good evening. nearly one week after robert mueller delivered his much anticipated report to the justice department, a new front in the battle between president trump and democrats has burst open into spectacular public view. congressional republicans in tandem with the president are setting their sights on some of their most prominent critics, some by name, others by association. it's both political and personal. part of a we told you so washington victory lap steeped in such long-running animus that president trump is levying accusations of treason which is a crime punishable by death. one key foe of the president, democrat adam schiff, head of the house intelligence committee, today the committee's full slate of republicans lambasted shift and formally sought his ouster as chairman. schiff responded in kind today. his response was the most full-throated response from a democrat since the barr summary was released. a summary that seems to have knocked the democrats back on their heels but today arguably

was a day the democrats started to find some footing. not only evidence by congressman schiff's remarks which we'll play for you in a second but also because the democrats learned something. namely that the mueller report is at least 300 pages long. 300. which is, of course, a far cry from the four-page barr summary that the president and his allies have used to claim victory. to be clear, democrats don't know what's in those 300 pages. we don't know either, nor do republicans. no one does, save for people very close to the investigation. does it spell out more detail about the trump tower meeting, the cover story to lie about the meeting concocted on air force one? are there details about the trump tower moscow project, about the oval office meeting with russian ambassador sergey kislyak? again, we don't know, but the revelation of the report's length only made the democrats that much more convinced it should be released and they seem to have had enough with the republicans framing this as complete victory for the president. which brings us back to intelligence chairman adam schiff. his committee met today for the first time since the report's

release and congressman schiff's critics wasted no time in going after him. we won't take the unusual step of playing for you the extended and vigorous exchange because it underscores for both parties this is far from over. it's about five minutes long but we think it's worth watching no matter what side of the political aisle you're sitting an. >> your actions both past an present are incompatible with your duty as chairman of this committee which alone has the obligation and authority to provide effective oversight of the u.s. intelligence community. as such, we have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your constitutional responsibility and urge your immediate resignation as chairman of the committee. mr. chairman, this letter is signed by all nine members of the republican side of the house, of the committee, and i ask for unanimous consent it be entered into the record of today's hearing. i yield back. >> without objection. i'm going to turn to our witnesses who are the subject of the hearing today, but before i do, and as you have chosen

instead of addressing the hearing to simply attack me, consistent with the president's attacks, i do want to respond in this way. my colleagues may think it's okay that the russians offered dirt on a democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the russian government's effort to help the trump campaign. you might think that's okay. my colleagues might think it's okay when that was offered to the son of the president, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president's son did not call the fbi. he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. no, instead that son said that he would love the help of the russians. you might think it's okay that he took that meeting. you might think it's okay that paul manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience in running campaigns, also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that

the president's son-in-law also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that they concealed it from the public. you might think it's okay that their only disappointment after that meeting is the dirt they received on hillary clinton wasn't better. you might think that's okay. you might think it's okay that when it was discovered a year later that they lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it's okay that the president is reported to have helped dictate that lie. you might think that's okay. i don't. you might think it's okay that the campaign chairman of a presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a russian oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. you might think that's okay. i don't. you might think it's okay that that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to

russian intelligence. i don't think that's okay. you might think it's okay that the president himself called on russia to hack his opponent's e-mails if they were listening. you might think it's okay that later that day in fact the russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. i don't think that's okay. you might think that it's okay that the president's son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the russians through a russian diplomatic facility. i don't think that's okay. you might think it's okay that an associate of the president made direct contact with the gru through guccifer 2 and wikileaks and that is considered a hostile intelligence agency. you might think that it's okay a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that

associate and find out what that hostile intelligence agency had to say in terms of dirt on his opponent. you might think it's okay that the national security advisor designate secretly conferred with a russian ambassador about undermining u.s. sanctions. and you might think it's okay he lied about it to the fbi. you might say that's all okay. you might say that's just what you need to do to win. but i don't think it's okay. i think it's immoral, i think it's unethical, i think it's unpatriotic and, yes, i think it's corrupt. and evidence of collusion. now, i have always said that the question of whether this amounts to proof of conspiracy was another matter. whether the special counsel could prove beyond a reasonable doubt the proof of that crime would be up to the special counsel, and i would accept his decision, and i do.

