the news continues. "cnn primetime" with kaitlan "cnn primetime" with kaitlan collins starts now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com

good evening. tonight, we have a stark preview of what justice could look like in a second term of a trump presidency. "the new york times" reporting on plans that are being formulated right now by people around the former president to strip the justice department of its traditional independence, something the former president telegraphed just two nights ago after his arraignment in miami. >> i will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt president in the history of the united states of america, joe biden. and the entire biden crime family. i will totally obliterate the deep state. >> i'm quoting now from this "new york times" story. quote, mr. trump's promise fits into a larger movement on the right to gut the fbi, overhaul a justice department that conservatives claim has been

weaponized against them, and abandon the norm, which many republicans view as a facade that the department should operate independently from the president. one of the workers is involved is jeffrey clark. you might remember that name because the former president tried to make him the attorney general during his final days in office as part of his effort to overturn the election. joining us now, charlie savage, who shares a biline on this new yorktimes story. also andy mccabe, former fbi deputy director, and four time a victim of the former president's hunger for political payback. charlie, reading through this, i was thinking about how we see a lot of talk from trump about the justice department. but it's not just empty rhetoric. you're reporting there are people working behind the scenes to formulate a plan of what this would look like, of putting this in place. >> right. the first thing that has to be said is even though trump is saying the if he gets into office again, he's going to

appoint special prosecutors to go after biden and hunter biden, the family, that is already happening under attorney general merrick garland, of course, there is a trump-appointed u.s. attorney who is looking at hunter biden's dealings. there is a special counsel looking at biden's handling of the classified documents. so, literally what he's promising to do is already happening. he's saying this to suggest that the charges brought against him were somehow directed by biden without evidence and that this is an evidence of plit ziization so he'll reverse the flow, which doesn't work when you recognize that is happening. so, what he seems to be saying is, i will appoint people who will charge my political enemies regardless of the facts of the evidence because these guys aren't real special counsels. and that gets us into what we're talking about here, which is the post-watergate norm, that the justice department is independent of white house political control when it comes to charging decisions, investigative decisions, about

specific criminal cases. the president does not involve himself in that for the last 50 years. and trump is openly saying, forget it. i am going to direct this investigation into my political enemies. and you're right that he has people around him, his allies, who are already putting in place openly -- they're talking about it, they're issuing papers -- putting in place the intellectual framework for how this could be so. look, the law does not make the justice department independent. forget this norm. it's not the real thing. we can do this. once we're in office again, we will have the power to do it. and they're openly saying that they will. >> yeah, and these are individuals who actually know how the levers of government work and how to use them. andy, i wonder what you think when you read this because essentially what we've heard from republicans so much is they feel like the justice department is being weaponized against them. but this is them openly saying how they would weaponize the justice department. >> exactly, kaitlan, exactly. so, this is -- you know,

mr. trump and his supporters on the hill can't finish a sentence without decrying the alleged weaponization of the department of justice. and this is their promise to do exactly that, if mr. trump comes back into power, weaponize the justice department against their political enemies. for anyone who has connection to prosecutions or the justice department, this is an absolutely stomach-turning concept, right? we depend in this country on the idea of a fair judicial system in which decisions are made about investigations and prosecutions and ultimately indictments and charges, not around politics, but around facts. and to be clear, that system is not perfect. that system has many problems. it is not fast enough. it is not consistent enough. it is not fair enough to people of color, particularly. but being political is actually not one of the current problems

with our system of justice. and i know that there are many people out there who are frustrated with the current investigations of the former president, and they feel like there is some sort of political retribution going on already. there is not. i would say to those people, ask yourself, upon what facts, what single piece of information do you have to indicate that former president trump and all of his supporters on the hill are actually talking about something that happened. you haven't seen that. there's no information whatsoever to indicate the white house has had any role in the justice department's investigation, the special counsel investigation of, for instance, the former president's withholding and retention of national defense information and his obstruction of justice. that was a conclusion that was brought by a grand jury of his peers in florida, in his home state, in his community. so, the idea that we might

tamper with the independence of the rule of law is really -- is frightening and frustrating at the same time. >> as charlie noted, there is a council looking into trump and one into biden as well. but i think when you look at this, some people may think it's just trump talking this way. when you take a bigger look at the entire republican field, it's a lot of republican candidates who are making comments like this. >> right. well, part of what's happening -- >> can be true at the same time. one, the doj and fbi have lost all credibility with the american people. and getting rid of just senior management isn't going to be enough to fix this. this is going to take a complete overhaul, and we have to do that. two, the second thing can also be true. if this indictment is true. if what it says is actually the case, president trump was incredibly reckless with our national security. >> i should note, chris wray is

