good evening. chris cuomo is off tonight. we have late breaking news out of baghdad on the report of killing the iranian general. he was killed, we understand, in a strike in baghdad airport. this is a video of the explosions that we just got. it's a very big deal, particularly in the region. nobody has claimed responsibility or taken responsibility for the attack at this point. the demise of him removes a major troubling figure from the scene from the u.s. standpoint and may set off a fire storm in

and of itself. we've got live reporting on this just ahead. we begin with new reporting on the unredacted comments on administration emails on ukraine, what they say and how they might play in the impeachment battle. this is what the emails, this is what they looked like after the justice department got done with them and released them to the public. line after line of blacked out redactions. now, the law and security organization called just security, they have gotten a look at the unredacted versions of those emails. and what they have learned and have talked about is striking. warning, for one from the pentagon that the hold on military aid to ukraine could be illegal. the pentagon was warning the white house about that. the battle over the white house budget's office talking points are a cover story to kind of try to explain what happened. plus an official from the office of management and budget making it clear the order to keep the freeze in place came directly

from president donald trump. quoting from just security's reporting on exchange michael duffey and the acting pentagon comptroller, after the meeting when the meeting took place, clear from potus to hold, meaning there was clear direction from president of the united states to hold the aid. more now on the story and the white house reaction from cnn kaitlan collins who joins us now. so, has the president or white house had response so far to the unredacted emails? >> no, they haven't said much. with e know in the past the white house argued that as far as it comes to the redactions they feel they've got a lot of leeway here. you're hearing criticism from democrats about the trump administration redacting this amid the over site with the impeachment inquiry. you can really see just how dead set the president was on withholding this aid and it only backs up the testimony we heard from multiple fushls and from

our own reporting about how there were official who is went to the president trying to get him to release aid saying it wasn't in the country's interest to withhold it. you can see from the simple email from the budget official to the pentagon official saying it's clear that the president is the one who wanted this aid to be frozen. >> and do we know that the president has been having meetings about the impeachment trial while he's at mar-a-lago? >> yeah, he has. the question is what decisions are they making. before the president traveling here, we were told they had pretty big decisions to make when it comes to defense, who's going to be representing the president, who's going to be saying what at the trial. and those are the questions that still remain about what exactly is going to be, has it been locked down? and we know the president has been at times airing his grievances about the impeachment trial and other times people have said he's in a pretty good mood while he's here because he's golfing, dining with old friends, meeting with a lot of people he typically wouldn't be able to see and interact with on a daily basis including allen

ders wits, rudy giuliani, trey gowdy. a lot of influence on the president has he's been down here. >> let's get the perspective from michael carpenter, former pentagon director, biden center for diplomacy and global engagement. you oversaw the ukraine security assistance initiative when you were at the pentagon. what was going on here? now that we've seen these unredacted emails, thanks to just security, what's going on here? because it certainly seems like the pentagon is raising a lot of red flags and then toward the end of this suddenly, you know, a white house official tries to throw a pentagon official under the bus saying essentially no one can blame the white house for this hold up because you guys didn't prepare well enough. >> well, anderson, a couple of things jump out at you when you read these emails. first is that throughout all the months of back and forth between omb, the office of management and budget, and the pentagon

over this frozen military aid, there is never a coherent rationale articulated for why the aid is being frozen. in fact during this two months process, you have a deputy small group meeting which is a meeting of the deputy heads of the various national security agencies that deliberate the freeze and they all decide unanimously that the aid should move forward. subsequent to that, at the end of august you have a meeting between secretary of state pompeo, secretary of defense esper, john bolton, the national security adviser, and president trump in the oval office where the other three gentleman try to convince the president to release the freeze and release the aid to ukraine. he will not do that at that point in time. and so there is never a coherent rationale. the other thing that jumps out at you is that the pentagon is worried sick that they're going to be left holding the bag for what is essentially an illegal action under the impoundment control act. in other words, moneys have been

