welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. we begin the hour with a stunning statement on capitol hill, that there was spying during the 2016 campaign. that amid a big and important debate over the mueller report. the promise from the attorney general william barr to the senate that he won't redact information in that report just because it harms the president. >> first question. >> redact information to protect the reputational interests of the president? >> no. i'm talking about people in private life. >> okay. >> not public office holders. >> barr not answering many of the questions from senate democrats, saying he doesn't want to explain the report or go more deeply into why and how he

reached the conclusions he detailed in a four-page summary letter until congress and the american people actually have the report in front of them, but the attorney general did open eyes with his answer when explaining his decision to take a detailed look back at how the russia investigation got started in the first place. attorney general barr saying he wanted to make sure what he called spying on the trump campaign was justified. >> so you're not -- you're not suggesting, though, that spying occurred? >> i don't -- well, i guess you could -- i think there is -- spying did occur. yes, i think spying did occur. >> well, let me -- >> the question is whether it was predicated, adequately predicated, and i'm not suggesting it was inadequately predicated, but i'd need to explore that. >> cnn's laura jarrett is at the justice department. laura, the attorney general not willing to talk about many issues, but talking in several

questions about what he called spying and then surveillance and he wants to know was it legit. >> talking about really one of the president's favorite topics, john, and opening -- seeming to open, i should say, a can of worms over this whole idea that president trump's campaign was spied on during the 2016 election by the fbi. now, barr said he doesn't think that there is something endemic at the fbi that was wrongdoing here, but he does say he wants to look at some of the upper echelons, sort of a hint to former fbi director james comey and the deputy director andrew mccabe possibly there, saying he wants to take a look at that. he acknowledged the fact that the inspector general, the internal watchdog over here at the justice department, has already been reviewing this issue. months ago was called upon to do so by the former attorney general jeff sessions. barr saying he wants to take a look at it more broadly. he wants to take a look at everything that's been done into any unauthorized surveillance. he was pressed at link to

explain what he saw as evidence. he declined to elaborate further on it, but saying he does think it's a problem. as for the consequences, he says that depends, john. he said it may not necessarily be something criminal, but he really wants to take a look at it. so this is going to be just the beginning of a pretty long and contentious conversation over spying, john. >> a contentious conversation over that. contention still to come over when we see the report and what's in it. laura jarrett, appreciate the live report from the justice department. with me here in studio to discuss. evan, he used the word spying, which, you know, for those of us in the, you know, mainstream or people watching at home, you might think that's james bond or jason bourne. within the community, it is a term of art. >> it is a loaded term. >> he was later pressed and said he wants to see unauthorized surveillance. when the attorney general of the united states says spying,

number one, he's channelling his boss, the president. number two, how significant do we believe his concerns are about this and where do they come from? is it just because this is the conservative chatter or is there something in the mueller report about this? >> well, i don't believe it's going to be addressed in the mueller report. i think the attorney general is -- he said towards the end of the hearing there, he said that there were -- he had his own concerns. he didn't want to discuss what specifically they were, but it's a big deal. what he said today was a big, big deal because, you know, again, he's raising the prospect of investigating the investigators, something the president has been calling for, and if the message that the justice department and the fbi get from what the attorney general is saying is that there ought to be a higher standard if you're going to do a counterintelligence investigation, something a national security investigation, that's very important, then there could be consequences. the fbi, that's five years from now, right? somebody -- we find out that the fbi decided not to open something on -- on something

that was of concern because they were concerned of exactly this. then i think we're going to remember this day, right? i mean, the justice department deals with this -- with this issue very, very difficult issue all the time. and what happens with counterintelligence investigations is that often we never know about them, right? they open them, they take a look at these people and then they close them without ever -- without any of that becoming public. why this became public, some of this stuff, including the fisa on carter page, was because republicans in congress demanded for it to be made public. and so that's the consequence that we're seeing here. >> and so some of the democrats are going to say, gee, you won't answer how you reached your conclusion, the president didn't obstruct justice. you won't tell us when we ask you questions about what's in the mueller report, but you're happy to sit here and say you're going to go back and look at the investigators. democrats look at that you are a trump appointee and making republican talking points, but it also is a critical issue that's come up from the

