we make money from ads, but they don't follow you around. join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on mobile and desktop today. >> tonight on three 60. new reporting that donald trump essentially disclose sensitive information about american nuclear subs at. mar-a-lago, to a fellow billionaire, who reportedly told dozens more. also tonight, jim jordan says he would take the job to. later, and one of the deadliest attacks in ukraine that we have ever seen, more than 50 people

killed at a week for a fallen soldier. we are on the scene from the scene. we begin with breaking news, reporting from nbc news, about the former president on how reckless he has been. reckless, allegedly, behind keeping highly classified documents at his florida club for all to see. he is the lead paragraph of the story from abc news's website. months after leaving the white house, former president donald trump allegedly discussed potentially sensitive information about u.s. nuclear submarines with a member of his mar-a-lago club, and australian billionaire who allegedly shared the information with scores of others, including foreign officials, several of his own employees and a handful of journalists, according to sources familiar with the matter. the abc story identifies the billionaire as anthony pratt, and federal prosecutors have indicted him at least twice this year. and those interviews, pratt told prosecutors he struck up a conversation with the former president during a meeting at

mar-a-lago in 2021. according to the report, pat told trump he believes australia should start buying summer into the united states, which excited trump, leading toward brat to be ex discreet. aiden told path to informations about u.s. submarines. the disclosed number of nuclear warheads that they carry, and how closely they supposedly can get to a russian submarine without being detected, and quote. abc further reports that subsequent emails and conversations, pratte described what he heard to at least 45 others, including six journalists, 11 of his company's employees, ten australian officials and three former australian prime minister's. sources tell abc that mar-a-lago employee told investigators that pratt began telling people within minutes of this conversation. the same sources saying this employee told investigators that he was, quote, bothered and shocked, and quote, to hear the former president had provided such secret sensitive information to a non-u.s. citizen.

just before airtime a trump spokesperson put out a statement which reads, these illegal leaks are coming from sources which totally lacked proper context and relevant information. department of justice should investigate the criminal leaking, instead of perpetrating their baseless witch hunts, while knowing that president trump did nothing wrong and as always insist on truth and transparency, and acted in a proper manner, according to the law. the new york times has more on this as well. maggie haberman is senior political correspondent, and author of confidence man, the making of donald trump and breaking of america. also joining us, william cohen, general mark hertling and senior legal analyst eli honig. maggie, what more have you learned from your reporting? >> we confirmed what abc reported, anderson. which is that trump had this conversation with mr. pratt, a member of mar-a-lago, not long after leaving office. this was a conversation in which trump was supposed to be revealed a couple of pieces of sensitive information.

it's not clear exactly what trump said. we know according to abc, the specifics about capabilities about the sense that the submarines can go and how close they can get in certain cases. this is not, does not appear they showed a document to this gentleman. i don't know prosecutors matter, because he is among the trial witnesses who prosecutors have listed as possible people on call. what they will likely use him for is to establish a pattern of trump being loose with sensitive information with government secrets. >> so he might actually be called? >> he is among dozens of people who might be called, and this list stretches back to the white house. anderson, as you know, as we have reported, as cnn has reported, trump has a history of allegedly talking about classified information or putting out classified information. there was an infamous oval office meeting with two russian officials, where he's sensitive

information that upset israeli officials. he tweeted out a classified picture of an iranian launch strike in 2019. this is something that he has done for a while. this kind of behavior added to why president biden cut off trump's briefings that ex presidents get to sensitive information. because according to the current president, what could happen other than that trump was led to say something? >> secretary cohen, what is your reaction to this report? >> it's not surprising. let's just look at his history, as maggie pointed out. the history is that he has a little concerned about national security, especially how it affects our military and civilian population. he's given away statements in the past, we'll do so in the future. in this case here, he is giving medical tao. how much more evidence that we need of dismiss behavior in terms of attacking our

institution, the military, people who give life and limb for service to the country, during the intelligence community under the bus and saying everything he has done to undermine respect for this country of ours. we are watching the slow, rapid disillusion of democracy under his hands. he is doing it day after day, and this is one example what we should never vote to allow him to get his hands on classified information and departure. we should not let him in the oval office ever. >> general, the capabilities of america's nuclear subs, the close proximity that they can get to an adversary subs, how valuable will information like that be to a foreign adversary or two people in the defense industry? >> what i say, anderson, all classified information is provided to those with a need to know. every president needs to know a