obligated -- sorry, authorized by congress for this security assistance to be obligated. and the pentagon wants to obligate it. they want to send the aid to ukraine, but they can't. finally the last thing, anderson is what you pointed out at the outset, that there is very clear direction from the president. everybody knows that that's involved in this process, that the president wanted this aid frozen. >> so, what's so fascinating is we've heard republicans in congress say time and time again that this was being held up for understandable concern out of the president's deep love of not corrupt places and his concern about corruption and they were going to review it and he got satisfied with the answers and he moved on. we know that's not true. we know that the only reason the aid was released was it was going public because of the whistleblower. even if that had been true, there was no evidence there was any kind of actual review by the president's people on corruption in ukraine. i mean, they could have -- they

didn't even bother have to a cover like a fake, you know, review done. they could have had an intern, you know, pull together just a random assortment of reviews of corrupt people in ukraine and put it together and they could show that and say -- but they haven't even done that. >> correct. >> there's no evidence. >> there could have been a semblance oof a process to give legitimacy to the supposed concerns from the white house about corruption in ukraine. but anderson, the other reason that is blatantly false is because the ent gone is required per the initiative to certify that the funds being spent in ukraine are being spent properly on equipment that's needed by ukrainian forces and that there is -- that any corruption-related concerns with regards to military assistance are being addressed or are being met. and the pentagon made that certification back in june well before the aid was frozen. and so there was simply no grounds for having any sort of

corruption-related review. >> yeah. and of course the u.s. embassy, their actual policy to ukraine was to fight corruption. so, it just -- it's amazing all the way around. michael carpenter, i appreciate you being on. >> my pleasure. >> senate minority leader chuck schumer tweeted senator mcconnell, this evidence raises questions that can only be answered by having key officials testify under oath in a senate trial. joining us is hawaii senator and judiciary committee member senator hirono. do you agree these emails are devastating blow to mcconnell's push to have a trial without the documents and witnesses the democrats requested. >> they corroborate what's been testified to by the witnesses, that the president wanted the aid to be frozen. and then these unredacted emails just verify that. but we all know that the

president has been stonewalling this whole process from the word go, and he has produced -- i don't know that he's produced a single relevant document. and he certainly hasn't made his witnesses available at all. >> i mean, could there be in your opinion any kind of legitimate national security reason for the administration to even redact the things they redacted from the documents? it's not about classified information about ukraine or the united states. it's essentially inter-office blaming and interof had office -- >> yes. >> the pentagon pointing out we're concerned what you're doing is illegal essential. >> it puts the responsibility on the president that he shook down the president of another country for his own political ends and basically compromised our national security. so, it points the finger where the finger belongs, on the president. and that's why they don't want any of this kind of information to come out.

and yet they trickle out. you know, truth somehow wills out no thanks to either mitch mcconnell or the president. >> yeah, what a difference it would make if you and other senators or if the folks in the house who were investigating this had actually had access to what i'm guessing are hundreds of thousands of documents. >> yes, mm-hm, that's right. and i think they would have called not just mulvaney and bolton but the person at omb who had first hand knowledge of why the aid was withheld. this is all par for the course. it's the president doing everything he can to prevent the truth from coming out and that truth is he's responsible for this aid not to be given out and it's illegal and these are impeachable offenses. as i've said anderson, the senate trial is going to be the opportunity for the president to

mount his defense. and we don't know what mulvaney or bolton will say. so, in our calling for these two people to testify because they were right there when all this was happening, we don't know what they're going to say. they can come forward and exonerate the president, but the president doesn't want them to come forward. so, we are where we are. >> where are we? you know the senate better than anybody. do you think that this will actually -- that there will be a trial? >> i don't know how mitch mcconnell is going to not have a trial. i don't think that nancy pelosi is going to withhold the impeachment articles. but let's face it. there are all kinds of on fis cations going on, all kinds of distractions. my expectation is there will be a trial. there probably won't be if mitch has his way the kind of fair trial that we should be having and that the american people want with witnesses and relevant

