good evening. we begin with breaking news on two issues. on capitol hill, bill barr is refusing to commit to releasing the full mueller report. that is according to house judiciary chairman jerry nadler who spoke with barr tonight. and trump vowing his administration will have a plan far better than obamacare. a white house official said they have no alternative plan as of right now. in a moment i'll talk about this

and the 2020 race with steve bannon. a cnn exclusive. we begin with the congressman nadler's talk with barr about the mueller report. manu raju joins us now from capitol hill. so, what is nadler saying? >> reporter: well, i talked to nadler after this ten-minute phone call with bill barr and he said that barr would not commit to releasing the full report to congress and the public. he also said barr would not commit to providing the underlying evidence to congress as something that democrats have demanded and he said that he doesn't believe that the justice department will meet the democrats' april 2nd deadline to provide the full report to congress. according to nadler, barr told him this report is, quote, very substantial and nadler questioned how it could be summarized in just four pages. and democrats are going to have to weigh or -- what they'll do next. if they don't get what they want. but nadler made very clear, he's not happy. >> so, the attorney general would not commit to releasing the full report?

>> no, he would not. i just had a conversation with the attorney general. i asked about the length and breadth of the report. he said it was a very substantial report. so substantial that i don't see how you could summarize it in four pages fairly. he said it was a very substantial report. i asked when we would see the report and he said it will be a matter of weeks, not months as we've heard before. obviously he's not going to -- they're not going to meet the april 2nd deadline and i'm upset and concerned by that and most concerned that when i asked whether the -- he could commit that the american people and the congress would see the entire unredacted report and the underlying evidence, he would not make a commitment on that. and that is not acceptable. >> reporter: now, i asked if any of the report that will be ultimately submitted would be summarized by bill barr. he said that barr reserved the right to summarize portions of

the report that would ultimately be heavily redacted but it is unclear to nadler how much that would be and how much of the report will be released. he did say, though, anderson, that barr did commit to testifying in public before the house judiciary committee, so expect that to happen in the coming weeks. >> well, the thing that congress nadler is not saying is what barr's explanation is, in fairness to the attorney general, there are some issues which may be from a grand jury -- which would need to be redacted or some issues which are -- come from classified information or reveal sources or methods that would need to be redacted. so i know chairman nadler is putting the worst possible light on the attorney general saying i won't release the full report, we don't know exactly what that means. it does seem the idea that the department of justice would give all of the underlying documents, that has always seemed like a -- that would be a major step if they were willing to do that.

i know it was done in the investigation of hillary clinton but that is a rare thing. that is essentially congress reinvestigating the mueller investigation. >> reporter: yeah, no question. that would be difficult for democrats. they want to see -- they realize they couldn't get all of the underlying evidence, but they want a good portion of the underlying evidence. they do point to what happened in the last congress where republicans got hundreds of thousands of pages of e-mails related to the hillary clinton e-mail investigation and that is a precedent that they point to. but nadler is saying the full report is what they are ultimately demanding, which is what he -- barr is not committing to. but one thing, too, anderson, i asked him whether or not the white house would have a chance to review this first and he told me that barr told him there are no plans to let the white house review it before the public ultimately sees the report. >> manu, thank you very much. and now the white house where the focus is shifted from praise for the muller report to an effort against obamacare. abby phillip joins us now.

so, does the white house have something to replace obamacare? >> they don't, anderson. the white house is acknowledging they don't have a plan at the moment. mark short, the vice president's chief of staff, acknowledged earlier on air that they would come up with one by this year. but one of the problems, the crux of the debate within the administration, has been that if there is no plan, which there isn't at the moment, it would throw the entire health insurance market into chaos, leaving millions potentially uninsured if obamacare is completely struck down and the white house has nothing to replace it with. an official told jim acosta this afternoon that there is nothing fresh at the moment. they pointed to some -- a plan that had previously been debated in congress that ultimately failed to pass. but at the same time that is a clear acknowledgment that the white house is starting from scratch here and meanwhile over on capitol hill, republican lawmakers are actually pointing to the white house and saying, we'll be happy to see what they come up with, but so far they have nothing. >> yesterday, the president said that the, quote, republican party will soon be known as the party of health care.