the guy that trump hand picked to be the fbi director. what do you make of the fact that it's so many republicans who are running for office that are saying this? >> i think the republican party has clearly been evolving under trump's influence. all this really goes back to 2017 when the russia investigation was getting going, when trump was wishing it would go away, he had to get rid of mike flynn. then he fired jim comey and there was this blowback, and suddenly he had a special counsel, bob mueller, appointed into him. and he started making these claims that the fbi was out to get him, that this was all a deep state plot as a sort of public relations defense. and the republican party, which for most of its history has been the law and order party, the crime hawks, the how dare you attack, the cia, fbi party, while the democrats were the liberals who were worried about civil liberties and so forth, has mapped itself onto trump. the people who are that way are

increasingly alienated, they're the never trumpers, they're being exiled from the party. the people who want to appeal to trump's base have paced him and are saying the fbi is bad, are voicing them in hopes of picking up the party as it exists today. so, it's not just nikki haley. it's, you know, trump's number one rival, governor desantis out of florida also putting forward this idea that there is something rotten to the core about the law enforcement bureaucracy in this country and saying as well that he thinks very little of this idea of justice department law enforcement independence when it comes to investigations. and in fact, it's all canard. he said this over and over. it's clearly a spiel. it's all a canard. the justice department is not an independent agency. the president can control it like any other cabinet agency. >> thank you both for joining tonight. perspective now from someone

who saw how the former president operated for years in new york, former manhattan district attorney cy vance, who is a partner at the law firm baker mckinsey. i want to talk also about what's happening today, when we got this new record from judge aileen cannon, and where she is working when it comes to the current investigation that is facing trump after he was arraigned in miami. in this, she's talking about expediting clearances for his attorneys. what does it signal to you about what the pace of that trial is going to look like? >> i think it's an indication that she wants to deal with some of the time-consuming issues up front, which i think makes a lot of sense. so, i don't look at that as a delay result. i look at that as taking head on something that's got to be worked out very carefully. >> well, on the timing questions here, you know, at the arraignment on tuesday, trump's codefendant, walt nauta, did not

have counsel with him. that delays it by at least two weeks before he goes again, to have local counsel with him. trump is still looking for an attorney, so there could be more that need security clearances. do you believe it's likely that this trial is going to get delayed? how much could it be after the 2024 election? >> i think it certainly could be after the 2024 election. i think in federal court in particular, they could -- the justices control their calendars with a tight fist. and that said, it's a case with some complexity. and the lawyers on one side are going to be saying, we're ready to move this as quickly as possible. the lawyers on the other side are going to be saying, perhaps we need more time to develop defense or develop another angle of litigation. and i think the judge is probably going to be given an opportunity to do something right down the middle.

>> we'll see what she does do. speaking of the judge herself, she doesn't have a lot of experience when it comes to criminal trials. when you said, some complexity, i think there's going to be a lot of complexity here. i think it's going to be also one of the most closely watched criminal trials in u.s. history. do you have concerns about her lack of experience when it comes to overseeing trials? do you think that will impact how the special counsel approaches this? >> the fact that she does not have a deep experience in criminal cases is going to make it, i think, a challenge for the judge. that's not to say that she's not going to dig in, that she's not going to try to fully understand, getting help from others, perhaps. there's nothing wrong with that. the criminal procedural aspects of the case. but this is a very important

case. her rulings are going to be critical in terms of what the outcome may be. so, i think the judge is going to have to show, by her demeanor and by her rulings, that she understands the terrain that she is playing in. and if she doesn't, there will be lots of critics pointing that out. >> when it comes to this case and what he is facing in new york, obviously we've heard from the attorney general in new york talking about how she believes, you know, this federal case will change the timeline for that. do you still believe that this case, this documents investigation that he is in, the federal charges that he's facing, poses a more severe legal threat than anything else to him right now? >> yes, i think unquestionably. the new york case, the hush money case, the charges with which the president has been indicted for do not carry a mandatory prison sentence. i think it's an unlikely event

that donald trump is convicted in new york would be sent to jail. the attorney general's case is a civil case. it's a very strong case, but it's a civil case. so, there are limitations as to what the remedy would be. of the three cases, clearly the documents case dealing with national security issues is the most significant and presents the greatest risk for the president. now, there's still two outstanding investigations that we are aware of, one in georgia and one around january 6th. i think both those cases, depending upon what the charges ultimately are, could pose serious risks for the president and the possibility of an incarceration if convicted. >> and i was told today there's been a lot of activity when it comes to that january 6th grand jury as well. cy vance, thank you for your time tonight. >> thank you very much kaitlan. up next, we'll have more on judge cannon's case.

