so logically this person argued the candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. and i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it although the justice department wanted to, i would have done it. because the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> again, also, you have testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal which is i think your way of saying i'll be honest and i'll be the head of the fbi and independent is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. and also, i mean, you see in my testimony also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi to be a part in a way because it's creditability is important to a president and to the country. so i tried to hold the line and got very awkward and i then said you'll always have honesty from me and he said honest loyalty and i ended this awkwardness. >>

so logically this person argued the candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. and i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it although the justice department wanted to, i would have done it. because the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> again, also, you have testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal which is i think your way of saying i'll be honest of the fbi and independent is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. and also, i mean, you see in my testimony also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi to be a part in a way because it's creditability is important to a president and to the country. so i tried to hold the line and got very awkward and i then said you'll always have honesty from me and he said honest loyalty and i ended this awkwardness. >> at the culmination of

coordination between the campaign an russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate, so logically, this person argued, this candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so i understood that argument. my view was that, what i sawed to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it, though if the justice department had wanted to, i would have done it because to have the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> and again, you've also testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal, which is your way of saying i will be honest and the head of the f.b.i. and independent. is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. also, you see it in my testimony, i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the f.b.i. to be a part, in -- apart, in a way, because its credibility is important to a presidentened the country, and, so, tried to hold the line. it got very awkward. an

coordination between the campaign an russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate, so logically, this person argued, this candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so i understood that argument. my view was that, what i sawed to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it, though if the justice department had wanted to, i would have done it because to have the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> and again, you've also testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal, which is your way of saying i will be honest and the head ofh is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. also, you see it in my testimony, i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the f.b.i. to be a part, in -- apart, in a way, because its credibility is important to a presidentened the country, and, so, tried to hold the line. it got very awkward. and i then said, you will alw

. >> caller: betsy, you're wonderful and so logical. i was going to talk about medicaid and the shame that -- and it's so shameful how 50% of the babies in this country are born under medicaid. what is going on with this country? but you talked about medicaid. you explained it well. and the changes. let me talk about the cost of drugs. i think the government has to negotiate the cost of drugs for medicare and medicaid. the insurance companies keep -- i mean, the pharmaceutical companies keep on saying that if they do, that will hurt development. there was a gentleman on c-span the other day who said that pharmaceutical companies are spending more on marketing on the airways than they are in development. if we negotiate the price of drugs, the pharmaceutical companies aren't going to stop developing drugs. they're going to have to go to the rest of the world and say you guys have to start paying your fair share for the price of drugs. >> it is unfair that american consumers go through the entire burden of research and development for thes

so logically, if you're going to do away with the taxes, those taxes would hit the upper bracket anyway. that's how they sold the plan to begin with. tax the rich. that's who the taxes go away -- that's who it hits; right? >> but i like having taxes on the rich. i think it's fine. i think the rich could -- i think the rich -- look, the idea that a rich person should have his taxes cut and therefore any american should lose their health insurance is just an outrage. liz: we can disagree. but let's talk about small businesses. we have to move on to house secretary sean spicer. earlier the president said does not need to go back to the drawing board. let's watch. >> we feel very confident that with where the bill is, and he's going to continue to listen to senators who have ideas and about how to strengthen it. but it's going to follow the same plan as we have. liz: okay. they're sticking with the plan. again, ben, you've seen this. the cbo's routinely attacked. it said obamacare would cover at least 21 million by now. it covered 10 million exchanges, 9 million on medicaid. do you think th

so wonderful're and logical. caller: he talks about medicaid and excited well and the changes. i think the government has to of drugs for cost medicare and medicaid. the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies keep on saying if they do, that will hurt development. c-spans a gentleman on saying pharmaceutical companies are spending more on marketing. -- more than the jug. guest: it is unfair that american soldiers -- americans put the entire bill for these drugs. cause.talking about it happens to be very close to my heart. these are adding almost $50 billion for adapting all. in fact, the numbers higher because in every state, the doctors don't put hospital infection on the death certificate. they are not required to. infection is not death.as the cause of we can prevent these infections. the single biggest cause is poor hygiene in the hospital. it is what room you are assigned to. -- your risk of getting an infection goes way up. the curtains, the call monitor -- this is something we can prevent through rigorous cleaning of hospitals. john, independent from indiana. ca

