>> anderson cooper, anti-baby, i see the posters now. smack wolf away from my stash of kalua. things i never thought i'd hear at least not tonight but it was good. i am chris cuomo. welcome to primetime. tonight the jussie smollett prosecutor is trying to explain a move that has the police and the mayor there fuming. the charges are dropped there but the case is headed straight to cuomo's court and a new scare for the boeing 737 max 8 jet. this time in the sky over florida. what was it doing in the air in the first place? and the president stomps his victory dance just long enough to trample on obamacare. does the law support it and how can you do this with nothing to

replace it? one of the president's big backers in congress is here. can he make a compelling case for the move? the closing argument. why is he saying the mueller report is great when he hasn't seen it? we don't know enough. maybe the president thinks he does but the case for clarity will be made. what do you say? let's get after it. >> all right. it's a good night to be jussie smollett. the same prosecutors that said they had him dead to rights for making up a hate crime dropped a 16 count indictment with barely an explanation. the outrage and disbelief got cranked up to 11 after they got word the investigation of a supposed hate crime turned hoax was all for nothing. >> do i think justice was served, no. >> this is without a doubt a whitewash of justice and sends a

clear message that if you're in the position of influence and power, you'll get treated one way and other people will be treated another way. there is no accountability within the system. it is wrong full stop. >> so let's look at the court papers. can't. case has been sealed. his record exponged. so why were they so good to someone that they said did something so bad? in a cryptic statement they noted circumstances including his volunteer service in the community and agreement to forfeit his bond. they call the outcome an appropriate resolution to this case. ten grand and helping out at reverend jackson's charity and you beat 16 counts including felonies? let's take it to the court. >> i'm seeing a lot of agreement on this one tonight.

first of all, we all agree, they have to say more about why they did this, yes? are we all in agreement about this? >> yes. >> oh, yeah. >> tell us why. >> oh, yeah. >> the thing about this case is we had a press conference not only held by the police department but also by the prosecutors in the case and the office of the prosecution that layed out a series of facts that then lead to a grand jury a presentation of evidence where grand jury members found that 16 counts were warranted so to tell the grand jury that all of your service, thank you, we don't need it any longer, we're going to dismiss the case and a $10,000 bond forfeited is highly unusual. prosecutors do have discretion to be able to terminate cases and say we no longer want to prosecute or we decline to do so initially but to do so after a grand jury indicted is unusual and to seal the record and say does anyone want more information is totally off.

>> it wreaks of politics. do you think there's a chance that they may have botched the case? when they let the brothers go, you have three people involved in the crime and it ends up being smollett and the other two aren't there. that was a mistake and now we have to cut the guy a deal. >> this isn't a deal. the deal is you plea down to one of the 16 indicted charges. it isn't literally dropping the case. >> fair point. i'm just trying to give them some legitimacy. >> you're a generous man. this is a miscarriage of justice. if i'm the mayor of the city this happens in, you bet i'm ticked off. this is embarrassing for chicago and the police are curious and

rightly so. it turns justice on its head and it makes it look like if you're rich or famous you just get treated a different way than everybody else. >> i'm going to say one that he didn't want to say. could this be a proverse play on race here. this prosecutors said we're going to go after people for hate crimes we're going to go after the people that attack people of color. we're not going to attack someone that's usually in the class of victims on this. it sends the wrong message. do you think that could be their explanation? of course they'd never say that but do you think that could be it? >> i think that could be setting prosecutorial priorities and say if you're going to bring down the hammer of justice you want to likely impose the burdens of that crime and punishment on those who it was intended for. this happens all the time in

civil rights cases where although the intended recipient of the benefit is not a person of color, people try to judge. so we want to actually investigate these cases anyway. that's true. however, i'm going to play devil's advocate and just say this, the prosecutor may have botched the case in the sense of what if they, by releasing those two men, did not have an immunity deal. they did not have a plea deal with those individuals, they did not have any cooperation by the attorney late in the game, perhaps they found information that they either recan'ted or changed their stories. they no longer have the best evidence to be able to prosecute this fully and also celebrity justice. it cuts both ways. i do find it hard to agree that you would bring down 16 counts on a false claim to a police officer but for all the attention that this case got. so perhaps it was a sense of in a case with a false report we

