, democrats and republicans, and it's fun to have you here today. >> mo: i've enjoyed it. >> harris: thanks for being here. tomorrow at noon eastern. "happening now" now. >> hour vice president penguins and the budget director will hold a roundtable discussion on the president's budget proposal. >> it comes one day after top administration officials defended the plan on capitol hill. we're covering all the news happening now. >> new reports on russian meddling in our presidential election. the documents allegedly linked to both sides of the 2016 race. plus, new arrests in the manchester terror attack as we learn more about the bomber's movements in the days before the deadly attack. and -- >> they're actually refrigeration trucks pulled up next to the coroner's office because they don't have room in the facilities. >> coroners running out of room for bodies as drug overdoses

skyrocket. one "ducks dynasty" wife getting involved in breaking the cycle of drug abuse. it's all "happening now." new information on the leaks related to the manchester bombing attack. this ias the president vows to o the bottom of it as he continues his trip to the overseas. i'm jenna lee. >> i'm leland vetter in for jon scott. the president pledging to rt, saying the leaks are deeply troubling. they've been going on for a long time, and my administration will get to the bottom of this. the leaks of sensitive information pose a grave threat to our national security. >> joining us chris wallace, anchor of "fox news sunday." chris, what exactly is the

president talking about? what are the brits talking about? what leaks are concerning? >> one of the presidents is upset, he's at nato meeting in brussels, and his british counterpart, theresa may, the british prime minister, is very upset, raising the question whether the united kingdom will share information with the united states. what they're specifically concerned about is that there were leaks of the name of the bomber, and also videos, pictures, that showed some of the key elements of the bomb. just why did that matter? because a lot of this was leaked here in america by intelligence services that had gotten it from the brits just as the british police, british law enforcement, were raiding various apartments, were trying to roll up the network of people involved in this savage attack in manchester, and to the degree that the name of the people, or some of the components were

disclosed, conceivably people would go to ground, would hide. i understand that they were now being searched for, that they were under suspicion. so it really interferes with the effectiveness, the ability, of british law enforcement to try to roll up this terror network. >> i'm curious your thoughts on this, chris. are we seeing a difference in the way that investigators approach these sort of investigations? you know, here at home, we want the name, details right away, we're going to put that person out. we've seen this in past terror attacks quite a bit. is it a difference culturally in the way we're doing investigations are or these intelligence officials that are purposely trying to embarrass the president perhaps while he's overseas with these leaks? >> i doubt that. i think that what you're seeing is a complete breakdown in culture. we've seen this with a number of leaks that had a more political motivation. i don't think this particularly had that. just seems there's folks, whether it's in law enforcement or the intelligence communities

here in the united states that aren't able to keep secrets, and that's part of their job. it's quite striking. sometimes you want to put information out immediately backups it may help in trying to capture the person, but sometimes if you know who the bad guy is, and you're trying to search for his confederates, people that may have been involved in it, you don't want that information out, because you don't want those people to know, gee, the name of the bomber is out so therefore i'll be under suspicion next. this comes out just at the time they were raiding apartments in manchester. they thought it was a tremendous barrier, obstacle, to their ability to try to catch these people before they tried to escape. >> we respect what the priorities of law enforcement as they're mapping out for themselves. of course everyone wants answers and justice when it comes to these sort of terror attacks. the issue of leaks, though, has been a theme of this presidency so far. while the president is overseas, while there is this major terrorist attack, that has taken so many lives, the story about

russia and what russia did or did not do with members of the trump campaign, continues to be on the newspapers here at home, chris. that has a lot to do with leaks as well. talk to us about what is the news, if any, this week on that particular story. >> well, this is a different kind of leak. the other one i just don't even understand the reason why on earth you would want to interfere with the investigation to try to find a terror network. these are political leaks. i have never, in my 40 years in washington, ever seen anything like this, the steady drum roll, drumbeat, over the last three weeks -- think of the astonishing amount of leaks, conversations that went on in the oval office, transcripts of conversations between the president and foreign leaders, front page of the "new york times" a story that says during the summer of 2016 that our intelligence agencies were able to interpret communications that indicated that the russians were

talking about how to get people in the trump campaign involved in their effort to disrupt the election, people like paul manafort, the campaign manager, michael flynn, the national security advisor at one point. that's just one of stories in the "new york times." this raises the question that you hear from some conservatives with the deep state, the idea that there are people deeply embedded, maybe former obama administration people in law enforcement or intel community who for political reasons are leaking this information, which they know is going to be damaging to this president. >> interesting. "the new york times," the lead story on this particular topic, starts with "american spies collected information last summer, revealing that senior russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over donald trump through his advisor. that's a remarkable revelation,