logic and go around in circles. for them to say that this is to kill people is so mean. d over the top and a lot of americans are sick and tired being talked to like they're stupid. >> neil: or that if you have any -- i'm sorry. or if you have any concern about this, you're heartless or clueless. the arrests coming out of capitol hill, those that say that, the republican efforts to sort of change this. this is their way of saying, look, what republicans are coming up with is tantamount to murder. how do you counter an argument like that? >> well, i think you couldn't counter an argument by saying simply that you're wrong. denying someone medicaid is not going to kill them. people die on medicaid all the time. we need to say that coverage isn't the same thing as healthcare. many people who are on medicaid, they get denied coverage and treatment from doctors all the time because of reimbursement for healthcare professionals is crumby, right? a lot of times they're forced to go to emergency rooms and wait times have expanded very drastically, right? a lot of people in emerge

"for me, i'm kind of a science and math guy so logic would dictate that if you had one of the best free shooters of all time as a personal free throw coach, you should at least give it a chance. so when i decided to make the switch, i just really liked the form. there's less pivot points and hinge joints, so it's a more repeatable motion." and with all that math talk, you can be sure barry has a pretty good contingency lined up. if an nba roster spot doesn't work out, he'll pursue a graduate degree in nuclear studies. "you never know how long the ball bounces, so crazier things have happened, whether it's a season ending or career ending injury. so just to have a nuclear engineering degree to fall back on, it's not a bad backup plan. but just really excited and just trying to pursue my basketball career for as long as possible." no matter what canyon ends up doing, we know this family always hits its mark. mark carpenter, kron4 news (vicki) that wraps up kron 4 news at 5. steve aveson joins pam moore with kron 4 news at six. (pam) vicki thank you. as

>> so the brain is divided to two hemispheres. the left sign has logical human being. the creative sense. so if we're okay with the creative side, not the logical? >> the word was "rigorous." we don't need stressed out preschoolers. tom? >> my youngest is just finishing kindergarten right now. so you know, you see the pressure that is put on these kids. i don't think -- these kids nowadays are playing with ipads and apps and getting logic-based learning. so why don't want them to be too stressed out as we get in -- as jimmy just said, the stuff they're doing now, coming home in first grade with homework. it's nuts. >> i'm with eric on this. maybe how i was raised. my mom was get in front of it, not behind it. >> all right. do go away. we circle back with our specialist, tom and jimmy, next. bp uses flir cameras - a new thermal imagining technology - to inspect difficult-to-reach pipelines, so we can detect leaks before humans can see them. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. when they thought they should westart saving for retiremen

ounce has the same fractional amount of each metal and it has been weighed it so it's a logical diversification we wouldn't put the same amount dollars of. alors and palladium as we would gold but giving it this diversified is basically a turnkey diversified portfolio we found and we you know when we created this we looked at the precious metals pricing going back to the eighty's that we created a product that with the exposure to especially the platinum palladium we kind of have a product that has less volatility than being in one of the individual metals on their own like gold or silver and that's the that's the goal of a product ok so i call up and i say i want to buy a p.m.c. ounce and you all know instantly that this means you're getting format all allocated allocation into this format awls per the formula correct that constitutes a p.m.c. ounce that formula concept is constituted by of these four precious metals now silver or gold plated him platinum so i mediately notice that. the composition of the ounce it has ninety three and three quarters percent so over three point five percent cal

potential coordination between the campaign and russia, first ahead of the campaign is the candidate, so logicallythis person argued that the candidate's knowledge, understanding would logically become part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it. although, if the justice department had wanted me to, i would have done it because of the slippery slope problem. >> you responded it would be an honesty loyal, which is i think your way of saying i'll be honest and i'll be head of the fbi, independent. is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. and also you've seen in my testimony, i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and any person in the fbi to be part of it in any way because it's important. i tried to hold the line. it got very awkward, and then i then said you'll always have loyalty from me. he said honesty loyalty, and i that was how i ended the awkwardness. >> was there any explanation by -- >> well, there was an explanation,