he's a good and honorable man and he is a good prosecutor. but i do not think that conduct, criminal or not, is okay. and the day we do think that's okay is the day we will look back and say that is the day america lost its way. >> joining me now are two key democratic members of congress. representative ro khanna of the oversight and reform committee and mike quigley who sits on the intelligence committee who was in that hearing today. congressman khanna, do you have any concern that the president and his allies have been able to define the mueller report based on the four-page summary and by the time whatever is released in the mueller report, whether it's all 300 pages or 250 pages, whatever it may be, that people will have essentially made up their minds and not care? >> anderson, i do. it's highly unfair. they're attacking adam schiff's integrity without letting adam

sm schiff or the american people read the report and read what mueller found. when bill clinton was investigated and the ken starr report took place, that report and all the grand jury hearings were public. that's all we're asking for. before casting aspersions, let the people read the report. >> obviously that was an independent counsel, different kind of setup. congressman quigley, you were in the room today when chairman schiff responded for the calls to step down. he seemed clearly emotional toward the end, seemed to take it certainly personally. what has it been like within the party, and what is the strategy going forward to push back on the president's narrative about the report? >> i think the first thing is to point out that it would be funny, if not tragically ironic, that mr. nunes led this argument today. when the russians attacked our democratic process, chairman nunes leaped into action and attacked the intelligence community and the independence

of the justice department with his memo and his now infamous ride to the white house. and the rest of the republicans have just equal blame involved here. during the middle of this investigation, they dumped it and they shut it down. they refused to call key witnesses, to subpoena key documents. they went along with a white house gag order so people didn't have to answer questions. again, it's very cold comfort to the american public that the prosecutor investigating this couldn't find a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. there is obvious evidence in plain sight and in previous court filings of collusion and obstruction. >> congressman khanna, i had steve bannon, talked to him last night. he said he thinks the president is going to go what he described as, quote, full animal on his opponents now. he also said he thinks this next year is going to be the most politically divisive year in

american history since the civil war, including the vietnam war. i want to play something that the president said tonight about adam schiff. >> little pencil neck adam schiff. he's got the smallest, thinnest neck i've ever seen. he is not a long ball hitter. but i saw him today. well, we don't really know, there could still have been some russia collusion. sick. sick. these are sick people. and there has to be accountability because it's all lies. and they know it's lies. they know it. >> congressman khanna, he's

saying what adam schiff said today are all lies. >> i had lunch with adam yesterday. he was a bit amused the president was insulting his golf game and insulting his drive. but the serious issue here is why is the president attacking a separation of powers. and for steve bannon, who believes the president should be tough in negotiating with xi jinping and this president can't take the heat of a divided government and separation of powers and a tough press? that's american democracy. harry truman said if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. if this president is tough, he should respect the process. >> congressman quigley, without the full report, without the full facts, how do you fill in the blanks here? you say there's still evidence of collusion. obviously it wasn't enough for mueller. the president hasn't seen the report, doesn't have the answers. he's already filling in the blanks anyway. how does a message of wait and see sell better than what the president is saying? >> i don't know what else to do but to file the necessary subpoena next week when they don't comply with this.

clearly one of the things that we would get from this paper is the fact that there are gaps. we absolutely have no idea where the special counsel went on money laundering, for example. knowing what we know about the fact that deutsche bank did most of the financing for trump world leading up to his presidency and that they were also fined $600 million for illegally laundering money with the russians. what do we know what's left to do? what's still in those gaps? and i think the answers will come with the report and a frank discussion with mr. mueller himself. >> congressman quigley, appreciate it. congressman khanna as well, thank you very much. one thing that is certain tonight, if and when the full mueller report is released the president's critics and supporters will seek to spin a tremendous level of detail depending how much is released, how much detail the public is prepared to decipher and digest, remains to be seen.

joining me is tim naftali and "the new york times" op-ped columnist and cnn contributor frank bruni. i was struck by something, frank, i want to get it because i wrote it, something you said in the "times," wrote in the "times yesterday, you said, "we americans excel at many things but we're terrible at nuance in reaction to robert mueller's report, rather to the madingly succinct and vague summary we've been provided is the latest and most vivid proof of that." the president and his supporters have been very successful in exploiting that lack of detail or nuance or making the most of it is the right term. >> i don't think we know how successful they have been. i think his base is feeling more fired up and confident about his righteousness than ever. do we really know whether they have been successful with those people? very few of them are in the middle. what distresses me and the reason i wrote that is two things can be true at the same time. we seem unable in america right now to hold two thoughts at the same time. it is certainly the case that

