hoping the american people will pull the plug on the trump party. jeanie moos, cnn. new york. >> and thank you for joining us. "ac 360" starts right now. >> good evening, for someone that's not worried about what's in the report. the president has staffers and former staffers being named in it and facing his wrath. john cain was first to report tensions are high with those that cooperate with the mueller probe. we are learning white house officials are fearing the president's anger. the question is why? we have new reporting. remember, the president repea d repeatedly claims the report completely exxon ramts. he tweeted, no collusion, no obstruction. the second time in all caps. it is the bumper sticker version of a long running theme.

>> i have not read the mueller report. i haven't seen the mueller report. as far as i'm concerned, i don't care about the mueller report. i have been totally exonerated. no collusion, no obstruction. and i'm off to dealing with china, i'm off to dealing with north korea and venezuela and all the problems in this world. i'm not worried about something that never, ever should have taken place. >> total exoneration, he says, whether that's true or not, we don't know. we could know thursday when the redacted report arrives, whether it represents the full document and we'll get into that tonight as well a recent episode from 1999 from attorney general barr raises questions on what we may see on thursday, despite having never seen it, then why the concern? why is he lashing out on the camera and online and telling

cnn and people that corporate are worried that, i'm worried now, he's going to go bonkers, consider that white house counsel don mcgahn gave 30 hours of conversations and he might have factored in the decision or lack of one on obstruction of justice. the president has his own way about telling the truth to potentially criminal law enforcement. >> it's called flipping. it almost ought to be legal. i know about flipping for 30, 40 years, i have been watching flippers. everything is wonderful, then they get ten years in jail and they flip on whoever the next highest one is or as high as you can go. >> he said that about michael cohen. he praised his former campaign chairman for failing to break. it's unreasonable to believe, the president might go bloncers about what some of his people might have said to mueller. maybe it'sing in uncriminal

nateing. maybe embarrassing. former people were under pressure to sell books, not under penalty of perjury. what is it dirty deeds? gracious exoneration and happy with everyone for doing their civic duty and fulfilling their public they serve by telling the whole truth. given the tweets and the sound bytes with damaging news, it's not sure if it will be one of his significant stories so far. we are waiting for an impact. what are you learning, kaylin? >> reporter: interesting. we know president trump is eager for the report to come out on 31st. he thinks it will back up his claims that he is exonerated. even though they have not read it. they don't know what's going to be in the report. they think at best it will paint an unflattering portrayal during

this investigation. >> is there any expectation among white house aides so what will or won't be specifically in the report? >> they do know think it will contain bomb shells. they know where it came down on occlusion or obstruction. they're worried about the details. the people inside the white house that used to be in the white house, and the president's allies all know that so many of them have sat down with the special counsel for dozens of hours. they will be able to back this up what the claims are with statements from them. with dates, e-mails, all of these documents to support what's in this report. so they're worried the details will be the damaging aspect. not that there will be bomb shells but an unflattering portrayal. >> we don't know the detail in the rorg nal report in terms of what people around the president

have actually said. how much would be in a finished report. >> no they don't know that. the white house maintained publicly they and president trump still have not read this, don't know what the redactions will be, they don't know that the testimony, currently white house officials and the president have told the special counsel, things that could relate to the president's temper or the way he operates inside the west wing. things that may not be a big deal or criminal or anything like that. it could be embarrassing for this president. they know how he is and reacts to coverage. while he is not expected to read this report page-by-page, allies fear he will act accordingly and grow anger at them based on what they told the special counsel, you have to keep in mind, some sat down for over 12 hours. >> you heard he is not expected to read them.

according to reporting, he's not a big reader. if you would think maybe this would be something that would interest him closely. no? >> yeah, but people close to the president have known he's not a big reader. they're not expecting him to do through this line-by-line, instead his legal team will do it and they will brief him on it. what we are learning is most white house officials say they want to read this report. anderson, they said they might wait until they leave the white house to actually read it. >> let's get perspective from two insiders. clinton senior adviser also with us, former trump campaign aide michael kaput to. he testified. paul, obviously, we have no idea what the people said to mueller, whether there is anything that should be of concern to the president.