senior legal analyst elliott williams and sarah matthews will join me. also, this is in "the wall street journal", the next stunning development after pga's development to reverse forces and join forces with the saudi-backed liv tour. now the justice department wants to review that merger. we'll tell you why and how long it could take next. your best defense against erosion and cavities is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend ainst erosion and cavities.

i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works. j.p. morgan wealth management knows it's easy to get lost in investment research. get help with j.p morgan personal advisors. hey, david! ready to get started? work with advisors who create a plan with you, and help you find the right investments. so great getting to know you, let's take a look at your new investment plan. ok, great! this should have you moving in the right direction. thanks jen. get ongoing advice; and manage your investments in the chase mobile app.

having triplets is... -amazing -expensive. so, we switched to the bargain detergent, but we ended up using three times as much and the clothes still weren't as clean as with tide. so we're back with tide, and the clothes are clean again. do 3x the laundry and get a tide clean. it's got to be tide. we know patients are more than their disease. that's why, at novo nordisk, we've spent a hundred years developing treatments to help unlock humanity's full potential. these are the greats: people living with, thriving with — not held back by — disease. they motivate us to fight diabetes and obesity, rare diseases and cardiovascular conditions, for generations to come. so, everyone can meet their moment. because your disease doesn't define you.

so, what will? novo nordisk. driving change. i will be a travel influencer... hey, i thought you were on vacation? it's too expensive. use priceline, they've got deals no one else has. what about work? i got you. looking great you guys! ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ ten years ago, i invented the ring video doorbell for moments like that. and ring security cameras for moments like this. [ring floodlight cam siren sounds] [bear growls] and ring alarm with professional monitoring. ten years of reinventing home security, and tens of millions of safer homes. protect your home, the way i do. learn more at ring.com more now on our reporting in

the last segment about judge aileen cannon and her new friday deadline for attorneys in the trump documents case to begin connecting with the justice department about getting their security clearances in order to work on the former president's case. a short time ago, a source familiar with the matter told me that trump's attorneys, todd blanche and chris kise, have already been in touch with the justice department on that matter. as for judge cannon's selection itself, a source close to trump's legal team also said they are thrilled that she is going to be the judge overseeing this historic case. joining us now, elliott williams, also sarah matthews, who served inside the trump white house and also testified before the house's january 6th committee. thank you both for being here. when you look at what judge cannon is ordering today, which is really her first big order in this case is to get the ball rolling on these attorneys getting security clearances. obviously they need them because

of what is at the heart of this. what does it say for the timeline? >> it shows she didn't fumble one of the more basic rulings she would have had to enter in this case, which is that in order for this to even take place at all in a way, kaitlan, you have to get lawyers security clearances. otherwise they can't even view the evidence that their client is being accused of having this handled. she did set a pretty aggressive schedule, having them turn things around in four or five days. so, it's clear that at least as of today, thursday night, yes, things are on track, and we'll see where things go from here. >> does it make it clear to you she's not going to recuse herself? >> hard to say. this is such a preliminary ruling and doesn't really get into the specifics of the case too deep in the weeds. it's really hard to tell. keep your eye out for when the first big ruling comes because i think the justice department certainly will be watching and seeing -- >> what would the first big ruling be? what are you looking for to happen next? walt nauta for his arraignment, he hasn't entered a plea yet.

what would the first ruling look like? >> there are a few. i think scheduling. when a time comes to set the date for the trial, that could be relatively soon. if she sets a trail date in 2025 or something like that, the justice department could be alarmed. if she starts restricting the evidence that could be put in front of the jury early on, the justice department could challenge that. if you reach a point where they start moving to strike evidence from the search warrant at mar-a-lago and so on, that could also be -- she could sort of botch that and the justice department could appeal that as well. >> she has a pretty broad overview in terms of what evidence is going to be used here. trump has to assemble his legal team first. what we were told is that todd blanche and chris kise, the two attorneys who showed up with him on tuesday, they're already in touch with doj about getting their clearances. but trump is still looking for another attorney to work on this team. sarah, you worked in his white house. what does it say to you that he