would normally not go to this excess and extreme and we would have a find and perhaps community service. if that was the case all along they should have said that before the press conference and all the resources but that may be what they're thinking. >> we're on the same page on that one. let me get you take on something else. the idea of what the administration now wants to do with this aca judgment in texas -- i don't want to get too deep in the weeds but when you remove a part of the law, almost always the judgment is about what we call severability in the law. this is no good but the rest of the law stands if it can. that seems to be the case here. what do you think the legality

of this move is that's going on with the trump administration to try to get rid of the entire aca because of one provision found lacking by one district court judge? >> this is a provision that in earlier rounds and it itself was the whole scheme. president palm balm said the same thing. so there's a legitimate legal case to be made that when that piece comes out the whole comes down and the fact that congress went after it in the tax bill will be the only source of argument or the main source of argument against that contention but the case and the history of the legislation that this is a critical element and not severable is strong. >> yeah. >> this thing is going to come

down. >> now, they went to just you alone there for a second. i want to look something up here and make sure that i get it right. i agree with you conseptually but i think it should come out the other way. here's why. there's no need to guess about where congress's head was on this and sometimes a judge actually has to guess about whether or not the entire law would still be held by the lawmakers that made it. a republican lead congress in 2017 eliminated the mandate but they did not -- i want to get the year right, 2017 but they didn't get rid of the entire aca. right? part of that was political. i don't understand why you'd want to get rid of something with democrats in the house when you know they won give you a quick fix. >> they didn't get rid of the mandate, they set it to zero dollars. >> they set it to zero dollars. >> right. okay.

fine. >> the reason to say there's a play to support the validation is the competition of the supreme court. when you go back to the time when this was actually put into law and grappled with in the supreme court it was chief justice roberts that had to negotiate a pretty good deal to actually sprefpreserve obamacar he had to try to convince and placate the liberal justices and the four that were there. that used to include scalia and kennedy as a swing vote. now it's changed to include gorsuch and kavanaugh. both of whom are probably not likely to side the same way. if you're the president of the united states that spent such

effort this is the primetime to do it. >> one other legal concept to introduce to people quickly. one of the expressions you learn in law school is equity is forfeit to forfeiture. we don't like to see people lose things. it almost guarantees that many people are going to lose coverage and care. is that a smart move? >> well, remember it isn't like the health care system goes away. the federal government comes back out of it. there will be displacement but essentially health care will be handed back to the state where is the federal government, to a greater degree than before took it over in obamacare. >> but there was a reason. >> it hasn't worked.

>> this is a political argument we'll have all night. you'll take me on the law. i appreciate the legal points and the analysis that's available. a pleasure as always and thank you. >> we'll get to the policy of it. because if the whole thing goes you'll have a lot of issues about what is lost and how do you replace it? some pre-existing conditions. i'm going to give you the facts first before the interview, next. feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin

and relief from symptoms caused by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear.

♪ named 'park' in the u.s. ninety-six hundred roads it's america's most popular street name. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours.

now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? how'd i get this yard? behind pete's great looking yard, is his secret weapon... the scotts turf builder program. it's the best way to get the yard you want all year long, guaranteed. all it takes is 4 feedings, with a scotts solution for every season. and with a customized plan from the scotts my lawn app, your yard can look like pete's. it's that easy. this is a scotts yard. download the scotts my lawn app for your personalized plan.

>> whether he thinks he's delivering on another campaign slogan or out to undue anything obama. the doj is now trying to get rid of the entire aca. there's a significant legal issue but also a huge practical issue. this president and his party have no plan to provide care to tens of millions if the aca is gone. those two conditions is how we

got companies that didn't want to cover the sick. that punished for pre-existing conditions. companies that didn't want to give the right coverage for the right amount of time and not letting your kids stay on after college. you remember all of this. the president remembers. he has said that many times. >> i want to keep pre-existing conditions. we need it. >> we will always protect americans with pre-existing conditions. >> yeah, except for now because if he gets rid of the aca he won't be doing it. he knows the policy matters and it's popularity. this administration has seen a huge surge in enrollment numbers at the end of last year's window. we're talking about nearly 12 million people.

