in the context of our laws, due process, and so part of what director clamper is going is to see if we can determine any lessons learned from what happened. >> are you getting all the intelligence and information you need from the russians and should americans be worried when they go to big public events now? >> the russians have been very cooperative with us since the boston bombing. you know, obviously old habits die hard. there's still suspicions sometimes between our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. 10, 20, 30 years back to the cold war. they're continually improving. i have spoken to president putin directly.

he's working with me to make sure those who are working this are cooperating with us fully. in terms of the response of the american people, i think everybody can take a queue from boston. you don't get a sense of intimidation when they go to fenway park. there are joggers all throughout boston, cambridge, and watertown. and i think one of the things that i have been most proud of in watching the country's response to the terrible tragedy there is a sense of resilience and toughness, and we're not going to be intimidated. we are going to live our lives. and you know, people i think understand we have got to do everything we can to prevent these kinds of attacks from taking place, but people also

understand in the same way they understand after a shooting in aurora or newtown or virginia tech or after the foiled attempts in times square or detroit, we're not going to stop living our lives because warped, twisted individuals try to intimidate us. we're going to do what we do, which is go to work, run in marathons, go to ball games. we're going to make sure we're vigilant. >> mr. president, you are a hundred days into your second term. obviously the bill didn't pass.

congress has ignored your efforts to try to undo the sequester cuts. my question to you is do you still have the juice the get the rest of your agenda through congress. >> if you put it that way, maybe i should just pack up and go home. golly. i think it's a little, as mark twain said, rumors of my demise may be exaggerated at this point. we understand we're in divided government right now. republicans control the house of representatives. in the senate this habit of requiring 60 votes for even the most modest piece of legislation has gummed up the works there. it comes as no surprise that

right now things are pretty dysfunctional on capitol hill. despite that, i'm actually confident there are a range of things that are going to get down. that's going to be a historic achievement. i've been very kpliment tear of the effects of republicans and democrats in those efforts. it is true the sequester is in place right now is damaging our economy and our people and we need to lift it. the only way we're going to lift it is if we do a bigger deal that meets the test of lowering our deficit and growing our economy at the same time. that's going to require some

compromises on the parts of democrats and republicans. i've had some good conversations with republican senators so far. those conversations are continuing. i think there's a general win desire to move past that. the sequester is a good example, the faa issue is a good example. you'll recall that even as recently as my campaign republicans were saying sequester is terrible. this is a disaster. it is going to be disasterous to the economy. then when it was determined that doing something about it might mean we close some tax loopholes for the wealthy and connected

then they said, you know what. we'll take the sequester. the president is crying wolf, he's chicken little. the sequester no problem. the white house tours, this is terrible. how could we let that happen. what are we going to do about the delays at airports. despite the fact that a lot of members of congress were suggesting that somehow the sequester was a victory for them and this wouldn't hurt the economy, what we now know is what i warned earlier and what jay warned is happening. it's slowed our growth. it's resulted in people being thrown out of work and it's hurting focuses all across the country.

the fact that congress responded to the short term problem of flight delays by giving us the option of shifting money that's designed to repair and improve airports over the long term to fix the short term problem, that's not a solution. in order to avoid delays this summer, we're going to ensure delays for the next two, three decades -- hold on a second. so the alternative of course is either to go ahead and impose a whole bunch of delays on passengers now which does not fix the problem or the alternative is to fix the problem by coming up with a broader, larger deal johnathan

you seem to suggest somehow these folks over there have no responsibilities and any job is to somehow get them to behave. that's their job. they're elected, members of congress are elected, to do what's right for their constituent sis and the american people. if in fact, they are seriously concerned about passenger convenience and safety, then they shouldn't just be thinking about tomorrow or next week or the week after that. they should be thinking about what's going to happen 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now. the only way to do that is to engage with me on coming up with a broader deal. that's what i'm trying to do, is to continue to talk to them about are there ways for us to fix this. i don't think that if i were to veto this faa bill this would

lead to the broader fix. it just means there would be pain now, which they would try to blame on me as opposed to five years from now. the only way the problem does get fixed is if both parties sit down and they say how do we make sure our deficit is reducing successfully, how are we rebuilding our roads and all the things that are going to help us grow. that's what the american people want. just one interesting statistic. there was a recent survey of the top airports in the world and there was not a single u.s. airport that came in the top 25. not one. not one u.s. airport was considered by the experts and