4 pages from over 300 is ridiculous, but it can also be the case/some hurdles and concerns to releasing the whole report. it can be the case that someone like adam schiff may be engaged in overbaked language and got too far out on a limb. it is not the case that he should be reprimanded and censored the way his colleagues are suggesting he should be. i just want to say one thing because i'm so outraged and embarrassed by the president and his pencil neck thing or whatever that is. he said it's all lies. actually everything adam schiff said is a proven fact. >> right. >> the debate is whether those add up to this word, collusion, which is so vaguely defined. but adam schiff gave a litany of proven facts that explain why people were so concerned about what was going on. and for donald trump to stand there and tell people it was all lies is shameful. >> not surprising, though. i mean, he has been -- >> i think -- not surprising but we need to keep being, i don't know if shocked is the word, but we can't be so unsurprised we let it roll off of our shoulders.

>> tim, has there been a ton of nuance in american politics ever really? we all think this is the roughest things have ever been. one, the decibel level is high, but as steve bannon said to you, there have been periods in our history where the decibel level has been high. i'm shocked and dismayed that he would say that we'd reached the pitch of the debate before the civil war. my god, i hope he didn't say that with glee. but there's also the question of nuance. >> he actually thinks -- he was saying he thinks democracy is stronger than ever. that people are energized, people are involved. >> well, i don't think that the 1850s is a model for what we want -- for what our democracy should be. but the other thing i wanted to talk about was the issue of nuance. it was a beautiful piece today. but we've never been very good at nuance. after all, how many times in the cold war have we asked presidents to have a doctrine. what's your doctrine? and a doctrine is not nuanced.

>> no. >> it's a very direct form of policy. you do this, we'll do that. we tend to want very straightforward responses. we also like contests. we like winners and losers. you don't get a participation medal in american politics. and so i think this bleeds over into the way in which we talk about things like the mueller report. the white house got a lot out of a four-page summary because that four-page summary said just what the president needed it to say, no collusion. the president had defined this entire investigation about collusion and not corruption. there's lots of corruption. it's just there wasn't direct collusion with the russian government. notice, it's the russian government, not with russians. so i think when we get the details, we will see lots of unethical misconduct with russians that should raise our hackles.

>> and hopefully americans won't be so over this that they'll pay attention to those details and those nuances. what's different on the nuance front, anderson, is we're more polarized than we were a decade ago, two decades ago. there have been fascinating surveys showing that if you're on the other political aisle from me, i don't just think you're wrong, i think you're evil. >> yeah. >> and that is informing people's language. the pitch of it. i think steve bannon is exaggerating. i worry that he does take some weird delight in this. but we are talking to each other with a volume and a kind of vitreal that was not true 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago. >> i just wanting to add this is part of the product of the contract with america. in the 1990s people entered the political fray saying i'm not going to think when i get to washington. i'm going to do exactly what you tell me to do. if i don't, primary me out, which means there's absolutely no benefit for a member of congress, certainly from the republican side, to compromise in washington. because they're going to be primaried out because they promised not to compromise.

that has polluted and -- >> and there are plenty of democrats who don't want to compromise, either. >> no doubt about that. but what i'm saying is when you have the newt gingrich structure of the '90s has really changed american politics. and then the tea party was a reaction to republicans not doing enough. >> but your point is really well taken, anderson. there are democrats who are just as strident. we're not going to get an infrastructure bill because of both democrats and republicans. neither party is going to want to do something that maybe the other side takes credit for. >> exactly. >> that's where we are. >> the democrats don't want to give the president a, quote/unquote, win. >> thank you, as always, appreciate it. up next, breaking news on the proposal to cut millions of dollars in funding for the special olympics. what the president is saying about the idea now after his education secretary came under fire on capitol hill. she's been defending it. he basically totally reversed it leaving her out to dry. i'll talk to the chairman of the

special olympics, tim shriver. also on the hill, the person for the secretary of the interior about processing and drill permits, you'll want to hear what he has to say. it's tough to quit smoking cold turkey. so chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix. you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in... behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking,