should the people around mueller be concerned? >> it's a world turned upsidedown. they seem to be concerned about telling the truth. we know that paul manafort lied and michael cohen lied and george papadopoulos lied. the rest august to be given the benefit of the doubt. they seem to be worried about the fact that they told the truth. this is holy week. christ, you should know the truth. the truth shall set you free. this president the truth should scare the pants off them. it's topsy turvy. >> you know there are flashes of anger, just because someone tells the truth, it doesn't mean the boss is going to like it. >> in fact in that case, everyone that testified told the truth. even ken starr didn't charge one person around bill clinton with lying about that vogs or that affair. in fact, after the report came

out, you know what happens? bill clinton apologized to me and to joe, because he had, in fact, lied about having that that affair. that's how the truth works. this president has to apologize to this team for putting them in this awful spot instead of the team worrying a they will tell the truth. >> everyone was bracing for the starr report years ago. is there some anxiety concern similar to what you experienced while waiting? >> ball will remember, we were on the same side of this fight. we were fighting with the lawyers because they didn't want to put out a redid you tellal of the report and they made a valid point, which is, we don't want to be charged with reports that we have been charged with. at the end of the day they realized they needed to look at something that looked at the exculpatory that hadn't been

leaked. these guys are in a tough spot. i liken this to president bush mission accomplished. they've set the bar so high at total exoneration on both obstruction and collusion and i think what we are going to see is a lot of black redactions, in between, we will see a lot of where there was improbable contact with the russians and lots of things that we already noye know about obstetricsr instruction and a few more. i think don mcgahn feels like the new white house counsel, that's what i think they're worried about. >> michael, you were interviewed by the special counsel's team, you described it as a less than pleasant experience. >> first of all, are you concerned about anything you may have said or should folks in the white house be concerned about a mueller report of what they said? >> first of all, i want to

congratulation joe lockhart, saying he is going to read the mueller report signature on a lawn chair at the end of ken starr's driveway, i thought that was invebl credible. at the same time, all those folks that testified, a lot of them actually are concerned i ploo everybody that they may have said something inadvertently as well. as you guys know, that's entirely possible. i think they're concerned about the ire of the president and his supporters. of course, but i mean, more important, not more importantly, also importantly, i think they will become very famous people in america very quickly. they've all kept their heads down, the former and white house staffers. now they will be in front of the stage. >> that will be uncomfortable. like, for example, they will start getting death threats. i've gotten 59 of them. i had two people criminally charged in the last ten days.

they will be right in the middle of a jackpot they were trying to avoid for a long time. in the end, i think this is about impeachment or taken, there will be no collusion coming out of this report. there will be enough of a path leaving the bread crums towards ob trucks based impeachment. i think it's about impeople or marching twoirtd and certainly a dozen hearings on the matter of obstruction. so those folks can count on a lot of legal fees. they will be in front of congress several times. >> paul, i saw you nodding your head, i wonder if it's fair a testimony to mueller it might end up in this report, should they have any expectation of privacy? >> no, michael makes a good point. we're on the opposite side of the political aisle. i feel people's lives will be

upended by this. what a world we live in. you know who didn't testify to mueller? donald trump. because according to his lawyer, john dowd, the president's lawyer told woodward, if he testifies he will be wearing an orange jump suit because he said he is a bleeping liar, michael didn't have that option. heels not above the law. this president is going to perhaps slip thes into because he avoided testifying when every other normal american had to. >> joe, there may be some fine embarrassing details about the president in the report. but to michael's point, nancy pelosi says that's not a road she would go down or pass the senate at all. so, therefore, what point is it? >> i don't think she wants to do impeachment. we may get to the report this is so redactive and what the

attorney general has interpreted or established or many established that that picture. the only way to get this grand jury testimony. the underlying the meat of the case is to go to court. if gong congress goes to court. they have to have an ongoing legal concern and impeachment could do that. that could bring the spectre -- >> is that wise for democrats? >> it's politically ricky for democrats. at the end of the day, democrats are going to have to decide, are we going to let them bury this report or take the necessary steps to expose the report. we'll have to see. >> paul, from a political stand point. what do you make of joe's scenario there? >> legally they may have to. crazy me, i'm going to wait until we reach the report until i dauda conclusions. right now, i don't support impeachment. if you want to discredit trump im, the way to do it is in the

