or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not. good evening, a railroad big night of breaking news, whether it's the sudden departure of sarah sanders or the government's own legal watchdog calling for the firing of a top adviser to the president for what it calls multiple violations of the law by kellyanne conway. we begin, though, keeping them honest with a page on the fbi's website, which is especially relevant tonight, given what president trump said today. once again, inviting foreign interference in american elections.

once again casting doubts on the fbi. the president of the united states all but telling foreign adversaries that as long as it benefits him, it's open season on the 2020 election because he's never reached out to the fbi to report anything, even with all the unsavory characters he must have done business with over the years. and he is not about to start now. the web page is titled when to contact the fbi and provides a long list of suspicious items to get in touch with the bureau about, including, and i'm quoting here, suspicious activities that you believe threaten national security, especially suspicious activities that involve foreign powers or foreign organizations. it is without a doubt serious stuff, though you wouldn't know it listening to our president. the same man who hired all the people now in charge of national security, including the director of the fbi, who is responsible for protecting the country from foreign interference, and who has warned repeatedly that the russians are already hard at work trying to undermine u.s. elections. in other words, even if it never occurred to him back then that foreign interference is wrong,

he's now had more than two years to learn otherwise. keeping them honest, though, listen again to what the president told abc's george stephanopoulos for the interview that aired last night and decide for yourself the lessons he drew. >> okay, let's put yourself in a position. you're a congressman. somebody comes up and says hey, i have information on your opponent. do you call the fbi? >> if it's coming from russia, you do. >> i've seen a lot of things over my life. i don't think in my whole life i've ever called the fbi. in my whole life. you don't call the fbi you. throw somebody out of your office, you do whatever. >> al gore got a stolen briefing book. he called the fbi. >> that's different. a stolen briefing book. this is somebody who said we have information on your opponent. oh, let me call the fbi. give me a break. life doesn't work like that. >> the fbi director says that's what should happen. >> the fbi director is wrong. >> the fbi director, he says, his hand-picked fbi director is wrong for saying this. >> my view is that if any public official or member of any

campaign is contacted by any nation state or anybody acting on behalf of a nation state about influencing or interfering with our election, then that's something that the fbi would want to know about. >> so got it? that guy's boss says he is wrong. today, with the boss' words still echoing across washington, the boss showed no signs of regret. tweeting i meet and talk to foreign governments every day. i just met with the queen of england, the prince of wales, the prime minister of ireland, the president of france and the president of poland. we talked about everything. should i immediately call the fbi about these calls and meetings? how ridiculous. i would never be trusted again. just on a purely factual basis, let's just think about what he just said. that argument, just on a purely factual basis is ridiculous. for starters, it's not like the queen of england or the princess of wales or anyone on that list

are adversaries with an interest in sowing chaos dissension in this country. the queen of england isn't selling julys to massively affect our election. the queen of england isn't figuring out who in the trump campaign she can meet with and coopt and nor is the queen of england over tea whispering i have dirt on bernie sanders and it's snogging good. i don't know if snogging is actually a term. remember, russia, the country he invited to hack in 2016 and says he might not drop a dime on this time says he is trying to influence our politics. prince charles didn't approach donny jr. with disinformation that his son so eagerly anticipated. russia did. the prime minister of poland didn't offer to set up a secret communication channel with the president's son-in-law at the polish embassy. that was the russian embassy and the russians. and yeah, the president and the people around him lied their heads off about all of it instead of calling the fbi. so the next beat to all of this

today was, as it always is, what is anyone from the president's own party going to say about this? and on this one, maybe indicating the gravity of what the president said, some republicans, some, actually spoke out against him. >> if a foreign government comes to you as a public official and offers to help your campaign, giving you anything of value, whether it be money or information on your opponent, the right answer is no. >> in circumstances where a foreign government attempts to be involved in an american election, that would be simply unthinkable for a candidate for president to accept that involvement to encourage it, to participate with it in any way, shape or form. it would strike at the very heart of our democracy. >> senator joni ernst said she would definitely alert an authority if approached. thom tillis and cory gardner both said they would call the fbi. there are a few. however they are in the minority, even after what the president said yesterday and today senate republicans today