do documents. if mitch has his way, we will have a trial and it will not be the kind of fair trial. so, he's taking his marching orders from the president as he basically always does in these instances. >> so, democrats only need four republicans to side with them with had it comes to what the senate trial will look like -- >> yes. >> -- whether or not there will be witnesses called. have you heard any appetite from moderate republicans if they will side with democrats on this? >> we know we've heard susan collins, lisa murkowski. we've heard mitt romney express concerns. but expressing concerns does not mean they're going to vote with us in insisting that witnesses be called and documents be produced. so, anybody can express all kind o s of concerns but big deal if they support mitch and what he wants to do which is to not have the fair trial we want. so, i think the bottom line is that if we proceed in this

fashion the way that mitch and the president wants, then i guess we're left with the president saying i did it, so what. that is the mulvaney excuse and explanation, get over it. this is nothing to get over. so, we need to do everything we can to bring truth to light. and thank goodness that this redacted evidence is yet another, in my view, evidence of the president's wrong doing. >> senator hirono, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. >> up next, an update on the breaking news, the killing of a top iranian general, late word on who may be responsible and what could be repercussions in the wake of it. we'll have live reporting from baghdad and the pentagon as well as perspective from somebody who knows more about this than anybody we know. that and more with we continue. fall back!

you have a brother in the second battalion? they're walking into a trap. your orders are to deliver a message calling off tomorrow morning's attack. ♪ if you fail, we will lose sixteen hundred men. if we're not clever about this, no one will get to your brother. i will. $12.99 all you can eat ♪ now with boneless wings. only at applebee's. my grandfather had an but ancestry showed me so much more than i could have imagined. my grandfather was born in a shack in pennsylvania,

his father was a miner, they were immigrants from italy and somewhere along the way that man changed his name and transformed himself into a successful mid-century american man. he had a whole life that i didn't know anything about. he was just my beloved grandpa. bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com wheyou want relief... fast. only thermacare ultra pain relieving cream has 4 active ingredients to fight pain 4 different ways. get powerful relief today, with thermacare. until i found out what itst it actually was.ed me. dust mite droppings!

eeeeeww! dead skin cells! gross! so now, i grab my swiffer sweeper and heavy-duty dusters. duster extends to three feet to get all that gross stuff gotcha! and for that nasty dust on my floors, my sweeper's on it. the textured cloths grab and hold dirt and hair no matter where dust bunnies hide. no more heebie jeebies. phew. glad i stopped cleaning and started swiffering.

ago. we have a video of explosions at baghdad airport. this was the videoed reporting killing of one of the top milita military leaders in the u.s., believed for much of the paramilitary in the region. the commander of the quds force qassim soleimani as well as iraqi militia commander were killed. arwa, we were talking about the -- what seemed to be air strikes or at least the explosions. didn't know at the siem, soleimani was involved or

others. explain what you know and the importance of it. >> first of all, anderson, we are arguably about to enter into uncharted territory. the significance of the death of qassim soleimani given who he was to iran and who he was to any number of iranian proxies throughout the entire region, given how revered he was inside and outside of iran by his men in the battle and given the fact that he is the commander of the quds force, this shadowy elite force that is specifically tasked with unconventional warfare, this is going to push this region into a potential conflict that is going to be very, very difficult to get out of without a lot of bloodshed.

what we know right now is that a couple of hours ago there were initially reports of rockets being fired in vicinity of baghdad international airport. we initially received reports that a senior figure within the popular mobilization force -- this is a branch actually of the iraqi security forces, but it's a paramilitary force that is mostly made up of different groups of shia militias, the vast majority are backed by iran. we initially received information that it was a senior leader within this paramilitary force, the head of their protocol division who had been targeted. we then later heard first on iraqi state television and then the pmf coming out saying yes, qassim soleimani had been killed along with the head of

hezbollah. that is that same group that was targeted by the u.s. in sunday's air strike. the pmf that i'm talking about is the same group that was out in front of the u.s. embassy that was attempting to breech t the walls of the u.s. embassy. this is not only just going to shake iraq and potentially escalate things here inside iraq for the united states, but the iranian regime and its proxies and the influence of the quds force, that extends well outside of iraq. it is hard to imagine a scenario where iran does not respond to this. add to all of this, anderson, the pmf is blaming the united states for this strike, for what they're calling an assassination. we do not have confirmation from the americans, but just the