election. democrats august to do it in the election than through impeachment. >> that may change if it brings impeachable conduct. i don't is right. it may be if mr. barr whitewashes this so much they may use that as a lever to get the facts before congress. >> michael, i'm sorry for the threats you have been receiving. >> on thursday, that was a lot. on thursday the script is going to flip from collusion to ob struvenlgs i think we all know that. >> we appreciate you being with us. thank you very much. up next, what a democratic law maker has to say about reporting and what his colleagues are about to get. saving grace, managing to recover, it's extraordinary, what they have managed to preserve from the notre dame fire. france's president has given a

time line. we'll have all the details tonight on 360. non-drowsy claritin. and relief from symptoms caused by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. [ dog whimpering ] boom! i fell 22 feet. i just remember climbing up the tree. next thing i know, i hit the ground. completely shattered my pelvis, in the middle of the woods. i called my wife, she thought i was jokin'. i said, "man, i'm not... i'm not." i was so lucky that day... saved my life. (vo) there for you when it matters most. get unlimited on the best network, with apple music included. and save big when you switch. only on verizon. hy-a-it's in here. new from revitalift: derm intensives hyaluronic acid serum

with our highest concentration of hyaluronic acid visibly plumps skin and reduces wrinkles. bounce back! new revitalift hyaluronic acid serum from l'oreal. [laughter] ♪ ♪ "i'm okay." ♪ ♪ each day justin at work... walk. 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.

forget about vacuuming for weeks. the (new) roomba i7+ with clean base automatic dirt disposal empties the roomba bin for you. so dirt is off your hands. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba.

yeah, i thought doing some hibachi grilling would help take my mind off it all. maybe you could relieve some stress by calling geico for help with our homeowners insurance. geico helps with homeowners insurance? they sure do. and they could save us a bundle of money too.

i'm calling geico right now. cell phone? it's ringing. get to know geico and see how much you could save on homeowners and condo insurance. tonight's headline, white house officials feel the anger ahead of the mueller report. he's been venting lately on twitter, which certainly fits a pattern. the question is what happens thursday when the redacted report arrives. >> how will democrats control the house and are demanding to see more. a democrat that stitt on the committee, i spoke to him before time. could he have been given a head up on the content of the report or do you think he's covering his bases? >> well, i think he's concerned.

the white house did not calculate their white house counsel testified to mueller. i think he's concerned about the obstruction of justice issues and what the white house counsel would have told mueller. >> they might be worried, the report might have made him angry at them, should everyone that talked to mueller should assume one day who what they say would become public? >> i think in an investigation like this. if you work for the white house counsel, you should assume this will become public. especially as mueller's report was going to go to congress. what is surprising to me is the president nor anyone on his team actually talked to the white house counsel or some of the aides to see what they told mueller. this is why they're concerned. they're worried about what might have been shared. >> there are four categories that barr has said he will use in terms of what to redact. one of them is about third parties and it's not clear

exactly what he means by that, he said it doesn't apply to the president. do you think it possibly applies to members of the president's staff? >> well, it shouldn't. and barr has not been transparent in this process. ordinarily, an attorney general sits down and comes to an agreement about what should be redacted and he hasn't followed any of that. what we need to do is see the report, what the redactions are, see if they are fair and push to see more if he has not been transparent. >> how long, i mean, if there are a lot of redactions that democrats feel are improbably, how long a battle? i mean, that could very easily become a legal battle that could drag on for in the past in somewhat similar circumstances, strike down for years? >> it could.

i don't think that's good for the country or the president. even if they're embarrassing details in the report. the president should be for getting it all out there and moving on, let's get the facts out there so we can focus on issues that people care about and the other thing is barr would at least show the report to nadler, the chair of the judiciary and minority leader. i think we should be able at the very least in private share the report with the key leadership and committee chairs. >> why is this so important? you can look at this and say speaker pelosi has passed and the senate and counsel ruled out criminal proceedings, so regardless of what the report says, what's going to come of it? >> well, it's parent because the american people should know whether there was misconduct.

the president or its subordinates cite i violated the law or engaged in behavior that is inappropriate. >> that has an implication for democracy. maybe we need to strengthen the laws and rules to prohibit it. it's important to understand that we haven't seen a single sentence of the mueller report and bill barr has characterized this as exonerating, but bob mueller never has, in fact, numbers of mueller's team have leaked information saying that the report, particularly on obstruction of justice could be much more damaging than barr is saying. so the public should just know what they paid for, which is what did mueller find? >> congressman, appreciate it. thank you very much. >> thank you, anderson. up next, more on what it's like for a white house under fire. two men that worked for five presidents between them. how they think the president's team is preparing.