blocked legislation that would force campaigns to notify the federal election commission and fbi about attempts by foreign nationals to influence an election. oh, and over on the house side, republican minority leader kevin mccarthy turned the gas light up to 11. >> i've watched this president. i've listened to this president. he does not want foreign governments interfering in our election, and he has been very strong about that. >> really? very strong. that's a term that a lot of people he used around the president. i know he likes the word strong, but how many televised addresses has the president given a warning for interference and outlined his plans to stop it? how many cabinet meetings has he held about this? how many times has he even tweeted about russia interfering without suggesting maybe it wasn't russia and it didn't happen? how many times has he undercut his own intelligence officials while siding with vladimir putin? i guess mccarthy is right when he says that president trump has been very strong on foreign governments interfering in our elections. the problem is he has been and continues to be very strongly in favor of it.

meantime, the chair of the federal election committee, they've just weighed in with a really extraordinary statement. this just happened, and i want to read to you the whole thing, because i think this is important. we've only had a second to make a graphic of the entire page. so the type on your screen is small. with that, i'm quoting now, let me make something 100% clear to the american public and anyone running for public office. it is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value in connection with the u.s. election. this is not a novel concept, they go on to say. electoral intervention from foreign governments has been considered unacceptable since the beginnings of our nation. our founding fathers sounded the alarm about, quote, foreign interference, intrigue, and influence. they knew that when foreign governments seek to influence american politics, it is always to advance their own interests, not america's. anyone who solicits or accepts foreign assistance risks being on the wrong end of a federal investigation.

any political campaign that receives an offer of a prohibited donation from a foreign source should report that offer to the federal bureau of investigation. that is the head of the federal election commission. let's get perspective now from strategic analyst, author and retired army lieutenant colonel ralph peters, his latest a novel of stonewall jackson's triumph and tragedy. colonel peters, this statement from the fec chair, it is stunning that a, they put this out and that they felt the need to put out what is so glaringly obvious. >> well, the integrity of our elections is absolutely fundamental to our system. and earlier trump comes up with his own one-liners, but when you were talking and trump is saying well i never called the fbi. my thought was of course not. criminals don't call the fbi. but this is a president, anderson, who i think is increasingly desperate.

and he will ignore the election commission. he will ignore good advice because he is so desperate to get reelected. and now i think very afraid. speaker pelosi last week used the magic word. she was talking about prison time. and this president knows that if he is not re-elected, you know, the coach turns into a pumpkin. he is vulnerable to prosecution. and even if he goes for two terms, he will spend the rest of his life in courtrooms or avoiding courtrooms. so i think this is a man who is genuinely afraid, and he will indeed take help from wherever he can get it, russia, china, you name it. and, you know, also, ironically, ironically, we have been criticizing this man for lying and lying and lying and lying and lying and lying some more. and now we're on him for being honest. for once, trump told the truth. he would welcome foreign help from a hostile power.

>> well, you know, the thing, you were an intelligence officer. you know how russian agents operate. you know, they're not giving, you know, information -- it's not just opposition research, as the president says. this can just as easily be disinformation and more than likely is disinformation. and the idea that president trump would want to look at it and maybe act on it anyway, it just seems incredibly i mean naive, corrupt, wrong. >> there is a fundamental difference between the russian intelligence operations back in my day and those today, and it's not the internet. it's not distorted images, et cetera. the difference is in the past we resisted. and now we have an american president who welcomes russian espionage operations. and that's indeed what they are. so we are gravely and grotesquely threatened.

and by the way, it's not just foreign interference. as trump grows increasingly desperate, unless the dems self-destruct, which they may, and the polls turn against them, you're going to see more domestic shenanigans, bending and breaking of domestic laws. and if trump is defeated, he will not accept a defeat. he will protest and try to raise his supporters' ire. and if that doesn't work, he will go on a rampage between election day and inauguration day and do as much damage as he can, much of it out of spite, much of it to advantage himself. so no matter what happens, we're in for almost two years more of grave danger to the united states of america. >> the president's tweet today, saying he wouldn't immediately call the fbi after meeting the queen of england and the prince of wales, first of all meeting

with a royal on an overseas trip, that's fulfilling your duties. there is a difference between diplomacy and intelligence agents reaching out trying to probe your campaign and give you what they say is dirt. >> yeah, indeed. and by the way, snogging is a word, speaking of the queen. indeed. and trump just has a different view of the world than you and i, or most normal people do, than most americans. even trump's own supporters, i believe in their hearts see the world very differently than he does. but they have drunk the kool aid. for instance, an example. if i say to you just the words "the founding of our nation," our roots, what comes to mind? the minutemen at lexington and concord or the declaration of independence. you say america's roots to trump, and he thinks of the dutch cheating the indians in