perception that it was america, that in and of itself is going to have a very, very devastating effect. >> arwa damon, thank you. we'll continue to check in with you. joining me now is dexter, who profiled with the new yorker. he was also based in iraq for 3 1/2 years while reporting for the "new york times." also with max boot. back with us this hour, fareed zakaria here on cnn. first of all, just your reaction. >> it's huge if it's true. qassim soleimani has been the most important operative in the middle east for the last 30 years. he's the most important. absolutely. he's the architect of the entire iranian regional strategy to set up clients in lebanon, hezbollah, to prop up the al saud regime, to take control of iraq and to do what he's been doing in yemen. he's the architect for that.

there's no one more important than him. he is literally drowning in the blood of the people that he's killed including hundreds of american soldiers who he -- >> he's responsible for the deaths of hundreds -- >> hundreds of american soldiers. he oversaw these militias like hezbollah who were iranian clients armed, trained, directed by iran. they're not just iranian backed and iranian influenced, they are iranian creations. and during the iraq war ten years ago, they were killing american soldiers at will. they were behind ied attacks that were wreaking havoc on american soldiers. so, this is a huge event. you know, the question is what happens now? i think the iranians are going to have to respond. and all bets are off. >> and there's many possible ways for them to respond in a lot of different places. >> yeah, they're very sophisticated. they're cool customers. they're going to do it. it's their neighborhood. they'll do it when they want and they'll do it how they want.

but things could get mighty dangerous very fast. >> max boot. >> well, dexter obviously gives a very good overvau of who general soleimani was, and i think based on his track record i would say there was no question about the justice of killing him. he was a very, very bad guy who as dexter said has the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on his hands, especially in syria where he's masterminded the genocidal strategy of the assad regime but also responsible for the death of american soldiers. he's inserted misery in lebanon and yemen as well. but the question is was this a wise move and is the trump administration ready for this escalating crisis with iran. leaving aside the justice of the issue, the question is was it a wise thing to do. we'll find out in the next few days. but given how haphazard the national security policy making is in this administration, you

have to wonder have they actually thought through all the rep ugs cans of what is a very major move. >> to that end, fareed, for people who have not been following the developments in iraq, particularly for the last couple o couple of years, can you just explain -- and i know it's incredibly complicated which we've learned time and time again. but this was a regime can had the united states backed and supported and a lot of americans died fighting to bring democracy there and fighting to attack forces there. how sit that a guy like soleimani is moving around freely in syria and iraq and all through the region, and this regime which we have backed with trillions of dollars and a lot of american blood is now having this guy freely roam around with all these militias?

even in the existence of all these militias i think it's confusing to a lot of people. >> the thing to remember was iraq was run by saddam hussein. wu once the americans liberated iraq, it emerged which is a shia majority country. the shia have a historical religious affiliation with iran that also most shia leaders had been backed by the iranians for years because they were in exile, persecuted by saddam hussein. what happened is iraq became a cockpit where america and iran battled for influence. so, the iraqi government, the democratic government in iraq that we supported enormously was also being supported by iran enormously. the two sponsors of the new iraqi government have been the united states and iran. and every iraqi diplomat, every

politicians has had to juggle this reality. so, they've kept the iranians happy while keeping the americans -- this blows the lid off that. i think that probably the greatest single vulnerability here is that iraq could explode into a civil war because the iraqi politicians have been handling exactly the dilemma you described. they've got to be nice to the iranians because they're next door and have all these shia ties. they've got to be nice to the americans because the americans have provided them with support and military assistance. now you're going to be forced to choose and it's going to reignite the iraqi civil war. and again back to max point, i think the question we all have is the administration seems to be going down a path of assassinating this crucial figure, you know, who again entirely justified in terms of the morality. but we are essentially entering into a war, a proxy -- a shadow