beginning. what are we learning? >> there are a lot of inconsistencies in what he's say. when he talks about unauthorized surveillance versus surveillance that wasn't correctly predicated. those are two different things. one suggests that someone was freelances. it would be improper for him to summarize the mueller report. his march 24th letter literally said he thinks it's in the public interest to summarize the report and the results of the conclusion. he refused to say whether or not he briefed the white house on the mueller report. i don't know if that's changed today. there is a lot going on here, senators might want to get a couple more round of questioning. >> we are starting to see over the past 24 to 30 hours why the president picked barr. republicans are thrilled. i mean, this whole idea of investigating the investigator for a long time, a lot of people oh sort of dismissed it, even though republicans on the hill had been talking about it. it was seen as this conspiracy theory that there were rogue fbi agents, you had this anti-trump

bias. he has very much elevated that. yesterday he actually seemed to take a crack at jerry nadler, who is the top democrat on the judiciary committee investigating the president when he was like, you know, some of the democrats during the clinton era argued against releasing the starr report, and he said i'm not -- i'm not interested in releasing grand jury information. and he specifically suggested that jerry nadler was a hypocrite for arguing against releasing that information in the '90s and then wants to have it released now. republicans are very pleased. democrats frustrated. >> if president trump was watching from air force one this morning, i'm sure he was thrilled. this reinforces everything he's been saying and was saying just this morning about questioning the investigation, questioning the investigators, talking about dirty cops, and this plays into a line we're hearing from him on the 2020 campaign trail. he's really framing himself as a victim to his supporters. >> and the attorney general near the end of the hearing, which is now over said, look, i want to look at this. we'll see what happens. maybe it was all legally predicated. if i find that it wasn't, he was asked if he would prosecute.

he said sometimes you prosecute and sometimes you change the rules. he went back to the vietnam era with surveillance on protesting groups. be transparent about that as well. one of the key question for democrats was about to your point to the summary letter. the mueller report, which we will see at least part of next week, says that there was no collusion and bob mueller did not find collusion, but left open the question. he couldn't exonerate the president on obstruction of justice but wasn't making a case of obstruction of justice. batte >> did he express any expectation or interest in leaving the obstruction decision to congress? >> he didn't say that to me, no. >> so he said the obstruction decision should be up to you? >> he didn't say that either. >> all right. >> but that's generally how the department of justice works. generally grand juries are to

investigate crimes and a prosecutor's role at the end of the day is binary. are there charges or no charges or is this a crime or not a crime? >> just this sort of calm answer. the democrats want to know did you decide in your letter i don't see a case to prosecute obstruction of justice. he says mueller didn't ask him to do that, he decided that was his job as attorney general. >> i think that's an important answer because it answers something everybody has been wondering. was mueller leaving this pregnant, so to speak, so the congress wouldn't pick it up. he said no, mueller didn't tell me that. we're going to see whether there is language in the report that sort of hints at that. we don't know. i think it's important -- he's right, by the way, the attorney general's job is to make these calls. the justice department's decision is to make a decision on whether or not to bring charges. when you decide not to bring charges, you're essentially doing a declination. he's right that that's what this is. >> to your point about him not

wanting to answer some questions that one would think would be easy to answer, the president of the united states said this morning he has not seen the mueller report. we're going to get to that in a little bit in more detail. this is senator chris coons, democrat of delaware, asking because the attorney general left to uncleared whether he shared -- the day he released his summary letter, he said he had not shared it with the white house. he has since left it unclear. democrats tried to again. >> has anyone in the white house seen any of the report? >> you know, i'm not going to -- as i said, i'm landing the plane right now, and, you know, i've been willing to discuss my -- my letters and the process going forward, but the report's going to be out next week and i'm just not going to get into the details of the process until the plane's on the ground. >> so he's willing to get into the details of the process of going back to investigate the investigators, but he's not willing to say yes or no as to whether he -- the president said he hadn't seen it today. the attorney general won't say whether he shared it with the