the first manhattan real estate deal. he doesn't know our history. he doesn't know the constitution. he doesn't know our values. it's astonishing how much damage he has already done, but you ain't seen nothing yet. >> colonel peters, appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you. coming up next, more on the legalities and the counterintelligence implications of all of this. and later, the departure of sarah sanders after 94 days of not doing what secretaries usually do every single day. iphone xr, ivee when they join t-mobile? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. your but as you get older,hing. it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish.

in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. even in my own home, i had my own designated space to smoke. if i think about it, it really was like i was punishing myself. a friend of mine that said, why wouldn't you just try the juul. and so i went out and i bought one. the idea of going back to smoking... i couldn't even imagine doing that. i don't think anyone including myself thought that i could switch. new infallible fresh wearar foundation by l'oreal. get longwear coverage from our most lightweight, breathable formula. defies sweat and transfer. stays fresh. feels light. all day to night. new infallible fresh wear by l'oreal. and relief from symptoms caused feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin by over 200 indoor

and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear.

♪

...work in harmony.ody... like you, they get hungry. feed them... ...with new centrum® multigummies® specially crafted for men and women 50 and over. so you're ready for anything. centrum®. feed your cells today. the chair of the federal elections commission moments ago making plain what president trump tried again to make muddy, accepting foreign help to win an election is wrong and always has been. reading from her statement, our founding fathers sounded the alarm about foreign interference, intrigue and influence. they knew that when foreign governments seek to influence american politics, it is always to advance their own interests, not america's. anyone risks being on the wrong end of a federal investigation

and any political campaign who receives an offer from a foreign source should report that offer to the federal bureau of investigations. it's not the president saying this. the president said this, tweeting this morning, "i talk to foreign governments every day. i just met with the queen of england, the prince of wales, the pm of ireland, the president of france. the president of poland. we talked about everything. should i immediately call the fbi about these meetings? ridiculous. i would never be trusted again. that's assuming he is trusted right now. the queen of england, the prince of wales always say, you know, snitches get stitches. that's what they say. they're known for saying that joining us now to talk about the laws that do and don't apply here as well as the counterintelligence considerations. jim baker whose tweet today alerted us to that fbi web page. and carrie cordero. jim, so the fec, the head of the fec certainly doesn't leave any

doubt as to whether or not this would break the law. and the fact that she felt compelled to put this out is very telling. >> it's very telling. and to me what jumped out was looking back at the mueller report today, one of the reasons that they decided that there was no prosecutable case there was because of the issues around the intent that's required by the statute. and the fec chairperson speaking publicly about this and basically putting all campaigns on notice about what the law is, a very clear, short understandable statement, i think that makes a big difference. and that will undercut anybody in the future who tries to claim that they didn't know that this was somehow federal law that this was somehow prohibited. so i think it's a very important thing that she did. >> carrie, is there any gray area when it comes to law on this? does a lot hinge on what's considered to be something of value? >> it does. under the campaign law, it would have to be a thing of value. and so that's where we really get into some gray space. we have to remember -- >> sorry, is opposition

research, as the president called it, a thing of value? >> well, we could make an argument that it is. most foreign interference or foreign campaign donations have to do with money. so most of the case law has to do with the application of money. but we have to remember that the russian interference activity in 2016 was an intelligence operation, and so to assume that future activities would be intelligence operations by russia or any other hostile nation means that they're going to try to get around the law. so it's wonderful that the commissioner issued this statement, because she is putting the u.s. candidates and campaigns on notice that they are at risk of becoming under investigation. but that doesn't dissuade, that's not going to dissuade foreign countries from trying to do this activity, especially now if they know that at least one candidate is open to their assistance. >> jim, a lot of republicans today were drawing a parallel between this and the steele dossier, which was paid for in