60 million more have medicare young people up to the age of 26 all over the country get care because of the aca on their parents plans. check ups, mammograms, birth control are available at no cost because of the aca. it's also helped fight the opioid epidemic. part of expanding medicaid was to cover that. now even trump's own administration is using this law to fight for lower prescription drug prices. if they don't have to do things, they won't do things. now he wants to remove the protection and replace it with nothing. so there's very little chance of a quick fix. why get rid of this law before

having something to replace it with for 21 million americans including many of our most vulnerable. welcome to the new normal. there may be timing because the other issue is the legal issue and the strategy there has problems. this effort stems from a ruling that when republicans eliminated the mandate by zeroing it out that made all of obamacare unconstitutional. did that remove it or zero it out? it rejects severability. they would have passed the law without that part but in 2017, a

republican lead congress eliminated the mandate by zeroing it out. they left the rest of the law as is. likely because republicans know the same thing that president trump knew. beyond the name obamacare, the benefits are more popular than ever. the democrats victory came in large part by arguing that trump had not delivered anything better on health care. this move would almost certainly prove them right and make our health insurance mess worse. so this could be a political gift. he's doing a victory dance about russian interference. so how does he make the case here? we have gop congressman sean duffy from wisconsin, next.

the new way to nourish hair. 98% naturally derived ingredients. use as a creamy mask and rinse in one minute, or leave in for lasting nourishment. get silky hair fast, with fructis treats. by garnier, naturally. with fructis treats. ♪ behr presents: tough as walls. that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪

that's some great paint. behr ultra, a top-rated interior and exterior paint. paint, prime, protect - all in one. now that's some great paint! find it exclusively at the home depot. so let's promote our spring ftravel deals, on choicehotels.com like this: (sneezes) earn one free night when you stay just twice this spring. allergies. or.. badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com. nick's mom called the t-ball league eight times to help her shy son make some new friends. his parents shared videos of highlights, dance moves, and jimmy carlyle stealing third... almost. they sent seven texts when a new friend invited nick for a play date. but in the end, they put their phones down, and watched as nick finally felt part of the team.

the mueller report was great. it could not have been better. no obstruction. no collusion. it could not have been better. >> see what it says on the bottom. he hasn't seen the report yet. we keep asking if they have because the statement makes no sense. they say we vn sehaven't seen i. we know from the summary from the a.g. that there's no criminal case that could be made that this president or his people helped russia interfere in the election. we didn't hear anything about a

ruling on obstruction because he didn't make one. nonetheless, riding high on word that he isn't being prosecuted the president is now opening up another fight ahead of 20 renewing his push to kill obamacare is this a smart play? health care gave many the edge in the near terms. let's bring in republican congressman sean duffy. >> thank you for having me on. you saw what i outlined as the political issue for me here. i get why people in your party want to change the aca but it was always repeal and replace. you do this this way is that the smart play? >> you missed in your analysis of the bill, where i come from we were promised our prices would go down for a family of four and we could keep our

doctors and health care plans. if my communities, if you get a subsidy in obamacare you love it. if you don't get a subsidy, your premiums have gone up. your deductibles have gone up. obamacare has been a failure for the american people which is why democrats are saying i'm not going to defend obamacare, i want to go for medicare for all. it's an acknowledgment that obamacare hasn't worked for the american people. >> one this is complicated so there's a tricky statistic which is that the rate of increase in health care costs with the aca, obamacare, is lower than it was before. are costs still going up? is it still too much? yes and yes but it's hard to make the case that the aca made things worse. the question is what are you going to do? you're not going to be able to replace anything.

why do it that way? why not do it politically where you have something ready so that you don't hurt anybody. >> i'm sitting outside the house floor right now is what you know is that often times unless the congress is forced to act, it doesn't act. so if the courts overturn obamacare you're going to see the congress republicans and democrats. the house controlled by democrats and senate controlled by republicans come together and figure out a way to take care of the american people. competition is part of this. there's a way to do this. the president said we'll have the party of health care but i wouldn't bet against president trump. he's been looking out for middle income americans. the forgotten men and women.