the capacity of american spies. that's the lead of this story. i want our viewers to hear some sound from john brennan on capitol hill this week. i want you to listen for this key phrase, "reports in the press." then we're going to discuss this with chris in just aad and rollt sound. >> i don't know what was shared or said in the oval office, but if the reports in the press are true, that mr. trump decided to spontaneously share intelligence with the russians i think he would basically have violated two protocols. those two protocols are, one is that such intelligence, classified intelligence, is not shared with visiting foreign ministers or local ambassadors. it's shared through intelligence channels because it needs to be handled the right way and it needs to be sure it's not exposed. he didn't do that, again, if the press charges are accurate. >> if the reports in the press are true. if. it's entirely a hypothetical, but in testimony and mapped out a damning conclusion.

if it was true, but it's still based on a premise. >> i'm not sure i completely agree with you there. let me say a couple of things about that. john brennan, the cia director under barack obama, there's no love lost between him and donald trump. remember, it was while he was still cia director, that donald trump was comparing the intelligence community and their leaks to the nazis. so, you know, they have earned their enmity the old-fashioned way. they plain don't like each other. the leak of that information, the story that was reported, and there were direct quotes from the transcript of that, have in effect been confirmed by the white house, and to a certain degree by the president. remember when the president was meeting with benjamin netanyahu on this trip -- not to say that the leaks were proper in any way, but the leak does seem to be accurate. >> it seems to be accurate.

have we independently confirmed that, our network? >> i don't know that our network was. jenna, the fact is that white house never said that the leak was false. in fact, when rex tillerson was asked about it on "fox news sunday," he tried to explain what was going on there, not to say that it was false. then in his meeting with benjamin netanyahu, the president said, i never mentioned israel in that conversation, once again seeming to confirm what was going on. >> is the idea is seeming to confirm, and not having the exact -- the exact facts is -- when i'm looking at this story, i can't help but wonder. when we're hearing the testimony time and time again from former officials based on reports in the press, even if they're hypothetical, that do eventually come true, i'm just wondering when we get to the facts of the story, whatever we're looking for. i guess i'm curious about the priority on the facts.

>> well, in case of this specific testimony by john brennan, he doesn't know any more than we do, because this event happened after he was out of office. all he can talk about is the media and you can take it for what it's worth. you can either believe, you know, that the report is correct or not. i have to say, based on the reaction from white house officials, having been in this town for 40 years, it seems to me pretty clear that the president said what has been reported that he said. you can argue as to whether -- how damaging it was, whether he should be or shouldn't have said it, but i don't think there's much doubt anymore that he did say it. >> what is the end result if he said it, if that's the conclusion? is it illegal -- >> no, it's not illegal. he can declassify anything that he wants, but the end conclusion, conclusion as a matter of opinion, is that he gave information to the russians that he shouldn't have given, and that that raises concerns as

we have with the brits, the israelis, wonder now whether or not they can share information with us, and that it will be kept secret. obviously in the case of the british leak, that had nothing to do with the president. >> right, exactly. these are different sorts of leaks, but again it's a theme that continues to come up. one of the questions we're examining on this program what is the impact overall on the american people, whether it's our relationship with our allies, there's a leak happening in this particular way, or whether or not there's leaks internally, the state, the media, perhaps damaging to our leader, and what does that mean for us? perhaps we don't have a conclusion on that yet, chris, but -- >> well, i do have a conclusion. >> okay. >> it keeps us less safe. the fact of the matter is, regardless of how you feel about this president, regardless of how you feel about information that's shared, whether for reasons of ego, for politics, for carelessness, as i said at the very beginning, there's been a breakdown in the culture of

keeping secrets. it's not only improper, it's illegal. >> how do you fix it? you said you've been in washington for 40 years looking at this. how do you fix it? the president said he'll do an investigation, it's ongoing. is this the status quo or should viewers expect a real change based on an investigation? >> unfortunately history would say to us that leakers usually don't get found. you know, barack obama launched a number of leak investigations about leaks that were being -- not so much for political reasons, but he thought for national security reasons, and we didn't find many of those leakers. you know, you just have to hope that the new people who are in charge, like mike pompeo, cia director, dan coates, the director of national intelligence, will be able to clean house. you know, there are a lot of people who get this information and frankly people in the intelligence community are very good at hiding their footsteps. >> interesting. i look forward to you.