part by the clinton campaign. is it the same at all in terms of legality? >> no, it's apples and oranges. on the one hand, you're talking about as director mueller stated in his press statement, a concerted attack by military and intelligence elements of the russian federation. so that's just obviously unacceptable. the steele dossier, he was a foreign national to be sure who was hired by a group of americans, the democratic party. so that's a totally different situation. i just don't think -- i think it's apples and oranges. it's really not comparable. >> carrie, do you see it that way? >> i think in terms of what is going on in terms of the foreign intelligence operation, the activities that the russian operatives are doing is they are conducting espionage. if we try to apply the campaign finance laws, the question has become what is the actual help. so would it be putting out

trolls and the social media websites? would that constitute help? would putting a plant of an individual in a town hall meeting trying to ask a candidate a question, would that be an activity? would it be obviously something like hacking and providing stolen materials would be an activity that would be a violation. but what if they do it through a cut-through? what if they do it through a u.s. person and not a foreign national? there are so many different variations and things that a foreign intelligence service could come up with that would fall outside the scope of particular interpretations of the law means that it's not just about the legality. it's about whether or not campaigns and the u.s. public think that this is okay to do. and that's the point that we have to continue to emphasize. >> jim, what about the fact that the mueller team looked into what donald trump jr. did in terms of being open to get information to hillary clinton from people who said they were from the russian government, and the russian government was

supporting his father, and they declined to and they did not move forward with the prosecution. we obviously know, you know, the rules that they were operating under. but does that provide any guidance on how this would be handled? >> well, it provides some guidance -- i think so. it provides guidance on how they thought about it. clearly it fell within the scope of their investigation. it was a matter worth investigating. i think what they conclude at the end of the day is they simply couldn't obtain evidence to claim all the parts of the particular defense. especially this valuation of the thing of value that was provided to the campaign. and also the issues that i mentioned before about the intent. >> right. >> but i agree with carrie. look, they -- our adversaries, the russians in this kind of situation are very sophisticated and highly motivated, and they are very smart about what our laws are, and they're going to try to craft the operation of the future in 2020 in a way that

will avoid these particular problems if they possibly can. but they really don't care, honestly, about being caught, because they know it's going to be very difficult for the u.s. government to get its hands on these people and put them in court. >> yeah. >> a bunch of russians that the mueller team indicted, and it's unlikely that we're ever going to see them. that doesn't mean that the fbi and others shouldn't try to stop them and thwart them in whatever way they can, lawfully, of course. >> james baker and carrie cordero, there is a lot more to get. to sarah sander hasn't held a white house briefing in more than 90 days. she is leaving the building. not that anyone might notice, because we haven't had a press conference, like i said, in more than 94 days. [sfx: turntable - needle scratching record]

[music (plays throughout): lack of afro - recipe for love] ♪ whoaahoooo oo ♪ ♪ yeahhh aa aa aye ♪ i've got so much love to give ♪ ♪ i've got so much more to give, baby ♪ this is a moment you plan for. to start your retirement plan, find an advisor at massmutual.com [sfx: mnemonic]

is this ride safe? i assembled it myself last night. i think i did an ok job. just ok? what if something bad happens? we just move to the next town.

just ok is not ok. especially when it comes to your network. at&t is america's best wireless network according to america's biggest test. now with 5g evolution. the first step to 5g. more for your thing. that's our thing.

be go[ laughing ] gone. woo hoo. ♪ welcome to my house mmm, mmm, mmmmm. ball. ball. ball. awww, who's a good boy? it's me. me, me, me. yuck, that's gross. you got to get that under control. [ dogs howling ] seriously? embrace the mischief. say "get pets tickets" into your x1 voice remote to see it in theaters. >> sarah sanders did something highly unusual today. no, she didn't have a press conference or apologize for the lies she's told like the one

about countless fbi agents grateful for james comey ouster who are reaching out to her. no. the unusual thing she did today is exit this white house effective at the end of the month, without major scandal forcing her out. in fact, the president tweeted she is a very special person with extraordinary talents, even floating a gubernatorial run. when asked by reporters today if she regretted not holding more press conferences, she said no, i don't. i still contend we are the most accessible white house. she may be leaving, but she's still lying. here to discuss, cnn white house correspondent jim acosta. his new book "the enemy of the people" includes his dealings with sanders. also former senior adviser to president obama, and also cnn political commentator david axelrod and cnn political analyst gloria borger. so sarah sanders has been a frequent sparring partner of yours. a, were you surprised by this announcement, and what do you make of it? >> i think it's surprising that it came now. but, anderson, there were