consumers who used these airports to be in the top 25 in the world. i think cincinnati airport came in around 30th. what does that say about our long term competitiveness and future? when folks say there was some money in the faa to deal with these furloughs. the money was supposed to try to upgrade our airports to we don't rank in the bottom of industrialized countries when it comes to our infrastructure. that's what we're doing. we're using -- right now we have got focuses who are unwilling to make some simple changes to our tax code to close loopholes that aren't adding to our competitiveness and helping middle class families. that's a long way of answering your question, but the point is

that there are common sense solutions to our problems right now. i cannot force republicans to embrace those common sense solutions. i can urge them to. i can put pressure on them. i can rally the american people around those common sense solutions. ultimately they themselves are going to have to say we'll do the right thing. there are members in the senate right now and i suspect members in the house as well who understand that deep down, but they're worried about their politics. it's tough. their base thinks that compromise would mean somehow a betrayal. they're worried about primaries and i understand all that. and we're going to try to do everything we can to create a

permission structure to do what's best for the country. >> mr. president, you are probably aware there's a growing hunger strike on guantanamo bay among prisoners there. is it any surprise -- >> it is not a surprise to me we have problems in guantanamo, which is why when i was campaigning in 2007 and 2008 and when i was elected in 2008 i said we need to close guantanamo. i continue to believe we have to close guantanamo. i think it is critical for us to understand that guantanamo is not necessary to keep america safe. it is expensive. it is inefficient. it hurts us in terms of our

international standing. itlessens cooperation with our allys on counterterrorism efforts. it is a recruit tool for extremists. it needs to be closed. now congress determined that they would not let us close it, and despite the fact there are a number of folks who are currently in guantanamo who the courts have said could be returned to their country of origin or potentially a third country -- i'm going to go back at this. i've asked my team to review everything that's being done in guantanamo, everything we can do administratively and i'm going to reengage with congress to try to make the case that this is not something that's in the best interest of the american people. and it is not sustainable. the notion we're going to keep over a hundred individuals in a

no-man's land indefinitely even at a time when we have wound down the war in iraq, we are winding down the war in afghanistan, we have kept the pressure on these transnational terrorist networks, when we have transferred detention authorities to afghanistan. the idea we would still maintain forever a group of individuals who have been not been tried, that is contrary to who we are and our interests and it needs to stop. it is a hard case to make. i think for a lot of americans the notion is out of sight, out of mind. it is easy to demagogue the issue. i'm going to go back at it because i think it is important.

>> [ inaudible ]. >> i don't these individuals to die. obviously the pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can, but i think all of us should reflect on why exactly are we doing this. why are we doing this? we have a whole bunch of individuals who have been tried who are currently maximum securiti security prisons around the country, justice has been served, it's been done in a way that's consistent with our constitution, rule of law, and our traditions. the individual who attempted to bomb times square in prison. life sentence. so mali who was part of -- who

we captured, in prison. so we can handle this and i understand that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 why for a lot of americans the notion was somehow that we had to create a special facility like guantanamo and we couldn't handle this in a normal conventional fashion. i understand that reaction, but we're now over a decade out. we should be wiser. we should have been more experience in how we prosecute terrorists. this is a lingering problem that is not going to get better. it's going to get worse. it's going to fester. and so i'm going to as i said

before examine every option that we have administratively to try to deal with this issue, but ultimately we're going to need some help from congress and i'm going to ask some folks over there who, you know, care about fighting terrorism but also care about who we are as a people to step up and help me on it. chuck todd. >> mr. president, thank you. democratic senator referred to implementation of your health care law as a -- why does senator bach believe this is going to be [ inaudible ].

>> i think that any time you're imp lmenting something big there's going to be people nervous and anxious until it gets down. let's step back for a second and make sure the american people understand what we're doing. obamacare has now been with us for three years. it's gone through supreme court tests. it's gone through efforts to repeal. a huge chunk of it has already been implemented and for the 85, 90% of americans who already have health insurance, they're already experiencing the benefits of the affordable care affect even if they don't know it. their insurance is more secure. insurance companies can't drop them for bad reasons.

