against isis, wolf, is far from over. >> ben wedeman reporting for us. thanks very much. i'm wolf blitzer. follow me on twitter and instagram. tweet the show@cnn sit room. erin burnett out front starts right now. out front next. breaking news, president trump now claiming his intelligence chiefs were misquoted when they contradicted him. the problem is, of course, that they did not and what they said is to tape. a cnn exclusive sent an investigator say the calls donald trump jr. made to a blocked number around the 2016 trump tower meeting were not to his father. that breaking news. and alexandria ocasio-cortez praised for her grit and fighting spirit from somebody who was very near and dear to donald trump. let's go out front. good evening. i'm erin burnett. the tapes don't lie, but the president?

so tonight he says that at the meeting today that you see a picture of here, that was a meeting when two of his top intelligence chiefs, dan coats and gina haspel, he says that at that meeting today with him they both denied saying what we heard them all say. just listen. >> mr. president, did you talk to your intelligence people today about the displeasure you had? >> i did and they said they were totally misquoted and it was taken out of context. what i do is suggest that you call them. they said it was fake news. >> i wonder if they used those words. let's just be clear here about the situation. haspel and coats testified under oath before the senate intelligence committee and they testified on tape in an open hearing for all americans to hear and watch if they wanted to. so let me play again what they said and you will hear that they were not misquoted when they

contradicted the president, for example, on isis. >> isis is intent on resurging and still commands thousands of fighters in iraq and syria. >> we've beaten them and we've beaten them badly. >> okay. and they were not taken out of context when they split with the president on north korea. >> we currently assess that north korea will seek to retain its wmb capabilities and is unlikely to completely give up its nuclear weapons and production capabilities. >> and the big thing is it will be a total denuclearization which is already starting to take place. they're going to start immediately. >> the tapes don't lie? and frankly, i think it's important to say this. neither did gina haspel and dan coats, they do not lie under another about security threats to the united states of america. to suggest otherwise is beyond insulting. but the president tonight isn't only saying that the nation's

top intelligence officers didn't say what we heard them all say. he's also saying they did not write what we can actually read in their 42-page report which is signed daniel r. coats, dreirecr of national intelligence. you can read it for yourself. here's what the president said. >> i didn't see the report from the intelligence. when you read it, it's a lot different than it was covered in the news. >> i guess that's a little confusing because he didn't read it but it's different than what you hear. whatever. he says he didn't read it and that is obvious because this report is consistent with the testimony of his intelligence chiefs. let's just take isis again. the bold summary paragraph because you go through the details here and we've got the bold summary paragraph on isis and it concludes with the ongoing threat to the united states. isis very likely will continue to pursue external attacks from iraq and syria against regional

and western adversaries including the united states. look, the facts are the facts. they are not this. >> and we have won against isis. >> okay. let's take a ramp. the president says the document is a lot different than it was covered in the news. let me just read the daumt ocumn iran. iran is currently not yr undertaking the development activities we judge necessary to produce a nuclear device. >> we do not believe iran is currently undertaking activities we judge necessary to produce a nuclear device. >> i mean, i don't even know what to make or to even say about this. abby phillips is out front live outside the white house. it's pretty shocking. it kind of defies belief we'd

have to sit here and do what i just did. is the white house actually going to come out and say what the president believes was misquoted in the testimony? >> reporter: well, the white house hasn't yet even attempted to fill in the blanks about what president trump believes was misquoted about this testimony. they really just let that statement hang out there and reinforced it with that tweet saying we are all on the same page, but the problem, erin, is that president trump yesterday was the one to say that his intelligence chiefs were naive and passive about iran, that they needed to go back to school because they had their facts wrong about what was going on around the world. even this morning when i asked president trump about whether he had confidence in dan coats and gina haspel, he continued to say that he believed that they would be proven wrong over time and that he would be the one proven right. now, what might be happening here, according to what we've been hearing from our sources, is twofold. one, that president trump didn't actually read the report as he