rumblings that this was coming. i talked to a white house official earlier this afternoon who said listen, sarah sanders has been planning this for some time. she set this date a while ago. so this was not a huge surprise to people inside the white house. we saw sarah sanders talking to reporters just a short while ago. she said her immediate plans are to move back to arkansas. we saw the president say he hopes she runs for political office. she said she has no plans for that at this point, but she is not ruling it out. anderson, we've had two press secretaries so far, sean spicer and now sarah sanders. i think both have left a legacy of not being straight with the american people, and we have to hope not only as journalists, but as citizens that the third try is a charm. >> gloria, i would ask who is going to take over press briefings, but there hasn't been a press briefing in 94 days. >> 94 days. >> again, it's just remarkable. >> it is remarkable. and it almost doesn't matter who takes over sarah sanders' job or who goes before the podium, if anybody ever goes before the podium again, because this is a

president who believes that nobody can talk to the american people as well as he can. he doesn't trust anybody to do it, which is why you haven't seen sarah sanders out there very much. you've seen the president in front of his helicopter or on his way to andrews. >> that's not a press conference. >> no, no. but he thinks what? you get me. so isn't that better than getting somebody like sarah sanders. so he doesn't really understand the role of what the press secretary is supposed to be. the press secretary works for the government and the american people and not just donald trump. >> david, sarah sanders has been caught lying from the podium a number of times. she is in the mueller report admitting when she said that countless members of the fbi had called her, and another statement in that same genre. is that -- is that going to be her legacy, lying repeatedly for this president? it's certainly sean spicer's legacy. >> yeah. >> and i don't know what he is doing for a job, but i would find it hard to believe that a major corporation or, you know, group would have sarah sanders

as a spokesperson. >> so here's the problem. if you are the spokesperson for a habitual liar, it's like being fire marshall for a pyromaniac. it's not going to end well for you. and the fact of the matter is that i thought that she was a spectacular surrogate for donald trump in the campaign, but in this job, she was called upon to choose between her fidelity to trump and her fidelity to the truth, and she chose trump. that actually may help her in her republican primary in arkansas, but as far as her legacy goes, her legacy has been described here. her legacy is one of defending the indefensible and not being truthful with the american people. >> jim, i want to play an exchange between you and sarah sanders. i think it's back from august of 2018. >> you did not say in the course of those remarks that you just made that the press is not the enemy of the people. are we to take it from what you just said, we all get put through the ringer, we all get

put in the meat grinder in this town, and you're no exception. but for the sake of this room, the people who are in this room, this democracy, this country, all the people around the world are watching what you're saying, sarah, and the white house for the united states of america, the president of the united states should not refer to us as the enemy of the people. his own daughter acknowledges that. and all i'm asking you to do, sarah, is to acknowledge that right now and right here. >> i appreciate your passion. i share it. i have addressed this question. i have addressed my personal feelings. i'm here to speak on behalf of the president. he's made his comments clear. >> it seems at some point she forgot the press part of her title of press secretary. >> yeah. that's right, anderson. i think she really acted as another employee of the trump organization. and as david and gloria were just saying a few moments ago, when you work as press secretary, you work on behalf of the american taxpayers. and we should not be in the business -- i recently put out a book about this. we should not be in the business

of having the united states government referring to journalists or any segment of the population as the enemy of the people. i thought that was a critical moment. sarah had a moment there where she could have said listen, i think i agree with what ivanka trump says when she said no, i don't think the press is the enemy of the people. kellyanne conway recently told me that she disagrees with that assessment too. but when sarah had that opportunity to disagree with what is really a repugnant thing to say about the press, i think she fell short of her duty to the american people, and it's going to be part of her legacy. i think it's a cautionary tale for people who go to work for this president. do you get sucked into the vortex? do you get sucked into the black hole, or are you going to work on behalf of the american people. >> gloria, who gets out of the trump white house alive with their reputation intact? >> you tell me. it's very hard to see. david was mentioning sean spicer, for example. she was saying -- >> i think he is a special correspondent for extra. >> i think so, i think so. >> a nightmare sweat dream i

had. >> and she said, you know, was telling colleagues that she didn't just want to be an analyst on television. well, i think she would have a very difficult time. maybe on fox she could be an analyst. but i think it would be very difficult for her. >> david, why does it -- look, i'm not trying to make the media to be so important. but why does it matter that the white house no longer has press briefings to inform the american people and actually answer direct questions in-depth about their policies? why should that matter? >> let me just say i don't think any press secretary or any president necessarily enjoys the exercise most of the time because the job of the media is to scrutinize government and shine a bright light in dark corners, and they don't want to answer those questions at time. but most presidents and most press secretaries feel it's part of the obligation of their job. the fact that she is going home to arkansas is very telling. her father was the governor of arkansas.