are you going to fly with the blue angels? are you going to go? >> you're tough on me today, jenna. i'm covering the blue angels. they've offered me a trip in the blue angels, our power player of the week. have you ever flown with them? >> no. i'm dying to, though. >> i'm is the word i'm worried about too. >> no leaks, no leaks when it comes to the blue angels. >> they talk about civilians that fly with the blue angels, they black out. that doesn't sound like a lot of fun to me. i've been offered a spot to fly in the f-18 hornet with the blue angels. we'll keep you in suspense. >> we're looking forward to it, chris. i think it would be great. >> it's the best thing you've ever done. >> we want it to end on a high note, the blue angels, literally. chris, thank you very much. >> blacking or getting queasy, both hazards of the job.

reaction pouring in from both sides of the aisle after the congressional budget office came out with its, quote, unquote, score of the gop healthcare bill. the details and what this could mean for appealing obamacare coming up. plus, queen elizabeth visiting children's hospital in manchester today, trying to comfort young victims and their families in a city on edge as investigators still look for the terrorists who planned and carried out that suicide bombing. >> i want to reassure people that the arrests that we have made are significant, and initial searches of premises have revealed items that we believe are very important to the investigation. (man vo) dad forgot how to brush his teeth. (woman vo) my husband didn't recognize our grandson. (woman 2 vo) that's when moderate alzheimer's made me a caregiver. (avo) if their alzheimer's is getting worse, ask about once-a-day namzaric. namzaric is approved for moderate to severe alzheimer's disease

in patients taking donepezil. namzaric may improve cognition and overall function, and may slow the worsening of symptoms for a while. namzaric does not change the underlying disease progression. don't take if allergic to memantine, donepezil, piperidine, or any of the ingredients in namzaric. tell the doctor about any conditions; including heart, lung, bladder, kidney or liver problems, seizures, stomach ulcers, or procedures with anesthesia. serious side effects may occur, including muscle problems if given anesthesia; slow heartbeat, fainting, more stomach acid which may lead to ulcers and bleeding; nausea, vomiting, difficulty urinating, seizures, and worsening of lung problems. most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, dizziness, loss of appetite, and bruising. (woman 2 vo) i'm caring for someone with moderate alzheimer's. if you are too, ask about namzaric today. hi..and i know that we have phonaccident forgiveness.gent, so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight- four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it.

manait's a series of is nsmart choices. and when you replace one meal or snack a day with glucerna made with carbsteady to help minimize blood sugar spikes you can really feel it. glucerna. everyday progress. awwhawhwhawh ... this! this is why i love it here. that fresh air all up in your face. my cousin wilbur in the city has to wear a leash just to go for a stroll. i'm sorry, that...no. but with propane, you can live where you want and how you want. and since it's both clean and reliable, you could say propane is "man's best fuel." she knows what i'm talkin' about tech: when your windshield trust safelite autoglass.. our exclusive trueseal technology means a strong, reliable bond. at safelite, we stand behind our work... because the ones you love, sit behind it. (parents whisper jingle) safelite repair, safelite replace.

we're family. we'd do anytbut this time...her. those bonds were definitely tested. frog leg, for my baby brother don't frogs have like, two legs? so they should have two of these? since i'm active duty and she's family, i was able to set my sister up with a sweet membership from navy federal. if you hold it closer, it looks bigger. eat your food my big sis likes to make tiny food. and i'm okay with that. open to the armed forces, the dod, veterans and their families. navy federal credit union. >> jenna: new details into the investigation in the deadly manchester attack. overnight raids leading to more arrests. among those in custody, the bomber's brother and his father, and we're learning more about

the suicide bomber himself. officials say he was in libya in the days leading up to the attack, and also in europe. here's more. >> reporter: manchester police have made a total of eight arrests, calling them significant, and said it's provided important leads into a possible terror network that may have supported the 22-year-old suicide bomber salman abedi. authorities believe he spent three weeks in libya and passed through a german airport on his way back to england. friday he was spotted at a shopping center buying the bag believed to carry the bomb. the bomb is said to have contained hydrogen peroxide, and could have been made on a kitchen table, not highly sophisticated. his brother arrested tuesday, and another brother and father taken into custody yesterday, where the 18-year-old confessed to the plot, saying both he and

his brother belonged to isis. here's more from manchester police. >> i want to reassure people that the arrests we've made are significant, and revealed items important to the investigation. these searches will take several days to complete. >> reporter: the attack on fans leaving an arianna grande concert killed 22, wounded a total of 116. of the 75 admitted to hospitals, 22 remain in critical care. >> leland: president trump not mincing words addressing nato leaders, calling them to pay their fair and pick up their fight against terrorism. we'll hear from the president and break down the exact numbers coming up next. when you have something you love,

you want to protect it. at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. legal help is here.