president or the president's lawyers or anybody else. why? >> definitely suspicious, right? democrats have said since, you know, barr sent his letter to capitol hill that he better not share this report with the white house. you know, there was some speculation that he could do that with some white house lawyers saying they want to go through it and look for information that they could claim executive privilege. democrats on the hill say absolutely not. when you decided to participate in the investigation, you waived that privilege, but, again, this is just another point of contention we could potentially see between barr and hill democrats if he did give him a sneak peek. >> and i want to go back to the -- near the very end of the hearing. the chairman of the subcommittee, senator moran of answer, brings this issue, comes back to the spying question. i just want everyone to hear this. >> and what are the consequences for those who committed unauthorizing -- unauthorized surveillance? >> did you say that i said that it occurred? >> you indicated -- i think i tried to at least reflect on

what your quote was, that you thought spying on a political campaign occurred in the course of an intelligence agency's investigation into russian interference in 2016. >> i thought the question was, did i have any basis for saying that? >> and i'm now asking what the basis is or what the facts are that lead you to that thought. >> okay. i felt -- i am concerned about it, and i was asked about whether there was any basis for it, and i believe there is a basis for my concern, but i'm not going to discuss the basis. >> and what's potential consequences for those who violated the law? >> well, it depends what -- it depends what the facts ultimately prove to be. >> which would be determined in a prosecution? >> possibly, but, you know, there are also -- there can be abuses that may not arise to the level of a -- of a crime but that, you know, people might think is bad and might want to put in rules against --

>> again, the language of the trade is very important here in the sense that he's not saying a bunch of republican congressmen have said it happened so i'm going to take a look at it, he said i believe there's a basis. as the country's top prosecutor, he's saying something there. he thinks he has a predicate, a reasonable certainty that he wants to look at this question. >> look, this attorney general is very careful usually in saying exactly what he means. so we usually listen very carefully to his words because he chooses them very carefully. you know, i know for a fact that he reads everything. he reads a lot of stuff. and, you know, "the wall street journal's" editorial page, for instance, has been hammering this point that this was an illegally predicated investigation. that is not supported by the evidence we've seen so far, but that's what -- that's what certain quarters of the media have been hammering on. so the attorney general talking about that? i don't know. or is he -- did he see something from perhaps some of the finding

of horowitz maybe, some of the things he's been briefed on. we don't know. but he's usually very careful in saying what he means, and so that's why i think you have to think that there are phone calls going on right now between the fbi, across the street to the justice department, trying to get a little clarity on exactly what the attorney general intends to do, what he means exactly because you're right. these are loaded terms. spying. again, this is what we do overseas. what the fbi does here is different. >> he tried to amend it some to surveillance. he used that word a couple of times. he knows what he's saying when he says it. up next for us, we continue the conversation, but in a different way. the president says he hasn't seen the mueller report. doesn't care about it. his republican ally in the senate says we should all know by now that's how the president operates. >> you cannot possibly be surprised that president trump would claim exoneration without having read anything. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration,

amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. try areds 2 + multivitamin. ♪ pardon the interruption but this is big! now at t-mobile buy any samsung galaxy s10 and get a galaxy s10e free! ensure max protein... to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. (straining) i'll take that. (cheers) 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. ensure max protein. in two great flavors. you'when you barely the clip a passing car. minor accident -no big deal, right? wrong. your insurance company is gonna raise

your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen. maybe you should take that pen and use it to sign up with a different insurance company. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

or crohn's symptoms... are holding you back... and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough... it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment

isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach. relit's way day!sion yes. it's wayfair's biggest sale of the year, and you're invited! starting april 10, score our lowest prices since black friday on best-selling furniture, decor, and way more. plus, everything ships free on way day. everything? everything. and flash deals launch all day long. hey guys, check out the flash deal i just scored! our biggest sale of the year only lasts 36 hours so shop way day starting april 10 at wayfair.com.

the president spoke to reporters before leaving the white house today -- as he left the white house today. if you listen, he made it pretty clear he's keeping close tabs on what his attorney general is saying about the coming release of the mueller report. on the one hand, so what, is the president's take. >> i have not seen the mueller report. i have not read the mueller report. i won. no collusion. no obstruction. as far as i'm concerned, i don't care about the mueller report. i've been totally exonerated. no collusion. no obstruction. >> but if he doesn't care, why this? the president again attacking the investigation and the investigators in a very clear effort to raise doubts about anything in the report that casts him in an unfavorable light. >> after wasting all of this money and all of this time with people that were haters, people that worked on the hillary clinton foundation, people that were absolutely haters of trump, they found no collusion. it was an illegal investigation.