his trip to the middle east for spring on the decision to split with qatar struggling to follow logic so my but maybe that's just how the trump team works everyone gets to do what they want for one the defense secretary can make decisions about sending more troops afghanistan without asking the president to understand it's my responsibility we're not winning in afghanistan right now the biggest non-nuclear bomb ever used in combat is dropped in afghanistan no need for presidential approval we are so proud of our military and it was rather successful at that if you walk around. everybody knows exactly what happened the u.n. ambassador the secretary of state am going to show advisor can say different things about key international issues within the span of just a few days getting assad out is not the only priority and so what we're trying to do as agi of obviously defeat isis there has to be a degree of of simultaneous activity is so i think we have to learn the lessons of of the past and learn the lessons of what went wrong in libya what would you choose that pathway of regime to use for

so sews logically, culturally, the united states has had a much better record of muslim independenintegration. most muslims in the united states if they see something say something. they would not abide by one of the paris attackers cooking up chemical weapons in the apartment next door. in europe, i lived in london two and a half years, i understand the difficulty of state multiculturalism in that country, it's easier. popopulations come over who dont feel a part of their own system and re-create their native lands in european soils. i.s.i.s. is using those constituencies and communities to recruit and radicalize. we see it time and time again. you don't have to have gone to syria and have weapons training and made your way across the continent. you can stay where you are and watch videos on youtube or twitter and get instructions for how the build a pipe bomb, a rudimentary weapon or buy a knife in the u.k. and go on a stabbing spree, we've seen that,ta. here it's proven to be more difficult but not impossible and we have to be on guard for it coming here. >> glor: the indoctrination, what'

coordination between the campaign and russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate so logically, this person argued, the candidates' knowledgensing would logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it. although if the justice department wanted to i would have done it. because of the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> again, also, you've testified the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal which is i think your way of saying i'll be honest and i'll be the head of the fbi and independent, is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. you see in the my testimony. i tried to explain it to him why it's in his interest and everybody president's interest for the fbi to be a part in a way because its credibility is important to a president and to the country. i tried to hold the line. it got very awkward and i said you'll always have honest he from

cat cafes are all the rage so it's only logical rats get in on the action. think ratatouille. diners and rodents share a table at the pop up rat cafe inside san francisco's dungeon. rats are safe - lizards apparently are not. iguana meat is showing up on exotic menus. and yes, it tastes like chicken. orange is the new snack. met with mixed reviews - bk's mac n cheetos. mac cheese in the shape of cheetos. easier to eat without a fork for sure.(vicki liviakis) if plain old fashioned oreos just doesn't do it for you anymore... you can pick up a bag of fireworks oreos...with popping candy that goes off in your mouth. speaking of mouth - forget white strips - a homemade tumerick and coconut oil paste is all the rage. (vicki liviakis) hard to imagine - this is supposed to make your teeth whiter. maybe once you wash it out. vicki liviakis kron 4 news. next we'll have some post game reaction from kevin durant after the warriors win tonight. . "here he comes out ont the floor, and what a receptio from these great warriors fans." "steve kerr is back on the side

lifting sanctions against cuba because that's the real logic behind the embargo to begin with the fact that cuba nationalized all american assets there so once you take that logic away say ok we settled the claims this isn't that why do we still have this environment place you know so you have groups right now such as engaged cuba gauge cuba right now as a lobby base here in washington and they're getting a lot of corporate support right now to help push for further trade hurting gauge meant which it would because nowadays when people hear cuba to see multimillion dollar signs in terms of potential for a lot of trade a lot of business happening there right now i understand like jet blue in these airlines they got ok nonstop let's go to cuba and they they increase lines and they're ready to go and then six months later or a year later they're saying you know at the traffic's been pretty slow we're going to cut back on some of these lines are not getting the boom that we thought we were going to get why well that's a mixed bag the reports that you've been hearing have to do with certain second tier airlines such as front tier in spirit wh

so. people have different opinions and they have a lot of ideal logical opinions, as well. >> moving fast may be difficult.

