>> welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. the supreme court hearing arguments today in a big fight over the 2020 census. the trump administration wants to ask the question about citizenship. three lower courts have said no. plus, call it the trump twitter fight club. the president lashes out at the mueller report, the media, democrats and then his son-in-law says the special counsel investigation hurt the country more than the russian election meddling. bernie sanders tugs the democrats to the left again. the vermont senator says felons should be allowed to vote in prison, even rapists, even the boston marathon bomber. is that thinking outside of the box or outside of the mainstream? >> you know, i prosecuted two people, sent them away for murder for killing teenage african-american boys, one of them right outside the boys school. that person should never have the right to vote, and for those who are serving nonviolent, non-sexual, not serious.

get them out of prison to restore their voting rights but some people are irredeemable >> back to that debate in an hour and the president's peek and a new take from the white house that you might call like father, like son-in-law. jared kushner about an hour ago saying the russia special counsel investigation was, get this, more damaging to the country than the actual kremlin-led interference in the 2016 election. >> quite frankly, the whole thing is just a big distraction for the country. you look what russia did, buying some facebook ads to try to sow dissent and do it and it's a terrible thing but i think the investigations and all of the speculation that's happened for the last two years has had a much harsher impact on democracy than a couple of facebook ads. if you look at what they did and the magnitude of what they accomplished the ensuing investigations have been way more harmful. we didn't know what russia was doing what they were doing, a notion what have they were doing didn't even register to us as being impactful. >> and the president just moments ago, you see it right there, leaving absolutely no

doubt he approves of his son-in-law's take. russia, of course, did a lot more than buy a couple of facebook ads but facts are not easy to come by in the white house effort to attack the mueller report and its damning findings about the president's conduct and about his character. fight is the white house mantra of the moment. the media, morning show personalities, tariffs, twitter, democrats, the obama administration, all subjects of presidential twitter scorn in the last 24 house, but the propane propelling hissage, read the tweets, is the mueller report. words like harassment, coup, twisted and witch hunt litter the president's twitter feed. the president now wants you to think mueller found nothing so that he can make his next argument, that the democrats are now trying to recycle nothing. democrats see it differently, of course, and are now pressing through a subpoena for testimony from the former white house counsel don mcgahn, the witness most cited by the russia special counsel in his report. with me in studio to share the reporting and their insights,

julie herb felled davis, jeff zeleny and richard share and just a couple of facebook ads. set aside collusion, obstruction, all of that, if you read the mueller report, no matter what you, are it's a tamning detail of the sustained russian interference and every american should be outraged by it and the president's son-in-law said just a couple of facebook ads. >> of all the many things up for dispute, was there obstruction, the -- the russian involvement is not disputed by intelligence agencies so for jared kushner to say this and clearly his audience was of one and clearly that person the president

responded in kind, but it's just another example-of-sort of living in this alternate universe but all of it is geared towards framing then tire thing for the re-election campaign, and the president has done a very good job of it. but the question is why can't he sort of follow one track here and move on to something else? he is consumed by this more than anyone else, so that is the unknown question here. how much will it consume him, envelope him, or is it just sort of a split screen here, still trying to define this as house democrats are sort of launching their own inquiries. >> right. this is an attempt to sort of downplay the findings, not just the findings that are sort of indisputably supporting the notion that russia interfered, in a very elaborate way, rather than just a few facebook ad, but in a very fulsome play, how to plan and how to interfere with american democracy. he does not seem bothered by that like is reflected in many parts of the report. he seems to see it as sort of a question of trump's legitimacy

to even look at that question, and feels that, you know, that's a worse thing for democracy as you heard than, you know, the underlying crime itself of a foreign country trying to have its way in a presidential election. >> his father-in-law -- his father-in-law's ego and insecurity are more important to him than sanctuary of american democracy. forget the names involved. what the russian disease was heinous. >> look, the political spin and the motivations behind what kushner and trump are saying is important, as jeff and julie said. what the is also important is the substantive implications of what hasn't been done as a result of them taking that viewpoint, right? when you say it's just a couple of facebook ads. that means you don't aggressive confront what happened in the past or what is likely to be happening in the future, and there is deep frustration in the bureaucracy, in the intelligence community bourque circumstances the cyber bureaucracy, that this administration, because of the president's grievances, is unwilling to do what's necessary to prevent this from happening