it was started illegally. everything about it was crooked. there were dirty cops. these were bad people. and this was an attempted coup. this was an attempted takedown of a president, and we beat them. >> illegal, crooked, dirty, attempted coup. that is what he's worried about. he clearly shows some worry as opposed to i don't care. >> that was not a president who doesn't care about the mueller report. >> protesting a little too much. >> the question of whether he's been briefed on it because of course he hasn't seen it or read it. that's like george bush saying i haven't read the 9/11 report. presidents typically don't do that. the question whether he's been briefed on it and its findings and the counterintelligence stuff would explain this total u-turn from total exoneration, to this blend of total exoneration and a coup and also dirty cops. it would certainly explain why. if he was told, you know, this

isn't great. bill barr, for example, elaborated on did not exonerate you, you know, laid out sort of a balanced case, that would certainly explain why he's reacting this way. >> though another reason for the coup language and the dirty cops and railing at the report is this for only a year now has been a very effective line for him with his supporters. he's using it out on the campaign trail. i think we're going to hear more and more and more about this. he's found to be really a powerful line on the trail. >> and the question that mueller leaves open and that barr made a conclusion that per was not a prosecutable case in his summary letter. the attorney general, a forum appointee, said he doesn't see a case to pursue on obstruction of justice. the special counsel said it leaves that question open. obstruction of justice comes up. here is the president. >> we fight back. and you know why we fight back? because i knew how illegal this whole thing was. >> there he goes again -- bill barr said he's going back to

investigate the beginning of the investigation. every time robert mueller was challenged in court. every time the legitimacy of the investigation was challenged in court, robert mueller won. so the public record is in favor of this not being an illegal investigation, as the president says, but that is a message mainly to his base, but also anyone out there who is a little confused. don't believe anything they say pause they shouldn't have been there in the first place. >> barr specifically quoted mueller saying that he wasn't exonerating the president when it came to obstruction of justice. he mentioned something else, which i think is important and perhaps why we're seeing the president react like this, and that is that most of the obstruction issues were publicly reported, but that was most, he said specifically in the letter. that seniority of suggests there were other things that happened that have not been reported that perhaps could be used in trying to make the case that the president did obstruct justice. we will potentially see those when the mueller report comes out. maybe he's threatened and worried. >> no, i agree with that. i think we are going to be reading that part of the report very closely for exactly those

reasons. >> another thing the attorney general has said about the redactions, one area he has to redact or ongoing cases or cases spun off from mueller to other prosecutors. new reporting in "the wall street journal" today about one of these cases. it shows just how far federal investigators reached deep into the president's inner circle. "the journal" saying the feds had two important cooperators in what became a campaigns finance investigation, hope hicks and keith schiller, the longtime trump security chief and former director of oval office investigations. both hicks and schiller, according to "the wall street journal," made phone calls to david pecker, "national enquirer" boss who had a so-called catch and kill agreement with the president to help bury the stories about what stormy daniels and karen mcdougal say are affairs with then businessman donald trump. among what prosecutors want to know, whether mr. schiller during a phone with pecker passed the phone to then candidate trump. so more details about these investigations. part of this was in the case against michael cohen, where individual one, the president of the united states, is essentially named as an

unindicted co-kpconspirator in campaign finance violation. are they trying to develop a case against the president, even though the justice department said you can't indict him? do they just want to have it in a file? >> look, i think all of those things are a possibility. the idea that the investigation is going to continue through the end of this presidency is very much i think on the minds of the trump lawyers who are dealing with this. what "the journal" story does is it definitely puts a lot of meat on the bones of what we knew already, which was that this investigation was continuing and they were continuing to look at whether or not anyone else was aware of the hush money payments, which could be a campaign finance violation, and so you would talk to hope hicks. we know that she went in to the interview -- had an interview. there was something that happened. perhaps she wasn't feeling well, had to come back a second day. there are different versions of that story. we also know keith schiller also