>> leland: the president overseas has been talking about fighting terror, and wants our nato allies to pay what he calls their fair share for our common defense. take a listen. >> the nato of the future must include a great focus on terrorism and immigration as well as threats from russia and our nato's eastern and southern borders. these grave security concerns are the same reason that i've been very, very direct with secretary saltenberg and members of the alliance in saying nato

members must finally contribute their fair share and meet their financial obligations. 23 of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying, what they're supposed to be paying for their defense. >> leland: the president with those tough words at his first meeting at nato headquarters in brussels today. his meeting with the nato fellow heads of state continues. let's bring in steve hilton, the host of "next revolution with steve hilton," former director of strategy for british prime minister david cameron. steve, nice to see you. thank you. big picture, does the president have a legitimate gripe here? >> he really does. this is an absolutely clear-cut case. in fact, what's interesting is that while the president in his own words is being very direct about it, what he's saying is actually nothing new. i remember when i was working, as you mentioned, with david

cameron, the previous prime minister to theresa may, it was the same issue. president obama was furious with the british back then, that even the uk, which meets the 2% target, but in those days it didn't. he was so furious with david cameron about that he could barely bring himself to discuss any other issue. now obama and his administration handled it more diplomatically, you could say, behind closeds ie that's been going on for many, many years. >> leland: you're supposed to spend 2% of your gdp on your national defense if you're a member of nato. back in 2014, nato agreed that all countries who are members, all 28, would rise up to that 2% level by 2024, 10 years. is it a little bit disingenuous, if you will, for the president to say, well, 23 of 28 aren't spending what they should when they have a few more years to do

it? >> yeah, but the target has been there before that. that was a formalization of something that has been longstanding policy. it's been an issue for a very long time. you can argue about the numbers, but some of the countries they're so far behind the target, it's not as if they're, like, 1.7%, just a little bit more will get them over the line. they're way off, especially those at the bottom, including our neighbors to the north in canada, who are way below what many countries, and certainly the u.s. spends. it's a perfectly reasonable argument. i think it's actually high time that it was made public and direct. a lot of people in the establishment might say, oh, there isn't very diplomatic. the whole point of electing donald trump was to have someone who's not like the same old politicians. perhaps he'll get a better result. >> leland: other place that the president has really pushed nato on and sort of at the same moment that he's there in brussels, meeting with nato chiefs, your home country, in england, manchester is dealing

with this terror attack. he's saying, they don't need to deal with the russia issue, originally brought forth and created to do, and at the same time become an instrument of counterterrorism. is that asking it to do too much, or does that seem reasonable to you? >> it feels completely right. i mean, after all it's about protecting our security. the whole strength of an organization like nato is that it can evolve to meet new threats. we're clearly not in a cold war as we were when nato was established. so when i -- >> leland: hold on. we may not be in a cold war, but at the pentagon they will tell you they have never seen the russians be as aggressive, even during the cold war, that now they're flying combat bombers near u.s. shores. now they're challenging nato more than ever in the former baltic state, and that's why nato needs to focus on russia. >> i don't think there's any

disagreement on that, but it's a question of whether that's the only area or whether you look at other areas. that's what president trump and his team are looking at, yes, we still have threats. it's different in nature. you don't have a soviet empire, all the satellite countries in the same way as he did before, but you also have this new threat of global terrorism that really is something that's emerged in the last few years. that's clearly a threat to our security. so when he -- >> leland: it is, but there's an irony in the sense that the only time of article five, the cornerstone of nato, collective defense, only time it was invoked was after the 9/11 terrorist attack. where's the distance between the cup of the lip of september 11th when nato went into afghanistan to defend essentially the united states to now not taking on terrorism? >> well, i think that what he's saying is that actually there needs to be more question. it's a question also of action

on -- on movement of people between countries, intelligence gathering. you've just seen now with manchester, the attack there, it's the same old story every time, where it turns out after the horrific attacks, the people who did them were known to the authorities. they were part of a system of surveillance, but no action was taken. there doesn't seem to be enough coordination, enough follow-through. it feels to me as if there's a lot of scope for improving what countries do to meet the security of the terrorist threat. also social integration, immigration, apart from what can nato can do, but to say nato can do more as an organization to fight this threat is perfectly reasonable, and probably overdue. >> leland: i don't think anybody is going to argue that we could do more, every country, in terms of combating this.