hasn't announced a new attorney yet. >> i don't think it's surprising that he's having difficulty tracking down another attorney for this case, especially because trump usually doesn't listen to the advice from his lawyers, as evidenced from the new reporting that came out today that his lawyers were pleading with him to cooperate in this investigation and to turn over the documents that could have avoided this indictment altogether. he chose not to. instead, he chose to listen to a conservative activist who told him he had the right to keep the documents. >> who is not an attorney. >> exactly. so, obviously that came back to bite him. i think he needs to be listening to his lawyers if he wants to avoid any kind of conviction in this case or anything like that. but he has proven time and time again that he does not listen to the advice of those who are giving him good advice. for example, you look at the election. those around him, his campaign and close advisers who were advising him that he had lost,

he started tuning those people out and started listening to the people who were feeding him what he wanted to hear, which were conspiracy theories that he actually had won the election. >> an important here, kaitlan, national security law is not an area where you can trust your gut or have your buddies come and represent you in court. it is a highly technical, highly specific body of law. forget the fact that donald trump can't find a lawyer who's admitted to the bar in miami. what he needs is somebody who understands national security and the law of national defense and documents and so on. that is what should be incredibly alarming to any defendant because it's not -- you know, this isn't minor narcotics or something like that. it's incredibly technical, incredibly complicated, and he could face serious peril if he doesn't have the right attorney. >> his attorney, todd blanche, has only been on the team about two months. elliott, sarah, thank you both. yet another addition to the 2024 gop presidential primary

hopefuls, what it could mean for the already crowded field and how they're responding to the former president. plus a potential challenge for president biden's re-election campaign next. the chase ink business premier card is made for people like sam who make...? ...everyday products... ...designed smarter. like a smart coffee grinder - that orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthroughs like that. ...i need a breakthrough card... like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more... plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases! and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas... ...a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours.

my name is joshua florence, and one thing i learned being a firefighter is plan ahead. you don't know what you're getting into, but at the end of the day, you know you have a team behind you that can help you. not having to worry about the future makes it possible to make the present as best as it can be for everybody. so, we're in norway - first trip together, and it's going pretty well. but on our way to tour this troll-themed town: we get into a dumb argument. hard to stay mad when you're literally surrounded by trolls in a place called trollstigen, but we manage it. that's when our tour guide steps in. we hear his voice float out from behind a troll statue, saying: “don't fight, little ones. you're missing the view.” haven't missed a view since. one app over 300 thousand experiences you'll remember.

do more with viator.

if you thought the gop presidential primary field was crowded before, just wait. miami mayor francis suarez launched his bid. he's speaking at the reagan library. he is the first major hispanic candidate to enter the republican race. and today he touted his approach to crime and his support for law enforcement in his announcement. he is previously a critic of the

former president, and this morning he was pressed to react to his indictment and what he makes of the arraignment on governing america. >> i think if we continue to have a conversation about the former president, the former president will be the nominee. i'm here to talk about why i'm running for president. >> do you think it shows that donald trump is fit to be president? >> i think what it shows is that people are frustrated in this country, particularly republicans, who feel that there isn't an equal administration of justice. >> with me now, democratic strategist and former lead strategist for bill clinton's 1992 presidential campaign, james carville, jeff zeleny, and cnn political analyst and axios senior con try batributor. we were talking about suarez getting in the race. what is his argument for getting in? >> his argument basically is turning the page, turning the page away from trump. he's giving a speech at the

reagan library, i'm told not going to mention the former president at all. he didn't vote for him. he's making his generational argument, selling his biography. the challenge is, though, the race is very crowded. it's a bit late, and exactly where is the market for that in this republican party. but i think his video this morning saying, i'm running, and literally showing him running throughout the streets of miami. obviously, you know, he looks different than donald trump. he looks different than joe biden in several ways. so, trying to, you know appeal to a new generation, i guess. that's what he says. but i think if you lift the hood a little bit, there's some structural challenges for him. >> yeah, and questions of whether or not he gets on the debate stage. margaret, on the other side of this though, with democrats, of course biden is the presumed democratic nominee. he does have some challengers though, rfk jr. himself. i think a lot of people are surprised at how well he's

polling. some polls have him at 20% in a recent cnn poll. axios is proposing that could pose a problem for biden. >> there is a technical argument for why it could cause a problem. biden has said south carolina should go first, and if there's a revolt in a state like new hampshire or iowa, then it's a balloting question. if biden's question were not on the ballot because he said, this should be the first primary, then he couldn't become the choice of that state. it doesn't mean that rfk would become the nominee for president, but it shows just the tensions, the complications, in the disputes among the states. there's a couple things to note. one is that, i think, a lot of voters don't know what kennedy necessarily believes in, the antivax stance. they know the name, right? come in with a higher name recognition that he might otherwise. we had very interesting swing voter groups in north carolina