again, and we're coming up to an election fast. >> and it fits into this idea that at first the president said he was totally vindicated, totally exonerated, the mueller report was great and now the mueller report was wicked, it's part of a coup and most of what the president says in attacking it has no relation to the facts. this is one of his tweets last night. isn't it amazing that the people who were closest to me by far and knew the campaign better than anyone were never called to testify before mueller in the reason is that 18 angry democrats knew they would all say no collusion but only very good things so let's define close to the president of the united states. as we do so, jared kushner who you just heard, just a couple of facebook ads. the president's son-in-law, defined as close. he testified to the russian special counsel. hope hicks worked for the trump organization and came out a key spokesman and went on to become the white house communications lawyer, she spoke to the special counsel. michael cohen, longtime lawyer and fixer, he spoke to the special counsel.

corey lewandowski, didn't the president say close to the campaign, don mcgahn, jeff sessions the attorney general at the president's side through you a lot of the campaign, michael flynn, the national security adviser by the president's side, paul manafort, the campaign chairman, reince priebus the national republican committee and steve bannon, rob porter the president's aide, chris christie around a lot during the campaign. who are we missing? >> the alternative narrative that the president is trying to create is not rooted in fact as you saw from the extensive graphic there, and also remember that the trump legal team from the start encouraged this method of cooperating with the spoum, and that's something that immediately after the redacted report was release, that a lot of his surrogates did emphasize. kellyanne conway told us in the white house driveway that look at all these witnesses that, you know, that mueller talked to. we had a strategy of full cooperation and yet this is the result and trump does seem to be kind of undermining that a

little bit here by insisting falsely that people in his inner circle weren't talked to. >> who wasn't on her? >> ivanka and melania and baron trump are really the only three people who did not talk to the special counsel. it's interesting. we seat president do this all the time. >> it's because, forgive me for interrupting, it's because what have they said. read the report. even if you're on the president's side, read the report. these people incredibly close to the president and corey lewandowski, says they were told to meddle in the investigation, do things to stop the investigation, and they refused to do so. >> right. but you see this time and time again with president trump. you're close to him until you say something that he finds unflattering about him and/or rerealizes he can't control you or what you say, and in the case of don mcgahn and a lot of other people who spoke to the special counsel. they told the truth and told the narrative the way they saw it so

now they are no longer close. >> think about the people that are out there that might turn to their neighbor and say did you know that the special counsel didn't interview anybody who was close to the president's campaign? >> that's why it's our job to call out the facts, number one and i would urge anybody out there, fine, it read it yourself. don't believe anybody else. the words quoted by the people who were pretty close to the president. what part -- you made the point, the president's political argumenting is to try to convince everybody there's nothing here so that when the democrats issue a subpoena as they did yesterday for don mcgahn he can say this is overreach. this is over. why are you trying to recycle this? nancy pelosi has a problem on her hands because they read the reports quite differently. they see robert mueller lay out ten counts of obstruction that are pretty compelling. you have to prove them and take it further and last night she calmed down the impeachment argument. whether it's the articles of impeachment or the investigation, it's the same set of facts, the presentation of facts, so she's trying to calm

the liberal fervor for let impeach immediately, saying no let's care they out a while longer but let's be aggressive. >> if you're looking at the public sentiment, obtaining that evidence and the full sorority something that is broadly supported by the public and clearly nancy pelosi and the democratic leader are looking at that which is why they issued the subpoena for the report last week and are continuing to pursue that evidence, but just look at the polling numbers for impeachment alone. i mean, you have maybe about six in ten democrats according to a recent "washington post" poll saying democrats support impeachment but if you look at the broader voting public it's only about 41% and that's the divide that the democratic leaders are looking at right now and try to very carefully navigate. >> a poll is a snapchat in town so we'll have to watch that to see if that changes. with the mueller report out thereto we know so much more information. it could very well change because there's a conversation obviously in the 2020 campaign as well and speaker pelosi has been very successful so far in

sort of calming and guiding and allowing things to fester privately. maxine waters, one of the first people to call for impeachment. is she out there now? no, she is not. she is following her speaker. i wouldn't rule out speaker pelosi leading the way but it's complicated. >> so far pelosi is getting her way. we'll see if it continues. a riveting day at the supreme court. the trump administration wants to ask on the 2020 census is that person a citizen of the united states. several states and cities object. riveting arguments just ahead. ♪ 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.