>> reporter: just yesterday the president seemed to suggest this would be the new battle plan for republicans. but it is not clear how many actual republicans are with him on this. the republican party did not fare well when battling with democrats over the issue of health care in 2018. and most that we've spoken to, sources that i've spoken to today suggested that they know that this is not going to be a great political strategy for them moving forward. and given that the president seems to suggest that this is going to be their standard bearing for the next two years, it would suggest that they would need to have a plan and they would need to come up with one pretty soon. >> abby phillip, appreciate it. my next guest was one of two people, ceo of the trump campaign and had a front-row seat to the battle over obamacare and interviewed by the mueller team three times and steve bannon joins me now

from rome. it is a pleasure to have you on. i want to get to obamacare later on but let's start with what the attorney general barr according to chairman nadler not committing to releasing the full mueller report. do you think he should, except for classified material or grand jury proceedings? >> look, i think it is obviously up to the attorney general. as somebody that was part of the process, i think they ought to release it but it is the attorney general's decision. one of the things, anderson, that is lost in all of this is president trump waived executive privilege and waived attorney/client privilege and not just reince priebus and myself but don mcgahn and the white house counsel and like 500 witnesses, 2,800 subpoenas, so the president went out of his way to get all of this information out and get it out quickly. so i would assume that everybody would want to get the full report out to people except for what is classified or what needs to be redacted. >> and lindsey graham said that the president told him, quote, just release it. i think you thought it was legal but not wise for the president to fire comey. given the fact that mueller has

exonerated the president and those around him when it comes to any kind of collusion or criminal conspiracy with russia, was it smart in retrospect for the president to have been attacking the investigation in the way that he did really for the last two years? >> well, you know, actually i used you as an example when we talked -- when i talked with the president back in the oval office. i said, hey, on the comey investigation, i said even anderson cooper has got this in the "c"-block. this is in the spring of '17. but the president had his own ideas about the job that comey was doing and so he terminated him. i always said that mueller -- i think he's an honorable guy. a combat veteran and a combat marine and the president -- whatever he said on twitter, or whatever he said in public declarations or on tv, the important thing was he told everybody to cooperate and to get it out there like no other president has ever done. that is what was stunning. in fact, i was kind of a critic about how quickly they were

releasing information. i thought there ought to be more process. there is 1.2 million documents released and the president's actions where he was supportive of the mueller investigation and that is why i think it is -- in coming back like it is to exonerate him and i actually think it is time to release the documents and let's move on and get on with the work of the country. >> you've been very clear about no collusion all along. you've been probably less definitive when it comes to obstruction of justice. were you surprised that mueller himself didn't reach a conclusion or recommendation on that and essentially handed over to the attorney general to make a conclusion? >> look, i'm not a lawyer. but the way i look at it, prosecutors either charge or they don't charge. the no exoneration line to me i thought was a little bit of a cheap shot. and i've been very supportive of the mueller process. look, here is the thing. they took two years and they looked at everything. it wasn't that i was concerned about obstruction of justice. i didn't think there was any. but when you go through all of

these documents and that is why the '18 election by the democrats getting out there and working so hard, the grassroots democrats, winning the house, i said, look, what they're going to try to do is weaponize the mueller report and to use that as the beginning under nadler's -- jerry nadler's judiciary committee to start hearings on the impeachment process. i think what happened with this report, it looks like that will be put to bed. so, we'll see when it gets released but i think it is time to kind of release it and people review it and then move on and let's get on with the great work in front of us. >> so, it is interesting, you believe even if the report is released, even if it has negative -- some things which are questionable behavior by the president or an attempt to cover up what the trump tower meeting was with the alternative explanation and that it was about adoption, as long as it is

not criminal, at this point you think it is done, no matter what is released, it is not going to matter and no matter what democrats try in terms of -- in your words weaponizing but in terms of investigating, it is not going to matter? >> i just think it's -- i think, look, if it is anything substantive -- mueller had, what, 20 serious prosecutors and 42 field agents in the fbi and as somebody who went through the process, it was like a proctology exam. i was a witness of fact as was don mcgahn and reince priebus and this was a very thorough investigation. i think if mueller had something, being the kind of senior-level prosecutor he was, he would have done something. and i think by not doing anything and saying there was no collusion, which this whole thing started about, i think -- i just don't think there is much there. it's, what, over 1,000 pages long. we'll have to see. i said early on that if the democrats won the house and the

mueller report had these type of charges in there and had this type of stuff, that the democrats will try to what i call weaponize it and use it to move forward but i think you're seeing already in the house people like nancy pelosi saying, hey, we have to get focused on health care and other things. so, i think this is a time to move on. i do think the media ought to kind of assess both the coverage and i've said this for a long time, both the coverage of the of 2016 campaign and now the coverage of the whole investigation process. i think the media ought to be self-regulating and look at itself internally and then move on. there is so much in front of us with china and what is going on in the world. it is time to get focused on the big problems facing the country. >> and there is stuff going on with china which i want to talk to you about. in an interview, though, i think you gave earlier this week, you said the president is going to, quote -- or going to go full animal. which is an expression i hadn't heard before but that is stuck in my mind. now that he sees himself as no longer under the cloud of the