he'll deliver for them. we'll put out a plan that will drive down the cost of care for the people that we represen. >> yeah but you don't have one. it's not about me being a cynic. it's about being a skeptic. there's no plan and you can't get anything done that quickly and that's a political reality. you shutdown the government over a wall. how long will this take? >> you mention the wall, it's like me saying that you voted against the wall as a democrat but you have no plan for border security. >> they do have a plan. >> no, you don. >> and you guys made it about a wall that doesn't even address it. >> tweet me the plan because it doesn't exist. he pulled our actually national guard off the southern border. there was boots and technology on the border. this stuff doesn't make sense. democrats are not about securing the border. they don't have a plan. it's never come out. >> all of you guys flood me in plans but you can never put them in effect. the border is something that we

examine closely on this show and we know for a matter of fact that a wall is not the fix for what they're most worried about down there right now these kids come in with their families and abuse the asylum laws. they don't have resources and they're worried. >> i'm going to come see you in milwaukee and i guarantee you when we go to the convention you'll see a big 12 foot wall with gates where they will funnel people through. >> walls work if you try to sneak in. it's a deceptive argument but try to make it and i'll respond. >> if you have border security they're not going to make the journey. what i'm saying is the rate of

people sneaking across the border is not the big concern. it's the people coming and presenting themselves for asylum. they don't have anyone to put them. but they don't have the resources. they don't have the caseworkers and you have done nothing about it. >> they're advised. >> i don't agree with that because they're not sneaking in. they're presenting themselves. >> i promise you when we hit a crisis down there -- and i fear it's coming, what they're worried about is kids they can't take care of and kids they can't keep from being abused. we'll talk about it. you're always welcome on the show. am i wrong on this, the president saying the mueller report was great. he gets he's not going to be charged as a felon but we don't know what's in that report.

>> what we do know is that bob mueller is not going to charge anybody else with collusion or obstruction. he spent a lot of time doing it. we talked about this for years. this is a time to celebrate. let's not speculate -- >> why not. >> i don't think you should speculate about it. >> because you spent two years speculating. >> it was never about criminality but it was about wrong doing. who did what and what did the president know so he can have accountability. >> i think you want to know who duped us. >> i want to know that too, but you guys have to figure that out. >> you have been talking about this for over two years, you should say who set this up. >> you should figure that out. >> chris what you guys did is

you reported on it and you took all of the salacious, you know, reports of all of the scandal and for two years and you have to say, we have to analyze how we get our information because for two years every single hour of every day we talked about it and i don't want to cast blame on you. you have been fair. but the american people say do i trust the democrats? >> part of the reason is because for the first time in our history we have a president that tells everybody that the media is their enemy and institutions of our democracy can't be trusted. >> but if the media was doing itself job, they would be far more skeptical. >> we're not the investigators. >> but you're the reporters. you have a job to make sure you're putting out the right facts. >> what wrong facts did we put out? >> that there's russia collusion. you're telling me i have to present the bottom line that there's no collusion. >> it's 100% behavior by people

around the president that qualifies as collusion. collusion is not a crime. it's a behavior. >> but collusion with russia didn't exist. >> that's not true. mueller says he couldn't make a case that any of those people helped the russians interfere. >> you don't have to report more on russia collusion. can't we report that unemployment is down, salaries is up. that we crushed isis. far more times for the networks around america to report on the great news that are making americans lives better which is a good thing for our country and if we start focussing on those issues an less on the salacious scandals that don't end up being true, we'll be better off as americans. >> there's nothing salacious using that in the context of meaning not important saying these guys lied about meetings in context in a way that would worry you a lot if you change the r and ds. you can look at the other issues

too. >> i think there were liars lying about their taxes and not russian collusion. >> they did. manafort lied about the polling data. stone lied about trying to get the e-mails. michael cohen lied about things that went on. >> how high did this go. >> sean, so you don't like these questio questions, they're salacious speculation but not when it's the other party. >> you reported on it and it's not true. >> it's not true that obama wiretapped trump. that's not true. >> but do you know that? >> yes. >> how do you know? >> because you wound up having the intel agencies look at this and they investigated it and they found out that there was someone in the tower that was the subject of a wiretap that has nothing to do with trump. >> listen, chris -- >> you're doing what you say you don't like. that's why people are turned off on politics.