indicated this afternoon. he didn't actually hear the full testimony as it unfolded yesterday. he was watching news coverage and he didn't like what he saw and even privately he exploded on dan coats blaming him for this testimony that seemed to contradict him. but secondly, president trump is seeing the world as he hopes that it will be when all is said and done and he believes he will be proven right. but the intelligence chiefs are doing is taking the work of the men and women in the rank and file of the intelligence community and they are putting on paper what they see happening right now and president trump disagrees with that assessment. but as he points out, he believes time will tell. i guess at the end of the day, time will tell it, but right at this moment, the facts are what they are, erin. >> abby, thank you very much. i want to go to david bergen, patrick healy political editor at the "new york times." david, let me start with you. as i said, i almost feel like

i'm in a surreal moment where he says something and it is just hard to even imagine saying it, right? the testimony from the intelligence chiefs was televised. the written assessment of the global threats is public. it's a 42-page document anyone can get off the web. the president is saying his intelligence chiefs are telling him they were totally misquoted. what is going on here? >> i don't think we know. and there are moments when the president seemed unhinged. two things we do know. yesterday when we went on twitter to go after his intelligence chiefs, to call them passive and the like, insulting them, he went off half-cocked. he didn't know his facts. he hadn't really tried to go deeper to understand what had happened, what they said. he just fired his gun without knowing. and that is very disconcerting. and today we know that our

president, the most powerful man in the world, hears things we don't hear and sees things we don't see. that's hardly reassuring. >> david priest, what do you make of this? we all heard them. we all read the report. we can see the key summary paragraphs. we can all read it. what's he trying to do here? misquote it out of context, fake news. >> yeah. the testimony is in clear view. here is the only way i can make sense of it. i can imagine, i wasn't there, but i can imagine that director haspel and director coats spoke to the president and said mr. president, the headlines didn't capture the full nuance of what we said. they didn't capture everything we said about iran, north korea, russia, isis. if you read the full testimony, you'll see it. and i suspect they did that knowing that there was no chance he was going to read the whole report. you can almost imagine president trump hearing that and

interpreting it as oh, they're telling me that the media mischaracterized it. well, that's not what they said. i am sure that's not what they said. i can see how the president could take what he wanted to hear away from a conversation like that. >> i mean, that's -- i guess that's what it is. he wants it to fit what he want -- wants it to fit. before he decided to say coats, haspel, and christopher wray, chairman of the fbi was ere misquoted, abby phillip asked him whether he still has confidence in them and i want to play his full response. >> i disagree with certain things they said. i think i'm right but time will prove that. time will prove me right probably. >> okay. so then he's saying he disagrees which makes it sound like he knows what they said and he disagrees with what they said. try to -- is it then all of a sudden they said don't worry? >> right. we have a president who doesn't

read and who believes that his own intelligence chiefs work for him. they're basically employees of his. and he dislikes as we know any kind of sign of disloyalty. he does worry that anything with prominent people who were disagreeing with him and who work for him could get out to the base, could sort of unsettle voters and say what's going on. so it's classic trump. he sort of hits them incredibly hard. calls them passive and naive. goes to sort of the insult well. meanwhile, he hasn't read anything. he hasn't read what these document actually says, how it aligns with the testimony. all he hears are people who he thinks work for him dis agreeing with him. that's what he needs to short of shut down. whatever went on in that oval office meeting that he was a able to come away with and say they were misquoted, that's, again, that's in his own mind. that's in the president's own mind. these people now agree with me

and that's all that matters. >> well, look, there's no misquoting and there's no mischaracterizing their conclusion, right? you could say sure, isis has lost territory, but their conclusion is it will continue to pursue eternal attack from syria where the president wants to take out u.s. troops against adversaries including the united states. david priest, i want to take a look at the picture in the oval office. you see gina haspel there and on the far right you see dan coats. when you look at this picture in light of what the president said about they're passive and naive, they need to go back to school, he's right and they're wrong, what do you see? >> i don't see them as passive and naive. i see them as active and realistic. that's the same picture we used tonight for an article i posted on the blog writing about the president's relationship with his intelligence chiefs. look, they're doing the best they can to serve the least traditional president we have ever had, but they're also preserving their credibility by