or life- threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking "slow turkey." talk to your doctor about chantix. it's not small. but it's not just big either. it's the kind of big where you'll never have to ask, "should i scooch up?" it's big that looks at a sunroof and wonders why it can't just be most of the roof. it's big that's better because we built it that way. the spacious, 121 cubic feet of cargo space ford expedition. each day justin 121 cubat work... walk. space and after work. he does it all with dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles

that provide all-day comfort. to keep him feeling more energized. dr. scholl's. born to move. 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 before the trip, jessica sent 22 texts to a swim instructor to help manny overcome his fear. their gps took them to places out of a storybook.

and they called grandma when manny felt sad about not being able to swim. overall, they shared 176 pictures. but when the moment came, they held their breath, and watched their son learn to believe in himself. 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. over the past few days the education secretary has come under fire on capitol hill for defending a proposal to cut nearly $18 million in funding for the special olympics. it was a difficult sell no doubt to lawmakers and late this afternoon, president trump stepped in. >> i've been to the special olympics, i think it's incredible, and i just authorized a funding. i heard about it this morning. i have overridden my people. we're funding the special olympics. >> total reversal there. now, the money won't be cut after all. shortly after the president spoke, the education secretary released this statement.

"i am pleased and grateful the president and i see eye to eye on this issue and that he has decided to fund our special olympics grant. this is funding i have fought for behind the scenes over the last several years." okay. sounds very different from what she's been saying for several days. doesn't make any sense because keeping them honest, devos has proposed spending cuts to the special olympics for the past two years. before this current effort. lawmakers rejected it. so this is the third time. this time she didn't even know how many kids with special needs could have been impacted. here's what happened when democratic wisconsin congressman mark pocan asked her about that on tuesday. >> the cuts to special olympics, do you know how many kids are going to be affected by that cut, madam secretary? >> mr. pocan, let me just say again, we had to make some some difficult -- >> okay. >> -- decisions with this budget. >> this is a question about how many kids. not about the budget.

>> i don't know the number of kids. >> it's 272,000 kids. i'll answer it for you, that's okay. >> let me just say that i think the special olympics is an awesome organization, one that is well supported by the philanthropic sector as well. >> sure. >> so the grilling didn't end there. she faced more questions about the proposal today on capitol hill, so she was still defending it before the president made his announceme announcement. look what happened when cnn's ryan nobles tried to get answers from her. >> madam secretary, you said today you were not the person that proposed this funding change. can you explain who in your administration did? madam secretary, have you spoken to the president about this at all? if there's some misunderstanding, madam secretary, this is the opportunity to explain it to us.

are you concerned about the supporters of the special olympics that are upset with the decision to remove their funding? >> oh, my god, that was so painful and awkward. i love how the camera after focusing on the back of her head, the cameraperson moves around and then she's looking at i assume that's someone who works with her for some sort of like saving. but the other person was just like, huh-uh, i'm not saying anything, either. that's an epic nonresponse. i mean, that's a wait for the -- that's not even like i can't talk, i'm on the phone, i'm sorry. that was just no -- that was something. i'd like to -- let's keep that on hold for later use and just bring it up every now and then. not long after that, the president said, "i've overridden

my people. we're funding the special olympics." and then miss devos was like yay, i wanted that all along. and that's all welcome by the special olympians and those who run the program which was founded by the late eunice kennedy-shriver more than four decades ago. it's much more than winning rub ons and medals. athletes gain friends, and the volunteers and all those in the stands gain an important lesson in tolerance and inclusion. joining us is tim shriver, the son of mrs. shriver. he's continuing his mom's mission. he's the chairman of the special olympics and he joins me now. tim, first of all, congratulations are in order for this happening. >> thank you. >> what do you make of the president's reversal on the proposed cuts after miss devos has been arguing about this now for days defending it? >> well, i think it's a great moment for the country, honestly. i think it's a moment of positivity, the likes of which we haven't seen in years. people from all walks of life, both parties, heartland and