this week. these are voters who had once been with donald trump, then voted for joe biden four years later. still really concerned about biden's age, his appearance, if he trips over a sandbag or if he stumbles over words, and saying things like they want to see him debate other democrats to be confident and others to be confident he has the general acuity for the general election. this is not a poll, it's not scientific. but qualitatively when you hear these things, you start to understand why there is some interest in democratic debates. it means they want to see biden pressure tested in the primary. >> on that note, james, there is a "usa today" poll which shows 80% of democrats would like to see those democratic debates. i wonder what you make of that. >> biden's got some critical decisions to make. new hampshire is going to go -- >> i think we're having a bit of trouble with james' audio.

we'll check on that and make sure -- >> hello? >> go ahead, james. we can hear you now. all right. we'll check back on his connection, of course. but there is that poll that shows that. i mean, the chances of biden debating his challengers, though, seems pretty slim. >> slim to none, and why would he? >> he's the incumbent democrat. >> the reality is the white house is relieved that there's not a challenge from the left. that is the biggest sort of issue if there was a progressive challenge. perhaps the biggest issue for them is cornell west, making the decision to become a green party candidate. a lot of democrats remember back, jill stein, from wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania. her margin in those states was more than the margin of what trump won by. so, that is an issue for them. but we are not going to see the president debate other democratic candidates. it would be silly of the white house, regardless of what voters

say. that would be folly. >> and i think we have james back with us now. hopefully we can hear him because obviously i'd love to get your take on all of this. >> well, look, the biden white house, they have some very critical decisions to make, particularly new hampshire. new hampshire is going to go first. i mean, they're just going to do that. it's going to be all the press -- all y'all will be up there. and, you know, kennedy or somebody else could get a slew of votes. and, you know, people like him better than you think in south carolina. the kennedy name still means something, particularly to older voters in south carolina. >> what's your view of how -- >> excuse me -- >> -- the arraignment that we've seen this week and how it plays out in the republican field. that's the only thing they're getting asked about is the former president's legal problems. >> well, how can you not? and, i mean, the idea that i

think pence and desantis and nikki haley are coming across is like circling buzzards. they're waiting to pounce on his carcass. the guy's got the smartest strategy for a republican, saying, i'm going to pardon him. it's clear that governor hutchinson and governor christie can't stand trump. even if trump gets knocked out for legal reasons or something like that, still these republican voters are going to remember who stood by him and who didn't. and there's some difficult positioning going on on their side because he's still a looming figure in that party. and you're going to talk about him and i'm going to talk about him and they're going to talk about him for a long time to come. >> do you think it'll hurt republican candidate who is say they wouldn't pardon him if he gets convicted? >> it'll hurt them with a large part of the republican base, yes. and unless there's some intervening thing -- there's

been so many intervening events here, and it hasn't shaken his core republican support. and you wonder, you know, you've got -- coming up, you've got potentially more things coming out of d.c. of jack smith. you've got the new york trial. remember that? that's in march. but it looks like this report is pretty unshakable. and they're going to be mad because the other candidates have a tight thing here because they're going to be mad that they look like they're turning their backs on trump, even if trump ends up not being the candidate. >> we'll have to see what that looks like. thanks to all of you for joining us. up next, a big question, where's the proof? that is what's being asked of republican lawmakers who are now making accusations about president biden and his son, hiden. when you hear some of their answers, you might have questions too.

we're talking about cashbackin. not a game. not a game! we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashback. we'reot talking about practice? we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. not a game! we've been talking about practice for too long. -word. -no practice. we're talking about cashbackin. we're talking about cashbackin. i mean, we're not talking about a game! cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours.

i was born here, i'm from here, and i'm never leaving here. imma new york hotel. yea i'm tall. 563 feet and 2 inches. i'm on top of the world. i'm looking for someone who needs a weekend in the city. who likes being in the middle of it all. you hungry? i know a place... and a few others nearby. it's the city that never sleeps. but hey, if you need a last minute spot, i've got you covered. let's link up at hotels.com

several supporters of the former president, former president trump, are responding to his indictment by asking why he is being charged but hunter biden isn't. this week, house oversight chairman, james comer, even claimed they are looking at whether or not president biden, quote, sold out the united states and allegedly ran a bribery scheme when he was vice president with his son, hunter, and a attorney national. chuck grassley alleged the