by war with iran, sacrificing the stability of iraq in a very volatile place. yemen is already in a civil war. syria is already in awe civil war. do we know what we're doing? why are we doing this? this was a president who wanted to get us out of the middle east. >> dexter. >> it's interesting. the bush administration had a chance to kill soleimani in 2006. they were hunting a guy who was the military commander of hezbollah, really, really bad guy. the cia eventually got him, killed him. they got a chance at one point. they found him and soleimani was with him and they had to think about it. president bush said it was too much. >> too much because it would be too destabilizing. >> i think legal reasons. there wasn't authorization to do that. we had the chance to do that and we didn't take it. there was another moment in kurt

stan when general mccrystal and a bunch of others thought they had him and just missed him. but this is -- it's kind of hard to overstate how potentially game-changing this whole thing -- >> game changing, the fault lines are where? >> look, soleimani has spent the last 30 years building this sphere of influence in the middle east for iran, basically, and that's hezbollah and lebanon, assad and syria, and the shiite majority in iraq. that's been his entire project. this, we've taken a hammer and smashed that. they're going to -- the iranians are going to have to respond. the white house needs to be thinking about how we're going to respond to their response because this thing could take off really fast. >> we're going to take a quick break. we're going to have more next including the late reporting. we'll be right back. [sneeze and sniffles] are you ok? yah, it's just a cold.

it's not just a cold if you have high blood pressure. most cold medicines may raise blood pressure. coricidin hbp is the... ...#1 brand that gives... powerful cold relief without raising your blood pressure. through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from finding out what's selling best... to managing your fleet... to collaborating remotely with your teams. giving you a nice big edge over your competition. that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence.

i feelbusiness cards...new logo...outdoor sign.

you always get me. now, get free 1 hour in-store pick up... ...at office depot officemax and officedepot.com. same time next week. yes!

we're joined tonight by t reports of the killing of a

terrorist, iranian general qassim soleimani, commander of the quds forces, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of american troops in iraq and syria, responsible for deaths of hundreds of thousands in the region. is the pentagon saying anything officially on this or is anybody claiming responsibility. >> no claims of responsibility yet. the pentagon is being incredibly tight lipped. we're hearing nothing from the department of defense. we've reached out to the u.s. military in iraq. we've heard nothing back. they're being more tight lipped than usual. so it is sparking a lot of speculation about whether or not the u.s. was involved, how much the u.s. knew about this situation. earlier today we heard from the secretary of defense, mark esper, who ramped up the rhetoric against iran and the iranian revolution and guard core saying that the u.s. could

take preemptive action against the group if they felt threatened. we haven't heard anything but heard strong rhetoric about what the u.s. was going to do to counter the threat from iran and proxies. general soleimani kind of oversaw all the linked militias and proxy forces, many of which have attacked u.s. troops. in fact secretary esper blamed one of those groups that general soleimani helped oversee the death of an american contractor on friday, something that sparked the air strikes on friday. we have heard nothing officially about this yet but there has been increased willingness to talk about the u.s.'s desire to push back against iran in iraq. >> we'll monitor any word from the the pentagon. it is -- i guess is question is what happens now if -- what does the iraqi regime do?

you were talking before about the iraqi regime walking the line between the united states and iran. there's natural affinity for fellow shiites to be linked to iran. the u.s. doesn't have the presence it was in that country. there's a lot of animosity in many quarters there. >> things had been seeming to be moving a few months ago toward a more kind of towards a approach. i talked to iraqi officials a couple months ago. they said we just want the americans to get on a little better with the iranians. we're otherwise caught in the middle. i was talking to saudi officials who were talking about how the yemen civil war might be, you know, there might be a negotiated settlement here. so, there were signs that syria sadly after enormous and barbaric killing, but there is an element of stability there. but we have now ratcheted it all up. we have decided we're going to

