>> chiefs are hours away from their meeting with president-elect trump. they will make their case that russia interfered in the u.s. election. on thursday, they told congress i went well beyond hacking e-mails and spreading of so-called fake news. >> just yesterday, gop in attendance, they listened and acknowledged with little pushback. that leaves one major republican standing in defiance of what seems so clear to so many, and that one republican is the president-elect. trump is going to get this more detailed briefing today. the question is, will he accept the apparent reality or continue to cast doubts on the intel agencies. we're still two weeks from inauguration day. let's begin our coverage with cnn's jason carroll live at trump tower in new york. >> reporter: good morning, chris. we're now hours away from the president-elect receiving that intelligence briefing where the
intelligence officials will show him the evidence they have, showing that russia was behind the cyber attacks. the question is, going forward, will it be enough to finally convince him? the heads of the fbi, cia, nsa and the director of national intelligence will meet face-to-face with president-elect donald trump today to brief him on their findings about russian cyber attacks. >> i don't think we've ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election process. >> reporter: dni head james clapper making it crystal clear at a congressional hearing yesterday that all 17 u.s. intelligence agencies believe russia med ld with the u.s. election. >> i do think public trust and confidence in the intelligence community is crucial. >> indirectly calling out trump for his repeated attempts to
undermine their conclusion. >> i think there's a difference between skepticism and disparagement. >> reporter: trump continues to strike conspiratorial tone tweeting, the dnc would not allow the fbi to see its info after it was supposedly hacked by russia. how and why are they so sure about hacking if they never even requested an examination of the computer servers? what is going on. former chairman of the joint chiefs, retired general martin dempsey breaking his strident rule not to comment on politics tweeting, intelligence is hard, thankless work. fortunately we have dedicated, patriotic and courageous men and women on the job. thanks. >> grow up, donald. grow up. >> vice president joe biden calling trump's comments dangerous. >> for a president not to have
confidence in, not be prepared to listen to the myriad of intelligence agencies is absolutely mindless. >> reporter: to the surprise of critics, the president-elect tapped dan coates to replace clapper. trump's transition team insisting he supports the intelligence community pushing back on reports that the president-elect wants to revamp the dni. >> there is no truth to the idea of restructuring the intelligence community int infrastructu infrastructure. >> reporter: trump's team did signal an about face on one of his biggest campaign promises. >> who is going to pay for the wall? >> reporter: house republican officials say trump is looking to ask u.s. taxpayers, not mexico to pay for his proposed border wall. republicans may try to add billions of dollars to a massive spending bill if mexico refuses to pay for it.
>> reporter: trump tweeting about the wall this morning saying mexico will end up paying for the wall. he says what would ends up happening is that mexico would pay back the u.s. for the cost of the wall. if that did happen and republicans choose to go that route, that could lead to a major showdown with senate democrats who could force a government shutdown. trump in his part, in addition to receiving the intelligence briefing on russian cyber attacks today, will meet with magazine editors including vogue and "vanity fair." president-elect trump is about to get all the details from u.s. intelligence chiefs. cnn learned it will include the identities of the operatives who served as the go-betweens for the russians and wikileaks. cnn justice correspondent hef van perez is live in washington with more. >> reporter: u.s. officials tell kn the u.s. has identified
intermediaries they believe provided the wikileaks websites the democratic party e-mails. but this is among the pieces of information that the top intelligence officials are expected to provide president-elect donald trump in a meeting in new york in the next few hours. today is the first time trump will see an extensive intelligence report that looks at not the only russian hacks of the democratic party groups, but also cyber hacks going all the way back to 2008 election year. we're told by officials that u.s. intelligence agencies also collected intercepts of russian officials expressing happiness at donald trump's victory in 2008. saying the intercepts aren't necessarily smoking gun evidence against the russians but part of the broader evidence they've put together. the director of national intelligence james clapper said yesterday that the intelligence agencies believe the information points at russia more resolutely than when they first announced
it back in october. wikileaks founder julian assange has said that the wikileaks never knows its sources. at this point the plan is for the public to see a declassified version of the intelligence report next monday. >> evan, thank you very much. there's lots to discuss. let's bring in independent senator from maine angus king, a member of the irn tell generals and armed services committee. >> let's start with what happened yesterday on capitol hill. you had a very interesting exchange with dni james clapper where you basically said prove it, what is your evidence that the russians were behind this. let me play this for everyone. >> people in maine are skeptical and they want to have evidence and proof. i'm hearing prove it. >> we have incested billions and we put people's lives at risk to glean such information.