talked to them. and so is that something that they are still looking at? we don't know exactly where the southern district of new york will go, but this is the reason why the president's lawyers have always been more worried about this investigation than anything else, because they knew they could deal with the collusion stuff and the obstruction stuff. they thought they had that handled. this is definitely much harder to deal with because you can't fire the southern district of new york. >> right. >> you can get rid of bob mueller. you can't get rid of these guys and they don't go away. they fully expect this is going to follow the president through the end of his presidency. again, if he doesn't get re-elected in 2020, it is possible you can bring charges against a former president. >> i think it's interesting that democrats on the hill, this is an issue that they really haven't been going after very much. they're talking about russia. they're talking about obstruction. they're talking about, you know, security clearances, but we haven't seen them touch this very much. i mean, maybe on the perimeters they're sending inquiries. when it comes to are they going

to impeach the president? his lawyers are very concerned about this. so far, democrats on the hill -- >> bill clinton -- >> they don't see this as safe grounds. >> asked trump about this before he left and he said he has no idea about this reporting. >> that was a more i don't want to talk about it than i don't know anything about it. he knows. he keeps track of this. we we come back, another big popeal today for one of the leading candidates for president. bernie sanders back with a new version of medicare for all.

travel and dining now kayak and opentable let you earn travel rewards every time you dine. earn points with each restaurant reservation on opentable and redeem them for hotel discounts on kayak. get started at kayak.com/diningrewards.

xfinity watchathon week. television is back! now through april 14, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! so, you can get more into what you're into. whether it's more laughs, oops. epic escapes, or high-flying thrills, get more into what you're into. just say "watchathon" into your x1 voice remote, or download the xfinity stream app. xfinity watchathon week, free. now through april 14.

senator bernie sanders today bringing back a new version of his health care proposal, medicare for all. this is the democratic presidential candidate just last hour unveiling on updated proposal that would put every american under a federally funded health care system, free of private insurance companies. it adds new provisions for long-term care and under the sanders plan, premiums and deductibles would disappear, as would co-payments with a possible exception, the senator says, if you purchase brand name drugs. already backed by four fellow senators competing with him for the democratic presidential nomination. >> this is not just an idea that ke kirsten or jeff and i or others thought of, this is a struggle for the heart and soul of who we are as the american people. >> this has to become the next social safety net. it has to become something that

is there for you no matter what. >> cnn's ryan nobles up on capitol hill. here is one of the big questions being asked, not just by republicans, ryan, but democrats as well, how does senator sanders plan to pay for this and how much would to cost? >> reporter: john, frankly, there is no good answer for that. senator sanders at this event that essentially amounted to a pep rally didn't take any questions so we didn't get a chance to pin him down on the dollar figure of this massive overhaul of the american health care system. they did release a summary of this new bill. the expansions edit includes. they do have a section in that conversation where they talk about the financing of it all. "there needs to be a vigorous debate as to the best way to finance our medicare for all legislation. unlike the republican leadership in congress, which held no hearings on their disastrous bill which would have thrown 32 million people off of health insurance, we will continue to get the best ideas from economists, doctors, nurses and ordinary americans to guarantee health care as a fundamental right." this isn't really that big of a

surprise, john. sanders has spent a lot more time talking about the potential savings that the average american would enjoy if this health care plan were put into place. he doesn't talk a lot of costs, but some estimates of the 2017 plan put the price tag as much as $32 trillion over ten years. john? >> that's a big number. ryan, appreciate the live reporting from the hill. let's bring the conversation into the room. i don't mean to be snarky. this is an idea, not a plan. if you have a plan, you detail how you're going to pay for it, how long of a transition, what would happen. he has the idea that he believes this is the best way to go, but how do you sell it if you want -- whether you're a liberal vote, undecided independent voter, conservative voter, here is what it is going to cost you. >> i think this is exactly how you sell it. you go out and say i'm going to be listening to all the stakeholders, my colleagues, doctors, economists. basically it's like his fund-raising model, right? join me to build this thing. i think stats exactly hthat's e

do it. maybe if people feel they have a voice in this they're less concerned with this sweeping overhaul of health care. >> i should have welcomed at the beginning before you jumped in laura lopez of politico. >> thank you. it's early stages. we're nine months out from the first content, so sanders is putting this marker out there right now trying to get ahead as much as he can. he's already seen the party start to shift towards him. there are a number of progressives in the house that are on board with medicare for all, but we also have to see how the new democratic majority handles this stuff. they may have very different views than sanders. we already have seen pelosi, rachel's reported on this, politico's reported on this, has thrown cold water on medicare for are. there is an emboldened blue dog caucus that is not for this. they want something different. there are a lot of options on the table that democrats can