mueller investigation, what does going full animal look like? what does that mean for -- because you said that 2019 would be the most vitriolic year in american politics since before the civil war and you included vietnam in that. both of those things are pretty startling statements. >> yes. >> what is the vision for this year, then? >> well, you know, i was talking to a spanish journalist and think i said honey badger which is one of my favorite phrases. >> i love honey badger. >> honey badger don't care. >> yeah. exactly. i think the president will be very aggressive. you saw the tweets. i was talking to the foreign press association in rome and the president tweeted out at the time about the opposition party media. so, i think the president will be very aggressive. i think he feels like the work of the country and the particularly the work he had was kind of slowed down particularly looking internationally because of some of the hysteria around this investigation. not the investigation, but i

think this is the thing that people should focus on. he overly supplied people with documents. he was very aggressive in getting this information out there. because he said from day one, there is no collusion. but i think about the hysteria is that is what -- i think reasonably upset about and i think you would definitely see some pushback. president trump's a fighter. i don't need to tell you, anderson. you know him well. he's a fighter. and he looks at this as a fight and i think he'll be very aggressive and i think he'll start giving interviews and try to push this. and look, in a time when democracy has never been stronger in america, we just had 113 million people vote in the midterm elections. we are divided but division is good and healthy because people have to argue out and have to kind of fight at the ballot box for what they believe in and the country is engaged in the political process and i think this year will be very vitriolic and we'll have to work through this and the president of the united states, and rightfully so will push back on what i think he believes is media hysteria around the investigation at the entire time that he was actually

putting everybody in the white house, everybody on the campaign front and center with all of the documents and his lawyers that worked through this. >> but, you know, listen, i understand the criticism of the media. i think every reporter i know is constantly trying to look inward and look at their coverage. and if something is wrong, apologize for it and correct it as quickly as possible. but at the same time, the president himself has, while he may have been behind the scenes or the people of the white house may have been behind the scenes providing all of the documents that they needed, publicly he certainly gave a lot of people a lot of reasons to scratch their heads and think, wait a minute. from interviews he gave to tweets he sent to things he said to the russians in the oval office. he did provide a lot of the questions -- he certainly stoked it whether he meant to or not. >> well, anderson, but mueller had all of this to go through.

so, i think he saw it. there is no collusion and if the atmosphere -- i think the president justifiably looked at and i've said this from day one, after the '16 defeat, the democratic party was in such disarray and the mainstream media was the opposition party and during the campaign it was the opposition party media. instead of doing mea culpa or big internally, the one thing that the media could do and this is a big issue for both conservative and liberal media, and this is the fbi's counterintelligence operation and some of the cia, what was done at the beginning of the investigation of the trump campaign and it has to be looked into. i've said over a year and a half i believe something like the church commission will have to be established to look at the fbi behavior and the cia and i would hope -- in the old days in the '70s, "the new york times"

and "washington post" would lead the investigations, that is not happening. maybe cnn will do it but i think there is a lot there and this is not to get partisan. this is for the good of the country. i'm a huge supporter and i'm never been a conspiracy guy and my daughter is at west point and i'm not a deep state guy and i think we have to in a bipartisan way look at the start of the trump investigation into the trump thing and seriously question some of the fbi counterintelligence and the cia and maybe even foreign intelligence services and i think this is for the good of the country and for the good of the fbi and the cia, too. but i would hope that that would be the next phase of investigations here. >> as to the question the vitriolic tone, the president said recently something which people who don't like the president or distrust the president or are very concerned about, he said before an audience, i could tell you i have the support of the police and the military and the support of the bikers for trump and i have the tough people but they don't play it tough until they get to a certain point and then it would be very bad, very bad. how do you interpret that?

>> i just think that is -- i think it is president trump talking about the deplorables, what his base is and veterans and people that served the country and in law enforcement and i don't think it is anything pejorative or to worry about. i think people read more into the president's statements sometimes in trying to read the tea leaves. this is all -- but i do think the president is going to be pretty aggressive in his tweets. i think in the interviews and the way he talks to people at congress. i know he's not particularly happy with -- i think some of these investigations that may go into his -- the finances of the trump organization. i think his point is, hey, the american people had a chance to judge that in 2016. we voted on it and then had a huge investigation into russian collusion which turned out to be i think kind of a hoax and we've gone through two years of that. it cost millions of dollars and more importantly it is the opportunity cost. and now it is time to get

focused and kind of move on. so i think very legitimate -- and i could tell you donald trump is a fighter and he'll fight on this one. and so i think it is time -- and all of the other investigations about his finances and all of this stuff, i think the american people are eventually going to say, hey, look, you're grasping at straws here. if you don't like the guy and i think nancy pelosi said this the other day, go beat him at the ballot box. if you think orange man bad then get organized and get out there and do the effort like you did in 2018 and defeat it like we have it in the united states. if you want to win, win at the ballot box not an investigative apparatus to do that. >> and i want to get your opinion about the candidates in 2020. we have to have a break. if you would, just stick around. i know it is late in rome. we'll be right back. and breaking news in the uproar of the dismissal of the charges against jussie smollett. what the state's attorney is saying about a so-called error. we'll be right back.