speaking the truth to congress and by serving all of the other intelligence customers that are out there. some people are asking why aren't dan coats and gina haspel resigning? i'll tell you why they're not resigning. they're not resigning because they're serving a whole range of customers that do read their analysis, that do appreciate what they're doing and they're hoping to paper this over with the president every time it happens. >> they do that because they are patriot it is for the greater good of the country. that's your theory? >> they serve the constitution of the united states, they serve the people of the united states. to the extent there is no conflict between that and what the president says, they serve the president of the united states. in this case their highest objective is to speak truth to the customers who care to read their intelligence product. >> one of those customers, of course, does not appear to be the president of the united states, right? "the washington post" last year -- patrick, i'm sorry, reported that president trump was the first president since nixon to not regularly read his daily read. it's not just that report. he was then asked by fox news

why he chose not to get his presidential brief, his daily brief and here's how he answered the question. >> i'm like a smart person. i don't have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. could be eight years. eight years. i don't need that. but i do say if something should change, let us know. >> we've been down this path before, erin. the danger involved with the president who doesn't read, doesn't consume information, doesn't ask hard questions, you know, can miss things. we saw this frankly before 9/11 where intelligence was missed, where you had a president and a white house that wasn't really kind of focused on a laser to the daily threat assessments that the chiefs were presenting. and it really does go to something that we've known about this president since he was a candidate which is that he

doesn't take detail seriously. he believes that his own intelligence and his own perception and his ability to deal with the north korean dictator or iran is far more valuable and influential than what his own intelligence agencies can do. the i alone can fix it mentality that the president has makes it okay somehow not to do your homework and not to be up on what the threats are to the country. >> david, today the senate voted to advance an amendment which would rebuke trump's push to move troops from syria and afghanistan, right? syria being one of the places that the report says that isis could try to launch attacks against the united states. all but three republican senators voted to rebuke the president on this, so i guess how does he explain that away? >> i think he'll try to explain it being less than meets the eye, that,inact,it'smore consistent. he's going to have some phoney

bologna explanation for it. we all know that. i think it's clear the words he pays attention to are what appears on fox news. if they seem to be supportive of him, he purrs. but if they suggest anything that's critical of him, he explodes and he goes off half-cocked. what i must tell you is a president who does not read that daily brief which represents billions upon billions of dollars of investment by the united states in order to get the best intelligence possible, you start building up biases when you don't read that stuff. then you have to make a decision about whether you're going to use force or not to solve a problem or how you're going to negotiate with somebody. you don't know really what reality is. that makes it very dangerous for the country. >> well, he's certainly shown his disdain for that by how he has chosen the words he's chosen. thank you all. next senate investigators have obtained information showing donald trump's jr.'s

mysterious calls before the trump tower meeting were not to his father. so what did he call? plus mueller's hall of evidence in the roger stone case. we're talking years worth of documents and e-mails. what's in there? a former third party presidential candidate ralph nader said it would be a nightmare if howard shultz runs. why he's out front. audible members know listening has the power to change us, make us better people. with audible you get more. two audible originals: exclusive titles you can't find anywhere else. nad s. all for just $14.95 a month, and always ad free. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories, the best place to listen. download audible and start your free trial today.

introducing e*trade personalized investments professionally managed portfolios customized to help meet your financial goals. you'll know what you're invested in and how it's performing. so you can spend more time floating about wan. [ding]

♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest.

ensure max protein... to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. (straining) i'll take that. (cheers) 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. ensure max protein. in two great flavors.

