i've been hoping people understand all along. if you are waiting for something to come out from the mueller probe that ends this presidency, prepare yourself for disappointment. all right, thank you to both of you. canada's officially legalizing weed. should we? the great weed debate. don't is have sanjay gupta for it, but i have the next best thing next. here we go. discover. i like your card, but i'm absolutely not paying an annual fee. discover has no annual fees. really? yeah. we just don't believe in them. oh nice. you would not believe how long i've been rehearsing that. no annual fee on any card. only from discover. ♪

♪ daddy, mommy's on the phone! hi! how are you guys? ♪

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

big day up north. today dispensaries across canada opened their doors to long lines of people waiting to legally buy recreational marijuana. under the law which just passed, canada's senate in june, adults will be allowed to buy, use, possess and grow pot with some rules. among others, it can't be sold where canadians buy alcohol or tobacco, and in quebec and alberta, the legal age is 18. it's 19 for the rest of the country. let's bring in d. lemon. d. lemon, i give you the choice, for or against? >> for. thank you and good night. >> i'm against. >> why? >> for the sake of argument i'm against. personally i'm for. >> i've said this for a long time. you mentioned sanjay before the tease. even before sanjay talks about medical marijuana.

>> 100%. >> he doesn't hold a position on recreational marijuana. i think that we need to have an open mind about this because all the studies show that marijuana is not as bad for you if it's bad at all, as alcohol. alcohol is much worse. the addiction rates for alcohol -- the death rates for alcohol. and on and on and on, yet, it is legal. most of the people i know who are familiar with marijuana usually handle it pretty well, and most of the time you don't know they're using it. it helps with headaches. it helps with their eyes. it helps with cancer, it helps all kinds of things. it makes people chill out. you don't get the wheel usually and get a dui. when you smoke a joint or whenever you do marijuana, you want to chill. you don't want to go out and drive a car or go dancing. >> strong points. the pushback is that less bad is not the best policy standard to make something legal. and when you talk to people -- >> okay. maybe it's good for you.

>> well, it depends. medical marijuana, there's stuff about that. that's about cbd oil as opposed to the thc, the components that is a hallucinogenic in it. the pushback would be there are those who deal with addiction and rehab who would say almost every story that comes their way about getting started in drugs involves marijuana. and when you talk to educators and experts in that field, they'll say most often the kids who are struggling and have behavior problems and learning problems, marijuana use is often among the top exacerbating factors. so do you know what will happen if you legalize it, or are we going to be creating problems? >> well, if you legalize it, then you get to regulate it, and your parents will be more open to talking to you about it. listen, i don't want to single out cheetos but potato chips aren't great for you. we sell it. cigarettes aren't good for you. we sell it. >> but those aren't gateways to worse things. >> well, who says that marijuana -- you don't think that alcohol is a getaway? >> i do believe it's a gateway.

>> okay, then you solve that. everywhere. you can't go to a corner in new york city, most big cities, without a bodega that sells alcohol or a bar that sells alcohol obviously or a restaurant that sells alcohol obviously. and we have huge problems with alcohol addiction. you don't have those huge problems with marijuana. it's a good way. you regulate it. you take off the stigma and the ill, the underground part of it so it's all good. >> don kind of overtalked me on that but weigh in on twitter and let me know who won. >> we're going to continue on with the khashoggi story on this show. >> all right, bud. i'll check in with you in a second. all right. you probably already know that president trump is a smart man. people who say he isn't, they're making a mistake. now, he calls himself a very stable genius. he went to the best colleges. but did you also know about his background in science? we have something for you that i'm calling a toxic tastycake, and you do not want to miss it.

hi. i'm misha. and my favorite bar is crunch. ♪ delicious 100% real chocolate embracing the lightness of crispy rice. crunch. the chocolate bar all americans love. (music throughout)

you can do things like change your settings, learn tips and tricks, troubleshoot, and even manage your account. finding your xfinity username or wifi password, restarting your equipment, or paying your bill is easier than ever with x1. x1 help. another reason to love x1. say "teach me more" into your voice remote to get started. only remfresh usesody's ion-powered melatonin to deliver up to 7 hours of sleep support. number one sleep doctor recommended remfresh- your nightly sleep companion. all right. it is a beguiling question. why? why does the president fight the science of climate change? we ask that a lot. is it corporate deference? he says he doesn't need their

money and that he's about the little guy, you know, the next generation and second generation to have to deal with whatever happens. is it because he has better science? he's never offered any. is he just feeding fear of facts or maybe green jobs are going to remove the need for current workers. there's no proof for that. guess what? we finally know where president trump's confounding contempt for climate change comes from, and here it is. i call it the uncle john slash i stayed at a holiday inn express last night notion. look at this quote. it says it all, okay? i'm calling this a toxic tastycake. it's all the bad things about trump on climate in just one quote. the reporter says, scientists say this is nearing a point where this can't be reversed. and here's what he says, okay? he says this. no, no. some say that, but he has --

there's so much in this. i want to take it bit by bit, okay? here's the first thing that he says. all right? you have scientists on both sides. no, you don't. nasa says 97% of climate scientists agree warming trends are extremely likely due to human activities, okay? what else do we know? 17 of the 18 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001. so either way, scientists on both sides, not so much. but then here's the interesting thing, all right? he says, my uncle john was a great professor. i'm not making this up. this is a quote. you can check it. he was a great professor at mit for many years. dr. john trump. uncle john. yes, trump is telling the absolute truth. he did have an uncle john. he did work at mit as a professor.

but uncle john here at mit, i don't know what that thing is, but i know this. it had nothing to do with climate science because uncle john was an electrical engineer, not a climatologist. it gets better. even if uncle john were a climatologist or a hobbyist who just read up on it, trump says he never spoke to him about this particular subject, which would make sense because it wasn't his field. but what an odd thing for him to acknowledge. so he concludes that, i have a natural instinct for science. so let me get this right. you don't have any other proof. you're not relying on an uncle who was a scientist who gave you better proof, but you're relying on the fact that you had an uncle who was a scientist, but

not a climate scientist, to come to the conclusion that you therefore have a knack for knowing more than real scientists. that's how he gets to how he feels about climate change. ladies and gentlemen, president donald trump. that's all for us tonight. thank you for watching. "cnn tonight with don lemon" starts right now. >> i -- okay. so this president doesn't believe in facts. the world is round. i mean, come on. >> but he does have an uncle john who worked at mit. >> i thought what you said was really good, not to undermine what you were saying. i'm just saying, is it surprising to us? >> i was a little surprised by his chain of rationale on this. it's like me saying may he rest in peace, i had an uncle frank who worked in management out on long island. that's why when it comes to physics, i feel like i have a knack for it. >> well, chris, i know more than the