and so, if we were to fool somely expose it in such a way that would be completely persuasive to everyone, then we can just kiss that off because we'll lose it. >> senator, what about that answer? will that satisfy your constituents in maine? >> i think there are a couple of levels on this. as the reporter just mentioned, there are going to be classified briefings. there was one yesterday to the president, today to mr. trump, the intelligence committee will get classified briefings. here is the issue. the intelligence term is -- if you tell all, you're compromising your sources and impairing national security because you won't be able to go back to those sources. peel could lose their lives in that situation. the all-time classic case of this was coventry in world war ii when winston churchill, they broke the german codes, they new
coventry was going to be bombed. the question was do we warn coventry and thereby tip-off the germans that we have the codes. he made the decision not to give the warning because he didn't want to give away the sources and methods. >> so, given that, how will these skeptics ever be convinced including mr. trump? >> well, mr. trump is going to get the full briefing. he's going to get all the details and he's going to get what should be persuasive to anyone. the question is how much of that can be made public. he has the highest classification level. he can hear this information without without it going public. the real issue is how do people in peoria or bangor, maine, decide it's accurate. at some point you have to have some confidence in the people whose job it is to collect this information and to provide this to the american public. this is a tough issue, i understand it. it's one of balance where, if
you kbgive away all your source you're compromising national security on an ongoing basis. >> understood. since mr. trump will have that fulsome explanation, what do you expect to hear from mr. trump afterwards? >> i think that's anybody's guess. my guess is, based upon what i've seen, he's going to have a more sober assessment of what this is all about, and i would suspect a kind of more serious response saying, now that i've seen all the data, i understand this is a serious problem and we're going to get to the bottom of it. i hope that's his response because, in the long run, these people are his eyes and ears, and to denigrate their work and their sack fights on behalf of the country isn't going to serve him well in the long run. if he doesn't listen to the people who are experts and professionals and trained to give him this information, who is he going to listen to when he has to make a tough decision. >> senator, i also want to ask
you about something else that has developed this morning, that is the suggestion from some on mr. trump's team and even mr. trump in his tweets, that the border wall with mexico that he promised will not at first be paid for by mexico as was often suggested during the campaign, but, in fact, will be funded by congress and the taxpayers, and later mexico will reimburse it. in congress will you go along with that? >> well, i think it should be mentioned first that the comprehensive immigration bill that passed the senate by a bipartisan majority two or three years ago, the house never brought it up, had in it substantial funds for border security improvements. bob corker was the author of that provision. that opportunity was lost. i have to tell you, my first thought, we'll pay for it and we'll pay it back made me think of repeal and replace obamacare. we'll repeal it now and replace it but won't tell you what it
is. i always thought it was improbable that mexico was going to somehow be coerced to pays the tens of billions that this is going to cost. they said during the campaign specifically they were not. i think if we're going to build a wall, we're going to have to pay for it. maybe there can be some contribution for mexico. it's certainly not anything we can book. >> let's talk about a few developments on the repeal and replace obamacare front. house speaker paul ryan announced yesterday that the gop will try to strip all the federal funding from planned parenthood as part of the repeal of obamacare. will they have the votes for that? >> they'll certainly have the votes in the house. it depends on what form it takes when it comes to the senate. i've never understood that. number one, federal funds don't go for abortions. that's been against the law for 20, 30 years. this isn't a case of taking money away that's now going for abortions. it's taking money away that now
goes for cancer screenings and health checkups and std analysis and health care for millions of people, women across the country. the other piece that i found ironic is, if you don't like abortion, planned parenthood and the delivery of contraceptive services is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and pregnancies that might be dangerous and thereby cut the um number of abortions. it seems to me it's a self-defeating move. it's just the idea of defund planned parenthood. planned parenthood, i don't know, 96, 97% of what they do has nothing to do with abortion. this is a symbolic gesture that's going to hurt health care for women across the country. >> in terms of the repealing of obamacare, it sounds like the latest plan, i think according to john cornyn at least, is to repeal it wholesale which they do have the votes for and mr. trump would sign, and then