i'm workin♪ to make each day a little sweeter. to give every idea the perfect soundtrack. ♪ to fill your world with fun. ♪ to share my culture with my community. ♪ to make each journey more elegant. ♪ i'm working for all the adventure two wheels can bring. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for.

here's the question of the day. is this person a citizen of the united states? the supreme court today hearing oral arguments. the trump administration argues asking that citizen question is a common sense addition to the census so the government gets the best count of the population but several judges have ruled that cannot be asked and the

supreme court decided to fast track the case. the stakes are enormous. the 2020 census will be used not only to allocate congressional seat and electoral college votes but funding allocations for billions in federal aid programs are based on the census count. just back from the court is our supreme court and legal analyst. you loved it. you're excited. why? >> the best 80 minutes i'll have all week. okay. they had an unusual amount of time. 80 minutes, heard from four different lawyers, three on the side of the challengers and then noel francisco representing the government. he got most of the attention from the conservative dominated court. he explained that commerce secretary wilbur ross had reasonable grounds to add this census question. you know, the challengers are saying this is going lower the count. this is going to make it harder for hispanics and non-citizens to be counted in the 2020 census which will mean so much for money and for political power,

but s.g. francisco said he had reasonable grounds to do it. it wasn't arbitrary the way the lower court judges ruled and the question from chief justice roberts and other conservative judges suggested they were willing to find in the evidence that the government was putting forward reasonable grounds. they also talked about the history. even though this question has not been asked since the 1950 census, it was asked prior to that and newest justice brett kavanaugh mentioned that. so did neal gorsuch. they talked about, you know, not just the history and the practice and the idea that maybe this is important for voting rights information which is the government's asserted reason and just as elana kagan on the left said this sounds like post hoc rationalization. wasn't in the original record but what you've come to deliver now. >> one of the plaintiffs the new york state attorney general, again to joan's point, new york saying, look, federal aid programs, a lot of money here.

this would be a huge undercount is their argument. >> states all across this country will lose resources, federal recourses as a result of an undercount. in addition to that, we will lose representation here in washington, d.c. >> and it appears that the issue of determining one's citizenship took priority over a constitutional obligation to get this count correct, and it's really critically important that we not do anything, add any question that will undermine that count. >> it's a giant legal question at the moment but when you hear the arguments play out, we were just talking about in the context of the mueller report, but you hear the president's re-election campaign playing out as well saying the democrats want to count people who are illegally here to get them benefits. >> right. so it has two things that are in common. it is part of the administration's political strategy that he's used throughout, from his 2016 campaign and mid terms and then

now to demonize immigrants as a way of riling up his base. it's also fundamentally like the substantive question is -- to this point about, well, it was done -- the question was asked before 1950. you know, 1950 is an interesting place where the immigration system in this country changed pretty dramatically, and the large bulk of hispanic immigration to this country happened after, that and the question of does a question like this put on the census, you know, essentially drive a lot of hispanic immigrants into the shadows because they are afraid of the kind of deportation, aggressive deportations that the trump administration is doing. that's a substantive question that makes it different. >> is the substance the issue before the court, or is it -- at least one of the challenges, was it not, that they didn't follow the normal process to add the question, therefore the court would throw it out on a technical grounds and not answer the is this right or wrong question? >> it's interesting. so many evidentiary questions today. you usually don't have that at

the supreme court but reason we did is because the administration was able to leapfrog over the appeals court level, so the justices themselves were asking about what evidence is in the record that might have led secretary wilbur ross to make this decision, and what evidence is in the record that led the census bureau officials to say do not ask this question because it will drive people away from filling out forms, and the house of representatives was -- was represented before the justice and douglas letter and argued saying all the demographic issues on the citizenship questions and other questions about money, household issues, those are all secondary to what the census is trying to achieve, an accurate count, and if you do anything that diminishes the chance to get an accurate count you're undermining the constitution -- constitutional responsibility of this census every ten years. >> and there's an interesting analysis being promoted by some of the immigrant rights groups, and they look at data from the

non-partisan migration policy institute, and they showed that of the top ten states with the largest population -- increases in immigrant poplations, eight actually vote for president trump, so a lot of those population growth is going in these red states, and if those -- if that population is undercounted it could actually hurt his vote sflers. >> that's an interesting point. thanks for hustling over from the court. like to have an excited panel. >> bernie sanders sends a gift basket to the republican party enraging both sides of the aisle. lping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™