. breaking news. cnn learning tonight that donald trump, jr.'s three mysterious phone calls before and after that infamous 2016 trump tower meeting were not with his father. now, this is according to new information obtained by senate investigators which show that the blocked calls were between trump junior and two of his business associates. manu, how significant is this development? >> this has been a lingering question for investigators over the past year or so in the aftermath of the revelation of this meeting with donald trump junior was seeking dirt from the russians and set up this meeting. there were records that were initially turned over to investigators that included these blocked phone calls. there were two phone calls that occurred just three days before the meeting with blocked phone numbers. those were sandwiched in between

phone calls that donald trump jr. had with a russian pop star and set up that meeting. there was a third phone call that occurred just two hours after the june 9, 2016, trump tower meeting where donald trump jr. was asked in his congressional testimony were these numbers of your father. he said he did not know. donald trump has a blocked number at his primary residence, so that fed a lot of suspicion that, in fact, donald trump was the person who had this conversation, but now we have learned that the senate intelligence committee has been told that it was not his father but two of donald trump jr.'s business asocie business associate. >> there's other calls that weren't blocked. they will have known who those were to and from. the question that matters the most is whether trump senior knew about the meeting or not. now, we know these blocked calls

were not to or from him. does that do anything to answering the fundamental question which is did he know about it. >> we still don't know. donald trump has denied. donald trump junior has denied his father knew about it before and after. they've said that pretty clearly. but that's all we're really going off of, their denials. the question is did he have any other conversations around the meeting, before, or after. that we just don't know yet. we probably have to wait for the mueller report to find that out ultimately. those conversations certainly still of interest for house democrats as they investigate this going forward and we'll see what the mueller team finds out as well. >> manu, thank you. i want to go to gerry connolly. congressman, what's your reaction to this reporting? there's been a lot of focus on those blocked calls and who they were to, whether they were to the president. we have now learned they were not. >> well, you know, an

investigation is an attempt to get at facts that get at the truth. we have unrelated facts. we have facts that may be connected. we have facts that don't have some other answers to them. one of the unanswered questions up until now was who did you make these phone calls to. might one of them have been or all of them have been to your father to which he said, as you said, i don't know. so now we know. that doesn't mean much. it rules out that he talked on the phone to his father in those three phone calls. it doesn't rule out the fact that in the same building where his father lives he may have run upstairs or downstairs and told daddy what he had just done. we know one fact. that donald trump, the president, wrote a false statement about that meeting for donald junior to cover the real topic of that meeting. >> right. that was on air force one on the way back from europe.

>> that's right. >> okay. so as you point out, we now know these three phone calls he doesn't answer the fundamental question of whether he knew or not, from donald trump jr. in person or someone he told or someone else that was going to be in that meeting. manafort, kushner, we don't know. we also are not sure of who these business associates were that donald trump junior called ahead of and after the meeting. that timing may be relevant or irrelevant. do you have any idea who they could be? >> i really don't. but again, i think they may be relevant, they may not. we shouldn't let the fact that it wasn't the president, you know, kind of mask the enormity of the fact that the president wrote a false statement, knowingly false, about the purpose of this meeting. we also know the relationship between donald junior and donald senior which is a dominant relationship on the part of the president. and the relationship where the

son really wants to make daddy happy. and so it really stretches credulity to believe that he never told his father or what it was about. >> donald trump junior has responded more of the democrats fake news narrative disappearing before their eyes. i wonder how many more false leaks will pop up to keep their dreams alive. you've said in the past donald trump junior should be worried about his legal jeopardy and he's put himself in grave peril. do you still believe that? >> i do. we don't know all of his testimony, but i think he is somebody who could be in real legal jeopardy and i find it ironic this kind of distraction with that kind of tweet that he just issued. well, if everything is fine, why did your father write a false statement, a blatantly false statement about the purpose of the meeting? >> right. adoption was the claim which was obviously not true. >> yeah. if everything is fine, why would you do that? >> all right. i appreciate your time. thank you as always.