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. little things can be a big deal.

that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ready to treat differently with a pill? otezla. show more of you. ready to treat differently with a pill? 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.

hear among white house staffers, people lashing out, days away from facing the consequences of cooperating with robert mueller. in the old civics book version, that will be no consequence, in today's modern day, there might be a different story. no one is receiving a presidential of freedom. david axelrod, if you were if president trump's inner circle tonight and you had gone in front of mueller and told the

truth. would you be worried? >> yeah, i think so, because we know that this isn't a president that's going to give him a big pat on the back for being opened and sharing the intimate details with the president and so on. he is going to react. if he feels that someone diamond him out. here we already know that he exalts manafort for not cooperating and condemns cohen for cooperating. so they understand what the dynamics, i think one thing is you may have a plan to deal with this, how you will react. what requires a reaction. what doesn't. do you put a report out or not. the whole thing can get blown up in a matter of seconds if he picks up his phone and starts tweeting and that is a very real pocket here. >> david gergen. in terms of temperament.

you worked for a number of presidents. you worked for president nixon when he felt under siege. obviously i have to ask you this question about one republican source to go bonkers? >> well, as i can tell you and the nixon administration as a staff assistance and i knew a report were coming about who was doing what inside the white house, what the president said, i would very worried. there is temptation inside a place like that when the sexs were so high for people to proceed and we had a president nixon who was drinking at the time. al haig was effectively running the country. so there were many as pictures you would fought want out. james schlesinger told the military, the brass, if you get an order from the president to hit the nuclear button, don't do

it. call me. you cannot do anything unless you clear it with me or henry kissinger. those were the types of steps that were company e tain. i would worried about what was said and what was done by the president with regard to the obstruction. we no efrom what barr said, himself, it wasn't all that transparent. we know that mueller found evidence that could jad up to obstruction by decided there was more evidence the other way. it was a close call. he decided not to make that close call. this means there is evidence in this report that the president on the one hand may have been obstructing. but there are bound to be something there, that was giving mueller pause. and he said the president is not exonerated under question of obstruction. >> david axelrod, you heard in the previous segment, and they were talking about democrats and

moving towards impeachment. even just to keep some sort of a legal case going if there are a lot of redactions, they want to pursue that, they need to have a legal case. i'm wondering what you have about that idea. pelosi and congressman adler have said they're not thinking about impeachment and there is some political danger in the democrats for that. >> yeah, i know, it's really complex. yes, they want a pull airing of what happened. i don't think they want the hot potato of impeachment thrown back into the middle of the debate. that decision has been made. but there may be elements of this report that are so compelling or so disturbing that the movement for impeachment, you know, picks up steam again. i don't know, i heard joe say that he thought that they may need to do this for reasons of pursuing the case. there have to be other grounds

like, for example, national security grounds to pursue this report. because there are obvious implications for national security that may not been apparent or the full testimony may not be aparent in this report. so, you know, i think this is, you know, if they're nervous in the white house, there also may be some nerves in congress or among the leadership of congress as well, because this has been put to bed and i don't know that necessarily the leadership wants impeachment to come back. >> david axelrod, david gergen, thank you very much. up next, the president by attorney general william barr is raising questions now how he may redact parts of the mueller report, it's fascinating. we'll take a look at it ahead. n. 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. you're having one more bite no! one more bite! ♪ kraft. for the win win. ♪ pardon the interruption but this is big! now at t-mobile buy any samsung galaxy s10 and get a galaxy s10e free! with peak season berries, uniqcreamy avocado. and a dressing fit for a goddess. come taste what a salad should be. and with panera catering, there's more to go around.

panera. food as it should be. leave no man behind. or child. or other child. or their new friend. or your giant nephews and their giant dad. or a horse. or a horse's brother, for that matter. the room for eight, 9,000 lb towing ford expedition. when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar.