pursue. >> but also -- >> part of the pushback comes if we're starting with a blank slate, democrats believe this is the way to do it. we're not. we're starting with a largely employer-based system in the united states and our government. if you just want to look, this is from america's health insurance plans. 512,000 health plan employees in the united states of america. insurance related employees, nearly 1 million. total payroll for them, $33.5 billion. this is a big chunk of the american economy. remember in the obamacare debate if you like your plan, you can keep your plan? that turned into a big stumble for the democrats then. listen to senator sanders this morning on this question, what happens to private insurance companies? >> and what happens to those insurance companies after your plan is implemented? >> under a medicare for all, we cover all basic health care needs, so they're not going to be there to do that. i suppose if you want to make yourself look a little bit more beautiful, work on that nose or your ears, they can do that. >> so basically blue cross blue shield would be reduced to nose jobs? >> something like that. >> can you sell that? >> i well, i think one thing to

think about, though, is, you know, all these democrats are competing to run against president trump, and they saw that in 2016 president trump very successfully ran on big ideas and not a ton of specific policy proposals. so i think if you're looking at that landscape and you're looking to voters who want these sort of broad proposals and ideas, i mean, i think people are calculating that. >> just a few weeks ago, you know, we saw kamala harris say the same thing, you know, private insurance would disappear. then there was a ton of blowback on her. she actually walked it back. these are things that speaker pelosi and other democratic leaders are very concerned about that saying things like your private insurance will disappear, that that is going to repel swing voters that they need and that actually carried them to the majority in 2018. democrats ran on protecting pre-existing conditions. they ran on making sure that obamacare could be the best it could be. they didn't run on medicare for all. >> republicans see an opening here. >> very much so. they see that, you know, you're proposing effectively repealing

and replacing the affordable care act, aren't you? that's the line you're going to hear from republicans now. and after, you know, a rocky couple of weeks in health care, they feel pretty good at running against this idea. >> right, but i think democrats really are on strong footing heading into 2020 on health care. as you said, this is why they won the house. so they really want to stay on message with this. i don't think that the argument from republicans, oh, you're going to repeal and replace obamacare is going to be effective against democrats. we may see pelosi try to move quickly on something that would have to deal with lowering prescription drug prices. i think that's where they think they could be most effective heading into 2020, rather than having a showboat on medicare for all. >> to the point of the republican argument, you see the republicans testing their lines. you had a good one there, you know, now you guys are for repealing and replacing this. this is kellyanne conway, the president's counselor, this morning on her take on the sanders proposal. >> we want to make sure people understand that medicare for all means choices for none. when you hear government

insurance, you have to hear the word government. you don't want government more involved in one of the most intimate parts of your life, your health care portfolio. >> medicare for all means choices for none. >> two messages in american politics, change is needed, change is scary. we know where everyone is lining up ahead of this, right? >> it's going to be fascinating to watch. again, senator sanders has some support. this is going to be one of the big debates, then democratic primaries. speaking of democratic primaries as we go to break. remarkable moment from our cnn town hall with one of the presidential candidates. senator kirsten gillibrand on whether she's mended fencing with hillary clinton after suggesting her husband should have resigned over the monica lewinsky scandal. >> for me, secretary clinton is still a role model for all of us, and my views on her husband is very different, and i've said all i'm going to say about that. >> has she given you advice on this presidential campaign? >> yes, she has. >> she has? so is it a sense of she understands or has forgiven you? >> you would have to ask her that.

here is another laundry hack from home made simple.

do you want ready to wear clothing without all the hassle? you can, with bounce dryer sheets. simply toss two sheets in the dryer to iron less. we dried one shirt without bounce, and an identical shirt using bounce. the bounce shirt has fewer wrinkles, less static, and more softness and freshness. for extra large or wrinkly loads, toss in three sheets. dermatologist tested bounce free and gentle is free of dyes and perfumes. bounce out wrinkles, bounce out static. rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. when considering another treatment, ask about xeljanz xr a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. it can reduce pain, swelling, and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened.

as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, low blood cell counts, higher liver tests and cholesterol levels. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. your doctor should perform blood tests before and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. don't let another morning go by without asking your doctor about xeljanz xr