escalate against iran, and they have been -- you know, they're in a box. so, they started lashing out. they shot down an american drone. they attacked saudi oil facilities. they harassed tankers, and now this. so, we're clearly seeing things ratchet up. so, the iraqi government is going to have to try to figure out what to do. but every country in the region is going to have to figure out. the saudis, for example, while the arch enmu of iran were very careful after the iranian strikes on oil facilities. they didn't make a big deal about it. they didn't retaliate. they tossed it over to the un. they didn't even formally accuse saudi arabia in the un. so, everyone had been trying to dial this down. think about it. the middle east is volatile enough. you've got syria in total chaos, civil war, 5 million refugees, half a million people at least killed. you have yemen which is the world's worst humanitarian

crisis. you have iraq fragile. >> time and time again, i remember george w. bush running on not wanting to get involved overseas in foreign wars and be the world's policemen. and even while in iraq and afghanistan, you know, saying over and over we're not nation building. clearly we knew it then they were nation building. we said it then. and subsequently, you know, reports that have come out show clearly we were nation building. presidents get sucked into foreign policy crises that they have no desire to get in and yet they still often get sucked sbie into it. >> and this is reflecting the contradictions of the foreign policy which can be described as bellicose isolationism. he keeps talking about wanting to pull out of the middle east but also wanting to strike back and be a counterpuncher. he's making threats and issuing

ultimatums. this is a crisis president trump has created between the u.s. and iran. relations that actually came down quite a bit since president obama concluded the deal. even when the iranians were complying with the deal, president trump decided to blow up the deal and imposed unilateral economic sanctions on iran this year which have been expected. the iranians view it as the u.s. waging economic warfare on them and they need to strike back. that's why you're seeing attacks on tankers, facilities, attacks on various targets throughout the region. and trump is escalating further. and again, perfectly justified to kill general qassim soleimani, but does trump have an end game here? does he know what the next step is going to be? if the iranians retaliate, what do we do next? >> also the question is odoes

the u.s. have the capabilities diplomatically, the personnel diplomatically -- we heard during testimony from state department officials about it being hollowed out from the inside. mick mulvaney, i didn't even know he was acting management of budget. there's a lot of people doing double duty and acting, literally acting secretaries. >> can we run a war right now? >> yeah, or execute other levels of foreign policy that are not related. obviously the military is related to do stuff, but is there -- folks in the military will often say, look, they want diplomats because diplomats help -- they help you not get into the pointy end of the sphere. >> the thing that the curiosity of the trump administration has always been particularly with iran is that it's schizophrenic. on one hand they walked away from the iranian nuclear agreement and they speak in a

bellicose way. but trump's never -- he's always walked away from the moment. and this is the moment he didn't walk away. but they've never -- >> we can't get behind it zblco behind it. >> the policy of the trump administration is regime change. make no mistake about it. they believe they can -- i mean i've talked to people in the white house about it. they believe they can topple the regime with the sanctions. and so it's very easy to imagine if, in fact, the united states did this, they thought well all it needs is a spark to take them down. >> and this is the point you made about the war. the part about this that's particularly complicated is the u.s. military, if you think back over the last 30, 40 years, the u.s. military is good at simple defined objectives because it has incredible fire power, incredible capacity. what it's not good at is the

shadowy wars trying to deal with paramilitary forces mixed in with the civilian population. >> vietnam. >> vietnam, exactly. it always leaves americans puzzled like we're the richest country in the world, greatest army in the world. lyndon johnson used to tell his pentagon people why are a bunch of bandits and knights in pajamas beating us? the danger here is getting sucked into a war on iran's terrain and iran's terms, and did we really want this? >> thank you all. appreciate it. great to have you here. new details from the white house. also presidential tweet that's raising all kinds of questions. and shortly we are expecting a statement from the pentagon about the situation that just occurred. a busy night. we'll be right back. what'd we decide on the flyers again?

uh, "fifteen minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance." i think we're gonna swap over to "over seventy-five years of savings and service." what, we're just gonna swap over? yep. pump the breaks on this, swap it over to that. pump the breaks, and, uh, swap over? that's right. instead of all this that i've already-? yeah. what are we gonna do with these? keep it at your desk, and save it for next time. geico. over 75 years of savings and service.