balanceus.org

. that four-page summary of the nearly two-long investigation is not something attorney general barr did. 30 years ago he received a controversial issue that came under attack. that was how he came under an attack. randi kaye has details. >> reporter: october 1999 a much younger william barr caught up in a legal battle with congress.

at the time he was a head of the office of legal counsel in the first bush white house. he had authored a controversial memo that said the if ib fib could forcibly seize people in foreign countries without consent of that country's government. >> some officials are calling the new fbi directive the president's snatch authority. one prime target might be panama's general noriega. >> reporter: news of the controversial memo surprised even president george h.w. bush. >> i'm abashed to say i'll have to get back to with you your question. >> reporter: as with the mueller report today, barr was asked decades ago to provide his full legal opinion to congress. n instead, barr offered a 13-page summary. he reasoned as head of the justice department legal counsel, he provided advice on a controversial basis. still, the chair of the house judiciary committee at the time wrote this letter to barr's

boss, the attorney general requesting the full memo. it is my understanding that the opinion is unclassified and that it does not discuss ongoing investigations or litigation. therefore, can i see no damage that would result from disclosure. barr refused. wanting congress to trust his summary, so barr was called to testify. as nyu law professor ryan newman noted on just security.org. barr argued opinions from his office had been treated in the past as confidential. the chair quickly pointed out. doj published other opinions up until 1985. the outrage of the memo continued. secretary of state james baker tried to play it down. >> this procedure will not be used absent a full inner agency discussion of all aspects of it. >> reporter: finally, in 1993, long after congress first suspended the full report, it

was made public. barr was long gone from his position at the doj. the clinton administration published barr's full 29-page opinion. allowing the public to see it for the first time. it turns out barr omitted key principle conclusions in his summary to congress. in it, barr failed to disclose his full 1999 opinion concluded the president has the power to authorize actions that violate the u.n. charter and also the attorney general as well as the president have executive power to authorize overseas abductions. >> it ought to be a very rare thing. we can't be an international rambo wandering around doing whatever we want regardless of international law. >> reporter: another key omission. barr failed to tell lawmakers that in his full opinion from fine 89, he concluded that the president can override customary international law. he had told congress that the full document is tikritly a legal analysis of the fbi's

authority. as a matter of domestic law. details from another time, now under the microscope. randi kaye, cnn, new york. >> joining me now someone who criticized what barr did back then, a law school professor and senior analysts. jeffrey, given your only in of barr's 1989 memos i wonder what went through your mind when you saw principle conclusions in his letter summarizing mueller's report? >> well, you know, anderson, athletes and dancers have signature moves and so do lawyers. and bill barr's is sort of a four-step process. first refuse and deny, delays, second, summarize, third, slant and four omit. so he was there asked by a congressional committee for the opinion. he refused and delayed.

second, when asked to give something, he summarized. third, when he offered the conclusions, he slanted it toward his client. and then when the-- the opinion was released three years later, it turned out it was the most unfavorable conclusions to his client. have you the most familiar feeling when you watch someone do something before. the question is something omitted and slanted? we'll find that out on thursday i guess. >> it's fascinating what he is saying, does this raise questions about the credibility of his mueller report summary first of all? >> i think it raises questions of whether or not this is a pattern of behavior he has engaged in. i will hold judgment until i see what he actually releases in the report on thursday. i think it also the accusations he withheld some information also are as relevant, if not

just as relevant as allegations that he had mistakenly portrayed the law. so some of the arguments about his 1989 memo are that he actually got the law wrong. and so what i'm looking for on thursday is whether or not the facts that are revealed in the report show that he got the law on obstruction wrong. >> think about one thing harold said. three years, it took three years to get the underlying document and given the way the legal system works, i wouldn't be surprised if it takes three years or potentially never that the house of representatives gets access to the full unredacted mueller report and that would mean we'll never know for sure whether he redacted -- >> why does it take that long? >> because the legal system works slowly. i mean, harold can answer why it took three years in that circumstance. but you know that the white house is going to fight and theious dis department is going to fight district court, circuit