clearly it hasn't been enough. we'll look forward to "the new revolution" when it airs. thanks for being here. >> thanks a lot. >> jenna: the tsa making some changes. how a new screening process could impact what you pack for your next trip. i joined the army in july of '98. our 18 year old was in an accident. when i call usaa it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief. we're the rivera family, and we will be with usaa for life.

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

>> jenna: one of the big news items of the day, president telling nato members to pull their own weight directly to their face really. mr. president trump speaking to our allies today at the new nato

headquarters, the president saying the time has come for all 28 nations in the alliance to shoulder the burden of keeping us all safe from the growing threat of terrorism. >> the nato of the future must include a great focus on terrorism and immigration as well as threats from russia and our nato's eastern and southern borders. these grave security concerns are the same reason that i have been very, very direct with the secretary and members of the alliance in saying that nato members must finally contribute their fair share and meet their financial obligations. >> jenna: joining me now mile gardner, director of the margaret thatcher center for freedom at the heritage foundation. we're trying to collect all european accents on this program today. nice to have you he.

>> glad to be here. >> jenna: and your expertise of course. we're talking about the nato countries and their contributions, but not expressing perhaps in the most accurate way. it's not as if the countries are not putting money into the jar, right, niles? they're supposed to put 2% of their spending of gdp. give us the cliffs notes of what exactly we're talking about with spending. >> right. president trump is really referring to the nato commitment, all member states, to spend 2% of their gdp on defense. at the moment only five countries do so. the united states, united kingdom, greece, poland, and estonia. so far too many nato countries have been not spending enough on their defense, meeting the minimum commitments, like france, for example, germany, which only spends 1.2% of its gdp on defense. president trump was absolutely right to send a clear message to

the nato alliance that all members have to spend more. >> jenna: why are not spending more? is it internal domestic politics for them, that they have other concerns, that it's difficult for them to tell their people, hey, we're going to spend this much on defense? what's the reason? >> a whole host of reasons really varying from country to country. in the case of germany/france, for example, they prefer to spend money on vast welfare systems as opposed to building up their military, and they're relying on the defensive umbrella that the united states has provided for so many decades. in many ways nato has become a two-tier alliance where the united states and the united kingdom largely bear the overwhelming burden of military operations, meanwhile too many european countries does not invest in their own defense. it's not acceptable that germany, europe's largest economy, spends so little on

defense. the germans punch way under their weight on the international stage. very interesting today to see the new french president smirking in the background when president trump made his remarks. it demonstrates the arrogance that you see in many european countries, and the deep-seeded anti-americanism that exists in countries like france. but french freedom has relied on this defense for so many decades, and it would be very good for mr. macron appreciated that. >> jenna: a different scenario, if they told to spend more on welfare programs, we might get like that. is it different with nato and defense spending or are there personal dynamics getting in the way? >> i think this is a different case to, say, a european leader coming over to the united

states, lecturing the person people -- the american lemon. the nato liance is a alliance of the member states. everyone needs to contribute to it. the united states has led this alliance for many, many decades, but the u.s. has been bearing the military burden. it's only right that the president calls on fellow nato members to invest more in their own defense frankly. the nato aalliance has been successful, but in order to continue that success we need to see commitment from all nato members to support the alliance joyride love you have to come back to talk about whether or not our priority is in the right place. should it be about spending when it comes to nato? should it be more focused on russia, an emerging russia? that's our topic next time. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> leland: great conversation. now to this, a growing opioid

epidemic, killing thousands. today senate lawmakers are listening to testimony on what could stop illegal shipments of these drugs. plus, press releases related to the manchester bombing have british officials furious, the leaks possibly coming from the united states. we'll take a look at the impact they could have on the investigation. >> the recent attack on manchester, in the united kingdom, demonstrates the depths of the evil we face with terrorism. ♪

when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites.

what makesheart healthysalad the becalifornia walnuts.r? the best simple veggie dish ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple dinner ever? heart healthy california walnuts. great tasting, heart healthy california walnuts. so simple. get the recipes at walnuts.org.