kper expecting a statement from the pentagon any moment now about the killing of an iranian general. the president has just weighed in on something, we don't know if it's on this. katelyn, have we heard anything from the white house. i know other lawmakers are responding. >> yeah, we're hearing from other lawmakers. the only thing we've gotten from the president is this tweet he sent out just a few moments ago, a little bit cryptic. i think we have not gotten yet. just a picture of an american flag that you can see here that the president tweeted out. other than that, it's been radio

silence from the white house. we've reached out to multiple officials asking for a request for comment on this. so far we haven't gotten anything. anderson, we do know we've seen several tweets from some of the president's biggest allies in congress including marco rubio tweeting he believes the president so far has exercised restraint when it comes to iran and essentially praising this move here. we've also heard from people like mark meadows, several other republicans on twitter, but nothing that makes clear yet what it is the president's role in all this. we know he's here behind us at his mar-a-lago club. he was seen at dinner earlier from a person who told me also there is the national security adviser on property tonight. that's not unusual for the national security adviser to be around the president. he was here on sunday when he flew down with mike pompeo, and mark esper, they made the brief

statements about the strikes. they took no questions, left, and flew back to washington several hours later. we are told that national security adviser has returned. we're waiting to see if there are any other officials around the president. as far as the activities today, we have not seen him in his public schedule. cnn did get a shot of him earlier on the golf course. he was out of his club for about five hours before returning to mar-a-lago earlier. and other than that, we're still waiting to hear more from the white house. and that could potentially just come from the pentagon tonight. >> all right. kaitlan collins, thank you very much. it's not clear if we're going to get a statement now or not. obviously kaitlan is going to continue to monitor it. for those joining us, soleimani, someo someone, you profiled him. you spent a lot of time in the region for years. you're stunned by this. >> it's amazing.

i mean, morally it's totally justified. >> the guy's a killer. >> yeah. if you just talk about american deaths, he's responsible for hundreds of deaths in the iraq war, hundreds. he oversaw the iranian militias that wreaked havoc on the iranian soldiers in the latter part of the war. no tears for qassim soleimani. i think the question is what happens now. and you know, things could get very, very hairy really fast. and because that's their neighborhood. they can respond at the time and manner of their choosing. >> i'm getting word in right now. go ahead. this is a statement from the pentagon. i'm just reading it to you as i'm hearing. at the direction of the president, the u.s. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect u.s. personnel abroad by killing qassim soleimani. it goes on to say soleimani was actively developing plans to

attack american diplomats and service members in iraq and throughout the region. that's the end of the statement? i'm sorry. it was being read to me. the statement goes on, but that's the bulk of the statement. dexter, what do you make of that? >> well, i haven't seen the intelligence, but actively making plots to undermine american interests or attack american soldiers, that's another day at the office for him. >> that's what he does. >> that's what he does. and soleimani, his entire mindset was formed during the iran/iraq war which is now so long ago. he was a very young man. >> iran/iraq war -- >> so long ago. >> a million -- was it a total of a million on each side? >> i think a million on each side. >> generations of people. young people just thrown as cannon fire. >> poison gas. for them it was a deeply scarring experience. so, after that war was over in the late '80s, soleimani set out to build the kind of iranian's

influence in the middle east which we see today. it's hezbollah and lebanon, assad in syria, and in iraq he was incredibly aggressive against american soldiers there. this is the thing and we've known this for a long time and, you know, the evidence is in. the americans have had chances to kill soleimani before. president bush had the chance to kill him i think in 2006. he didn't take it. and i think he didn't take it, i can't speak for him, but my guess is that everybody paused and thought, why do we really want do this? we're certainly entitled to do it, do we really want to go through with this? now we have. >> dexter from "the new yorker." again from the pentagon, the u.s. now taking responsibility for the strike. more ahead. we'll be right back. my derm just let me in on her little anti-aging secret-

glycolic acid. revitalift 10 percent glycolic acid serum. with our highest concentration of glycolic acid. resurfaces skin to visibly reduce dark spots and wrinkles. revitalift glycolic acid serum from l'oréal.