they're kids are able to stay on their health insurance until they're 26-year-old. they're getting free preventive care. there are a whole host of benefits. this thing has already happened. they're only impact is their insurance is stronger, better, more secure than it was before. full stop. that's it. they don't have to worry about anything else. the implementation issues come in -- they're paying 50% or a 100% more than those who are lucky enough to have group plans. people who are poor enough to get health insurance, maybe they work for a small business and

the small business can't afford right now to provide health insurance. so all the implementation issues that are coming up are the implementation issues related to that small group of people, 10 to 15% of americans relatively narrow group who don't have health insurance right now or on the individual market and are paying exorbitant amounts for coverage that isn't that great. we're setting up a pool so they can all pool together and get a better deal from insurance companies. and those who can't afford it, we're going to provide them with some subsidies. that's it. that's what left to implement because the other stuff has been implemented and it's working fine. the challenge is setting up a

mark based system, an online marketplace where you can go on and sign up and figure out what kind of insurance you can afford and the subsidies, that's still a complicated piece of business. when you're doing it nationwide, relatively fast and you have half of congress who is determined to try to block implementation and not adequately fund implementation and you have a number of members of -- or governors republican governors who know it is bad politics for them to try to implement this effectively. when you have that kind of situation, that makes it harder, but having said all that. we have a great team in place.

we are pushing very hard to make sure we're hitting all the deadlines and the benchmarks. i'll give you an example, a recent example. we've put together initially an application form for signing up for participation in the exchanges. it was initially about 21 pages long and immediately everyone sat around the table and said this is too long, especially in the age of internet. let's streamline this thing. we have cut what was a 21 page form now down to a form that's about three pages for an individual, a little more than for a family. those kinds of refinements we're going to continue to be working on. the main message i want to give

to the american people here is despite the sky is falling predictions about this stuff, if you already have health insurance that part of obamacare that affects you, that's already in place. that's about 85% of country. what's left is to be implemented is those provisions to help the 10 to 15% of american people that isn't lucky enough to have health insurance. some of you who have health insurance now may lose your health insurance. this preexisting condition -- is something that will not leave you vulnerable. every single day we are trying to hit our marks.

everyone if we do everything perfectly, there will still be glitches and bumps and stories that will be written that this isn't working how it should be. that's true of every government program that's been set up, but if we stay with it and understand our long term goal is, in a country of ours no one should go bankrupt if they get sick, if we keep that in mind, we're going to drive down costs. we're going to be able to improve efficiencies in the system. we're going to see people benefit from better health care and that will save the country money as a whole. >> [ inaudible ] fully implement. >> i think it is harder.

there's no doubt about it. >> [ inaudible ]. >> we will implement it. if states aren't cooperating, we have set up a federal exchange so people can access that federal exchange. these folks believe in empowering states that they're going to end up having the federal government do something we would prefer states to do if they were properly cooperating. let's see how we're doing on time. last question. there you are. tell those big guys to get out of your way. >> two questions. there are some concerns about how [ inaudible ] from the house [ inaudible ] in the senate. it seems to be a more

conservative proposal. is there room for a more conservative proposal than the ones in the senate, that's immigration. second for mexico. yesterday the mexican government said all contact with u.s. law enforcement will now go through a single door. the federal interior ministry. is this change good for the u.s. relationship with mexico? do you see the level of security and cooperation can be maintained? >> on immigration reform, i have been impressed by the work that was done by the guys in the senate. the bill they produced was not the bill that i would have written. there are elements of it that i would change, but i do think that it meets the basic criteria that i layed out from the start,

which is we've got to have more effective border security, although it should build on the great improvements on border security over the last five years. we should make sure we are cracking down on employers who are gaming the system. we should make the legal immigration system work more effectively so that the weights are not as burdensome, the bureaucracy is not as complicated, so we continue to attract the best and the brightest around the world to our shores in a legal fashion. and we want to make sure we have a pathway to citizenship that is tough, but allows people to earn over time their legal status here in this country. and you know, the senate bill

meets those criteria. in some cases not in the ways i would, but it meets those basic criteria, and i think it's a testament to the senators that were involved. they made some tough choices and compromises to hammer out that bill. now, i haven't seen what members of the house are yet proposing. and maybe they think they can answer some of those questions differently or better, and i think we need to be open minded and see what they come up. the bottom line is they still have to meet the basic criteria. is it making the border safer? is it dealing with employers and how they work with the government to make sure people are not being taken advantage of or taking advantage of the

system? are we improving our legal immigration system? and are we creating a pathway for citizenship for the 11 million or so who are undocumented in this country? if they meet those criteria in a slightly different way, we should be able to come up with a compromise. if it doesn't meet those criteria, i will not support such a bill. we'll have to wait and see. when it comes to mexico, i am very much looking forward to taking the trip down to mexico to see the new president. i had a chance to meet him here, but this is will be the first more extensive consultation. it is be an opportunity for his ministers and my cabinet members to hammer out some of these issues. a lot of focus is going to be on