>> here's what i want -- we have a right to know who started this crazy story about donald trump and russia collusion? was it someone inside the white house of obama? haters on the campaign. >> the president said russia didn't interfere in the election. will he accept that now? >> do you not care how the story started? >> yes. i do. i do passionately. i just think i know. >> we need to know who started it. what obama knew and when he knew it. all of us should have this information. >> we do. they gave us a whole report on it. >> i don't want to go here but i'm going to for one moment. >> you hate it, but you'll do it. that's what i love about you. >> the only russia collusion that happened was hillary clinton getting the dirty dossier. >> not true. >> she paid for it. >> that's not true. >> it is true. how can you say --

>> i'll say two things. one, you can't be upset about the clinton stuff and not be upset about the trump stuff, but you do. okay. the second part is collusion is when you're doing sneaky things with people that you know you're not supposed to do it with. might it be a crime? maybe, maybe not. that's what was going on with the trump people and we don't know whether or not they knew about it. they may not be crimes but shouldn't they be things that the american people should know about. >> let me tell you a secret. representatives are trying to make contacts with them so they can know. >> they were geared toward helping trump and reached out to them repeatedly. >> do you know what the russians want? to buy america. that's what they want and that's why they were promoting different sides of different issues and the media played into that for two years.

i feel like i was calling it out to stop it from happening. >> i only control only half the time what comes out of my own mouth. do you know what a good antedote is? you get your case out to open minds here. >> thank you for having me on. >> you're not just handsome, you're smart. we usually have better looking guys on this show. >> you're a funny guy. >> people come on here and they get tested and you get the benefit of it. another scare in the sky. got a report on this. the 737 max 8 in the air over florida forced to make an emergency landing this aftern n afternoon. what was it this time and why was it in the air? there's an answer to that. miles o'brien is here. he has it, next. and this twist in the jussi jussie smollett case.

does d.lemon see this as justice? i'll argue the easy side of, no. let's get after it, next. that's a win. but it's not the only reason i switched. geico's a company i can trust, with over 75 years of great savings and service. ♪ now that's a win-win. switch to geico. it's a win-win. switbe right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission

in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. and you're still not sure if you want to make the trade?. exactly. alright, call td ameritrade's trade desk. they can help gut-check your strategies and answer all your toughest questions. call for a strategy gut check with td ameritrade. ♪ rewards me basically aeverywhere.om so why am i sliding into this ski lodge with my mini horse? because hotels.com lets me do me. sorry, the cold makes him a little horse.

hotels.com. you do you and get rewarded.

implts >> a southwest airlines boeing 737 max 8 was forced to land after taking off.

the pilots reported an engine problem this time. let's bring in our aviation expert. so different problem. this was about an engine. do you see this as a deeper concern? >> well, it's hard to say if there's some grand problems with the engines. i'll tell you this, chris, these are new engines. put on board the 737 which had to do with why the anti-stall system was put on board in the first place. they were put more forward and caused the stability problems i would say this is completely unrelated to the software problem but it's also under a tremendous amount of scrutiny now and this would be a fairly routine semiemergency in the world of airline flying will get much more scrutiny than others.

>> people will say why was it flying? i thought they were supposed to be grounded. this is part of it? >> it's very expensive to park an aircraft on the ramp of any airport and the calculation by southwest and the other airports is that this is going to go on for awhile. it's cheaper to fly them to a place where the weather is conducive, the desert southwest is always good. and it's cheaper to park them there. and then when the fix comes in they can do it in one place. >> now what we know about the software. there was experimenting to see how much time a pilot has if this software glitch happens. they came up with a number of 40 seconds. do you buy that as a rational assessment? and what does that time period mean? >> i have been saying all along that everything had to be perfectly right for the crew to do the right thing and save the day. this was a system that had too