coastland, volunteers, young people, parents, business leaders, all standing up, sports figures, saying that these are american values that we believe in, that we are committed to, and that we will not step down from. i think the president responded to that in a very positive way and recognized how important these values are in this country right now. and i think we should celebrate the fact that we have a moment of unity in the country and let's maybe build upon that, not just for people with special needs, although that's obviously critically important but maybe for broader conversations about what unites us because at the end of the day that's what this ended up being a conversation about. >> before the administration changed course, part of what secretary devos' argument was, that the special olympics doesn't need federal funding because of what she described as robust support from private donations. is that accurate? the funding cuts she proposed from what i understand would have cut programs for special needs students around the country. >> well, first of all, i think people don't understand that the

traditional special olympics program is privately funded. this particular initiative is a school-based initiative. it's trying to teach inclusion, teach empathy, teach connection to kids in schools in the country. we're in about 6,000 schools. we're introducing what we call unified sport, where kids with and without special needs get to play on teams, learn from each other, become teammates, recognize that everybody matters. >> that's awesome. >> this is such a fundamental american lesson. and i think people are responding to it right now where we feel maybe that lesson is under threat. this is all about being able to look into your friend's eye and learn from the child who has down syndrome, learn from the child who has autism. when you're in sixth grade or eighth grade or tenth grade, learn this most profounding -- i mean i dare say it's an american lesson. we are a country founded on at least the hope that we can build a country where everybody matters no matter what. that's what we're trying to

teach in schools. that's why we're getting funded by the department of education and that's why we want to grow that effort. we're in, as i say, 6,000 schools. there's 100,000 schools in h this country. every one of them, the families in those schools, the teachers in those schools, the young people in those schools are starving for positive messages and for ways to find their purpose and big ideas like these. why not celebrate that, grow it, partner with the private sector philanthropic giving to make these kinds of lessons the norm in our nation's schools. >> it shows my own ignorance on this. i didn't realize that this was something that you've had working in schools and that you're in 6,000 schools. it just sounds like a remarkable program. the whole idea of pairing people with different abilities together and learning from each other, i mean, what's more important than that? >> i mean, it's the future of our movement, anderson. we call it the inclusion revolution. what we're saying, and i think what the country said in these last 48 hours, and it's really

quite remarkable, to parents who have kids with special needs, to people who have differences, they heard a message loud and clear. this country cares about you. this country believes in you. this country values you. this country believes you're important. this country will fight for you. and that's a lesson and a message that for so many days and weeks and months those families never hear. >> yeah. >> but they heard it here. they heard it now. we are committed to you as a country. not just to a program. of course i believe in the special olympics movement and the work we're doing in schools is critical. the social and emotional development of children is critical. >> yeah. >> right now, critical in our schools and it's growing. so, you know, we're at a moment here to celebrate, but for all those young people, life is still very difficult. >> yeah. >> if you're different, it's still tough. >> yeah. >> so we've got a lot of work to do. >> tim, i appreciate you being on and i appreciate all the work you're doing. it's extraordinary. thank you. >> thanks for having me.

much more breaking news tonight. up next, the president's nominee for interior secretary gets grilled about our report last night. you'll want to hear what he has to say. -here comes the rain.

[ horn honking ] [ engine revving ] what's that, girl? [ engine revving ] flo needs help?! [ engine revving ] take me to her! ♪ coming, flo! why aren't we taking roads?! flo. [ horn honking ] -oh. you made it. do you have change for a dollar? -this was the emergency? [ engine revving ] yes, i was busy! -24-hour roadside assistance. from america's number-one motorcycle insurer. -you know, i think you're my best friend. you don't have to say i'm your best friend. that's okay. you don't have to say i'm your best friend.

i thodid the ancestrydna toian. find out i'm only 16% italian. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about.

this isn't just this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving simple. easy. awesome. stay connected with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. for the past few weeks on this many program, our drew griffin has been reporting on the close ties between acting interior secretary david

bernhardt and the industry he once represented. drew's been asking bernhardt repeated questions about allegations he's been granting favors to his former clients. allegations the department denies although bernhardt is refusing to talk to drew griffin. last night drew disclosed bernhardt ordered federal workers back on the job for drilling permits for oil and gas leases on federal land. that report came up today on capitol hill as he sat for a hearing that would confirm him to the job full time. here's the exchange between bernhardt and new mexico senator katherine cortez-masto. >> it was reported on cnn that during the 35-day government shutdown earlier this year, vlm under your supervision approved 267 drilling permits and 16 leases applied for by oil and gas companies. what exactly was the safety component applied to your decision to continue with the oil and gas permitting during