>> jenna: happening now, lawmakers on capitol hill are hearing testimony today on the opiod crisis, emphasizing the need to stop the shipment of opiods, hoping to pass legislation that would require the postal service to report suspicious packages to law enforcement. can you believe it? they don't have to do that now.

they're trying to make sure that's done. ohio senator rob portman talked to us yesterday about the growing epidemic. >> refrigeration trucks are pulled up to the coroner's office because they don't have room in the coroner's facility. this is a huge challenge for our country. over a hundred people are dying every day. more people died in the last three years from overdoses and deaths than the vietnam war. it's the number one cause of accidental death in america, surpassing car accidents. >> jenna: for those caught up in drug addiction can be difficult, oftentimes charities step forward,. missy robertson has a new with a help. >> the name is actually a protein molecule that holds our cells together, in the shape of a cross. so that's where the name came

from, but the idea came from just a desire to help some women in our community, women i met through miss kay. we started this jewelry company, and miss kay provided the first employees. >> jenna: why was it important for you to start a company rather than a charity? >> well, that's a question i'm asked a lot actually. a friend of mine in the fashion business wanted to do this. at first i rejected it. i thought i don't know much about this. but with my connections with all of these women, and then her desire and her knowledge about this fashion and jewelry, it was a good match with that. i learned a lot from her, and was able to pass this on to women who needed a job. >> jenna: tell me about what makes your company different. obviously you're making jewelry, but tell us about the women you're employing and the purpose

of it all. >> the women came to me with an obvious need to help themselves, because they have been involved in drugs, some even in sex trafficking in their life, and some even homeless because all of these really bad choices in their lives. they want to change their lives. they want to break that cycle they've had passed down to them from generation in order to better themselves and better the lives of their children, but because of their convictions in their past it's just hard for them to find a job. so this way they can come to a safe environment, one that is receptive and open to what they're trying to do in their life, and this way they're able to find the community that they have, but also learn a skill that they can actually show to improve their lives, make a paycheck, and pay their own bills without having to rely on someone else to take care of them. >> jenna: it sounds like you provide a community for them. >> it is. the main thing is that all of

these women, there's no judgment, because they've all come from similar backgrounds. they're able to open up and share, even though it's taken time for some of them, they understand that it is a safe environment, and that there's no risk of being -- you know, having that temptation of someone bringing drugs in the house or anything like that. they know they're there, they're clean, can stay clean, and encouraged to do so. >> jenna: you've been an entrepreneur yourself, providing them the place where they work, providing them this company, that they're partners in, they design jewelry, make the jewelry, they sell the jewelry. we talk a lot about the opiod crisis, the addictions. can you tell our viewers about success you've seen in the short period of time you've been doing this. >> sure. i don't plan to be an expert. i grew up in a very secure environment, a very stable and loving environment. i've learned a lot from these women. what they've told me, what we've

found out through trying -- i'm trying to know more and more about their lifestyle so i can help them, but we've learned that about 80% of women who have been addicted to drugs, once again they get clean, they go right back to it, because it's too difficult for them in a nonsupportive environment to stay clean. in the year that laminin has been open, we've seen 1 in 4, possibly 25%, go back to that lifestyle. i believe it is a success. i hate to lose anyone back to that, but i'm trying to focus on the good, and the women assure me that they love where they are. they really see an important difference in their lives. and they are -- they're able to have hope to see a few future that they can have for themselves, and again changing lives of their children. >> jenna: a lot of our viewers recognize you from "duck dynasty," of course. >> yes. >> jenna: you could be doing a lot of things right now, missy. why did you choose to do this?