lot of stuff that helps them and their decision-making. that need to know comes with a requirement not to disclose. if he was truly talking about capabilities, as maggie said, about the nuclear sea bass part of the new color triad, i would suspect, and i don't know this for sure, but they are the higher levels of security clearances, either top secret or code word, when you talk about the nuclear force. that puts the country, and as the secretary said, put service members in harm's way, when he is giving up the capabilities. one other thing i would add to that, if this alleged incident did occur, and it seems that it did. this is just one incident that is being reported. how many other times at mar-a-lago or one of his golf courses did he lean into somebody and put other secrets or citizens in danger, because he had given up other secrets. that is the thing that concerns me. >> eli, the abc report says

that this billionaire, the australian billionaire went and talk to other people very quickly, and that the fbi and federal investigators had to talk to him. the alleged incident is not part of the council charges brought up, but he is on the witness list. >> i think this could be both evidence for prosecutors. you are right. the indictment is not specifically mentioned this incident. it does mention other incidents where donald trump does show people classified documents. the infamous incident at bedminster, which we heard the audio of. that said, prosecutors did not have to list all of their evidence in an indictment. you can introduce evidence that goes beyond what is in the indictment but has to be relevant. relevance here is to intent. it goes to donald trump's state of mind, goes to a pattern, answers the question of what he was doing with all of this information anyway. he is out there disseminating it to people. i think it will really resonate with the journey. >> maggie, is there any reason to play the access to the former president at mar-a-lago

is -- as it has been the last few years? >> no, i think it's exactly the same. what is different is that he does not have those documents at mar-a-lago anymore, as far as we know, involved in retrieve or turned over in a subpoena or fbi search. but he continues to entertain members. again, it's worth noting that this gentleman that he was talking to, this australian businessman is a member of mar-a-lago. he's a man that joined mar-a-lago after trump became president. he became pro-trump after being pro-trump prior to the election. he is somebody that the new york times and my colleagues reported a couple of years back that the presidency was part of this broader effort or habit of trump's, holding the presidency and his business and his own persona into one, so this gentleman, mr. pratte, was met at a state dinner in 2019. the president went to one of his factors and ohio, so there

is this atmosphere where there is a sort of seamless rolling of things related to the white house, things related to government secrets and two aspects of trump's business. >> abc news also reports that the billionaire, the australian guy, want to talk more than a dozen other people, how difficult if not impossible to stop this game of telephone when sensitive info is out there? i can't remember if it was world war i or two when there were posters that the u.s. government put out that you loose lips, sink ships. this is a prime example. >> exactly right, anderson. i was thinking back in greek mythology, they had the bird rumor, and under rumors, felt the word eyes and ears. that is how information spreads. you think, i am just tipping this information to a friend. once a violation of law, but number two, that front is going to spread it just like everybody else would.

they have a rumor that they heard, have inside information. look how important i am, i am close to the former president. i have disinformation. that is the danger. you're not just giving it to a friend, you are potentially giving it to an enemy as well. this is why it's so important, general hertling, you mentioned the treaty in particular. the triad is the submarine that is more secure for us, because it's most target-able. a preemptive target cannot go after subs. they can go after airplanes, go after land based missiles but not subs. they are special, and he is giving away special information on what is protecting us around the world. >> to general cohen's point, it is adjustable start ones eagle. that's why people in this case, it would seem, unless there was some business pro quo here, it's just to make himself feel more important and look like having the title a president would be enough.

what kind of steps could military take to actually limit damage when they know sensitive information is out there? once it's out, it's out. >> they know exactly the kind of information, it's been given to others. they can certainly take steps to try to fence the information, fence at the capabilities, fence the type of secrets that had been given away. that has happened multiple times, anderson. we've looked at spies that have given information to foreign governments, and there is the reaction that the military or the state department to try to mitigate the risk that can occur with this. but you never expected out of a president. he is keeping secrets to people and caring secrets into his room, where everyone that has been in two classified document, signs a piece of paper that says, i will not divulge this, because each of the secrets of something to do with national security and divulging a could cause either grave or serious

