. >> is lonnie jackson still the president's position and if not why not? see -- >> is still an active duty dr. assigned to the white house. upon his nomination to the veterans affairs department of veterans affairs secretary, acting dr. was put in his place. he will remain there. >> why not bring him back in that role? >> again, the other doctor reddy assumed the role but after debts and continues to be an active duty navy dr. assigned here at the white house. where there are a number of doctors that are part of the white house medical unit. and what about the response of the declaration of the defamation suit filed by stormy daniels? i don't have anything on that. >> as standard operating procedure for new president, the white house medical unit took possession of the presidents medical records. >> it was characterized as a raid. the dr. seemed to be pretty upset. >> no, that is not my understanding. [inaudible question] >> he has talked about how none of these questions relate to collusion, but that is not true. over a dozen of them do. we have talked ab

. >> reporter: if lonnie jackson is no longer the doctor's personal doctor, why not?still a navy doctor assigned to white house. but an acting doctor was put in his place and dr. connolly will remain there. >> reporter: why in the bring him back in that role? >> dr. connolly had already assumed that role but dr. jackson continues to be an active navy doctor assigned to the white house. >> reporter: does the president has anything to say about the stormy daniels def may amation ? >> i have no comment of that. >> as a standard practice, the white house took possession of the president's medical records. >> it was called a raid. >> reporter: the president has tweeted about it. he's talked about how none of these questions relate to collusion. but that's not true. over a dozen of them do. we've talked about accuracy from the president in the past. why is he mischaracterizing these reports? >> once again, i'm not going to get into the back and forth on matters involving the special counsel -- >> reporter: it's not a question involving the special counsel. >> it certainly h