much authority. and these accidents occurred shortly after playoff. there wasn't a lot of altitude to play with. on the most cerecent flight the was flying with only 200 hours and precious seconds elapsed. they had to identify that problem with precious little time. everything had to go perfectly right and of course it didn't. >> as we know from television, 40 seconds can be forever or a flash. it depends on your experience. thank you so much. next question of the night. how is dropping a charge -- all charges against jussie smollett justice? is this about celebrity? is it about race? is it about incompetence? why did this happen? let's see if d.lemon can see

what i'm missing. i'm working to keep the fire going

for another 150 years. ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪ dealing with your insurance shouldn't be more frustrating than the accident itself. that's why esurance makes it simple. just take some pics. [picture noises] go to sleep. wake up. grab a bite. maybe some racquetball. and boom - your money's on the way so you can get back on the road fast. well, not that fast. the editor had to make it fit in 30 seconds. it's pretty tricky actually trying to ... and ... tagline. when insurance is simple, it's surprisingly painless.

i have been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one. i would not be my mother's son if i was capable of one drop of what i had been accused of. >> the facts don't match his feelings but let's bring in d. lemon. why did they let him go? >> i can tell you, it's what they worked out. i can speak to what you were saying there. you have the president where he says there's no collusion but this does not exonerate him. you have hillary clinton back during the 2016 election. we're not going to prosecute her

or seek to prosecute her. but she was negligent. >> negligent or acting recklessly and then the prosecutor in this case saying this is not an exoneration. we still believe he made this up and the evidence from the police department and the investigators but we're dropping the charges. i can't explain to you what's going on here. but that's one of the things i want to ask his attorney. >> it has to be one of two things. one, maybe the prosecutor's botched this. when they let the nigerian brothers go. you had three people involved in the crime but now only a case gens o against one of them. maybe they weren't as reliable. maybe they couldn't secure them in at trial and make the case. that's the best answer i can think of for prosecutors. the other one gets into politics. is this about going easy on a celebrity. is this about where his race is relevant to where you want to prosecute in a situation like

this? >> well, i will tell you, i have been speaking to my sources and they will tell you, i was going to say this on my show, but i'll give it to you now. >> my man! >> they tell me that the brothers were consistent all the way through. that they were not notified. they were cooperating witnesses. so it wouldn't seem that the prosecution screwed it up, if you believe the source who told me that. what most people believe -- and listen, i don't know, i'm not there, i'm just reporting -- that this was political in nature, because the people who had been trying to prosecute him, which was the people who decided to drop the charges, did a 180 and when they spoke to him today, as opposed to yesterday or the day before, they were like, who are you? i have never met you before, even though you look like the same person i have just spoken to. so most people believe that it came from on high. i don't know from who. >> wasn't the mayor. >> but it's certainly unprecedented. >> the mayor, i spoke to him when this happened. i spoke to the police superintendent as well.

we asked for both of them tonight. the mayor ended up going on wolf and spoke to him and a great conversation. i don't want to interrogate her, but there are a lot of questions that i want to ask her attorney. and also that i would like to ask jussie himself, right? >> i would love to see that. you've got a great guest tonight. person to have, i'm going to be working for sure. i'll see you in a second, d. lemon. so the jussie smollett case is one of two big legal conversations going on across the country tonight. stay with me on this. because i don't think it's a big stretch to compare this smollett investigation or problems with it with the mueller probe. both beg for more information and there is a lesson in both and it starts with this. don't be a sucker, next. allergies with sinus congestion and pressure?

you won't find relief here. go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray only relieves 6 symptoms, claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. ♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest. tit can't be found on. just any map. a place miles from the beaten path. overcoming twists and turns, ups and downs.... whatever life throws. a place to always strive for. for all the journeys that make us stronger.

the biggest week in television is almost here. xfinity watchathon week. starting april 8th, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! whether it's more jaw droppers, standing o's upon standing o's or tv's biggest show stoppers. get more into what you're into. get ready to watch with xfinity x1 or the xfinity stream app.