so logically this person argued the candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. and i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it although the justice department wanted to, i would have done it. because the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> again, also, you have testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal which is i think your way of saying i'll be honest and i'll be the head of the fbi and independent is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. and also, i mean, you see in my testimony also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi to be a part in a way because it's creditability is important to a president and to the country. so i tried to hold the line and got very awkward and i then said you'll always have honesty from me and he said honest loyalty and i ended this awkwardness. >>

co—ordination between the campaign and russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate, so logicallyortant to a president and to the country. so i tried to hold the line. hold the line. it got very awkward. i then said, "you‘ll always have honesty from me." he said "honesty loyalty" i ebbing seeded in a way to end this awkwardness. you are fired without any explanation or anything else? there was an explanation, ijust anything else? there was an explanation, i just don‘t anything else? there was an explanation, ijust don‘t buy it. well, yes. so you‘re fired. do you believe that you were fired because you refused to take the president‘s direction. is that the ultimate reason? i don't know for sure. i know i was fired. again, i take the president‘s words, i know i was fired because of something about the way i was conducting the russian investigation in some way putting pressure on him and some way irritating him. he decided to fire me because of that. i can‘t go further than that. the russian be investigation as you pointed out, as my colleagues have reflect liberal democrat, is one o

so, logically, this person argued the candidate's knowledge, understanding, would logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so, i understand that argument. but my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair. and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it. although if the justice department had wanted to i would have done it because of the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> now, again, also, you've testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him. and you responded you'd be honestly loyal. which is your way of saying i'll be honest and i'll be ahead of the fbi independent, is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. and also, you see it in my testimony. i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi to be a part, in a way, because it's credibility is important to a president and total country. and so, i tried to hold the line. hold the line. it got very awkward. and then i said you'll always have honesty from me. he said honest loyalty. and i saw th

so logically come this person argued the candidate's knowledge , understanding would become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. i understood the argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea publicly saying it. if the justice department wanted to, i would have done it. testifiedalso you that the president asked repeatedly to be loyal to him, he responded that you would be honestly loyal, which is your way of saying, i will be honest and i will be ahead of the fbi. is that fair? mr. comey: tt is correct. i tried honest first. i also try to explain to him why it is in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi be a part because it's credibility is important to a president into the country. and so, i tried to hold the line and it got very awkward. i then said, you will always have honesty for me. he said honest/loyalty. and i use that to end the awkwardness. >> and you were fired. mr. comey: there was a nation, i just don't buy it -- there was an explanation, i just don't buy it. >> do you believe you ar

coordination between the campaign an russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate, so logically, this person argued, this candidate's knowledge, understanding will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds. so i understood that argument. my view was that, what i sawed to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it, though if the justice department had wanted to, i would have done it because to have the duty to correct and the slippery slope problem. >> and again, you've also testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and you responded you would be honestly loyal, which is your way of saying i will be honest and the head of the f.b.i. and independent. is that fair? >> correct. i tried honest first. also, you see it in my testimony, i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the f.b.i. to be a part, in -- apart, in a way, because its credibility is important to a presidentened the country, and, so, tried to hold the line. it got very awkward. an

so logically this person argued the candidate's knowledge understanding, will logically become a part inquiry if it proceeds. and so, i understood that argument. my view was that, that what i said to the president was accurate and fair, fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it. although justice department wanted to i would have done it because the duty to correct and slippery slope problem. >> again also you testified that the president asked you to repeatedly be loyal to him, you replied would be honestly loyal, you're way saying i will be honest and head of fbi an independent, is that fair. >> correct. i tried honest first. also, you see it in my testimony. also tried to explain to him why it is in his interests and every president's interests for the fbi to be a part in a way because its credibility is important to the president and to the country. so i tried to hold the line. got very awkward. i then said, you will always have honesty from me. honest loyalty? i acceded to end the awkwardness. >> culmination of all this events you're summarily fired without any explan