>> migray -- my great pleasure. howard shultz insists he will not be a spoiler in 2020, but my, my, my, he's on the hot seat. >> two words which a lot of people here probably weren't even born when this happened. ralph nader. >> ralph nader speaks out front. ralph nader. liberty mutual accident forgiveness

means they won't hike your rates over one mistake. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today.

liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ and the army taught me a lot about commitment. which i apply to my life and my work. at comcast we're commited to delivering the best experience possible, by being on time everytime. and if we are ever late, we'll give you a automatic twenty dollar credit. my name is antonio and i'm a technician at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome. new tonight, a massive haul of evidence by the special counsel robert mueller in the roger stone case. mueller's team revealing it has several years worth of evidence collected from stone's icloud

accounts, e-mail accounts and hard drive on the computer, including, quote, multiple hard drives containing several tara bytes of information. obviously this is a lot. what could be in there? >> well, the special counsel appears to have pretty much everything on roger stone. that was pretty much clear from the indictment. the pages in the indictment express text messages and e-mails, communications between roger stone and other people that they say show hthat he was trying to do witness tampering, that he was lying when he went to provide information to congressional investigators. that's what's behind these charges. i think that's one reason why i think roger stone is beginning to understand that this is a very serious case. he tries to minimize that this is not a big deal. these are process grinds that could send him to prison for several years. that's the reason why i think the special counsel today asked

to ensure that there would be a protective order which is common in these types of cases as you know to make sure that information that is being shared as they get ready to go to trial is not going to be leaked out, is not going to be shared with the public, because again, they have to get ready for a possible full trial here in case roger stone does not make any kind of a deal, doesn't plead guilty to any of these charges. and then the other thing that we saw from the court filings today were indications that robert mueller is trying to hand off this case. we saw that the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia was the one essentially that's going to be handling this case. again, this is another indicator that we had from matt whitaker that mueller is trying to wrap up this investigation or at least his role in this investigation, so roger stone is going to be put on trial by the u.s. attorney here in washington. >> all right. thank you very much, evan opinion i want to go to former u.s. assistant harry and former

federal prosecutor laura coats. harry, what do you think mueller's team is looking for? >> i think they're looking for communications with or about wikileaks. they're looking for communications that he's had with the other people named in the -- they're not named, but identified as individuals one and two, horsey and randy, and some of these they probably have already seen. we also know they've executed search warrants and to the extent stone communicated using encrypted apps as he may well have, that information is now also going to be available. so it's a lot of data. a lot of this data like the michael co hhen case has no relevance to the law at all. it could be photos of friends and family, but there will be evidence in there too. >> could this mean for more charges for stone, right? because they've done process crime, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, lying, but there could be more charges, or could there be charges coming

for others that we have not yet heard of yet? >> yes and yes, erin. here's why. what's interesting about this is that normally you would have a search warrant executed. you'd be able to get all the information you need, the evidence, the digital evidence we're talking about that evan was talking about, and harry, and then based on your review of the information, you would then file charges or seek to have the first indicted if there is criminal conduct contained. now you have somebody charged with a crime and you get the treasure trove of information that dates many years back that could substantiate what they do know about which is of course the obstruction and the tampering and the overtures to wikileaks. now they may be able to identify if they don't already know anybody else who was a player in trying to somehow entice julian assange and company to provide information and looking for

information as well to blow out of the water what roger stone has always said, which is it's a coincidence. i happy to be right twice a day. i happened to be right when there was a dump of stolen e-mails. they want information to support their claims and discredit that entirely. yes, there could be charges against him. there could be more charges against other people. either way, the fact that there was a contemporaneously executed search warrant, even after there had been an indictment, is really telling. >> so obviously when we talk about who could be involved here, stone and trump have known each other for decades and by the way, over time, they've both admitted that very openly. here they are. >> roger is a friend of mine. he's a good guy. >> he's my friend of 40 years. >> i've known him for a long time. he's actually a quality guy. he's a nice guy. >> donald trump came to my wedding. i went to two of his. i was at both his parents'

funerals. >> mueller seized e-mail accounts, cell phones. how likely is it that there's communication involving president trump? who by the way let's be clear does not use e-mail in any way that i've ever known covering him or i've ever heard anyone else refer to. >> there may not be communications with trump. we don't know other than twitter how he communicates with people. is he somebody like the kind of executive who may have other people working for him sending e-mails and printing them out for him and him dictating something back? or does he just not use that at all? but stone is clearly somebody who is very conversant with technology and uses it all the time. to the extent that he didn't remember to delete things or didn't try to obstruct the investigation further by destroying evidence of his communications, it's there and it can be harvested. >> which i would imagine they would see. roger stone is expected to be arrested every day, so if he tried to destroy evidence they