about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k? have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing.

don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. the big drug companies don't see they see us as profits. we're paying the highest prescription drug prices in the world so they can make billions? americans shouldn't have to choose between buying medication and buying food for our families. it's time for someone to look out for us. congress, stop the greed. cut drug prices now. metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i'm relentless too. mbc doesn't take a day off, and neither will i. and i treat my mbc with everyday verzenio-

the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. in fact, verzenio is a cdk4 & 6 inhibitor for postmenopausal women with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer, approved, with hormonal therapy, as an everyday treatment for a relentless disease. verzenio + an ai is proven to help women have significantly more time without disease progression, and more than half of women saw their tumors shrink vs an ai. diarrhea is common, may be severe, and may cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms may include tiredness, loss of appetite, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising more easily than normal. blood clots that can lead to death have also occurred. talk to your doctor right away if you notice pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain or rapid breathing or heart rate. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant.

common side effects include nausea, infections, low red and white blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. i'm relentless. and my doctor and i choose to treat my metastatic breast cancer with verzenio. be relentless. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio. whooo! want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over a hundred thousand tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new york! from bus tours, to breathtaking adventures, tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip... monumental! read reviews check hotel prices book things to do tripadvisor back with steve bannon, former chief strategist of the

trump white house. in terms of the 2020 election how much is convincing people to switch sides or find new voters and how much is about candidates getting out their side, mobilization? >> it is mobilization. i don't think we're in an age of persuasion. you want to persuade people in the margin, but i think it is mobilization and you saw that in '16 which we were able to mobilize the deplorables in states the clinton campaign wasn't focused on and they didn't think we would win places like michigan, wisconsin, and pennsylvania. i think '18 is the same thing. i think the progressive left did a good job like the t.e.a. party in the old days. with grassroots door-to-door and mobilized the base and had a big victory. this is all about mobilization and i think this next four or five months of what i call the gauntlet that the house of representatives will try to

put up around president trump and the investigations, i think they look at that as one aspect of how to mobilize their base and how to excite them. so i think this is all going to be part of the lead up to 2020. >> do you include reaching out and finding people who haven't voted before? because that is one of the arguments that alexandria ocasio-cortez makes, reaching out to people who find new voters and bringing them in. >> i think it is very important. low propensity voters. that is what we did in '16 and wasn't done in '18 in the house races was low propensity voters. the good news for the trump supporters is brad parscale and the campaign is focused on already doing the pick and shovel work that you have to do to build up this kind of field operation and this digital operation to get out there and do it. i know the democrats will do it. mike bloomberg is talking about putting $500 million of his own money in to kind of anti-trump. so i think this is going to be -- look, i think our democracy, anderson, is in great shape because 113 million people voted.

the political discussion has permeated even popular culture and everybody is talking about it. i think 2020 is going to be just huge. i think people will be very engaged and it is about mobilizing the people that support you and this is very important and i think the winner at the end of the day will be who mobilizes his base. >> a lot of people hear you say democracy has never been stronger in america and would take huge issue with that. that, look, this is a president who has undermined a number of institutions. you could argue they deserved to be undermined. but he's questioned the fbi and questioned u.s. intelligence and many people have over the years -- >> but i -- but, anderson, i don't think that is undermining. i think these institutions -- look, i believe in these institutions and i believe in the fbi and the cia and some of the institutions in washington, d.c. but they have to be rejuvenated. you always have to question -- remember back in the -- >> but saying the polls are fixed and -- >> and with vietnam and all of

those issues -- all of the issues, people are going after those all of the time and what happened, i think we made those institutions stronger. and i think that is -- i one of the things, remember, trump was elected because working-class americans believed america was in decline and the elites were comfortable with managed decline and they weren't. trump is a disruptor. he got hired by people who said we want you to shake up things and he had this cute phrase of drain the swamp but it is serious to focus on the institutions and making sure they're working for the american people. so i don't think -- i think undermine is way too tough of a word. i think trump is trying to -- his a disruptor and he's trying to rejuvenate. >> i understand the idea of disruption but he is siding with vladimir putin over dan coats and others in the u.s. intelligence service about whether russia was involved in the election. he stands next to putin and said he -- >> well, listen, by the way -- but anderson -- but, anderson, here is the other thing. when you see this evidence, i

think reasonable people can say -- can question about this whole thing of interference. i think it is another thing that kind of question -- >> you don't believe the russians interfered in the election? >> look, no, i think -- i think it was complete marginalia. this is another overhyped part of what i call the hoax. >> so you don't believe they hacked the e-mails -- >> i think like i said on the margin, you might have had some e-mails or these guys down in florida that even clapper said was, what, $115,000 of ads. it is all marginalia, right. >> you don't think -- so you don't think stealing the e-mails was a russian -- >> the stealing of the podesta e-mails? >> yeah. the podesta e-mails. >> should you have done it? no. it's wrong to do it. but it is marginalia. it is inner office gossip and it is complete marginalia. i'm not saying it is right and