. topping our political radar today, senator and democratic presidential candidate elizabeth warren releasing her 2018 tax return today. she and her husband reported an adjusted gross income of $840,000. close to half of that from his job as a harvard law professor. she took in $300 fr,000 from he book deals. gave more than $50,000 to charity. presidential candidate john hickenlooper laying out his economic agenda today at a labor conference. hickenlooper said he would push to raise the minimum wage,

provide portable and affordable health care and focus on skills training and apprenticeships. the private sector would get a big role. >> two out of three young people will never get a four-year degree. two out of three. those kids are the real future of our workforce but today they're being me neglected. we'll give every major company an incentive to create a substantial skills training program within their own firm. others may want to attack the entire private sector, but the private sector drives growth. >> another democratic hopeful, senator kirsten gillibrand says in her words, "it's really important to admit when you're wrong." at a cnn town hall last night, the 2020 candidate quick to acknowledge her views on immigration have changed quite a bit since she served in the house. that, she says, sets her apart from president trump. >> we are a better country when we care about one another, when we believe in the golden rule, when we treat others the way we want to be treated.

because i did not do that as a house member, i was ashamed. so now as a is in err for ten years, i know i'm in the right place. i know i am going to defend this country. i know i'm going to fight for those immigrant families as hard as i would fight for my own. >> the senator described herself as open-minded or not quite committed on federally mandated vaccines and lowering the voting age. >> would you support mandatory vaccination except in the case of medical exemption? >> i haven't thought about whether i would make it mandatory. i'd need to think about that. >> would you consider lowering the voting age to 16 years old? >> i really don't know. >> some people find that refreshing. the words "i don't know, i'll think about it." others are like, well, you're running for president, where is your answer. >> i think it's fair, right? again, it's early, so a lot of these candidates have time to make a decision on certain policies like that. ones that we know is only going to come up in the democratic

primary. it's not something that trump is going to be tweeting about. i mean, he might, but i don't expect him to. also what is notable about gillibrand is she is willing to say i'm sorry, i made a mistake on this policies, specifically on immigration. my viewpoints have changed. and contrast that with biden, who last week we saw didn't really apologize for the positions that he's taken and the way he's handled the allegations of inappropriate touching against him. it will be also interesting to see whether or not he wants to apologize for the crime bill of the 1990s or other policy issues that could come back to haunt him in the democratic primary. >> he would prefer to explain his evolution to apologizing, i think is probably the best way he would put that. up next for us, get ready for a fight. deadline day, not for you, but the president. the irs to hand over his tax returns. mom! he's blinking too loud. sorry, is that too loud? you don't need any more hormones in your house. that's why you chose kraft natural cheese. made with fresh milk without the added hormone rbst. it's cheese as it should be.

♪ here i go again on my own ♪ goin' down the only road i've ever known ♪ ♪ like a drifter i was-- ♪ born to walk alone! keep goin' man! you got it! if you ride, you get it. ♪ here i go again geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. with no down payment and no helpclosing costs.homes your va home loan benefits are worth more at newday. why rent when you can buy?

7a2y ♪ pardon the interruption but this is big! now at t-mobile buy any samsung galaxy s10 and get a galaxy s10e free! not to worry about changing their minds in retirement. you may have always imagined your dream car as something fast. then one day you decide it just needs to be safe enough to get her to college and back. principal. we can help you plan for that.

it's deadline day for president trump's tax returns. house democrats now waiting for the irs to send its official response to a ways and means committee request for the president's personal and business tax filings. waiting for an answer in writing. but here is a pretty good verbal cue. >> i would love to give them, but i'm not going to do it while i'm under audit. it's very simple. remember, i got elected last time. the same exact issue with the same intensity which wasn't very much, because, frankly, the people don't care. i built a great company, one of the best companies. i have some of the greatest assets in the world. i did a good job. and now, frankly, i don't care about them. i only care about the united states. but i have no obligation to do that while i'm under audit. >> anyone at the table think the irs is going to send up the president's returns after hearing that this morning? >> surprise. washington would totally go for a loop. diplomats on th diplomats

democrats on the hill don't expect this. we are not expecting them to send a subpoena right after they missed this deadline because the democrats are actually going to this policy retreat and they're going to try to keep the conversation on legislation this week as opposed to tax returns. which is something they're trying to do at this point in time. >> i think also the next thing we could see from ways and means chairman neal, again, expect the deadline to be missed. the next thing he could do is send a second letter. lawyers advised him you want to have more of a paper trail, it's a stronger argument for the judge. democrats expect this to go to court. >> to the irs commissioner, read the law and answer the question. don't listen to the president or don't listen the to the president's lawyers. he's prepared to go to court to fight this. this is the senate this morning. senator ron wyden questioning the irs commissioner about is anyone trying to shape your decision. >> we received the letter.