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. ♪

title x for affordable natbirth control and reproductive health care. the trump administration just issued a nationwide gag rule. this would dismantle the title x ("ten") program. it means that physicians cannot tell a patient about their reproductive

health choices. we have to be able to use our medical knowledge to give our patients the information that they need. the number one rule is do no harm, and this is harm. we must act now. learn more. text titlex to 22422

presidential candidate bernie sanders dropping a new wedge into the 2020 democratic field today. senator sanders says he's ready to let convicted felons back into the voting booth. in a cnn town hall last night he was asked if he thought felons, like the boston marathon bomber, should be allowed to vote even while they are still incarcerated. here's what he said. >> if somebody commits a serious crime, sexual assault, murder, they are going to be punished. they may be in jail for ten years, 20 years, 50 years, their whole lives. it's what happens when you commit a serious crime, but i think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. yes, even for terrible people. >> the reaction from the right tells you conservatives see this as a political gift, this from

the official republican party twitter account. this is beyond extreme and the rest of the 2020 democratic field should be asked to condemn this insanity. if you had any doubt about the radical -- about how radical the democratic party has become their 2020 front-runner wants to let terrorists convicted of murdering american citizens vote from prison, and this from congresswoman liz cheney, coming soon, kamala harris and bernie sanders launch their absentee ballots for an al qaeda program. maybe a bit of a stretch and harsh at the end but when you say i would let the boston bomber or a racht or a murder vote while in prison you ask for that. >> exactly. even though senator sanders remains at the top of the polls right now. that if he's the nominee that these are the kinds of positions that the democratic party will have to embrace. you saw the splits. not everyone in the town halls last night got on board with what senator sanders was

espousing in terms of voting for people in prison, but in terms of another republican criticizing, senator lindsey graham. he hails from south carolina. he tweeted just before the show saying i would love to see how that plays if dylann roof, referring to the charlotte shooter, how senator sanders would allow him to vote. >> it's a different conversation for nonviolent offenders, but a conversation for sleviolent offenders and are back in society, that's a different conversation. than someone just sent to prison or serving a life term but senator sanders pushes the envelope on these conversations. we had five town halls here on cnn last night. sanders was third. two candidates came after him. those two candidates were asked what they thought. >> i agree that the right to vote is one of the very important components of citizenship. i think we should have that

conversation. >> part of punishment, when you're convicted of a crime and you're incarcerated is you lose certain rights. you loose your freedom, and i think during that period it does not make sense to have an exception for the right to vote. >> so buttigieg says sorry, disagree, bernie. senator harris, this is -- i can never figure this out about politics. we should have that conversation. we should have that conversation. this is elizabeth warren works again, was not on after senator sanders last night but elizabeth warren moments ago in south carolina asked the same question. do you agree with bernie? >> i'm not there yet. >> i'm not there yet she says at the end. she says she's willing to -- she says that she's willing to have the conversation s.willing to have the conversation a polite way of saying you have an idea that i think is way outside the mainstream but i don't want to offend you so i tell you we'll have the conversation other is it, oh, my god, i hope you don't ask me about that again, please. >> i think that's both, also a careful way of saying i don't

have an answer. i haven't thought about this and don't want to step in there and go somewhere the party won't follow or more generally could be a problem for me down the line. this is sort of one of the dangers, you know, the bless and curse of having a big diverse democratic primary for democrats, particularly in an era when, you know, progress i was are really the energy behind the parliament ideas like this will come up and they have to decide will they get punished by primary voters for not being on the right side of this. voting rights is rightly so a very hot button issue for people. it's a fundamental part of civil rights in this country. it's a fundamental part of democracy. >> it's -- >> yeah. you just don't want to be in a position where you're sort of throwing out an idea like this if you're a democrat trying to run against bernie sanders. you don't want to get cross--wise with the base that wants to hear some of these idea. >> it's yet another example of starting the debate that the other candidate has been forced to react to. while we're having this conversation. we'll talk more about him later, we've now confirmed that the

vice presidential announcement, joe biden's anointment, breaking news, will be on thursday. some talk it will come on wednesday and now comes on thursday with a video. seems like we've been waiting a long time for the official date and now we have it, and we've said it on television. he was the chairman of the senate judiciary committee for a long time. involved in democratic debates on law and order issues for a long time. one of the things he's had to quasi-apologize for saying i was representing the times was the tough stance on the 1990s crime bill. we'll have to ask joe biden where he stand on should the boston bomber be allowed to vote. >> his answer on all of these things was going to be fascinating. i was asking his aides if he watched last night and they didn't answer. he said i'm waiting to be the last one in. he won't be quite the last in. montana governor steve bullock we're told is likely to jump in in early may but he'll certainly fill a void, the question that's been hanging out there, but how he answers specific questions like this is going to be