would see that. the president has criticized how roger stone was arrested. he told the daily caller i'm speaking for a lot of people that were disappointed to see that go down that way. you've got armored vehicles and roger is not a person they would have to worry about from that standpoint. i thought it was sad to see it. the 29 by the way seems wildly off i'll just say. but it's very consistent with what the president has said about other people involved in all this. here he is. >> what kind of an fbi -- they break down doors for paul manafort early in the morning. his wife is in bed. like at 5:00 or 6:00 in the morning. and they undo the lock for michael cohen early in the morning. >> manafort, they raid his home at, like, 5:00 in the morning i think on a weekend and his wife is in bed and they go in with guns? this is an al capone. >> this is a clear pattern, laura.

>> it is. the thing about it is that the execution and pursuit of justice is very inconvenient to people who end up being defendants in a court of law. it's not the sort of delicate use and delicate treatment of people. that's what happened when you are alleged to have committed a crime. by the way, the other theme here is the president of the united states very quickly changes his mind about the manner in which people have been treated if they tend to flip on him. cohen is but one example of this. it is odd they did have such a number of people go to his home, but it may not be overkill if he was going to destroy evidence because why they would do that sort of raid in the first place. >> thank you both very much. next, democrats fear that if howard shultz runs, he could be the next ralph nader. what does nader think? he's out front. plus freshman democratic congress alexandria ocasio-cortez getting some cloeiclo glowing reviews but not from the person you'd expect. (burke) parking splat. and we covered it.

talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ when i walked through a snowthat's when i knewtte, i had to quit. for real this time. that's why i'm using nicorette. only nicorette gum has patented dual-coated technology for great taste. plus intense craving relief. every great why, needs a great how.

ed gets copays as lowlily go to as zero dollars on medicare part d prescriptions. ed gets labels clear as day. and, lily.... lily gets anything she wants.

ed knows he could just have us deliver his prescriptions. but what's the fun in that? switch to cvs pharmacy. tonight howard shultz embracing the fight. a source tells cnn shultz's team sees the democratic attacks on the former starbucks ceo as a good thing because they make him look anti-establishment. last night he defended himself saying the system needs to be disrupted. let me play for you how it went down. >> two words which a lot of

people here weren't even born when this happened. ralph nader. i heard the same exact thing for him and we got president george bush. just keep that in mind. >> out front now the man you heard mentioned there, ralph nader. ran as a third party presidential candidate in the year 2000. ralph, i appreciate your time tonight. you heard that voter. your name brought up in vain last night. she is comparing shultz's run in 2000. should shultz run? >> i never say to anyone don't run because running for public office is the full use of the first amendment. speech, free speech, assembly and petition. you can oppose a candidate, support a candidate. you don't tell in america any potentially candidate to shut up. that's not a civil libertarian win. >> but should he run? >> i think he's testing the waters. i don't think he's decided yet. he's on a three month tour. he's going to get a lot of pushback as you've shown.

he's not on the democratic party table. he doesn't like consumer regulation. he's down on entitlements they call social security and medicare. doesn't want full medicare for all. he's against labor unions and has practiced in his coffee business. he's known to have an aggressive foreign policy in the middle east. i see his positions are more cons na with the republicans. because there will be so many candidates in the democratic field, he can't get up there in the polls. he looks around and he sees there's not going to be many candidates challenging donald trump and he will appeal to more than a few republicans based on his ideology, his business background, his anti-labor and other things that commend him to the significant republican base. >> so ralph, i want to play something else shultz said last night. here it is. >> i can assure you i'm not going to be a spoiler and i'm