we want to stop the chinese and the russians and other people from trying to hack this but at the end of the day it is total marginalia and i don't think president trump is trying to undermine any american institutions. i have to challenge you on that. i think what he's trying to do as a disruptor who was hired by working class people in the country to say, hey, we don't want america to be in decline and we particularly don't want this permanent political class that is comfortable with managed decline in the united states. remember, his task is to rejuvenate and i think that is what you're seeing. >> i would say that is a charitable interpretation. but just one more thing on that. meeting with vladimir putin without anybody else present, meeting with kim jong-un without just -- just with interpreters. i understand disruption, doesn't it concern you that have no idea as an american citizen that was discussed? >> anderson, he is commander in chief of the united states military.

he's the chief law enforcement officer and president of the united states. if he makes a decision that he wants to meet with the world leader with just interpreters or without, i wouldn't have problems with president obama or with clinton or reagan or anybody. if the president of the united states in his judgment is going to make that decision, i would abide by it and i think people like president obama and democrats will say it is fine. i don't think there is any nefarious activity. if he wants to make a decision to talk with an interpreter, i think that is -- look, he was oe elected commander in chief. one of the big issues we had in the campaign when i stepped in to give people permission to vote for him as commander in chief. particularly given the resume of hillary clinton. people did. they weighed and measured donald trump in that campaign and as hard-fought a campaign as you

remember. they selected him and i think he got -- i think you have to trust his judgment and if you don't trust his judgment, you have 2020 and get out and knock on doors and say he's done this bad stuff and get your friends out there. >> is there one candidate on the democratic side announced or expected to announce who you think would provide a real challenge to president trump? >> i don't really see a real challenge right now and frankly i'm surprised, i thought there might be challenges. i thought the launches have been weak. the one thing i think is different in this primary season than any other in american history is that the sitting president, donald trump, is going to have a vote in the democratic primary. that is a reality. and this is because of president trump's house style. he's going to be engaged and i think a perfect example is -- is elizabeth warren. >> he's defined her -- >> more well-thought through -- she has probably, if you look at other candidates, some pretty well defined policy initiatives on big tech, on getting people more participation and ownership in society. >> which are things that you have been talking about for a long time. >> yeah.

on the populist side, you have right and left wing populism and some of the stuff is very smart. and she's lifting from our playbook. but what is most amazing to me is she's now at 8% and even trump said maybe i moved too quickly. she would have been a weak candidate. i think it is interesting and i think it is his direct involvement that has brought elizabeth warren under 10% and she's having a tough time getting that muzzle velocity and traction you need to get going. so i think all of the candidates -- one of the things that surprised me the most is how much the aoc's kind of new green deal and this movement to the far left economically has pulled the candidates farther left and they've had some slow starts. right now i don't see anybody -- and think when joe biden announces that is going to -- to peak biden. i don't see anybody taking on donald trump. donald trump will be very tough in this campaign. he's going to go right at you.

>> do you see hillary clinton coming in? >> here is what i think. secretary clinton said she's not running but she's in the bullpen waiting for the call. if you go through this gauntlet this summer and start the democratic primary and by the fall of next year if there is not a candidate that is kind of breaking out of the pack and looks like they could take on trump because the number one thing for the democrats is not policy right now. the number one thing for democrats is beating donald trump. and they're going to fall in line with whoever they think could beat donald trump. if you get to the fall of 2019 pre-iowa and you don't have a candidate breaking out and looks like it matches up with trump, i think somebody will call the bullpen and get her to warm up because she's there and will say i have 63 million votes -- i realize heads will blow up and particularly democrats that don't want anything to do with her, but at the end of the day the democrats will focus on somebody who could beat donald trump and search for that. it is not a policy discussion.

it is going to be electability and if you are going to beat donald trump as an incumbent you'll have to bring it. you have to really bring it and the field i've seen so far, i don't know anybody that could hit a fastball like trump can throw. >> just lastly, you're in rome tonight and focused -- there to focus on china. i've heard you talk about the china 2025 initiative and i find it fascinating, and not getting a lot of attention in the united states and chinese espionage and recruiting americans to steal information, it is become a huge issue for intelligence agencies. more than -- i've talked to some intelligence officers who say it is more -- more than russia and more than anybody else. is the u.s. on top of this enough? >> well, i think before trump got there, we weren't. remember, xi came to the rose garden a couple of years ago with president obama and promised president obama and signed documents saying we're going to stop the cyber espionage and didn't and the reason we did it is why we won the upper midwest because the manufacturing jobs that the