donald trump is very popular with republicans in arkansas. republicans do well in arkansas. and my guess is that she will end up somewhere in politics in the state of arkansas where she won't pay a big penalty for having been donald trump's press secretary. >> it was a dumb question i asked earlier, what kind of job can you get as a spokesperson after lying. you can get a job in politics. >> of course. >> thanks very much. up next, federal watchdog agency recommend president trump fire kellyanne conway. ling. we like that! by the way, these chairs are ours. everyone is already sitting. by the way, these chairs are ours. you don't always use your smartphone for directions... are we there yet? hey guys, up there. ...or to laugh out loud.

♪ but when it matters most, you count on tracfone to keep you connected for less. ♪ our smartphone plan gives you talk, text and data with unlimited carryover starting at $15 a month, no contract. all with nationwide 4g lte coverage. get top smartphones or bring your own phone. tracfone. for moments that matter. welcome to our lounge. enjoy your stay. thanks very much. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ find calm in over 1,000 airport lounges worldwide. it's another way we've got your back. the business platinum card from american express. don't do business without it.

congressman elijah cummings wants kellyanne conway to appear before his oversight committee after a watchdog agency today recommended president trump fire her. the office of special counsel, no relation to bob mueller, says that conway has repeatedly violated a law known as the hatch act which precludes federal workers from preaching politics on company time. this is what she said to a reporter just a few weeks ago when asked about at least one of the alleged violations. >> the office of special counsel which says that you -- official government business. >> listen -- >> on the special election. >> i'm sorry. are you talking about something from a year and a half ago? if you're trying to silence me through the hatch act, it's not going to work. >> i'm not trying to silence

you. the office of special counsel said you violated it. >> let me know when the jail sentence starts. >> the white house calls today's report deeply flawed and objects on a number of grounds, including a violation of conway's free speech rights. joining me is former special adviser to president obama, van jones, the white house council's office under president obama, daniel jacobson. kellyanne conway dismisses this entire line of questioning over the hatch act, blah, blah, blah, let me know when the sentence begins. does she have anything to worry about? >> she is making the joke that there is no criminal -- there is no penalty, that you don't go to jail for violating the hatch act. the problem is i think we now are in a world where we have to remind people why we pass these laws. we used to say listen, you break the law, that's bad. everybody gets it. now it's break the law, i don't really care. why do we care about this? we do not want people who have

the imprimatur of the u.s. government who are being paid by taxpayers to do the people's business to abuse that office, who abuse that opportunity, to abuse that platform to play petty politics to crap on other politicians, to try to put the opposition party in the gutter. that's what happens in countries that we look down on and say you guys need to have better democratic norms. government officials shouldn't be playing politics. and yet in the hatch act enshrines that. kellyanne conway doesn't seem to respect that particular law, that particular idea. there is no criminal penalty, so she may think she can get away with it. but listen, this is not just rules for rule's sake, some minor stuff that doesn't matter. it really does matter. if somebody is standing up representing the government, representing the white house, standing in front of the white house, wearing that honor, they should be doing the people's business, not the party's business, not the politicians' business. and the hatch act is the way we encourage people to do the right thing. i think kellyanne conway, who by the way has done a great job on

opioids and a bunch of other stuff she doesn't get credit for would do better by her country better by her party and her career to follow the rules and stick with stuff she is supposed to be doing which is moving forward an agenda for the american people. >> the white house is deeply flawed and violated conway's right to free speech and due process. are they right? >> no. the hatch act is a law that has been around for decades, and the supreme court has said and other courts have reaffirmed that government employees continue to have first amendment rights. but despite that, there are very legitimate, compelling reasons. some of the reasons that van gave as to why we would want to limit the ability of employees who are being paid with taxpayer money to advocate for or against a candidate for political office. so that sort of argument has been rejected by the supreme court and other courts going back decades. >> van, i talked to jen psaki