we're working on the letter with counsel. and we anticipate responding. >> has anybody in the trump administration at any time, including your nominee vetting process, discussed with you how you'd comply or not comply with a congressional request to obtain the president's tax returns? >> no. >> has anyone in or on behalf of the white house directly or indirectly instructed you to not comply with chairman neal's request? >> no. >> again, does anyone think that they're not listening at the irs to what the president and his lawyers say, though? >> that would be the indirectly. >> that would be the indirectly part. >> i just want to pause and say i'm under audit. it doesn't mean anything. he just doesn't want to do it. >> right. >> okay? there is nothing under audit that prevents him from releasing his tax returns. that was the indirectly part. has anyone indirectly shaped your thinking? of course they're watching. >> the president's lawyers made it very clear they think -- they're questioning the basis for this request to the irs.

that they're going to fight this. the president has assembled a legal team around this. they're going to push back very, very hard. >> you make a very important point for anyone who thinks the president -- no, he could if he wanted to release -- if he wanted to be transparent, he could release four or five years and say this particular year is under audit. at least he's trying there. here's the republicans, though. they understand where this is going. you're saying the democrats are going to be careful. a follow-up letter. probably a follow-up letter after that then maybe a subpoena. republicans seem to think this one's going to court. >> this is a question that's going to have to be litigated. there's a lot of people who disagree with that assessment, but if you're using this 6103 provisional law for political purposes, it's clear to me that's not what the intent to congress was. this is not about tax administration. this is about political and weaponizing the tax code for political purposes. americans should be concerned about this. this is dangerous precedent. >> we'll watch this -- go ahead. >> democrats are also prepared for it to go to court. so neal has been meeting with lawyers and counsel for months

now leading up to before he even released this first request. so they -- a number of them expect it to head that route, and they -- that's why neal made the requests so narrow because they want to make sure they're on solid legal footing. >>ment . >> democrats might be using this to get at a political opponent, but it might not matter. the law says the irs shall turn over this tax information. it doesn't say may. it doesn't say should. it says shall. legally, democrats feel they're on solid footing. it's going to be up to republicans to make the case publicly this is a witch hunt and they're going after the president and sway public opinion in that way. democrats point to polls that show something like a majority of americans want to see the president's tax returns. >> we'll watch the fight in public opinion. thanks for joining us on "inside politics." brianna keilar will be here after a very quick break. have a good afternoon.

parts of me i didn't even know. i find out i'm 19% native american, specifically from the chihuahua people. what?! that's... i find that crazy. it traces their journey in the mid-1800s from central mexico to texas. learning about the risks they took for a better life... ...it gives me so much respect and gratitude. it just shed so much light in my past that i never even would've known was there. 20 million members have connected to a deeper family story. order your kit at ancestry.com.

dad! dad!! can you drive me to jessica's house? ♪ at northwestern mutual, this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but so is making the most of the house before they're out of the house. spend your life living. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com. i was told to begin i my aspirin regimen,. i just didn't listen,

until i almost lost my life. my doctors again ordered me to take aspirin, and i do. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. listen to the doctor. take it seriously. why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. we're the tenney's and we're usaa members for life. call usaa to start saving on insurance today. woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain,

stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action. run with us on a john deere 1 series tractor. beacuse changing your attachments, should be as easy as... what about this? changing your plans. yeah. run with us. search "john deere 1 series" for more.

i'm brianna keilar live from cnn's washington headquarters. under way right now, round two. attorney general bill barr back on the hill saying he does believe that spying occurred on the trump campaign. they know president trump's secrets and now they're talking to prosecutors. why two of the president's former top aides may be the biggest threat to his presidency.