harm to the united states. it appears that there have been incidents with president trump, just willy-nilly giving that because he wants to appear big. there have been times on cnn, where you all have asked me questions that i've known the answer to because of my background and seeker information that i had. but i am not going to give it up to you. maggie will try to get it from anonymous sources and others, but they will never give up the details of the secret information because people that take the oath, know that these kind of things harm the country, number one, and number two, if they're found out doing it, they could be held accountable, with a lot of jail time, as eli can probably talk about. >> eli, he is an australian billionaire. i don't know if he has any u.s. citizenship, but can a foreign national -- that is a picture of him with the former president. can a foreign national be compelled to testify? >> absolutely, yes, there is a

treaty that we have with certain countries, including australia, to compel someone to comply with the subpoena. he might also testify voluntarily. to general hertling's point, but site any documents, it is a first in crime to disseminate and spread this type of classified information, not charge at this point, but jack smith may be chewing on that. now >> eli honig, thanks. maggie haberman, general cohen, thank you mark hertling, as well. the race for the house speaker, congressman jim jordan, lobbying moderates, the former president said he can do the job to. later, ukraine and a memorial service faced a russian attack. a report from the scene from one of the deadliest attacks.

>> last night, the former president was near the capitol, was on the ellipse at the january six, rather ng's followers to march on. tonight, he tells fox that he would return if asked a return as how speaker. he's expected to be there on tuesday to speak with house republican. speaking today with cnn's christiane amanpour, his 2016 opponent hillary clinton weighed in on the former president. >> it's a classic tale of an authoritarian populace who really has a grip on the emotional, psychological needs and desires of a portion of the population. and that base of the republican party, for whatever combination of reasons, and it is emotional and psychological, cease and

someone who speaks for them. and they are determined that they will continue to vote for him, attend his rallies, where his merchandise, because for whatever reason he and his very negative, nasty form of politics resonates with them. maybe they don't like migrants. maybe they don't like people or black people or the woman who got that promotion at work they didn't get. so it is like a cult. and somebody has to break that momentum. >> secretary clinton was also asked about congressman jim jordan, who is trying to one of moderate republicans in his bid for the speakership. >> it's said that the main contenders for his position are jim jordan, who you know very well from benghazi -- >> i don't know him well. i watched him and stare at him for 11 hours, while he made up

stuff about me. i don't know him, i've seen him in action. >> what does it mean if he gets the speakership? >> he is one of the principal ringleaders at the circus that has been created by the republican party over the last several years. when you look at the extremists in the house, they certainly don't represent the majority of the country. somebody has to stand up and say enough. >> melanie's and anna joins me now with more on the speakers race, and if anybody is even close to finding a candidate. let's start with jim jordan. does his history with the maga elements potentially complicate his bid for speakership? >> i think that could be one of his biggest vulnerabilities in today's speaker race. his flame throwing brand of politics, as well as he's the face at the biden impeachment inquiry, it's going to be a tough sell among vulnerable members, particularly ones won by. joe biden. and one moderate gop lawmaker told cnn he is not anxious to

support jordan and jordan's challenge is he built the mobster that is part of the problem. remember, jordan was a cofounded member of the freedom caucus, which is home for many of the members ultimately voted to oust kevin mccarthy. but jim jordan knows he has his work cut off for. he has been making calls, specifically trying to win over some of the moderates. part of his pitch, i am told, is he's the best position to try to unite the conference, in part because he has the ear and respect of that freedom caucus. one other group i would look at four is the moderate members who are loyal to kevin mccarthy. because a lot of bad blood between kevin mccarthy and steve scalise, the other republican running, has happened over the years. and jim jordan was really a loyal ally of kevin mccarthy, particularly in january during the speakers race. that could go a long way in at least convincing some of these members to get behind jim jordan. >> could donald trump actually become speaker, especially given he's under federal

indictment? >> that is a pretty farfetched idea, anderson. first of all, there are conference rules, which states that any member who is embedded on a felony charge that carries a prison sentence of two or more years has to step down from their leadership post. it is unclear how that would apply to somebody who's already indicted, step into that role. they could always change the rules. but that would take the requirement of 218 votes from republicans, just like electing trump as speaker is going to take 218 votes. he doesn't have the support of the republican party and remains every polarized a figure inside the gop. the republicans -- >> the republicans that you talk, too many want him to be speaker? >> of course, there are some hard-core trump supporters like marjorie taylor greene egging on this idea and floating it openly, but i talk to one republican lawmaker who told me that the solution to chaos is not to bring in a chaos agent. you also have to keep in mind that there are 18 republicans who are in districts that were