not going to do anything to do anything whatsoever to re-elect donald trump. >> i believe he said the other day if he ran, though, it would be a nightmare. do you think he would do exactly that if he ran, re-elect donald trump? i know you said everyone has a right to run, but is that what the outcome would be? >> i don't think so because there will be too many candidates in the field. they will divide up 100% of their voting base twe20 differe ways and he'll be lost. he doesn't have a single grabbing issue. look at the issues that he's already taken a position on. he's more republican like than democrat party. >> but do you think he'll help donald trump win? is that definitional for him at this point when he says i won't be a spoiler? is it definitional he would be a spoil sn spoiler? >> i don't believe in the word spoiler telling people get out, don't run, especially people such as myself who wanted to run to deal with the rotten spoiled political system run by a two

party duopoly very exclusionary and dialing for the same commercial money. let's get that straight. everyone has a right to run. you can oppose or support. please do not censor people out >> he's the one who used the word i don't want to be a spoiler. you're hearing it's democrats who are telling him to get out, you're going to kill it for us and you're going to be a spoiler. this is all nastiness coming from the people he says he's trying to appeal to. >> well, i think first of all, we don't know enough about what his surveys are going to show over three months, his polls. my guess is he's going to appeal to more republican voters than democrat voters. he is in some ways a corporate reactionary. the way he treats his workers is not -- >> so you think instead of this whole helping trump win, it might be the opposite? >> of course. i think the field is open to

challenge trump. governor kasich from ohio my tral en challen challenge him. shultz will be in the headlines every day. if he's part of 20 people running as a sort of democrat, he won't have the visibility. >> he will be the richest person running if he runs. he will be richer than donald trump. thank you very much, ralph nader. >> the rats reformed the congress. read it, erin. it's a serious book. >> i will. thank you, sir. next, why some of trump's biggest supporters are now praising alexandria ocasio-cortez. the president now says a wall is a wall and not these things. >> steel barrier, peaches. making you wait in line. keeping billions of dollars of your interest.

they've been treating you like you're lucky to have them. that's not right. show them who's the boss of your money. you. better is out there. ally. do it right. with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia. ( ♪ ) dealing with psoriatic arthritis pain was so frustrating. my skin... it was embarrassing. my joints... they hurt. the pain and swelling. the tenderness. the psoriasis. tina: i had to find something that worked on all of this. i found cosentyx. now, watch me. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are getting real relief with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic.

cosentyx treats more than just the joint pain of psoriatic arthritis. it even helps stop further joint damage. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms. if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. i got real relief. i got clearer skin and feel better. now, watch me. get real relief with cosentyx.

(male announcer) we know some resolutions are easier to keep than others. we know what's around the corner is always worth the trip. we know the only thing better than the last adventure is the next one. we know the great outdoors. we love the great outdoors. bass pro shops and cabela's-- where incredible selection, great people, and an experience like no other,

all come together. this is the avery's trying the hottest new bistro.ery's. wait...and the hottest taqueria? and the hottest...what are those? oh, pierogis? and this is the avery's wondering if eating out is eating into saving for their first home. this is jc... (team member) welcome to wells fargo, how may i help? (vo) who's here to help with a free financial health conversation, no strings attached. this is the avery's with the support they needed to get back on track. well done guys. (team member) this is wells fargo.

oh my gosh. >> congresswoman ocasio-cortez will soon be set to unveil one of her most controversial and talked about agendas. the green new deal. it's a massive economic stim las packa -- package to get the united states on a renewable energy system. she has been a proponent of the proposal. >> this is going to be the great society, the shot civil rights movement of our generation. >> the freshman congresswoman is working with democratic massachusetts senator ed markey on getting the bill down approximately it's clear this is legislation ocasio-cortez has been pushing for.

>> we have to get to 100% renewable energy. >> a group called the sun rise movement organized that protest. it's executive -- >> i can't tell you what it meant for thousands of young people in our movement to see a politician finally stand up with the courage and conviction, and a ton of moral grounding and authority to call for the kind of massive action that we need. >> the movement gaining traction in the 2020 presidential race. democratic presidential candidate kamala harris says she supports a green new deal. critics, such as billionaire former starbucks ceo howard schultz is concerned about the cost. but leaders do not agree on the price tag. ocasio-cortez has proposed a 70% tax on those whose income is above $10 million to help pay for it. >> the american dream is to rise above your standing in life. now we're going to provide