foreign national had, quote, dozens of conversations with the bidens, but now not so much. >> i just know they exist because of what the report says. now, maybe they don't exist. but how will i know until the fbi tells us -- are they showing us their work? >> i don't know if they're legit or not, but we know the foreign national claims he has them. >> this could come from a very corrupt oligarch who could be making this stuff up. >> more now from cnn's sara murray. so, sara, what is senator grassley actually claiming here? >> well, he's basically saying that there was a foreign national who was involved in this alleged bribery scheme with joe biden while he was vice president who has audio recordings, 17 audio recordings with joe biden and with hunter biden and that this is all documented in an internal fbi document. and he wants to know what the fbi has done to investigate this. what's interesting is that a

number of his republican colleagues have sort of been pumping the breaks on this. we heard from james comer, the house oversight chairman, saying, we don't really know if these tapes are legitimate. we heard from senator ron johnson saying, we haven't even verified if these tapes exists, and sort of poured cold water on whether you can trust the foreign national's account in this case. we do know that the fbi prosecutors looked into this years ago and were unable to corroborate the claims of that, kaitlan. >> trump's attorney general bill barr has said as much. despite the fact that we're hearing about it's not verified, they don't it actually exists, we're already seeing republicans using this to talk about saying that essentially this came out and that trump was indicted on the same day that a lot of this information was circulating last week, basically tying them together even though they don't even know this is legitimate. >> it seems to me some kind of

notion that the justice department tried to move ahead with these stories to overshadow the stories about joe biden. if you asked democrats, they say it's the opposite. they say the only reason we're hearing these things about the unverified allegations against the biden family is because they want to take the attention off of what's going on with donald trump and his legal problems. suffice to say, there is no evidence to back up the fact that jack smith decided to move ahead with this indictment in a case he's been working on for months and months to try to overshadow, again, these unverified allegations against the bidens, kaitlan. >> no h but certainly something that the former president is using to defend himself. sara murray, thank you. our thanks to sara murray for that conversation earlier tonight. joining me now is tennessee republican congressman tim burr chant, who is part of -- grassley comments in a moment. i know you want to talk about

that. but first you were part of this group of these conservative hardliners who basically brought all action to a halt over the last week because of this deal that kevin mccarthy cut with the white house over the nation's debt limit. what commitments did he make this week in exchange for ending that impasse? >> well, speaker mccarthy did the right thing, ma'am. he got us all in a room and something i had suggested. and just to hear everybody out so that he knew what our thoughts were. we'd send emissaries in. he would send somebody over to see us, back and forth. and it's always something to get lost in the translation. i suggested to the speaker that he get us all in the room. and really i think he just committed to us that he would forge ahead with the conservative -- fiscally conservative -- agenda, and he gave us his word that he would work with us and keep us in the loop. and i think that's the key thing, as he should with all different factions of the party.

it's a lot of moving parts. >> were those the only commitments he made, just to make sure you're part of the conversation next time. >> yes, ma'am. basically i think it was more anything than that than anything physical. there are specifics. we're upset that the bill -- we're going to end up with additional $4 trillion in debt in less than ten years the largest portion of our budget will be interest on our loans, the largest portion. that's just shoveling money out into the air. so, we're -- i think we're moving ahead in more of a fiscally sound -- and you saw what the chairman of the appropriations said this week about their agenda in the future as far as the appropriations and going to the budgetary process. >> those meetings aren't typically very fiery, but they were very fiery this week. as you know, the fight for government funding is far from

over. and what the spending demands are we're seeing from the house, republicans in the house, are not going to go over well, as you know, in the democratic controlled senate. do you think there could be a government shutdown this fall? >> well, my friend, hakeem jeffries -- and he is my friend. he's the democrat leader. and he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. he's representing the democratic faction and frankly the far left end of that party. it's always ironic to me that when the republicans were in the minority and we were trying to get something on the agenda, we were called obstructionists. and now we're in the majority and we're trying to do the will of our constituents. here we are back again being called obstructionist again because we won't yield a very liberal chuck schumer, who honestly doesn't represent -- sure doesn't represent the second congressional district of tennessee. and i dare say he represents the majority of this country in his thoughts and beliefs and his fiscal responsibility. >> well, he is the majority leader. republicans obviously do have control of the house.