won by joe biden. there are two republicans still around that voted to impeach donald trump. they are not going to be on board with a trump speakership in any form. meanwhile, i don't know if donald trump wants this job. he has a presidential campaign that he needs to think about. he has a court battle that he needs to fight. i do think that perhaps he is bringing up this idea for some more attention and headlines, but that has not stopped one of his most loyal supporters from trying to push this idea. he could potentially cut the capital next week. >> i am shocked that this could be about headlines. melanie zanona, thank you so much. respect from political commentator alyssa farah griffin, who worked for congressman jim jordan, when he chaired the house freedom caucus. jordan is trying to lock down the support of moderates. the former president says, put me in, coach. what do you make that the situation? >> both steve scalise and jim jordan, the two declared likely candidates, are trying to take votes from each other. steve scalise talked to moderates and his supporters.

i suspect that jim jordan is talking to the freedom caucus, who he is a founding member of, tomorrow. i also think matt gaetz will lower his requirement for the motion to vacate for jim jordan to be speaker. that's a big selling point in the conference. the motion to vacate hanging over the speakers head and them lasting for only a few months is a problem. neither of these candidates have 218 votes. not even close to it. i suspect next week, you'll see a private conference ballot. they did not make the votes public. they are going to realize, that nobody has majority at the votes. i am considering it political fan fiction at this point. he does not know how to do this job. it's a functional role for one thing. he also would not have the votes. even they must die hard republicans i think would admit that he would be a further agent of chaos. he's not somebody that could fund the government. i think you would probably get under 150 votes on a private ballot. >> can jim jordan went over moderates?

>> it's a tough sell. anyone that has been part of the house republican conference is the early day of the freedom caucus would say that jim jordan is not somebody that you could expect to pass a government funding bill in a divided government. that is going to be his biggest hurdle. he is a good messenger. he's a good fixer the party in an era where they wanted to go after joe biden and talk about the impeachment inquiry. a scenario it could soon be happening, have not heard many rumblings at this, is ultimately a deal cut between steve scalise and jim jordan. one speaker and won as -- where they tried to bring everybody into the fold. right now, the votes did not exist for any one individual. >> if there is a battle going on for the soul of the republican party, i am not sure if it is going on order has already been won, trump winning. what would a jim jordan speakership say about the future of the republican party? >> that would be the logical, almost conclusion of the trump era, someone is sure mental and going after john boehner, him

leading, someone who started the freedom caucus, who became the biggest defender of trump. he received a presidential medal of freedom from donald trump, for his efforts related to investigating hillary clinton. him becoming speaker would basically be the icing on the cake of this is donald trump's party, not the party of paul ryan and the regular party anymore. >> alyssa farah griffin, thank you so much. more on the man who sparked all of this, randi kaye talked to matt gaetz,'s congressional district, to see what his constituents think of it all. >> what do you think of matt gaetz leaving that mood to asked speaker mccarthy? >> i think it's a great move on his part. he's a hero to me. >> a hero is how republican voter billy mitchell sees matt gaetz. here on the northwestern edge of florida's panhandle and gaetz's congressional district, voters like mitchell are in good company. matt gaetz believes that he did what his constituents wanted him to do. do you support that? is that what you want it? >> yes, absolutely. shut down the government for a

while. maybe our money will not be going to ukraine. >> not every republican we met backs matt gaetz's decision to oust mccarthy? >> we did not think that was a good idea. we thought that this was a mistake. john roberts is chair of the republican party. >> i don't think majority of the constituents really wanted that. it would be better if we simply supported them, work together and got the job done. it's all this waste of time. republican buddy cummings had nothing to say about the gates led rebellion and a house. >> now, we don't have a leader, so i think it creates so much more chaos. >> matt gaetz would disagree. >> i don't think voting against kevin mccarthy is chaos. i think 33 trillion in debt is chaos. >> i don't know if he is about trying to create a circus and be the ringleader of it. i think it's very dangerous.