about this before, and if you work in the white house, and she worked in the white house under obama, you're well aware of the rules regarding this, and you take great care not to violate them. this is not some arcane guideline that is found centuries old text somewhere in a library. >> i don't know about you, but the first two days when you work in the white house, they put you in a room with a whole bunch of lawyers and government officials, and you literally spend two whole days saying if you do this, you go to jail. if you do this, you go to jail. you do this, you're breaking the law. by the time you leave, you're i don't know if i want this job. there are so many ways for me to get in trouble. and then you've got the ethics people all over you. so this is not an accident. if she is doing this, she is doing it consciously and knowingly. like i said, she actually is doing stuff that she never gets praise for on opioids and other stuff. i think when you break the rules, we've got to focus on that. just follow the rules like all of the rest of news the white house. you can still get your guy re-elected, but you don't have to do it this way. >> the reality is the only guy who decides what happens to kellyanne conway is the president of the united states

in this case. >> yeah, i think it's interesting and important to clarify. the office of special counsel for career employees, regular career employees, they have authority to institute disciplinary action themselves, and they even said in their report today that if ms. conway was any other regular career employee, they would implement disciplinary action and recommend her termination. because she's a political appointee to the white house all they can do is recommend to the president that he take disciplinary action and they obviously recommend he take the most extreme disciplinary action possible. >> i doubt that's going to happen. >> i doubt it also. >> a programing note this sunday at nine p.m., don't miss the redemption project with van jones. he travels to indiana to meet two brothers whose father was shot and killed when he tried to stop a robbery. up next, nancy pelosi responds to president trump's blistering attack against her on the sacred ground in normandy.

♪ this is my mom's house this place is home. a lot of firsts happened here... first kiss, first cigarette. never saw it as a problem... but when i was younger... 2 cigarettes, 3 cigarettes it wasn't; it wasn't a habit... my mom - she was always like "you need to do something, you need to get rid of them." that was her thing. as time went on, as smoking started falling out of fashion in society and rules started changing. gave the juul a real chance and... found that i liked it. found that it really works. the switch was easy. it was a no brainer really. but now that i look at people who smoke i am like "dude really?! you still doing that?" you know there's an alternative to that right?

you don't have to do that. the person that i like to think that i am is because of her. this came from her... really. i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. from whole blendsare, blended with purpose, for hair that hates humidity with rich coconut oil, a legendary smoother, and cocoa butter known to soften as a whole blend, it nourishes for 24-hour frizz control blended makes us better. whole blends. by garnier, naturally! -excuse me. uh... do you mind...being a mo-tour? -what could be better than being a mo-tour? the real question is...

do you mind not being a mo-tour? -i do. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive.

speaker nancy pelosi not mincing words tonight as she responds to president trump's criticism of her at normandy. they were both overseas in france.

mash b -- marking d day. at one point the president did lash out at speaker pelosi calling her a nasty, vindictive horrible person for telling lawmakers she wanted him to go to prison. tonight in an interview at the counsel on foreign relations here in new york, speaker pelosi said it was beyond inappropriate what he said. she also said this. >> we were right there at normandy with the tomb stones behind us and i wasn't going to engage in it. i never did anywhere. when he then came on tv later in front of the same tombstones and started saying all of this stuff it was so beyond inappropriate i felt sorry for him. >> beyond inappropriate. i felt sor for sorry for him. chris cuomo joins me now. tough words from nancy pelosi. it's also interesting on this day that sarah sanders is leaving. i don't know what hand she had

in setting up that interview with tombstones in the background knowing the president would say what he was going to say. >> well, that's a pretty tough job. you don't really know when he's going to do what he's going to do and even why. i think, look, i think the puzzle for the democrats is how do you balance calling out what you must, something we struggle with also from time to time. what do you expose? what do you ignore? and then for the democrats, how do they motivate their understanding of this president into the agenda? for biden you hear him say, he's a threat to national security. that's what you're hearing democrats say about this president. he's a threat to the country and a threat to national security. is that sellable with the american people. nancy pelosi is going the route of i feel sorry for him. i wonder if she does. i don't think any of them actually feel sorry for him but what they should feel sorry for is the complete inaction this dynamic yielded. >> what are you covering tonight? >> we have andrew mccabe.