the furloughs and during the government shutdown? >> i made a decision during the shutdown that we were going to put people back to work because i could guarantee they'd get paid. i didn't know how long this was going to take and i can tell you i had employees who were calling our ethics office to see if they could sell their plasma. and so i made a decision to put folks to work that i could and that we had resources for. >> i want to apologize. senator cortez-masto is from nevada, not new mexico. joining me is the hawaii senator hirano that also is on the committee that heard from him. do you buy his reasoning as to why he did that? because he said there were people calling saying they were going to have to sell plasma. he was putting them back to work but they weren't being paid right then. he just said they'd be paid down the road. >> i thought his answer was bizarre. after all, there were 800,000 federal workers, many of whom were standing in food line --

you know, food banks. so i thought his answer was really strange. but he is very typical of too many of the trump nominees. they have spent a lot of their professional time fighting the laws of the very departments that they are now being asked to head. so in his case, of course, it was the oil and gas industry. that's why this industry is very happy that he is now poised to become the head of interior. they're very happy. so too many, as i said, of these nominees are very conflicted. at some point the conflict gets so bad and ethical violations get so bad they ending up having to resign add his predecessors did. >> bernhardt pushed back on criticisms about potential conflicts of interest saying he's actually worked to bolster the ethics guidelines in the department, hiring more people to oversee it. >> good for him. good for him. we shall see. i commended him on that point

but a lot of it was relating to sexual harassment and those matters that had already been brought to the attention of this department. and so, yes, i think he is making sure that he inoculates himself on those points. at the same time, there's no question that he represented so many oil and gas people that i understand he has a list in his pocket of all the people that he's not supposed to have contact with. and we also learned that he doesn't keep a schedule. and yet in his testimony he said he's met with all these environmental people. how does he even know that if he doesn't keep a schedule and how are we supposed to ascertain that? so just a lot of responses that i thought were not terribly credible. >> but as you say, at the end of the day he is going to be confirmed. regardless of the concerns you and other democrats may have, republicans have a majority and they support the nomination. >> yes. i'm waiting for the day that the republicans wake up to the fact that you can't keep confirming the roosters to guard the hen houses. so rather than draining the

swamp, they are part and parcel of helping all these people who are just jumping into the water saying come on in, the water is fine. i am waiting for the republicans to wake up to their responsibility and to recognize that we cannot keep doing this. but you know, so far, that hasn't happened. but as i said, meantime, anderson, sometimes their ethic violations come so close to the bone that they actually have to resign on their own volition before they get indicted. >> yeah, senator hirono, i appreciate your time tonight. thank you. >> sure. coming up, the latest on the jussie smollett saga. now president trump is having his say. 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. 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. select hotels to your existing trip. 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 tonight on the roller coaster drama encircling jussie smollett. president trump said both the department and justice and the fbi will now review the case. this after the cook county state's attorney's office said it dropped all the charges against smollett and before he left for his rally in michigan,

president trump weighed in even more. >> i think the smollett, i think the case in chicago is an absolute embarrassment to our country. and i have asked that they look at it. i think that case is an absolute embarrassment to our country, and somebody has to at least take a very good, hard look at it. >> for his part, chicago's mayor, rahm emanuel, said once again is, quote, a trump-free zone, unquote. sara sidner is in chicago with the latest. so aside from what i just said, i also understand the city of chicago is asking smollett to pay them $130,000 for their work on the case. is that right? >> i mean, i this is an extraordinary response in this case. mayor rahm emanuel saying the city was going to send smollett a bill to help pay for the investigation in what he said was a hoax perpetrated by smollett and indeed is the

letter that they sent smollett demanding $130,106.15 and asking for it in a money order and certified check. now, i should mention that smollett's attorney snapped back. they are saying it is the mayor and police chief who owe jussie an apology and they say it's for dragging an innocent man's character through the mud, jussie had paid enough. that's what they're saying back to this request, or demand, if you will, for $130,000 plus. >> so the state's attorney, she stated she was going to unseal the case. but that wasn't actually correct, is that right? >> yeah, you are correct, anderson. the state's attorney first said she could have sealed -- unsealed some of the case, but now her office says she misspoke. the law says she cannot unseal the case and it's also interesting to note that smolle