economics. we have spent so much on security issues between the united states and mexico, that sometimes i think we forget this is a massive trading partner responsible for huge amounts of commerce and huge numbers of jobs on both sides of the border. we want to see how we can deepen that, how we can improve that and maintain that economic dialogue over time. that doesn't mean we won't be talking about security. the president indicates we are concerned how we can work together for how we can deal with transnational drug cartels. my suspicion is things can be improved. some of the issues he's talking about have to do with

refinements and improvements with how mexican authorities work with each other, how they coordinate more effectively and it has less to do with how they're dealing with us per se. i'm not going to yet judge how this be alter the relationship between the united states and mexico until i have heard directly from them to see exactly what they're trying to accomplish. overall, my impression is the new president is serious about reform. he's already made some tough decisions. i think he's going to make more that will improve the economy and security of mexican citizens and that will improve the bilateral relationship as well. i don't want to leave out we're going to be talking to costa rica, presidents of central american countries, many of whom

are struggling with both economic issues and security issues, but are important partners for us because i think the vision here is that we want to make sure our hemisphere is more effectively integrated. that's good for the united states. that's good for our economy. there are a whole range of opportunities. that's going to be the purpose of this trip. i'm sure those of you who will travel with me will have a chance to discuss this further. thank you very much everybody. >> so there he is the president -- hold on. i had a chance to talk to him yesterday. he seems like a terrific young man i told him i couldn't be prouder. one of the extraordinary measures of progress that we've seen in this country has been

the recognition that the lgbt community deserves full equality, not just partial equality, not just tolerance, but a recognition that they're fully part of the american family. and given the importance of sports in our society for an individual who's excelled at the highest levels in one of the major sports to say this is who i am, i'm proud of it. i'm still a great competitor. i'm still 7 feet tall and can bang with shak and deliver a hard foul. and you know, for i think a lot of young people out there who are gay or lesbian who are

struggling with these issues, to see a role model like that who is unafraid, i think this is a great thing. this is just one more step in this ongoing recognition that we treat everybody fairly and everybody's part of a family and we judge people on the basis of their character and performance and not their sexual orientation. i'm very proud of him. all right. >> there you saw the president go back to the podium to praise jason collins. he is now a free agent. a stand ford grad that came out in sports illustrates. it is very interesting to see if he gets picked up by another one of the nba teams. he is getting widespread praise

for his decision to let everyone he is gay and he is an active basketball player. the president made lots of news here at this news conference. it was a news conference. the president announcing on git moe he hasn't given up on shutting down the guantanamo bay prison camp. he says the russians have been very cooperative with the united states as far as the investigation of the boston bombings. as far as syria is concerned, if in fact the syrian military used chemical weapons against his own people, he reiterates that would be a game changer. he says it would result in a range of options that would be reviewed, a spectrum of options. no one believes u.s. troops are going to be sent on the ground in syria.

he did acknowledge when reporter johnathan of abc news asked him if the juice was running up. >> he said maybe i should just pack up and go home. he joked about that. he explained why he is going to go forward on comprehensive immigration reform. gloria borger, you watched it all. what did you think? >> i think on closing git moe it was asked about the hunger strike there. it was important i think and surprising that the president came out right away and said i'm going to go back at this. if you remember this was a retractable problem and he hasn't been able to do that. the fact he's going to go back

at it again, he's looking for allys to help him out with this, was interesting to me. one other thing that was interesting to me was that he was very careful when talking about the russians not to talk about the fact when the fbi went back to the russians on tsarnaev and asked for more information about him, this was when they were investigating him, that they were effectively stone walled and did not get the information about sources that they were looking for, but now the president decided to focus instead on the fact he's talked to putin. they were working with them on this very closely. he admitted to the suspicions that still remain between the u.s. intelligence services and the russian intelligence services. on health care, the president defended health care. he said it's taking effect.