separately, on another note, you said this week that you couldn't see yourself supporting president trump if he gets convicted in the documents case. if he gets convicted, do you think he should pull out of the republican race? >> i suspect his numbers will surge, ma'am, to be honest with you. as you probably have done your research, i'm the only -- i believe the only congressional member from tennessee who has not endorsed the president. i'm just not a big believerer in endorsements. i don't believe you pick up friends, just enemies. and i've never searched for endorsements, nor given them freely myself. i don't really know what the end game will be. i know it's more click baits. it's more people on their cell phones, getting more emails, and raising more money. you know, they attempted to censure adam schiff yesterday, and it failed. and i think he raised over $1 million overnight. so, i told somebody, i said, all they did to adam schiff was just probably elect him to the u.s.

senate. but i suspect that's -- in this case, ma'am. >> the former president has already raised about $7 million. when you read through that indictment and you see how he handled some of this nation's, you know, most sensitive military secrets, do you know that's someone who is fit to be the republican candidate for president of the united states? >> well, i've sat in a lot of those secure briefings, and i remembered my first one i sat in, i leaned over to an old democrat. i said, so let me get this straight. i said, when i walk out of here, i'll probably see all this secure information on cnn in about 30 minutes. he said, tim, it'll be about 15 minutes. so, washington is very porous. anything left in there isn't very secure. honestly, we can look at when joe biden was a senator and he had confidential stuff, which he was not supposed to have in his possession --

>> but he returned those documents once they realized they had him. trump held on to his despite getting a subpoena. and the fbi showed up and then found those documents that were still at mar-a-lago. >> well, i can't speak for his reasoning on that and i don't know about that. but i do know that secret service had secured mar-a-lago regardless of if he kept it in the bathroom or in the house. >> they didn't even know these documents were there. they weren't in charge of these documents themselves. >> i can assure you, ma'am, if someone was in there taking stuff out or going in taking pictures, they would have known. i know the secret service, and they are a pretty fine-tuned group of folks. and they understand what's going on. so, anything within the perimeter of -- >> if you read the indictment, it says that the storage room where they were kept was close to the pool at mar-a-lago. and there was a door in there that was often left open, and people could essentially come and go through that hallway. does that sound secure to you? >> well, i can't speak to that.

i don't -- is it the truth? i don't know if it's the truth. that's why we have a court of law and you don't go to jooifrl indictments or accusations. you have a court of law, and that's what we're going to hear. i'm sure you all be covering it from end to end. >> we will be covering it, of course. it's maybe the most important criminal trial. do you believe the charges, though, trump kind of brought on himself given he had these documents and refused to turn them over when the government so clearly wanted them back? >> why sure. he's donald trump. he's going to do what he wants to do, and that's his -- that's his m.o. and that's why people like him because they're sick of washington. they're sick of the same old stuff over and over and over again. and frankly, he's a breath of fresh air when it comes to that. when he says, i want to drain the swamp, you know, it's not code. it's not something -- >> how is that related to national security secrets? >> i don't know that he did, ma'am. that's why there's this -- that's why we're obviously going

to have a trial and that's why he was indicted. but, as you well know, you can indict -- as many lawyers have told me, you can indict a ham sandwich, but we'd still have a system of judge and jury in this country. and it won't be decided by the board room at cnn. it'll be decided in a court of law. >> he's innocent until -- >> they've already started telling the judge -- proven guilty. you attack the judge because he's a trump appointee. but if she'd have been a biden appointee, you'd have been okay with it. so, i mean, you obviously throwing doubt -- >> i didn't attack the judge. >> -- in the system anyway. >> i didn't attack the judge. >> in your prior report, ma'am, you threw doubt upon her by saying he was a trump

>> i have no doubt about her. she is a trump appointee, and the reason she's drawn scrutiny, with all due respect, congressman, is because of her rulings from last fall, rulings that i should note were overturned by an appeals court because they said she was simply wrong. she was giving preferential treatment to trump because he's a former president and not treating him like he's any other person like they would if it was you or me. >> i can assure you, ma'am, if she was a biden appointee and she was overturned by a higher court that was a trump appointee you all would be pointing that out as well, but she is a member of the judiciary and the system a system of checks and balances. and she has a right to adjudicate as she sees fit. and she obviously is going to do that, and that will of course draw you all's ire if they don't throw trump in jail for 20 years obviously. >> congressman, that's not fair. just to report on what simply she has been doing, how she has ruled, looking at what trials she's overseen when she's about