>> and this individual voter, he is no fan of matt gaetz either. >> matt gaetz is a bully. i am one of his constituents, and i disagree. he won't be getting my vote. >> this woman, a democrat, believes that matt gaetz's vote to remove mccarthy was personal, unrelated to the house ethics could media mastication of gaetz. >> i think it was absolutely personal. he comes across as attention-seeking. i don't think that anything he does is really for the good at the constituents. i think it's what's good for him. >> matt gaetz, now 41, was born in hollywood, florida, booker up into panhandle. he earned a bachelor's degree from florida state university and later graduated from william and mary law school. matt gaetz worked as a attorney before becoming florida state senator in 2010, alongside his wealthy father. don gates was a state senator from 2016 2016. now 75, he's announced plans to run. again in 2016, matt gates was elected to the house of representatives. now, with some republicans

calling for gaetz to be expelled from the house gop conference, his own political future may be in jeopardy. >> do you think that he should remain in congress? >> if it was up to me, certainly not. >> i think commandant, get along, work with him. >> randi kaye joins us now. given the electoral makeup of florida, is support for matt gaetz surprising? >> it's not really surprising, anderson. no, this is a red part of the state, the first congressional district here in the panhandle. in fact, back in 2020, donald trump won this district by a wide margin. he got more than 65% of the vote, compared to joe biden, who had about 33% of the vote. just last year, here, matt gaetz won reelection in this district by nearly 36 percentage points. this very friendly republican territory, and i spoke with a lot of people today on both sides of the aisle, anderson, that do expect that markets will win reelection again next year. >> randi kaye, thanks so much.

coming up, the former president thanks he is immune from prosecution, but the special counsel could claim a role in the supreme court. plus, more testimony and his civil fraud, tied to the alleged inflated evaluations that will cost them millions of dollars.

from chrome to duckduckgo. duckduckgo is a browser you download to your mobile and desktop devices. unlike chrome, the duckduckgo browser has privacy built-in. it comes with a private alternative to google search, which doesn■t spy on your searches, and it blocks cookies and creepy ads. and there's no catch. it's free. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you around. join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on mobile and desktop today.

>> more legal issues for the former presidents night in the civil trial in new york. testimony from the top record skipper for the trump organization, also a defendant, appeared to back up to states claim that trump knew about the allegedly inflated financial claims his company was making. specifically, testified about a hand written note that read the j t to get final review. also, we should note, that despite criticism, he was forced to appear at is fraud child. they took me off the campaign trail. the former president was not in court today because you don't at the before a civil trial, so he was lying when he said that. there's also been a new following and the special counsel jack smith's case to overturn the 2020 election. the former presidents attorney asked the judge to dismiss all criminal charges. they say he has admitted he because he was the president, and because he was ordered by the senate.

it's a claim that could one up before the supreme court. back with us, eli honig and law school professor, just a rod. eli, does the former president have a chance of getting the federal election case thrown out? >> he does, anderson, and some of donald trump's motions, including the impeachment one, are ridiculous. you can dismiss them of hands. that is not this. this immunity argument has real consequences, and their eyes a lot of unknown territory here. let's clarify what we do and don't know. we do know that a president has civil immunity, meaning he can't be sued for anything he did with broad parameters of his job. what we don't know, the supreme court said we don't know whether that applies to criminal charge, so this could be a moment where we find that out, and whether trump was in fact acting within the broad parameters of being president. i don't think trump will win at the district court. i don't think judge chutkan will grant the dismissal, but he is not planning for judge chutkan here. he is looking at the u.s. supreme court. i think there is a reasonable, non-zero chance that he winds

up the case goes his way. >> you think that this is heading for the appeals court? >> absolutely, this is heading for the d.c. court of appeals and for the u.s. supreme court. this is a serious motion. it's well written, and the issues are tremendously significant. and the court, as eli said, has not ruled on whether or not a president or former president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution. in cases in the civil context that have already been decided by other judges in the d.c. district court, the court where judge chutkan sits, the court had ruled that former president trump has not enjoyed immunity from civil suits, for actions related to january six. i think this judge is probably going to be influenced by other decisions in that regard, but ultimately, this is going to the d.c. circuit and u.s. court of appeals, u.s. supreme court, and it really will turn on how broadly the court characterizes the facts. what trump is acting is for the court to say, look, in a broad manner, at the actions that i