fascinating, because on the one and he's going to be defending the obama record which is going to come under new inspection in a way that it has not yet in a big way, on deportations, on immigration, on the financial crisis. elizabeth warren last night punt on a question, essentially didn't answer it, when she was asked to say what she disagreed with from the obama administration, but she's talked a lot about -- she does not believe that the bankers and others were punished enough. how joe biden, a, defends what president obama and he did versus reconciles his long record over really almost four decades is going to be fascinating to watch. >> and to this point, the conversation that we're having, bernie sanders who is the driving force at the moment of the party moving to the left. he has been for the last several years. you have joe biden who has lived the evolution of the democratic party and wants to get grace and say i took some positions over the last 30, 40 years that might be out of favor now and remember what it was like back then and how he weighs in on this evolution, where he says that's good and where we should go and where he says whether it's

voting felons or medicare for all as opposed to fixing obamacare where he says that's too far is going to be interesting because he'll be the elder statesman of the party. >> in an issue like this felons voting for prison thing is actually an opportunity for some of the other candidate, as well, right, because if you're anticipating the republican attacks of these crazy left democrats, the ability to maybe position yourself kind of vis-a-vis sanders, say no, no, no, we're not that craze, we're sort of over here sort of in the middle. >> that's crazy. >> we're only this crazy, they will have to figure out as joe biden and all of them will have to figure out where -- where are the primary voteers? are they really over there with sanders, or can i position myself in the middle. >> to that point you saw buttigieg saying no, no. you made the point when you say let's have the conversation, is that a punt. is that a give this a few weeks and see what the polling says and feel like what i do six or eight more town halls and buttigieg took a firm position. he'sin willing to have those fights. >> and sometimes the most

instinctive answer is the right one. senator harris has been a prosecutor and attorney general. this is not an issue out of left field. this is akin to beto o'rouke being asked to talk about his immigration plan a couple months ago and he didn't really have that. this is in her wheelhouse. she last night, i think, had a strong performance but in many respects seemed more unsure and cautious and calculating of her answers than she did in january. that is one of those things, you know, she and others are seeing all these third rails out there and not necessarily knowing how to answer it, but we should remind ourselves, debates and other things. barack obama 12 years ago had one of the worst debates in april of 2007. he had to apologize for several things he said back in orangeburg, south carolina, so this is a growth process for all of these candidates. >> it's spring training to a degree but in a crowded field as you're winding up to the real debates. town halls are great practice but they should learn when we get closer.

more on the breaking news. the former vice president of the united states joe biden will announce his campaign on thursday. what does the terrain look like as former vp jumps in?

more on this hour's breaking 2020 presidential campaign news. cnn has learned joe biden will formally announce his presidential campaign thursday with an online video. we're also told his first big public event will be monday in pittsburgh. if the former vice president is studying the climate, including the latest polling, well, there's some good news and not so good news. if you take a look, look at the national polling, joe biden

enters the race as your democratic front-runner or at least as your leader. brand new monmouth poll out, 27% for the former president, down two points from january, but that's pretty stable and static, bernie sanders second to 20, up four and pete buttigieg up eight and he's third or tied with kamala harris. the former vice president starts at the top of the pack. we don't elect the president by national primaries. new hampshire is second after iowa on the calendar and here a bit of a warning sign for the former vice president. did he get hurt by waiting? bernie sanders in first in new hampshire. sanders is strong in new hampshire. just ask hillary clinton from 2016. bernie sanders up four points. he's about opinion in the race rand is active and the vice president is on the shrines, at 18% and second, and rook who is sneaking up. the south bend mayor pete buttigieg up 13 points since february in this poll. the vice president those deal with not only a strong bernie sanders but with a rising pete buttigieg not to mention the other candidate in the race. here's the biggest let'sson for all of the candidates.