smollett's attorneys dropped their expungement argument. they basically are not going to ask for an expungement. now, if you look at this, that actually means that the case will never be unsealed likely because the only way it could be unsealed is if they ask for an expungement. the law allows for an unsealing of the case if the expungement is out there. but since they're not going to ask for an expungement, the case will remain sealed and out of the public's view. >> and there's more information on another case that involves smollett from years prior. >> yeah, this is a 2007 misdemeanor case. jussie smollett pleaded no contest for providing false information to law enforcement according to the los angeles city attorney's office. that case stemmed from a dui stop in which smollett gave police the wrong name. smollett also pleaded no contest to driving with a blood alcohol level over the legal limit and driving without a valid driver's license. this is another case in which wrong information, improper information was given to the

police. in the first case -- in that case he pleaded no contest. in the case here in chicago he said, look, i am an innocent man, this is what happened to me and none of the words of the police chief or of the mayor of the city, they are wrong. he is still proclaiming his innocence in the case here in chicago. >> all right, sara, stick around. i want to bring in cnn legal analyst joey jackson. okay, joey. first of all, the repayment to the city of chicago is requesting, is that just a pr thing? do they have any power to demand payment? >> no, they don't. so here's what happens, and, you know, this case is just on so many levels problematic and here's why. i think initially, anderson, before getting to that, they should have called it what it was. this was a plea agreement and they didn't call it a plea agreement. they said we're just dismissing the case, they're not transparent about it. let's be also clear they have the discretion, that is the prosecutor, to do what they think is appropriate. >> if it's a plea agreement, what is the plea? >> so the plea agreement, what

they did as you recall, the initial statement is you're going to forfeit your bail of the $10,000. in addition to that, we evaluated what you've done for the community then we found out he did community service. now, as part of a plea agreement customarily, what a district attorney can do, county attorney in this instance, is they could require restitution. that gets to the core of your question, can the police require him to pay it back? if that was going to be a requirement, the district attorney, county attorney, could have conditioned it upon a plea. but it's not a plea, we're just dismissing the case. i think the mistake was made in that it's sort of like the county attorney became his advocate and they should have just come out, held a press conference said, look, we ran too hard at him, we indicted him for 16 felonies. we don't think it's appropriate. it's disproportionate to what he actually did. we think he's a good member of the community, he's done so many things. this is an appropriate resolution. instead they covered it up, we didn't do it, it's dismissed. we had the proof. we're confused because they were not transparticipaent in the fi instance.

in terms of the police department sending anyone a bill, there's no statutory authority for a person who's a defendant in the case where the case is resolved do have to pay them back so it is pr. >> do you think this will ever be unsealed? >> i think it could be unsealed and let me tell you why. first, we see this federal investigation, and that also is bluster, right? it's bluster because the county attorney calls the shots. if you feel that a resolution is appropriate the world could be upset about it. president can be upset. department of justice can be upset. you do what you think you feed to do. why do i raise the issue? if we're talking about unsealing there's another component. that is the alleged letter that he sent to himself. that maybe a threat. and that may have been a hoax. that allowing the federal government to pursue federal charges and found out what the state found out. so the feds could get it unsealed but other than that the feds don't have any authority.

>> a lot of twists and turns. >> sarah as well. appreciate it. i want to check in with chris and see what he's working on for cuomo primetime. >> if this situation at the border gets half as bad as they fear you and i will be spending quality time down there in the future. i'm shocked that it's being ignored. you and i see this fatigue on tragedies all the time. god forbid there's a shooting that happens too soon after a shooting it doesn't get the same attention. but we have a president that literally made his bones on this crisis at the border. he's talking about it right now at his rally and he's deceiving people about what's actually happened there and the fact that he's not done what he needed to do to help him. so we're going into that tonight. we also have the senator from minnesota. klobuchar. what does she think about this? what does she think about the mueller report and the disclosure and we have vicki ward is here tonight. she wrote the book on jared cushner and ivanka trump. what does she have to say about why kushner got called back today.