took, i was communicating with members a department of justice. i was communicating with the state election officials. those are the kinds of acts that the president takes as part of his official duties. what i expect that the special counsel will respond as you really need to look at a more specific level at what he was doing, and whether those actions are consistent with the president's role. >> what would the timeline go of all of this going to the supreme court be? >> it will depend on how quickly this case gets up to the d.c. circuit and out quickly rules, and then how expeditiously it gets the supreme court. the d.c. circuit and other circuit courts dealing -- with >> the child would have to take place -- there would have to be a sentencing, and then it goes to appeals. >> unless he grant a stay from a court, which we see him asking for in a variety of contacts and other codefendants asking for it in other cases involving trump, asking for states, but they have yet to be successful. >> eli, if he was successful on this, with this help from-ification for the georgia

trial? >> oh, yes, i think if trump wins this one, if it gets the u.s. supreme court to say, you're immune from criminal prosecution for jack smith's case, fani willis's case is gone as well. she might argue, well, i have charge different laws, state laws as opposed to federal laws, there are different nuances. the court of conduct, to steal the election in georgia, that is included in jacks mitt's indictment. if he prevails here, again, there is a reasonable chance, not saying it's more likely than not, but it's also not a 5% chance, not a 10% chance. if he succeeds, here he will knock out the jeff smith election difference case, and probably fani willis's case to. >> indeed fraud trial, the former presidents attorney told a judge that they plan a stay tomorrow. is he clear what their argument for policy is? >> no, that is what we are waiting to hear. also, what is the scope of this day? are they seeking a stay at the child? are they seeking a stay at the

judges order that would rescind the certificates to do business? what part of the judges order from last week are they seeking to stay? we'll know more about that tomorrow. >> eli, when you look at the case, how long of a child do you think it would be? >> they say it could take into december. trials do sometimes have a way of pressing, especially because, remember, this is tied to a judge, not a jury. you can simplify the issues, do so away with some of the histrionics. the judge has said in this case, okay, folks, not a jury here, but let's get right to the point. i am picking a 68 weeks, i would guess. >> eli honig, jessica carl, appreciate it, coming up now, more than 50 civilians killed and a russian missile strike on a village in eastern ukraine. we meet a victim who gathered at a week for a fallen soldier. cnn is on the scene ahead.

>> ukrainian officials say russian fired a cruise missile hitting a café at a shop in a small ukrainian village. at least 51 civilians were killed and wounded a sixth boy. and one of the deadliest attacks of the world. several victims were attending a week for a fallen soldier. cnn's fred pleitgen is on the scene. >> an absolutely devastating attack that happened here in the village in eastern ukraine.

we're far away from the frontlines. i would say, about 25 miles away from the front lines. nevertheless, as you can, see this building here absolutely annihilated. ukrainians are saying this was a supermarket and café. they say there was an event going on, at the café, there were a lot of people at the café. for some sort of funeral event. for someone who was local to hear. they also said people were killed in this attack, and the bodies were absolutely mangled. i want to show you over here, you can see a lot of the forensic work is actually still going on over there. we are not going to come close to, there because some of the bodies are not been very good condition. but ukrainians are telling us that because of the thrust of the explosion, it was so strong, they actually haven't been able to identify all the bodies yet simply because they're in such bad condition.

ukrainian authorities say that the missile used to destroy this building was an iskander, medium range missile with a massive or hit that can do a lot of damage. obviously, when it is dropped on a fairly small building like this one, the result, you can see here. >> fred pleitgen joins us now, live. fred, what did president zelenskyy and other leaders say about this? >> they are absolutely angry and irate about this, anderson. i want to show you more of the devastation that we are seeing here. you can see this building here, it has been destroyed, absolutely reduced to rubble. these are the kind of things, looks like a magnitude eight earthquake had gone through here. that's a powerful it was. president zelenskyy was in spain today meeting with european leaders. this is one of the things on his mind. he said issues that need for ukraine to have better air defenses. he says the kind of missiles that this building, the iskander cruise missile that

does a lot of damage in what parts in ukraine, has a debilitating effect when it hits civilian areas. we know that there are better systems and ukraine to are better protected by our defense, precisely like this one, when a missile is fired, it does a lot of damage to the civilian areas. that is certainly one of the things that president zelenskyy pointed out. coming back to some of the uncertainty of the weapon supplies coming from the u.s. as well. ukraine saying that this is one of the best examples of why they continue to need eight. why they continue to have to drive the russians from their land. they understand this is not the only time that this happens. it will happen once again in the future. >> fred pleitgen, thank you very much. just ahead, a former president goes after his former chief of staff, retired general kelly, confirming the disturbing statements that trump allegedly made by wounded veterans and competence killed in action. details ahead.