punitive tax rates for people who have succeeded. >> reporter: ocasio-cortez has no shortage of critics for the proposed new green deal, the self-described socialist has of late been getting praise from an unlikely political corner, the far right. people such as former trump adviser steve kornacki telling politico she has the combination of grit, determination, fighting spirit that you can't coach. pundits such as ann coulter and activist mike certainvich, while loathing her policies, have acknowledged her abilities to energize the progressive left. and while some on the right may be complimenting ocasio-cortez, it should be noted that could also be strategic. those on the right now she is a polarizing figure. they also know some of her policies upset those who are moderate democrats, and there are a number of strategic folks on the right who are going to be looking for a way to sort of use

that come 2020. >> all it is a bunch of manipulation. all right. thank you very much. and next, jeanne moos on trump's wall, coming full circle. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order? ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering. reach her health goals! i'm in! but first... shelfie! the great-tasting nutrition of ensure. with up to 30 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals! ensure. for strength and energy. ensure. ♪ ♪ wake up early, o. ♪ slap on some cologne

♪ i'm 85 and i wanna go home ♪ ♪ just got a job ♪ as a lifeguard in savannah ♪ ♪ i'm 85 and i wanna go home ♪ ♪ dropping sick beats, they call me dj nana ♪ ♪ 85 and i wanna go don't get mad. get e*trade, kiddo. - with tripadvisor finding the right hotel at the lowest price is as easy as dates, deals, done. going on a work trip? dates, deals, done. destination wedding? dates, deals, done. because with tripadvisor all you have to do is enter the dates of your stay and we'll take care of the rest: searching over 200 booking sites to find you the best deal it's as easy dates, deals, you know the rest. (owl hoots) read reviews, check hotel prices, book things to do, tripadvisor.

amazon prime video so when you say words like... show me best of prime video into this... you'll see awesome stuff like this. discover prime originals like the emmy-winning the marvelous mrs. maisel... tom clancy's jack ryan... and the man in the high castle. all in the same place as your live tv. its all included with your amazon prime membership.

that's how xfinity makes tv... simple. easy. awesome. tonight trump changes his mind on what to call the wall. here's jeanne. >> reporter: president trump has finally come full circle on the wall. after all the jokes -- >> first it was a wall, then it was a fence, then it was just i guess cones, you know. >> reporter: with his back to the wall, the president has gone back to his roots, tweeting let's just call them walls from now on and stop playing political games. a wall is a wall. which brought retorts like and a fence is a fence, and ladders are ladders. in the words of the immortal dr. suess, a wall is a wall no matter how small, or even if it

isn't built at all. in under 20 seconds, watch the president end up where he started. >> i will build a great, great wall. powerful wall. as beautiful as a wall can be. precast concrete, going very high. wall or fence. >> there could be some fencing. >> has to be see-through. you could call it a steel fence. >> we'll build a steel barrier. >> or a slat fence. >> and now a wall is a wall. oh, wait, we left out the best one. >> name it peaches. i don't care what they name it. >> reporter: just the other day presidential counselor kellyanne conway was counseling reporters not to use the word "wall." >> i'm asking why you and the polling questions respectfully are still saying wall when the president said you can call it whatever you want. it's a great slogan. build a wall and crime will fall. >> why can't we call it a wall when he calls it a wall? >> reporter: besides, build a slab fence, it's the best defense, doesn't have quite the same ring.

remember the good old bad old days when a wall really was a wall? imagine president reagan saying -- >> mr. gorbachev tear down this -- solar wall, steel fence, peaches. >> reporter: jeanne moos, cnn, new york. anderson starts next. good evening. thanks for joining us. we begin tonight, keeping them honest, the president of the united states once again telling you not to trust your own eyes and ears. not to believe what you see and hear, but to believe only him. two days ago, the president was contradicted by his own intelligence officials about the most urgent threats facing the united states. at a senate intelligence committee hearing tuesday, director of national intelligence dan coats and cia director gina hasp pel contradicted the presidential claims on everything from iran to north korea. not much left to interpretation. but tonight the president