the man who took over for jim comey. what does he think of the president's words? what does he think about investigating the investigators? let's dig into a little bit about what he'll reveal about the motivations of people at that time and here's a provocative question. if, god forbid, russia were successful in interfering again and they seem to help the trump campaign, would this d.o.j., would this a.g. even open an investigation? what does mccabe think about that? we'll ask him. >> it is an interesting question. we'll see you about 8 minutes from now. breaking news, new details that could shed light on what's behind a burning tanker in one of the world's most dangerous hotspots. [music playing] (michelle) i know what it's like to be in a financially struggling family. we had a lot of leftovers...[chuckles] i couldn't have asked for better parents, but like most people they didn't have anyone to teach them the best financial habits. so we changed that. as a financial health coach, i help people every day. i try to put myself in their shoes from my own experience. i connect to them because i've been there.

helping families like mine save a little money changes everything. this is personalized guidance. this is wells fargo.

♪ (music plays throughout♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century.

they're america's bpursuing life-changing cures. in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.

>> a tense con frons confrontation between u.s. and iran. the question were they attacked and if so, by whom? mike pompeo said the iranian are to blame. u.s. officials say there's new video and photos which we have yet to either see or verify that show an iranian naval vessel removing an unexploded mine attached to the hull of one of the tankers. we have not yet seen that video so we can't confirm it. joining me now. retired naval officer. commander in 200 when it was bombed in al qaeda. in yemen. killing 17 sailors. commander, good to have you on the program. we haven't independently seen this video but if it's true,

then an iranian navy boat removed an unexploded mine from a tanker, how do you interrupt that? >> if we have the video and i'm sure that will come out overtime once the intelligence community reviews and declassifies it and we can put it out, it's going to clearly show there's some action by the iranian government or their proxy to interfere with the free flow of shipping and oil going in and out of the middle east and this is what i said before is that we need to find proof and share it with the world, just like we did back in the late 1980s when the tanker wars were going on. >> if they are removing an unexploded mine from a japanese chemical tanker, why would that be? >> there would be only one reason. they put it there. we have to look at it. this maybe half of the coin. we may need to look at okay, these boats, where did they come from? what path did they follow? do we have any other overhead

imagery to determine how they put the mines into place? how did they get that close to do it? or what mechanics did they follow? there's still a lot for the intelligence community to still do here. we want to make sure that we put the pieces together properly because if we're going to blame iran, we need to make sure that we have rock solid evidence that the international community can see and that they can follow the path from the time the iranian government thought of it to the time that they installed it to when now we show them removing it. >> there's something that i'm missing it. why would they remove it because they installed it in the first place? because -- >> proof. if you get a hold of that, when you look at the explosive foreign projectiles showing up in iraq and afghanistan that have the iranian markings. you're talking to the soldiers that served over there. they knew they came from iran. now we have a mine and we can

prove it came from iran. that's also going to be part of the puzzle as well. >> what are the similarities between the way they were damaged and the way the other four have been? >> i have not been able to find out exactly the mechanics of the explosives that were used and the similarities but when you look at the pictures we have seen so far, how it was clearly an external explosion because all the medal was shoved inward. similar to what happened on my ship. you could tell they were external to the ship. some type of explosive device had to be placed there or something had to go next to it. it could have been a mine because now that we're starting to see these mines that have been attached and detonated in one case and another one removed off the same ship, that's giving us some of the indication of what they're doing and how they're doing about interfering with these ships and causing these explosions. >> only about 30 seconds left but these are similar, the situations in the gulf in the 1980s. >> absolutely. we had to put ships in and out because of the on going iran and

iraq war. they were mining the shipping lanes coming all the way down to the straight. we knew the iranians were doing it and the international community felt they were doing it but it wasn't until the u.s. was able to have overhead cameras. i believe it was on a helicopter actually showing an iranian boat putting those mines into the water that we then had the proof that we took to the united nations that caused us to take action. >> commander, appreciate talking to you. thank you. i want to hand it over to chris for cuomo primetime. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time". the president opened the door for russia to mess with our next election and that gives our first guest a bad case of deja vu. he's andrew mccabe. he took over for the fbi when comey was fired. he launched the instruction and counter intelligence investigations into the president. remember why? fearing he could be a russian asset. how does he weigh the