we're focusing thon because we have 20 candidates and they are all out there early but 77% of new hampshire democrats say still trying to decide. we are not in a hauery. don't vote until next year. 14% say they are leaning to someone and only 9% say they have definitely decided so if you're the president or someone like cory booker, low in the polls if you're cory booker and you welcome joe biden to the fray saying we've got some time. >> i'm excited about having a vibrant debate over the coming year. we're still a very long way from the first votes being cast, and i think it's going to be a real wonderful debate, and i'm looking forward to that, but my philosophy has always been from the time i was running track in high school you is don't look to the left of you or the right of you, you run your race. >> so biden steps in. he's a leading candidate. is he a front-runner? is bernie the front-runner? is that term even useless because we're so far out, but

the challenge now is to to prove it. you've won twice before. way in the rear view mirror and have lost both times. a lot of democrats love him, treasure him. they are not sure he can do this. >> no question, and those are people as you said they love him. when you talk to people, every voter i've talked, to democrats, like him and say, gosh, we wish him well and think so fondly of him but, so this is very much -- it's still the shopping phase so he's going to have to prove again to people why he is the strongest nominee, but underlying question here of all of this campaign is who is the strongest democrat to stand against donald trump? so i'm told he's going to go directly at that from the very beginning, but he's not going to be able to avoid all these land mines that are, you know, very much under way in the democratic primary field. after the pittsburgh stop he's going to go to early states like iowa, south carolina, new hampshire. south carolina could be the most important state for joe biden. he has strong support there.

he was speaking at a fritts holings funeral. african-american leaders there support him, but that's a central testing ground because he has so much competition in the race here so how he evolves and grows and modernizes, if you will, as a candidate. we don't note answer to that, but that will be central to his success or failure. >> and he thought this through, and we're very early, i can wait. i have the gravitas, we're still waiting for the former mop mongovernor who might get into the race and the question of electability, democrats and polling, can you beat trump. biden used to lead in all of those polls. new hampshire is important. if you're joe biden you don't want to lose. south carolina is important, you don't want to lose iowa and new hampshire. hard as a former vice president to sustain that. sanders is viewed in new hampshire, again, a strong state for the vermont neighbor. 30% of new hampshire democrats say sanders is the most electable and 25% is biden. person up, biden down and just in the sense he's been on the

sidelines, not out there or on tv every day. pay a price for that. doesn't mean you can't fix it once up get in, but it's a challenge. >> it's a challenge, and heenters with a challenge that no other candidate that he's had is that he is so high up in the polls. he's viewed as having done nothing official to sort jump in and sort of brand himself and say what his argument would be, so he's at the top so he has to sustain that now, and if he starts to slip you showed all the plusses and minuses. buttigieg is up 15% in ham many had a. if joe biden gets into the race at this late date and starts to fall or doesn't -- or doesn't continue to rise, that's going to be a challenge for him. his expectations, his bar is much higher than some of these other candidates. >> and because he's a known entity, eight years vice president, 35, 36 years in the united states senate, he's going to get some ways more scrutiny than some of the fresher faces, some of it fair, some not but headlines just the past week. joe biden's toughest 2020 opponent is joe biden.

the biggest money challenge is in 2020. sanders tops biden in new hampshire poll as buttigieg surges. no one knows what is biden thinks about healthcare. >> one quick counter sthout he also may have the opportunity to suck up oxygen in the race, and when you have 20 people, the people who aren't getting the attention are the ones that literally drop off your list that was up there. the names -- beto wasn't even on that first list because you only had the top five or six so if joe biden can suck up all the oxygen good or bad that helps with the rest >> it could affect the dynamics further on down in the race. see if he's willing to do town halls and how much he's willing to cape and before we go to break, governor larry hogan of maryland in new hampshire this morning teesing a potential primary challenge against the president. says he can handle the president's trademark twitter bashing no problem. >> when is the last time you spoke to president trump? >> february.

i was at the white house for a dinner with him. >> any of this come up? >> no. he was very nice. >> how concerned would you be about the wrath of trump in the campaign? >> you know, i'm -- it's probably not most pleasant thing to go through, i'm sure, but, you know, i battled cancer for 18 months, so i can probably take it. is my lawn. now there's scotts thick'r lawn 3-in-1 solution. with a soil improver! seed! and fertilizer to feed! now yard time is our time. this is a scotts yard. we need a solution.ut their phones down. introducing... smartdogs. the first dogs trained to train humans. stopping drivers from: liking.

selfie-ing. and whatever this is. available to the public... never. smartdogs are not the answer. but geico has a simple tip. turn on "do not disturb while driving" mode. brought to you by geico. i've always been amazed and still going for my best, even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin... i want that too. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? reeling in a nice one. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop.