court, supreme court potentially and you know it could be more than one round. there could be other agencies that want to redak things. so you know, what makes us even more frustrating potentially is we won't know what he actually redacted. >> professional, why did it take three years? >> well the office of legal counsel, the legal department, the counsel's office, where i used to work. they used to publish their opinions. in fact, they published them all through the mid-'80s under republican administrations when ted olsen was the head. starting around the time that barr became the head, they started to declare them confident, or increasingly, they started to call them drafts so that never payment final. when someone tried to get them they would say they were legally privileged. the comment was made we have to withhold judgment. i've known bill barr for 39

years. he's a lawyer of considerable repute. you have to look for the 13 chime of the clock. we've now had three. first his you know unsolicited letter about obstruction. second a statement about spying. and then third this kind of signature move. so it makes one worried as to the possibly that he told this one also. >> first of all, does it make sense to you, as someone who redacted documents, should it take three weeks to go through the 400-some pages of the mueller report to redact? >> no so, first of all, depending on how many people you put on it, you can get it done in a couple of days. secondly, i think the thing that hasn't been mentioned enough. jeff should comment since he was on a similar special prosecutors force, mueller's team was a team. it was people who were extremely experienced with handling these kind of materials.

they knew the pressure that there was under for public release and they would have done i assume everything to make it release ready. and i think what the leaks that we heard about the summaries if it into that. if there were sources and methods, information on intelligence, that would have been put down into a footnote that could be easily redacted. they've tried to keep the narrative clean. a lot of what you do that has classified material is do exactly that kind of redaction. so three weeks makes it more and more suspicious. finally, it is very rare that at additional levels of review that someone says, somebody else redacted this, now i'm going to unveil it. people just add more redactions until it is that rts to look like a piece of swiss cheechltz so. >> i'm sorry, there is another point about the timing, though, it's one thing no delay three

weeks. it's another thing to come out of the box immediately after two days and, you know, give a clean bill of health to the president of the united states. you know, it would be one thing he he delayed the whole thing. but he actually embraced a very favorable interpretation to the president and then made everybody wait for three weeks acting as, letting the impression set in that there was essentially nothing to see here. >> go ahead. >> the release of the letter though, it did in some ways bo, the attorney general in. because the report is going to come out. now we'll see whether or not it is as transparent as the attorney general says it's going to be or if like harold says, it's going to be a document that looks more like swiss cheese. but we will know one way or another whether he is redacting so much information as to hide what was in the actual report. >> interesting. well, we'll be seeing it.

thanks very much. all right. let's check in with chris. see what he is working on. chris. >> oh, the intrigue, anderson, the inteeg. i can't take it anymore. we have mike iz cough on tonight, the famous reporter reported on this information with our now ag barr back in the '80s when this was going on. >> kind of dating him. >> look at the head of hair on iz cou izikov. remember congress has this type of clearance for classified information. you know, the idea that starting with some redactions are okay for congress is really not necessarily a reasonable argument. so, what should be expected color coded or not and what you can expect from ag barr and the argument of the night is going to be he showed you who he is.

he showed you what he is about. don't be surprised. we also have the cardinal on tonight, do lan is here to talk to people what he believes comes next after notre dame. >> all right. chris, thanks, very much. look forward it to. that's in about 13 minutes from now. coming up next, new information about what happened in the first moments when the fire started at notre dame cathedral and hear from a priest who helped get them out. there are people out there who see things others can't. they're the ones who see a city that make those who live in it feel a little safer. who see the efficient shape and design of the ocean's wonders as the future of aerodynamics. at dell technologies, we see it too. if you'd like to transform your business, talk to us. and we'll show the world what impossible looks like... when it's made real. [horn honks] man this is what i feel like when i wear regular shoes, cramped and uncomfortable.

we can arrange a little upgrade. which is why i wear skechers... wide fit shoes. they have extra room throughout. they're like a luxury ride for my feet. try skechers wide fit shoes. theeach day justinury rat work... walk. 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.

that we're playing "four on four" with a barbershop quartet? [quartet singing] bum bum bum bum... pass the ball... pass the rock.. ...we're open just pass the ball! no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. yea. [quartet singing] shoot the j! shoot, shoot, shoot the jaaaaaay... believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