to oversee one of the biggest criminal trials in this country's history is not attacking her. it's just simply look at her record. it's not an attack. it's just reporting on it. >> do you all make a note of whether it was an obama appointee, was it a bush appointee -- >> absolutely. we talk about who judges are appointed are all the time. >> you do not. well, why don't you talk about her law school, why don't you talk about her credentials? >> she went to michigan. i've looked at her credentials. >> well, this is the first i've heard about that from you all. why don't you talk about things like that? why don't you talk about she's a hardworking person, put herself through school. no, you immediately say she's a trump appointee and you create doubt, ma'am. come on, you're cnn. that's a game you all play. >> that's an unfair attack. we're noing her credentials. it is notable she is a trump appointee. trump's own legal team in his orbit would say that. they're thrilled she's going to

be the judge overseeing this case. but we'll have to leave it there, congressman. thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you, ma'am. it's been a pleasure. up next why the controversial pga liv tour merger may be delayed and even end up in the bunker. trying vapes to quit smoking might feel like progress, but with 3x more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes - vapes increase cravings - trapping you in an endless craving loop nicorette reduces cravings until they're gone for good.

♪ old school wisdom, with a passion for what's possible. that's what you get from the morgan stanley client experience. you get listening more than talking, and a personalized plan built on insights and innovative technology. you get grit, vision, and the creativity to guide you through a changing world. ♪

dupixent helps you du more with less asthma. and can help you breathe better in as little as 2 weeks. dupixent is an add-on treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that's not or sudden breathing problems. dupixent can cause allergic reactions that can be severe. get help right away if you have rash, chest pain, worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor about new or worsening joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. ask your specialist about dupixent. if we want a more viable future for our kids, we need to find more sustainable ways

of doing things. america's plastic makers are investing billions of dollars in new technologies and creating plastic products that are more recyclable. durable. and dependable. our goal is a cleaner, healthier planet for generations to come. for a better tomorrow, we're focused on making plastics better today. shingles. some describe it as an intense burning sensation or an unbearable itch. this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. it could make your workday feel impossible. the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older, ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles.

tonight "the wall street journal" is reporting that the justice department has informed the pga tour it is going to investigate that surprise merger that was announced last week of the saudi backed liv golf. according to this new report the just department is going to look at whether or not that deal violates anti-trust rules. joining me now a golf journalist with barstool sports. dan, i think a big question a lot of people will have regardless of how you view this merger is how long this doj investigation could take in addition to what's happening in washington. what's your sense of that? >> i don't think we're going to have a resolution or anything resembling a resolution for at least a year. i think the pga tour will kind of continue on its path for 2024. i think liv golf will continue on its path for 2024. and we know the united states senate is not known for its

timeliness. i think it'll be dragged on for years to come. there was a doj investigation into the pga door before this about anti-competitive practices. so the feds were always going to get involved in a merger or business deal this big with this many geopolitical ramifications. so i don't think this is going to end anytime soon. >> yeah, and it certainly does have ramifications. i know you're at the u.s. open, at the los angeles country club now. what's your reaction you've been hearing from golfers? what are they saying about not only about the investigations but just the deal overall? >> yeah, i think there's a little bit of bitterness or jealousy that they weren't involved in the negotiations, which is different from thinking it's a bad deal. i think a lot of these players put a lot of time and effort over the last year into trying to play a role in this and have meetings and try to reshape the pga tour. and then when it came time to actually make a deal it was three gentleman in the room representing the pga tour none of which were actual players.

from talking to the guys the reception and reaction i get is kind of surprise. it's almost one of relief because they feel like, look, we put in all this effort, all this time and we know it didn't really matter. now we're going to get back to playing gulf. what's going to happen is going to happen whether we want it to or not. so i feel they feel they don't have as much power as they thought they did. >> what are you hearing from them? >> they need to be made right, but it's a tricky situation. is that money going to come from the pyf, from the fines of people who did go? basically every top player whether they negotiated far enough to get an offer or not knows if they put their head out there and they wanted to negotiate with the saudis they could have gotten an offer for 50 or $100 million. and you had jay moynihan, the commissioner of the pga tour saying don't do this, don't

betray us, we're not going to negotiate with these people, we're going to continue down our path. now you've got guys who did take the $100 million going to be allowed back into the same ecosystem. so there's definitely jealousy and where's my money kind of situation. >> and jay moynihan was talking about human rights and saudi arabia's record on that, of course a terrible record an that. after this deal was announced obviously he was getting a lot of criticism, then it was announced he was going to be essentially on -- had a medical situation and was going to be stepping away from his duties. have you heard anything about that? >> i've heard rumblings that he's doing okay. i don't think it's a life threatening situation, but it's hard to speculate about someone's health. i will say when he took this job as pga tour commissioner this is not what he's had in mind. these last couple of years have been tumultuous, chaotic, whatever word you want to use. i think he was stepping into a