elites let go to china, that is what is -- the jobs left as j.d. vance says, the jobs left and the opioid crisis came with the workers left behind. this is a central issue to the united states and made in china in 2025 -- and it's not about the stealing of intellectual property, it is about forced technology transfers and what this tough negotiation that ambassador lighthizer is having right now on president trump's guidance is about the trade deal, it is not about soybeans it is about making changes to the economy. every american should understand this because it will change your life, the convergence of advanced chip design and intelligence and robotics and they have a plan they've been working on for years and by 2025 the conversions of those three will make them an advanced manufacturing superpower and really we'll become kind of a component parts supplier for their manufacturing, high value added and that will crush manufacturing in the united states and lead to underemployment like you can't

believe. this is going to be a massive issue in 2020. this economic war that china is running against us and one of the reasons i'm here in italy, this one belt, one road initiative, the italians, who are allies, signed a memorandum of understanding, it is not a deal but to anchor the one belt, one road up near venice on the adriatic sea, it is a major strategic shift and the united states is now engaged in talking to italy, et cetera. but this geopolitical struggle and this economic war of china versus the west -- and this is why the russia thing is silly. russia's economy is the size of new york state. and china -- and this is not the chinese people, they are decent and hard working, honorable people and this cadre, those who run the economy.

you'll see this play on a global stage and it is a huge part of the 2020 campaign. >> steve bannon, appreciate talking to you, thank you very much. >> thanks, anderson. still ahead, breaking news in the jussie smollett case. the prosecuting attorney speaking out for the first time since the bombshell announcement that her office was dropping all charges again the actor and smollett's attorney will join us with her reaction, next. 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.

bill's back needed a afvacation from his vacation. an amusement park... so he stepped on the dr. scholl's kiosk. it recommends our best custom fit orthotic to relieve foot, knee, or lower back pain. so you can move more. dr. scholl's. born to move. ♪ ♪ t-mobile will do the math for you. right now, when you join t-mobile, you get two lines of unlimited with two of the latest phones included for just one hundred bucks a month. 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.

♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to [ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there. ♪ whooo! want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over a hundred thousand tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new york! from bus tours, to breathtaking adventures,

tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip... monumental! read reviews check hotel prices book things to do tripadvisor

breaking news in the jussie smollett case. in her first interview since the charges against the actor were dropped, the state's attorney's office believed they could prove him guilty and also blamed a clerical error for the fact the court files were sealed and this is raising more questions tonight. smollett's attorney will join us in a moment. but first, ryan young has the latest from chicago. >> reporter: tonight, cook county state's attorney kim foxx under fire, speaking out for the first time after her office dropped all charges against actor jussie smollett. >> he chose this alternative prosecution method. the court has not found him guilty. i believe based on the facts and the evidence that was presented in the charging decision made by this office, this office believed that they could prove him guilty. i think this office based on those charging decisions believe that he's culpable of doing that.

>> reporter: new and important, she said parts of the file were sealed in error. >> mr. smollett was allowed to have his criminal record to the police report around the arrest sealed. the court file was not supposed to be sealed. i think what happened was, the clerk sealed the whole thing. >> reporter: but an attorney for smollett made the request for the case to be sealed in court and a judge approved it contradicting the state's attorney's statements. the decision to drop the charges has received criticism including from the mayor. >> he committed a crime here and lied about something. >> reporter: meanwhile foxx was criticized for her involvement with two people close to the smollett camp so she recused herself from the case back in february. cnn obtained e-mails between foxx and tina chin, a former chief of staff to michelle obama. chin e-mails foxx asking for help in the matter.

on february 1st, foxx e-mailed chin saying in part, spoke to superintendent johnson and i convinced him to reach out to the fbi to ask that they take over the investigation. he's reaching out now and will get back to me shortly. chin then gave foxx's number to a smollett family member and a text message exchange between the family member and foxx sharing the same update and the family member responding, oh, my god, this would be a huge victory. >> the family reached out to me largely because they didn't have a connection with the police department, asking if there was a way to make sure that the leaks in the case were to a minimum. >> reporter: despite it all, smollett's attorney claiming victory. >> if they believe the charges they would have never dismissed the case. >> reporter: ryan young, cnn, chicago. >> and jussie smollett's attorney joins us now. thanks for being with us. how do you square state attorney

kim foxx's confidence she could prove the case with the fact she dropped the case. >> i think, as i said earlier, if they were able to prove the charges they would have never dismissed the case. sorry. >> that is okay. those things pop out all of the time. >> i think there has been a lot of political pressure in this case and so as much as we applauded the state's attorney office for what they did yesterday, which was the right thing under the circumstances, they've been backpedaling and we understand all of the heat and pressure they've gotten and they've been reacting to that. >> so, jussie smollett did, what, like, two days of community service and paid a $10,000 fine. why did he do that? that seems to be some form of punishment. what was he being punished for? >> he was not punished or ordered to do a thing in this case. he voluntarily agreed to forfeit the bond because if he had chosen -- and this is a decision he struggled with because he knew what the perception would be and he didn't want that to be the perception. but had he wanted to go to trial