>> donald trump is not attacking his former chief of staff for targeting john kelly, who was unsparing in his criticism of his wartime boss. the exclusive statement to cnn's jake tapper. kelly confirmed a number of incredibly damning statements that the former president made behind closed doors attacking u.s. service members and veterans. kelly described the former president, as, a person who thinks that those who defended their country in uniform or shut down or susie wounded in combat, p.o.w.'s, are all suckers because there is nothing in it for them. the person who did not be seen with the president our military amputees, because it does not look at to me. in response, the former president said in part, quote, by military people picked up the theme of the radical left, lying about families and soldiers and a church of big capable of doing a good job. it was too much for him, i could not stand the guy, so i fired him like a dog. also mentioned kelly's wife, quote, before firing him, his wife who suffered a lot, told

me he would never speak badly about president trump. jake tapper joins me now. jake, obviously, the former president's reaction is pretty typical. it's about one would expect. he brought in general kelly's wife into his argument. >> yeah, but fundamentally, the stories that we have heard that john kelly is not confirming on the record by multiple people, when jeffrey goldberg wrote that story for the atlantic in 2020 about all those horrific things that donald trump as president sent about veterans, who were killed and action, and about veterans who were in the cemetery and france, about wounded veterans, and on and on and on. those resourced to multiple people behind the scenes. john kelly is the first person to credit and acknowledge and confirm it on the record. the thing that has, again,

shocked, not surprised me, is the lack of response from republicans. i don't know if privately, you're hearing from republicans, but certainly, if any other politician, democrat or politician had said anything like this, you would think, there would be outrage. >> when barack obama slip it a marine as president, while holding a cup of coffee in his hands, that was fox news banner headlines for a week, just because he held the coffee in his hand while giving a salute. so, correct, it's outrageous. one of the things that i think has escaped the notice of a lot people but olivier knox and the washington post noted today that what general kelly picked up on, the statement about the assassination where the execution, rather, of general milley, is that in kelly's view, trump doing --

trump saying not so long ago, a guy like milley would be executed for such a thing, in kelly's view, that is trump wanting somebody to act. if you look at the statement that he gave me. wanting somebody to take a hand and taking matters into his own hands. they're calling for violence. i think that is one of the things that is so shocking about it is, other than the likes of the contenders and the chinese and the rockies at the world, where are the republicans? including the nikki haley's and around desantis's and tim scott's running against trump. why are they not saying anything about this sort of thing? >> lindsey graham who was in the military, have not heard anything from him either. >> no, it's shocking and, we've seen this before, not just with donald trump but during the joe mccarthy era, when people say

and do indecent things, and are not challenged at all but people within their own party, it just gets worse and worse. >> also, the president has said that, nobody loves the military than he does. if all of these statements are true, and again, from general kelly and all the other sources, there is no reason to believe that they are not true, multiple people have confirmed these statements. he does not understand, the former president does not understand why people join the military, does not see what is in it for them, which is what he said about those who worked in arlington. and if you fight and get wounded and disabled or disfigured, he does not want you around him, because it does not look good for him. that is through this person is. >> i don't think that somebody,

who tries to get out the military by pretending to have bone spurts and look, lots of people tried to get out of service vietnam. i am not here to cast dispersion, but i don't think anybody who tries to get a service that the military can credibly say that nobody loves the military more than them. when there are people who actually joined the military, volunteered to serve, devoted their life to the military and their families joined the military to, we actually -- general milley served his country honorably, including on the front lines of battle for four decades, to say that nobody loves the military than somebody who never served, for somebody who did is ridiculous. >> jake tapper, thank you. >> thank you, anderson. >> coming up next, remembering the life and career of nfl hall of famer, david lucas.

a pedestrian reminder that -- was right, chicago is the city of big shoulders. chicago southside is where the mastiff and legendary nfl linebacker -- was born 80 years ago. overnight, a will to weigh in malibu, california, he d