he didn't give one ounce on senator bachman saying it was going to be a train wreck. he took issue with that. what you saw was a president very careful on weapons on mass destruction saying i've got to make sure i've got the facts. it was very clear he wasn't going to be pushed on the question of red line until he understood exactly what he was looking at. >> he was very precise in his wording on that so-called red line and game changer. the u.s. didn't even know who was using these others than the fact they may have been used. jessica yellin, you were there. you asked an important question of boston. the president said he supports the director of national intelligence who wants to have a

full review of what happened and didn't happen to make sure important lessons are addressed. he did go after senator graham. he said mr. graham is not right on this issue. the president did not back off at all when he defended the fbi and the entire investigation. >> you're right. the president was unwaivering in his support of fbi and the jttf. he has maintained that they've done -- the information sharing has been excellent and that there are some things, some times, when you just can't catch a terrorist act before it happens. so he sort of repeated a thing we've heard from him before suggesting that he didn't say it quite explicitly, that senator graham is pushing this issue too hard. we heard it after senator graham

attacked him over the benghazi incident. senator graham is up for reelection. perhaps there's a political back and forth over this issue is the intimation there. more broadly the president did confirm the dni clapper is doing its intelligence review. he views that as just standard procedure, not a sign that there's something amiss or we should see that as a sign of a failure. on the syria question, it was worth noting it is a game changer if they determine they have used chemical weapons. it does not necessarily mean military action. it means that he is to assess what the next moves are. he wouldn't even explicitly

state what his options would be if he believes that red line has been crossed. we'll have to go back and press to find out what will happen if the red line is crossed. i point out the president did come out, did not make an opening statement. he said he is holding the q and a to satisfy ed henry. ed has pressed for access to the president, more opportunitys to question the president. there's been complaints the president has not made himself available enough to answer question. it is part of his ongoing charm offensive. he's made an effort to sit down and talk with republicans in the senate and it could see now he's trying to make himself mor

available. we'll see if he does this more often. the press would welcome it. in the first term, he meant to make more outreach like this, but the financial crisis was too pressing. >> we'll see if that goes on. thank you very much. i will point out one additional note. the president did say russian intelligence did alert the u.s. to the older brother, tamerlan tsarnaev, and his mother. he used the word and his mother as potential sympathiers with the radical terrorist movements. much more on this story coming up. i'll be back in about 20 minutes with more live coverage. 5:00 eastern i'll be in the situation room. our special coverage here in the "cnn newsroom" will continue after a short break with

ashleigh banfield.

i'm also a survivor of ovarian a writand uterine cancers. i even wrote a play about that. my symptoms were a pain in my abdomen and periods that were heavier and longer than usual for me. if you have symptoms that last two weeks or longer, be brave, go to the doctor. ovarian and uterine cancers are gynecologic cancers. symptoms are not the same for everyone. i got sick...and then i got better.

hello, everyone. i'm ashleigh banfield reporti i live in boston. just moments ago president obama strongly defended the fbi's handling of the information from russia about one of the suspects in the boston marathon bombings. at the news conference the president said the fbi did its job in questioning tamerlan tsarnaev a couple of years before the attack. he rejected the criticism from senator lindsey gram. >> now what director clapper is doing is standard procedure around here, which is when an event like this happens we want to go back and review every step that was taken, we want to leave no stone unturned.

we want to see if there was additional protocols and procedures that could be put in place that would further improve and enhance our ability to detect a potential attack. and we won't know that until that review is completed. >> and the president also remarked on the fact that the inspector general of the overall intelligence community, 17 different agencies in this country, will be leading a review into whether the information was shared the right way by the government before the bombing. all of that news just happening and all of it as the search for answers in the attacks has led investigators all the way around the world and also once more to the neighboring state of rhode island. as we speak, the agents there

are believed to be comparing the dna from the dead suspect's wife to a fragment found on the pressure cooker bombs. katherine russell married tamerlan tsarnaev in june of 2010. he susan candiotti joins me live. the curiosity is whether they're serious about katherine russell given the fact there is such potential for this dna evidence to really mean nothing at it. >> that's right. we're one step at a time. now that they know there's female dna on the pressure cooker the next step is does it match the widow, does it match the store clerk that sold it to them? does it match anyone at all? what does that mean? it doesn't necessarily mean -- in the widow's dna was the match

up, she helped putting the bomb together. that is why the fbi has been spending so much time talking with the widow simply to find out what she knows about a broad range of issues. we know even today we saw federal agents over at her lawyer's office. we believe she may be there too. >> thank you for getting that inside information and also susan just mentioned if the female's dna that was reportedly found on the bomb fragment, if that's a match to tamerlan tsarnaev's wife, so what? i put that information to the forensic scientist. larry, you and i have covered many trials where we have seen a scenario like this play out.