dramatic developments in iraq tonight, before the break we got the news the united states takie ining responsibilir the strike at baghdad airport that killed iranian general qassem soleimani. joining us from the cnn pentagon, pentagon reporter ryan brown. ryan, talk about what the pentagon's statement just said. >> well, anderson, it's a lengthy statement. it goes on for quite some time, basically the pentagon's statement says president trump directed this strike. so saying that, calling it a decisive defensive action to protect u.s. personnel abroad. the killing of qassem soleimani.

they go on to say he was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of american service members, now, this is during the time of the u.s. occupation of iraq. iran-linked groups for blamed for hundreds of american soldiers' deaths. referencing that. they said that the strike was aimed at deterring future iranian attacks saying qassem soleimani was actively plotting attacks against u.s. personnel in iraq and the wider region. so, very strong statement from the u.s. claiming responsibility. the pentagon's confirming that it was a u.s. strike that killed qassem soleimani. they call him a terrorist in the -- head of a foreign terrorist organization. of course, the islamic -- iran's islamic revolutionary guard corps had been recently designated a terrorist organization by the trump administration, not -- a little while ago. so, again, kind of laying out the justification for this strike. you know, earlier today we heard

from secretary of defense esper who briefed reporters saying that the game had changed and that the u.s. was going to act preemptively if need be to stop iran and some of its proxies and clearly with this strike of killing qassem soleimani the game has, in fact, changed, anderson. >> yeah, ryan, appreciate it. ryan brown from the pentagon. i want to quickly go back to cnn's kaitlan collins just outside mar-a-lago. kaitlan, a lot of things moving now very quickly. >> reporter: yeah, we're waiting to hear from the president, himself. so far, anderson, all we've gotten is the tweet of the american flag, picture that came from the president. so far, we haven't gotten word from him or anyone inside the white house. just so far that statement that ryan read from the pentagon. what we do know is the national security adviser robert o'brien is here with the president on property. he'd left earlier this week then came back either yesterday or today. though, we do know also the defense secretary mark esper is, of course, back in washington. he is not here on property with

the president. just to give you a heads up of who was around the president at the time of this, though, it's hard to see how the president doesn't come forward, either put out something. we're waiting to see if that happens tonight, anderson, or get word from the president tomorrow. >> and do we know how long he plans to -- is it -- do we know how long he plans to be at mar-a-lago? >> reporter: so far, he's scheduled to be here until sunday. that's what we've heard from several officials who have been here traveling with the president. of course, that could change and he does something on his public schedule tomorrow. that's not something you see often while he's here on this break typically. it's no public activities. he is leaving here tomorrow afternoon to go to miami for a rally, a rally he's having a evangelicals in the miami area, not too far from here where we are here in west palm beach. the question is whether or not we hear from the president before then or if he takes that chance to speak with reporters about this strike that the pentagon just confirmed tonight. >> all right. kaitl kaitlan collins, appreciate it. thanks very much, kaitlan. we'll be right back. as a struggling actor,

i need all the breaks that i can get. at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ [sneeare you ok?fles] yah, it's just a cold. it's not just a cold if you have high blood pressure.

most cold medicines may raise blood pressure. coricidin hbp is the... ...#1 brand that gives... powerful cold relief without raising your blood pressure. the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network. $12.99 all you can eat ♪ now with boneless wings. only at applebee's.

what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy...

the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing. very busy night in news continues. i want to turn things over to my friend, victor blackwell, and "cnn tonight." victor? >> this is cnn breaking news. >> this is "cnn tonight." i'm victor black well sitting in for don lemon. our breaking news tonight is huge. a rocket attack on the baghdad airport kills iran's most rev e revered military leader and senior official in iraq's paramilitary forces. the pentagon announced tonight the aing to was a u.s. air strike. here's the statement. "at the direction of the president, the u.s. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect u.s. personnel abroad by killing