>> the heart. my heart is for these women. you know, when something is open to you, when god puts something in front of you, sometimes it's not clear that you need to do this. that's the way it was for me. i just wasn't sure. i actually rejected this idea two or three times before i said, you know what, i'm just going to go ahead and go for it. my life has been so blessed. it's been very difficult. it's been heartbreaking at times. it's a struggle running or scene business normally, and -- running your own business normally, starting your own business, but hiring these women who have high-risk lifestyles, and have family members who are high risk around them, it's been a difficult process, but it's been one i'm not ready to turn back on right now because i've seen so many blessings in each of their lives. >> jenna: for viewers that want to help? >> people ask me all the time, once they hear what we're trying to do at laminin, they ask how to get involved, help, volunteer. it's a business, so we want to

treat it as a business. so i have three simple words -- buy the jewelry. the more jewelry that we sell, the more that we can hire these women, the more women we'll will have jobs in a secure environment. it's really simple. go to our website, follow us on social media. if you own a boutique, just contact us, and we'll be more than happy to sell you the jewelry. >> jenna: you got that, leland? you got a sister, a mom, looking for gifts. >> leland: all the jewelry looked really good. even someone as incompetent as be could pick something out there. >> jenna: senator portman was talking about a solution through government, but perhaps there's an equal or partner way to do it through business or charity. check it out, laminin. >> leland: this isn't a handout. it's a hand-up to folks. it's an offer for accountability. >> jenna: i'll send you the

website so you have it handy, leland, just in case. >> leland: and we'll both tweet it out. information meant to be kept secret between u.s. and british officials, leaked to the american press. the u.k. is not happy, and might stop talking to their american friends. a former member of the fbi on what this means in fight against terror.

>> leland: fox news alert, after leaks to the u.s. press connected to the manchester bombing, british officials are now considering not sharing intelligence with their american counterparts, believing that crime scene photos and information in u.s. newspapers may have hindered their investigation. joining us to talk about, ed dickson, former senior executive with the fbi joint terrorism

task force, and now msa security president of investigations. we'll get right to it. you ran terror investigations at the bureau. there were times that information you developed was shared with the british. if it ended up in the british tabloids, i'm guessing you would have been upset too. >> yeah, leland, first of all, thanks for having me. yes, i can completely understand why the brits and manchester pd are upset. >> the mayor was almost -- he was livid. >> yes, yes. we're day three, day four out from the attack. names, addresses, locations, detailed information about the bomb and its components. now you're looking at a negative impact on decisions they have to make. you know, now people may be fleeing, evidence may be disappearing. and that's not a good thing. >> leland: you know, the president has talked a lot about leaks. he says he's going to get to the bottom of this and find the leakers. >> right.

>> leland: there's different kinds of leaks, as chris wallace pointed out, the white house intrigue leaks where people are trying to faction off and gain political power. that's one thing. >> right. >> leland: that hurts the administration. another thing with these kind of leaks, because this puts lives in danger. >> yeah. it could impact the investigation, future investigative activity. right now manchester pd and the british counterterrorism officials, they're trying to prevent the next attack, you know, whether it's a copycat, a follow-on attack from this same group. that's what they're trying to put together. when this information is leaked prematurely in a very sensitive operational phase, yeah, that could be bad and have dire consequences. >> leland: dire consequences have real meaning in this business. >> yes. >> leland: we did research in terms of what leakers, penalties leakers could face. president trump said, if necessary, he will prosecute people. put those up on the screen.

it's up to 10 years in jail for leaking classified information, even unclassified information, and lying about leaking information can earn you a few years as well. clearly this isn't a deterrent, though, to people who have clearances, who had access to this information, to turn around and leak it. >> a deterrent is going to be open up these investigations, and run them into the ground and find some accountability. that's going to be deterrent. otherwise -- you know, law enforcement, intel community at times will leverage the press. they help with the investigation. but not at this particular point in this particular case. manchester, again, four days away, and we have pretty much all everything initially leaked out regarding people, places, and the bomb -- >> leland: as you and i were talking earlier, at some level it helps to have a broad net to

help solve the crimes. ed, appreciate your insight. >> thanks for having me. >> leland: all right. we'll be right back. tomorrow is not a given. but entresto is a medicine that helps make more tomorrows possible. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ i love ya, tomorrow in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto helped more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure... ...kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow i love ya, tomorrow ♪ ask your heart doctor about entresto. and help make tomorrow possible. ♪ you're only a day away.

>> thanks for joining us everybody. "america's news hq" starts now. >> sandra: british police searching a number of homes after making, quote, cigar rests. but investigators believe the terrorists who actually built the fatal bomb is still at large. hello everyone. i'm sandra smith. police think the fatal manchester bomb was much more sophisticated than salman abedi was capable of making. the race is now on to stop the terror network from launching another attack. meantime, officials in libya say abedi's mother said he called her the day of the attack begging for forgiveness. the crime causing a rift and launching an investigation between the u.s. and the uk. rick levinthal i