seek immediate medical care for sudden sign of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you.

topping our political radar today, president trump will finally make that long talked about state visit to the united kingdom just six weeks from now. he'll be in britain for three days in june according to buck hamm palace. besides visiting the queen he'll also hold talks with the prime minister theresa may and attend a ceremony marking 75 days since the d-day invasion and then will head to france for commemorations at normandy. the president promising new trade retaliation after

harley-davidson's first-quarter earnings. who said profits were down 27% citing tariffs as part of its weak performance. the president acknowledging that the company's pain on twitter saying the retaliatory tariffs that harley is facing is unfair and, quote, we'll reciprocate and president trump now being honored for going above and beyond for israel. it's controversial. prime minister benjamin netanyahu promising to name a settlement in the golan heights after president trump following the president's recognition of israeli sovereignty over that territory, something no other country has done. netanyahu will take that proposal honoring the president to the israeli parliament. next, she may be struggling in the early 2020 democratic polls but watch the democratic campaign and you see this, the warren effect.

do your asthma symptoms ever hold you back? about 50% of people with severe asthma 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.

hmm. exactly. and doug. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? oh. well, we just spend all day telling everyone

how we customize car insurance, because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. [ loud crash ] yeah. he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

i put out a proposal yesterday to not back student loan debt, to cancel student loan debt for about 95% of students with students with student loan debt. >> that's senator elizabeth warren in south carolina a bit earlier today taking her plan to cancel loan debt to a plaque university and establish a plan for a minimum of $50 billion for historically black colleges and moy north serving institutions. senator warren's proposal to eliminate student loan debts to millions of americans and make

public colleges free became a central policy discussion. every candidate participating faced a question about senator warren's proposal. >> i still want to do some math around it. i find it pretty appealing. >> i support anything that reduces the debt of student loans. >> everyone saying bernie is crazy talking about making public colleges tuition-free. >> i would target loan forgiveness, i brought up people that went into public service in demand locations and in demand jobs. >> interesting to watch in the sense that she has had a hard time getting traction in some of the early polls, but she is without a doubt, she has more specific policy proposals out there on a wider range of issues than any democratic candidate. new proposals in this campaign and she's driving the conversation about policy to a considerable degree. >> without question. every bit like the professor she was for a long time. show's leading the intellectual

debate in this presidential campaign. the question here is she going to get a credit for her in the end. also talking about impeachment. you have to see if that is as well thought out but this student loan thing, her aides believe it can bring her back into the front ranks of this race. we'll see. >> certainly she is driving the -- the ideas conversation, but it's also how long can that last when you look at the campaign finance number. she had a high burn rate. would she have the resources to keep that conversation going through the caucuses and the primary. >> hat least get to the debate stage. i think the debates will winnow this field a little bit. she says she can pay for it with taxes on the rich. let's listen. >> if we put that two-cent wealth tax in place on the 75 largest fortunes in this

country, two cents, we can do universal child care for babies 0 to 5, universal pre-k and universal college and knock back the student loan debt burden for 59% of our students and still have nearly $1 frillion left over. . >> again, the country should have the debate. do you want to raise the taxes on the rich. is it the proper role of government do all the things but to her credit she's says here's my idea. she's telling you how to pay for that. >> the one danger in that is when you get out something so early so specific it makes you the target for people, to you know, poke holes in it. find the -- the consequences that maybe you didn't intend for it to have and, you know, it is your plan that becomes picked apart by both the republicans and also the democrats in the race. >> that's true, but it also -- you know, it's clear that these are well thought how the proposals. this is how she's chosen to spend her time, and, you know, to some degree it sets the predicate for all the other candidates and forces them to

respond saying if this doesn't look good to you or what's your plan and in some ways it's smart of her because she's defining the terrain. >> a real debate about substance is a good thing to have in any campaign. >> see you back here. don't go anywhere. it's a busy day. brianna keilar starts right now. have a good afternoon. i'm brianna keilar live from cnn's washington headquarters. under way right now, documents, no. financial records? no way. comply with subpoenas, nope. president trump testing the power of congress and the law. meantime, his 2020 challenger is starting to break out from the crowd. how cnn's town halls showed the differences between democrats, plus court documents show the extremist militia that held hundreds of migrants at the u.s. border with mexico also claimed to have trained to assassinate president obama and hillary clinton. and the terror may not be over. just 48 hours after bom