>> i want to show our viewers again the most awkward non-response by betsy devos. this is halfway through it. asking her questions. she's looking at the camera challengeingly. and at her assistant. a person with her and perhaps an attorney and she says nothing. it's like nothing -- it's one of those, when would the elevator come? >> it's a little bit of a combination of those two. who me. and what say? and a combination of those two. it's not unlike how you react when i ask you if you have money. >> my reaction is huh? yeah. i can't hear. got to go. see you. >> see you in a few minutes. >> president trump claiming total vindication in the wake of the summary. what do independents in a state won the president think about it. randy kay talks to some of them just ahead.

the follow up cat scan showed that it had gone to her liver. we needed a second opinion. that's when our journey began with cancer treatment centers of america. one of our questions was, how are we going to address my liver? so my doctor said i think we can do both surgeries together. i loved that. now my health is good. these people are saints. ha, they're saints. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.

this is the averys trying the hottest new bistro. this is the averys. wait...and the hottest taqueria? and the hottest...what are those? oh, pierogis? and this is the averys wondering if eating out is eating into saving for their first home. this is jc... (team member) welcome to wells fargo, how may i help? (vo) who's here to help with a free financial health conversation, no strings attached. this is the averys with the support they needed to get back on track. well done guys. (team member) this is wells fargo. (coughing) need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites and filters by cabin class, wi-fi and more. so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done.

president trump held a rally calling it total vindication. after the are lease of the mueller report. the full mueller report said to be at least 300 pages long won't be released for awhile it seems. earlier on the program frank rooney said we don't know what voters will think of all of this but we went to pennsylvania to find out what some voters think. she spoke with eight voters there. who consider themselves independent. all of whom consider themselves independents because to vote in their primary elections you have to register as republican or democrat. four are registered as republicans but can still vote in the general election as

independents. >> in the wake of attorney general barr's letter to congress and what we learned about the mueller investigation, is there anyone here that feels more or less supportive of donald trump? >> i feel more supportive. i think it was an exhaustive investigation. >> i think it was a sham from the beginning. >> my mind hasn't changed. i have a pretty firm opinion of him and i didn't need their help. >> yours is a negative opinion and hasn't changed? >> no. >> these 8 independent voters in bucks county, pennsylvania are happy the mueller investigation is complete. they're anxious to move on to issues that matter to them. >> well, the mueller investigation and what we have learned about it so far through the attorney general, will that impact your vote for 2020? >> no. >> no. >> not at all. >> what does this group care about? >> the economy will be one piece but things like health care and the environment are definitely

other pieces. >> raise your hand, how many of you give president donald trump credit for a strong economy? raise your hand. just three. if the issue is doing great, do any of you care if the trump administration or the campaign colluded with russia or if he tried to obstruct justice? do any of you care? or does the economy outweigh that? >> no, the economy is way more important to me. >> despite everything the president has been criticized for, his lies, now further investigations with the southern district of new york, the government shutdown, we could go on and on, despite all of that, could you still vote for him if the economy is strong? >> absolutely. >> no. >> yes. >> absolutely not. >> why not? >> it's not specifically him. it's not specifically those investigations, it's not specifically that.

it's just like every tiny little piece of the open like i want to say racist or bigotry. the openness of that for me is of course like number one. >> you look at what's important, the pocketbook issues. the stock market is booming. unemployment is at historic lows. the economy is strong they say, that still wouldn't change your mind? >> it's a trend that has been going on before trump came into office and he has continued it so i think it's continuing to do well i think some what in spite of donald trump. i have voted for a republican for years. 40 plus years and i could not vote for him. you know if donald trump isn't president two years from now i don't think that the economy is going to fall apart at the seams. >> if the economy happens to be good i'll be really happy about it but i'm not going to give donald trump all the credit.

>> we all appreciate their time and their opinion. the news continues. i want to hand it over to chris for cuomo primetime. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo and welcome to "prime time". as the trump folks celebrate not being felons word that 300 plus pages of findings from mueller will soon be released should chill the mood. you don't have to be a criminal to be exposed as having done things that were wrong. and lied about the same. not a felony. will the american people think it's all fine when the full story comes out. a senate judiciary member fighting to take on president trump in 2020. speaking of people that weren't indicted but are not in the clear, jared kushner was called back by senators today. i wonder what they were curious about. our guest says she knows plenty of reasons why. the author of kushner ink is here. she has a new scoop.