so, let's use logic and common sense. if russia really was going to hack the elections through this system, wouldn't they have targeted the key swing states? if that does not blow the russia conspiracy theory completely out of the water that you are being fed today, well, there's also this. back in january while testifying before congress, the former director of national intelligence -- james clapper, he said that russian election interference did not have any impact of actual vote tallies. watch him. >> they did not change any vote tallies or anything of that sort. we have no way of gauging the impact that certainly the intelligence community can't gauge the impact it had on choices in the electorate made. >> sean: james call me and the current director of the nsa have also said the same thing. on top of that, we also have the former director of national intelligence james clapper and several prominent democrats admitting -- we played this before -- no smoking gun that they have seen. no evidence whatsoever. in spite of

that phones today are so different that that logic should no longer apply. se the supreme court will hear in the fall and decide whether the police, when they want to try to track you, need to give a search warrant first, hallie. >> pete, quickly, over the next three to four weeks here, we expect the supreme court decisions onever other big cases, right? >> reporter: right. well, the first thing is othe president's executive order. it will be at least a week before the supreme court does anything about that. the government as you know late last week asked for permission to begin enforcing the executive order while the supreme court considers whether to take up the appeal. but late last week the court gave the challengers a week to respond to the test, so nothing will happen in a while for that. but yes, the big cases pending are bans that many states have on giving money directly to churches, is that constitutional or not. very interesting question about whether the first amendment free speech question on whether the government can ban offensive trademarks. i

you said the bigger the group the lower the cost, so i'm taking your argument to its logical conclusion. >> so, no, i'm talking about when people join together, large associations with a good idea. collective bargaining is not a bad idea. labor, getting together. but that's not the government doing it. that's just people getting together, have more leverage in the marketplace. so i'm all for trying to balance the equation with insurance companies. i think they have too much power, but i am not willing to have the government break them up. >> thank you very much. good to have you with me. you heard him mention senator sanders. senator, good to have you with me. you heard rand paul, some of his argument there. he says insurance is too expensive. >> i also heard, erin, if my ear piece was correct, i heard him talk about gu lags. i live 50 miles away from canada. we have national health care throughout every major country in europe, the u.k., france, germany. not quite sure they are gu logs. the truth is the united states is the only major country not to guarantee health care to all people

potential coordination between the campaign in russia, the head of the campaign is the candidate, so logically this person argued that the candidates knowledge, understanding would logically become a part of your inquiry. i understood that argument. my view was that what i said to the president was accurate and fair and fair to him. i resisted the idea of publicly saying it. the justice department wanted me to, i would have done it. >> again, also, you've testified that the president asked you repeatedly to be loyal to him and he responded that you would be honest lay loyal. which a jury of saying i'll be honest and the head of the fbi. is that fair? >> correct. i try to be honest first. i also tried to explain to him why it's in his interest and every president's interest for the fbi to be a part in a way because its credibility is important to a president and the country. i tried to hold the line, it got very awkward and i then said, you'll always have honesty from me, he said honest loyalty and i use that as a way to end the awkwardness. >> there was an excellent nation, i just don't buy it

it seems like there are so many disparate opinions within the party it's impossible to have a logicaln with so many of these. they may not be in favor of single payer per se, but they are in favor a watered down version of obamacare. >> they are complaining as much as the democrats. your issue about technology that should be driving prices down. but it doesn't do this. 237 it's one place where the prices go up. yoget imbursed by third parties, and they are forced to do it. they may complain now and then. but they were all for this obamacare. this is corporatism at its worst. the run problem is they get stuck and defend what's happening. they say that must be preenterprise and it isn't. >> they shifted the money from the government to the insurance company. sow it's corporate welfare on the grandest scale. thank you for your time and expertise. i appreciate it. oliver stone interviewed vladimir putin at the kremlin. and the russian president has interesting things to say regarding gender and sexuality. when asked by stone if he ever had off days, putin stated, i am not a woman so i don