he would have to put his career and life on hold for a minimum of a year and incurred much more costs than $10,000 to ultimately bring this to trial. and to have his day in court would have put his career on hold and also been very costly. so we strongly advised him to agree to forfeit the bond. as far as the community service, that has completely been falsely represented at this point. jussie, as we told the judge at the initial bond hearing, has always volunteered. he's been a contributing member of society for decades at this point and volunteered with dozens if not hundreds of organizations. and so he has done volunteer service. i know there was some questions about the push coalition. they put a statement out saying that there was no court ordered community service, which is the true facts here. and if you look at the transcripts from the proceedings where the case was dismissed, there is no mention of any required community service. either before or after the fact. >> so, if you can stay with us

because i do want to bring in laura coats and jeffrey toobin. laura, you hear the argument from the legal team and you hear the comments from the state's attorney, does this make sense to you? >> well, it sounds as if this is an alternative to prosecution. just hearing what they're having to say about it in the sense that perhaps that the dismissal was contingent on the payment and forfeiture of the bond and perhaps some look at his criminal record, et cetera. that to me suggests that it wasn't a full dismissal with no contingencies. having said that, i do have a question for you in the sense of, well, when you think about the notion that your colleague talked about this being prosecutorial overkill, is there something to suggest that the reason they may have decided against this and not to the charges because of the number of counts against him and charging as a felony rather than a misdemeanor?

>> no, i think the fact that they charged so many counts is the reason it looks so odd that all 16 counts were dismissed. 2 1/2 weeks after he was arraigned on the 16 counts. so there is obviously very different ways they could have tried to dissolve this case and their initial offer to us involved a dismissal. this wasn't something negotiated. we were never going to enter a plea. he's maintained his innocence and he continues to maintain his innocence and a plea was offer the table for them two and a half weeks later to completely dismiss the case, i think speaks volumes. >> jeff toobin, you have questions. >> does your client plan to apologize to victims of hate crimes who will be disbelieved because of your client's ridiculous stunt? >> i disagree with your categorization this is a ridiculous stunt. he's not convicted of any crimes. it is unbelievable the amount of conviction in his guilt when prior to him ever stepping foot

inside of the courthouse and now the 16 counts were dismissed against him by the state attorney's office in such a high profile matter and the fact that people still call it -- call this a ridiculous stunt is very offensive to me. and so -- >> so -- >> the only person that should be apologizing is the mayor and the city of chicago. that is -- that is who should apologize to the victims of hate crimes who will now hesitate to come forward because they don't want to be charged with 16 counts themselves. >> what was his relationship with the two people who allegedly beat him up? >> he was friendly with one of them. he had met abe osundario and they were friends and friendly and they trained together and they socialized. he knew the older brother strictly -- he met him only a few times and did not even have his contact information. had never communicated with him. which also should make you wonder, if he was going to pull such a ridiculous stunt, would he actually entrust pretty much a stranger to do that to ruin his -- potentially ruin his life

and come out with this? >> let me ask you, so he knew this guy for a year and a half. they trained together and they socialized together. if this guy is punching him in the face, and saying things to him, how is it possible he could not recognize this guy? >> he was wearing -- the attackers, i should say, were wearing ski masks. >> did they have gloves on? >> i'm sorry? >> did they have gloves on. >> yes. but more importantly his face was covered with a ski mask. >> but they were wearing gloves so he didn't know he was of nigerian decent and he was net not white? >> he did not. >> i don't understand -- >> so why did he identify the person on -- >> as white. he identified the person as white. but if you know -- if you have known somebody for a year and a half -- >> if you were jumped from behind -- >> i would know if it's your trainer. >> the first point of contact is a punch to your face all of a 30

to 45-second tussle and they're wearing a ski mask and the commotion that goes on in a fight. i don't think through a ski mask you'll identify anybody in the excitement of the moment. >> we're out of time, unfortunately. >> i have to ask, if i could just ask one question. if you -- the reason you say this is -- they're all lying, why do you think the state's attorney office has not charged those two brothers with committing perjury if they testified in front of the grand jury? there was no plea deal or cooperation agreement, why would they not be charged. >> i can't speak to what the state's attorney has done because it has been inexplicable to me. you would have to ask them. >> appreciate that. still a lot to learn. tomorrow the nomination of david bernhardt to become the secretary of the interior and coming up, an investigation about what he was doing during the shutdown when hundreds of thousands of federal employees weren't getting paid.

so, you're open all day, that's what 24/7 means, sugar. kind of like how you get 24/7 access to licensed agents with geico. hmm? yeah, you just go online, or give them a call anytime. you don't say. yep. now what will it take to get 24/7 access to that lemon meringue pie? pie! pie's coming! that's what it takes, baby. geico®. great service from licensed agents, 24/7.