xfinity watchathon week. free starting april 8th. boop! all right. new cuomo cups. we give them to the guests, we ran out. a little hard to read on tv. big, like my hand. don't be a sucker. part one and part two. here's part one. actor jussie smollett's story is no more believable now after charges were dropped. the video, the accounts of the brothers and his own account have never made sense. hence the charges and the apologies from the brothers. even in dismissing the charges, the first assistant state's attorney said this. we did not exonerate mr. smollett. there's that word again. the charges were dropped in return for mr. smollett's agreement to do community service and forfeit his $10,000 bond to the city of chicago.

here's what i don't get. why are you processing this as a mystery? we should hear more, but they cut him a deal, period! why, why? celebrity? a perverse play on race? did prosecutors screw up here? did they mess up with how they treated the other two members, the three people involved in the crime. did they screw it up? is there some unknown other reason? whatever it is, the prosecutor owes their city and frankly all of us an explanation, because this reeks right now. the main argument right now is this. these calls that charges are being dropped means that smollett was telling the truth. that's what he says, but don't be a sucker. even the prosecutor says, that is not the case. they said they don't believe smollett is exonerated, meaning innocent. the legal standard is guilty or not guilty, not guilty or innocent. so maybe there is a hole in the case that made this an easier path to make this deal, but it was an odd word to use. in fact, it becomes the word of the day in my opinion. exonerated. and it takes us to part two of

don't be a sucker. how is the mueller report case closed when no one has seen the report? these four pages that we saw, these are the ag, bill barr's, letter summarizing the report. didn't stop our president from proclaiming this today. >> it was a complete and total exoneration. >> not today, sunday. but he'll say it again. and once again, the president can't go with the truth, even when it is on his side. let's just be straight about this. mueller said barr echoed, no charge of criminality. can't make a case. a criminal case when it comes to the president or his people being involved in russian interference into our election. that's the good news. but on obstruction, mueller went out of his way to apply an unusual standard. and barr went out of his way to repeat our word of the day. the special counsel states that while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. that means mueller can't show

that trump did nothing wrong, which would be a tough thing to do, with the nonexistence of a fact. and that's not his burden. his burden was to prosecute or not. not to prove the president innocent. so why did he say it? it's another question we've got to get the answer to. the big point is, the president is wrong again. there's a lot more to know. again, the ag didn't use the word "collusion" in his summary. why? because collusion is not a crime and mueller was looking for crimes. that was his essential job. collusion is a behavior. and there could be ample proof from that kind of behavior in mueller's full findings. manafort giving the poll data, stone's efforts to get stolen e-mails for advantage, the trump tower meeting and more all could be folding into the counterintelligence investigation that the ag didn't even mention in miss summary. what did the president know? what was done by those around him with respect to meetings and contacts with people that we know they knew to stay away from? that could be in the counterintel.

could be somewhere else, could be nowhere. we may know in a few weeks, we're told. we'll be asking on this show all the time. that's our job. you should demand we do our job and that congress deliver. are there more crimes related to russia to come? no! that part is done. but maybe in the bucket of other probes, maybe. i say unlikely, maybe i'm wrong. it happens all the time. here's what's completely right. you have the right to know of any wrongdoing. i'm not calling for an unending obsession. that's a different 9:00 p.m. show that does it that way. we paid for this probe, as taxpayers. the interference matters. we should know what we paid for what were the fruits of the labor. don't be played for a sucker. demand the report, read it for yourself and then you decide what matters. that is the right conclusion. thank you for watching. "cnn tonight" with d. lemon is always the right conclusion to this show, because then his begins. >> i like that subtle 9:00 p.m.

shade. but listen, here's what -- >> not that subtle. >> i know. slig slightly subtle. exonerate. especially of an official body, absolve somebody of blame from a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case. and the second, it says, to absolve, clear, acquit, to pronounce not guilty, discharge or release from a duty or obligation. so, is that what we have in a lot of cases going on? i don't know. i mean, i seem to -- >> almost never. prosecutors almost never use it. you get guilty or not guilty. we either made the case against you or we didn't make the case. innocent means, you did nothing wrong, which is often a different standard and often a different reality than not being guilty. people keep using oj an as example of that. they didn't make the case again against him, but does that