there is a the potential of something called transfer dna, which would not impl kate there indirect transfer. so that if in fact the bomber touched his wife and transferred her dna on to the pressure cooker, that might explain the results. also, remember that the -- there's a report that there is a fingerprint also found on a bomb fragment. so there's going to be an intensive investigation. you've got to be able to compare that evidentiary information with a suspect. and of course, we have a suspect, catherine russell. obviously what happens when there is no match? then where do we go? the fingerprint might be something we can check against a

database. it might be extremely important information. we finally have a lead. but there also may be other information we haven't learned about yet. there may be something else's genetic profile on another fragment that hasn't been reported. >> well, it will be fascinating to find out if there's any match at all. of course, there is that potential for all of the dna that was actually at the bombing site itself. more on that. i hope you'll join us as we dig deeper. as the investigators do this kind of work, they're also trying very hard to get inside the heads of the crime suspects. in this particular case, they may literally want to do that, literally. physically examine tamerlan tsarnaev's brain. you know that tamerlan tsarnaev was a boxer. a two-time new england golden glove champion. you play not know boxer and

football players and soldiers have cte, repeated blows to the head. one of the foremost experts in the field. dr. robert stern, neurology professor at the boston university and the co-founder of the study of traumatic enself-lopty. we have heard about this condition, cte, how it affects athletes who have had repeated blows to the brain and how it can be fairly lethal. we haven't heard much how cte can cause someone to be potentially violent. what do you know about fla? >> we flee some of the early symptoms and be changing in behavior, impulsivity, explosivety, rage, changes in mood. we don't think that it can cause a huge change in the way someone views the world that they will then start this long process of a well-planned kind of egregious act like tamerlan did.

>> if it was someone who had a proclivity already to certain beliefs, could cte have been a tipping point? everybody wants to know the why. is this something that could lead investigate to why a motive was created from somebody who might have been on the verge of becoming very radicalized? >> he's been in boxing for a long time, had been boxing. so this disease starts early. progresses as someone gets older. we don't know when symptoms begin. but the reality is that it's not going to be that brain damage or brain disease caused this egregious act. we'll be looking into this more. clearly we don't know what the answer will be, whether there will be an investigation because the body's not claims. can't be released to the public. has to be released to the family and filings made publicly. thank you for joining us. appreciate that. in our truncated version of the

program due to the president. george zimmerman back in court, right now, in fact. the judge has an important question for mr. zimmerman. the answer to the question could change everything. everything. [ male announcer ] with wells fargo advisors envision planning process, it's easy to follow the progress you're making toward all your financial goals. a quick glance, and you can see if you're on track. when the conversation turns to knowing where you stand, turn to us. wells fargo advisors. a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left.

i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes. new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding

if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. no doubt watching a lot of the coverage here from boylston street and the nerve center of where a lot of the remembering the victims has been because

this site behind me, it attracts hundreds and hundreds of people every day. not usually the caliber of the guest i'm about to introduce you to. kevin spacey. we're going to wing this. i saw you over my shoulders seconds ago. i did read about you. kevin spacey needs no introduction. you've come and you have met with people at this rehabilitation center, bombing victims and met with some of the responders, boston police. give me a run-through, how you've been navigating through this since you've been here? >> well, you know, the truth is i guess like everyone else in the world i've been glued to the television and reading about the unbelievably tragic events here. last week i was, you know, in baltimore, about to start the series i'm doing again i was like i can't -- i can't spend another second watching this and not get on a plane and just come to boston. shot a couple of movies here. i love this city.

got here sunday and spent the day at spaling and i met all of the staff and a number of those who had been -- their lives had been altered forever. and the spirit, the comradery, the love that you feel, and the kind of extraordinary ability that they are showing to want to come back and run the race again and get over it and walk again, you know, i met adrien, the extraordinary young dancer who lost her leg, who is going to dance again. roseanne, remarkable woman from the north end and all of their friends. >> were they surprises to have you walk in and say, i'm kevin spacey, i came to say hello. >> i'm not a doctor, i'm not a first responder, i'm not a psychologist. if people know me by movies and by walking into their hospital

rooms or place of work, we went to boston hospital met all of the doctors and nurses and surges who did an extraordinary job or the 4th precinct or the place where the s.w.a.t. guys are. >> the boston place, the 4th precinct unannounced, a big surprise to them. >> yeah. i mean -- i wasn't planning on doing a -- any interviews while here. but you caught me. >> a big surprise to us. >> i spent the morning with the boston athletic soesh dwragsiation who run the marathon. they've been isolated over the last 14 days and having a tough time sort of knowing how to respond and how to deal with it. so we all had this like hour and a half conversation today in their boardroom just about ah ahowing themselves to not feel like they always have to be strong and the best thing they can do is do their job and get ready for next year. because i suspect there's going to be a lot of people coming from around the world to be a part of the marathon and beer