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. anna, do you yes! those plans? i just wanted to show you something i've been wor... ♪

james r. and associates. anna speaking... ♪ james r. and associates. anna. ♪ [phone ringing] baker architects. this is anna baker. at northwestern mutual, this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but you're ready to bet on yourself today. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com.

the senate committee holds hearings tomorrow for the acting interior secretary, david bernhart, to be confirmed for the job full-time. bernhart is a former oil and gas industry lobbyist who has been questioned by cnn's drew griffin

about why so many of his former clients have been getting what they asked for while he's serving as secretary. on the eve of those hearings, there's new information about how bernhart ordered federal workers back to the job during the government shutdown, specifically to process and approve drilling permits on federal land, this, while during that shutdown thousands of government workers were severely impacted. we even met some on this program who told us stories of rationing badly needed medicine and wondering if they were going to wake up the next morning and choosing between eating and putting gas in their car because money was no longer coming in. keep that in mind as you watch drew's report. >> reporter: the oil and gas industry in northeastern colorado is booming. new wells, new drilling rigs, new roads and an industry awash in gas and oil. and in a controversial move, the interior department, under acting secretary david bernhart. >> my name is david bernhart. >> reporter: tried to make sure all of this activity didn't even slow down during the recent

government shutdown. how? by calling in furloughed federal workers in the bureau of land management whose job was to process and approve drilling permits for the industry that david bernhart used to lobby for. a few of those permits even when to bernhart's former clients, which has environmentalists fuming. >> in every shutdown prior, the interior department actually shuts down. so there's no reason to bring those employees only back, just to do the bidding of the oil and gas industry. but that's what happened here. >> reporter: some members of congress are questioning if it was even legal. federal law dictates when an agency doesn't have funding to pay workers, like during a shutdown, only essential employees, those needed to protect life or property, should continue to work. but the blm under bernhart used a novel interpretation, saying permit fees would cover the cost of the permit workers. during the shutdown, the blm approved 267 drilling permits along with 16 oil and gas

leases. permits went to at least two of bernhart's former clients. >> i'm happy to visit with you at any time. right now's not the time. >> reporter: bernhart, who refused to answer questions on a previous cnn report concerning his ties to the oil and gas industry, has again denied a request to be interviewed here and has yet to fully explain why it was so urgent, essential, that workers be brought back to process drilling permits. bernhart was quoted in a local new mexico newspaper saying there's also safety and we need to keep things safe, though it's not clear how permitting impacts safety. asked for an explanation, the interior department said the acting secretary's words speak for themselves. >> that makes no sense to me. not issuing a permit does not make things unsafe. and i can't imagine a way you can parse that sentence in which

that does make any sense. >> reporter: kathleen scama is president of the western energy alliance, which represents the oil and gas industry. the western energy alliance did not raise a concern on safety? >> no. we started to hear concerns from companies that, hey, i've got these situations changing in the field. i can't get blm on the phone. and not problems as in safety problems, but problems as in, hey, this company wants to keep moving forward with development and can't because they can't get an answer out of blm. >> reporter: couldn't this be viewed as just another favor to the energy industry? >> it's not a favor because we pay for those permits. >> reporter: it wasn't that long ago, these wild pawnee grasslands were just that. wild. now, almost everywhere you look is a gas rig. it doesn't look like a grassland. >> kind of fallen away from

that, hasn't it? it looks like a factory. >> reporter: brian rutledge has worked for decades trying to prevent encroaching oil and gas drilling from destroying habitat in the grasslands. what he sees now is rampant drilling on federal lands with the interior department focused on approving permits as fast as possible, even during government shutdowns. >> our responsibility is these great western lands. it's not whether or not gas and oil is hitting their profit margins. >> reporter: the bureau of land management told cnn we had a legal and ethical obligation to continue this work, especially since halting would have increased the hardships borne by our people and the communities that depend on energy production for jobs and economic development. >> drew, this is the third story we've done on bernhart's close ties to the oil and gas industry. he's up for confirmation tomorrow. any expectations that his confirmation will be challenged? >> his nomination may get some tough questions from democrats, but on the issue of granting

favors to his old industry clients, bernhart through his office maintains, anderson, that he has done nothing wrong. >> drew, thanks. i want to check with chris and see what he's working on. >> my favorite word from the bannon interview that i learned tonight, marginalia. all the russian interference, marginalia. i had to look it up and it means what i thought it meant, which is something opposite than the truth. what an important interview for you. tonight, we'll take on people on the other side of the equation. we have adam schiff and elijah cummings here tonight. big members of the democratic party, chairs of oversight committees. what do they see as the path forward? >> all right. chris, look forward to that. just about three minutes from now. we'll be right back. ♪ [laughter] ♪