>> anderson, if you stood in notre dame and looked up you would see stone arches. if you looked down from above you would see a vast lead roof so what was burning with such intensity here? to find that out you have to

look between the two structures where the investigators say they believe the fire started and that is in this huge wooden roof, this attic space between those two structures. this was made of 13,000 trees of forest that would have covered about 39 football fields and once these ancient timbers started burning there was just nothing they could do to stop that. what they could do was try to rescue what was below. look at the artifacts. for example, this is what believers say holds part of the original cross. one of the nails of the kr cruxifiction. there's many dating back to the 16th century that are still not sure about their future right now. we're not sure what happened with some of those. of course we know the roof is gone and the conspire up above but the most holy relic of this cathedral, crown of thorns which again believers think was part

of what happened with jesus at the cruxifiction. also one of the oldest organs in the world, that survived. the main bell that range out at the end of world war ii and other events, that survived. the three big windows that helped draw 13 million viewers or visitors a year, those survived. of course we know the two main towers up front that have the famous gargoyles on them, they are also intact. so the real remarkable story here is not merely that there was such a terrific fire but that as they rebuild, there's so much to rebuild upon, anderson? >> thank you very much. according to the french ambassador of the united states, the rooster that sat atop the spire is intact. the ceo of the metropolitan museum of art.

thank you for being with us. i'm sorry it's under these circumstances. when you hear frances president saying he wants this done in five years, that seems ambitious, certainly. >> it is unrealistically ambitious but it speaks to an aspiration that is very powerful. to do this work the way it needs to be done so that the building stands for another 800 years, it's going to take longer but the fact that the world stepped up as it has is remarkable and that's the most important part. >> it's sad that it took firemen -- there was renovation work going on. clearly it needed renovation work. even people who are not catholic that have never been there. i was surprised yesterday just by reaction.

>> people from all over the worldcom. they come to celebrate this great monument for its beauty and historical significance and place in the middle of paris. it's an icon on the city. >> it's also a living building. it's not a museum, it's a community church and there are masses there and the history of it -- i was talking to somebody earlier today that talked about it's many layers to this building. >> there really is. it's a great religious monument. it's the cathedral of paris but you can walk through as a visitor to the cathedral and there's a mass going on. it's so much more than just one thing and that's part of what makes it so compelling for people. everyone has a story about their relationship with this church. >> the craftsmen, there aren't enough craftsmen that have the

skill that, i'm sure they used hundreds of craftsmen back when -- over the years as this was built and it's been built and rebuilt in many different ways as have other churches. >> yes, the original campaign took more than 100 years so craftsmen spent a whole lifetime working on this building and never see it come to completion. many of those skills are fundamentally lost. we can rebuild it. we can rebuild it beautifully. it won't have the same level of craft or building technique done in the 13th century when it was built. but people thought they had gone too far. >> the building was 16 years old and they decided to venerate it. they made a decision to change

the way the whole building would be constructed. they're going to restore it to the building we knew of last year. bring it back to what it looked like before the fire which is what people most remember. >> certainly there's technology now and building materials that exist even if there's questions about should it have a wood roof. there's obviously wood that can be used that's more resistant to fire than in the past. >> i don't know what material they'll ultimately choose. the odds are it won't be the same kind of wood. it will be more fire resistant if they're going to use word at all. they're going to use this opportunity to restore it to how it looked before. >> it also has really -- you know, france has been going through a very tough time. there's been demonstrations in the streets rioting. it's an extraordinary thing to witness. >> there's two stories. there's the loss of the building where the damage to the building and the way the world stepped up to support this and this has to be ultimately being heartening

for paris and the cultural monument. i think that story would be a good one in the long-term. >> appreciate it. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> that's it for us. i want to hand it over to chris. cuomo primetime starts now. >> thank you. welcome to primetime. we have new information and stories to tell about what happened to our lady of paris. the headline is, the french president thinks the cathedral can be rebuilt in five years. really? also what a story. a hero chaplin braved the inferno to save the religious treasures inside. wait until you hear this incredible story. tonight we also know more about what did and did not survive the flames and what did survive largely in part because of the chaplan and chain they put together but there's also nagging questions. why did it take so long to report the fire? what does that tell us about what has to be done better in the future? information on that. guess who we have, cardinal timothy dolan here on the great