replace it piecemeal. they like some of the ingredients, some of the parents of the provisions in obamacare, and they would insert those back into law. what do you make of that plan? >> i've always said it ought to be replaced and repealed. if they want to repeal, let's see what the replacement is. this is bait and switch kind of thing. to repeal it -- by the way, repealing it is going to throw the insurance market into chaos. it's going to threaten a lot of people's coverage, something like 30 million people across the country. that's a lot of people and threaten rural hospitals. there are ramifications that i think opponents are trying to understand. that's why i think there's a sense of let's slow down a bit, fellows and see where we're going. the results are going to be
very, very problematic across the board. i don't understand -- except for trying to honor a bumper sticker campaign promise, repeal obamacare, slow down, talk about what we're going to do. i for one have been willing for years to talk about curing some of the defects in obamacare. nobody ever said it was a perfect law, but it's always repeal and then we'll talk. i think the talk and discussion -- i think the burden should be on those who want to repeal it to say to the american people, here is how we're going to replace it. don't give us vague assurances, here is how it's goings to work. this is very complicated stuff. >> senator angus king, thank you very much. always great to have you on "new day." >> thank you alisyn. how will the president-elect respond to the plan to have taxpayers pay for the border wall. trump senior adviser kellyanne conway joins us next.
. in just hours president-elect donald trump will receive even deeper proof that russia is to blame for the hacks during our election. it's going to be a highly classified intelligence report that will go into sourcing and methods that can't be made public to everybody, but the conclusions have been clear. we saw it in congress. we've seen it for well over a month. will the president-elect finally accept what seems so clear to so many? joining us now, senior adviser to president-elect trump kellyanne conway. it's a new year and i wish you the best. >> thank you, chris. same to you. >> so new year, but same problem that faced you at the end of the year. you're in this bad situation where the president-elect is an outlier not accepting the proof that russia is behind the hacks of the election. why does he continue to fight what is so obvious to so many? >> chris, how is it obvious? have you seen a briefing?
he's getting the briefing today, and we just were very concerned about all the leaks that happened, people running to the media rather than running to house intelligence closed door meetings. just this week our own president, president obama received the final report just yesterday the hearings on capitol hill. the idea that somehow conclusive evidence has been out there in the public domain provided to the president-elect is simply not true, and the other thing that's going on here that's very disappointing to us in this building is how much people are conflating alleged russian hacking with the actual outcome of the election. it's just nonsense, the idea that team clinton is still running around, people are doing it, your network is doing it constantly. that's what we need to push back on. the idea there's a direct nexus between russian hacking which we're against any foreign government interference in our cyber security -- speaking of cyber security, did you hear the hearing yesterday?
this country's cyber security is woefully under served. hasn't been tackled sufficiently in the last eight years. >> first, the intelligence agency also said disparagement is not the best way to help bolster our cybersecurity. you know hat that was going towards, the idea of clinton's people saying the legitimacy of the election is tied to the revelation that russia is behind the hacking is political. that's not something that the president-elect should be putting first in his priorities. and the idea that just yesterday or only today, kellyanne, is when you can safely say that russia was involved is nonsense. for months they've come out and say this. >> finish the sentence. involved in what? >> russia was involved in the hacking. >> for what purpose? >> that's irrelevant. >> it's not irrelevant. >> not irrelevant to you. >> i let you speak. let me frame it.
clapper came out in october -- >> you're not asking a question. you're making statements. >> i'm giving you context. you made conclusions. >> that's an opinion. >> tell me what's an opinion. did clapper come out in early october and say we know it is russia. >> what didn't obama say in response? >> no, no, no. >> he said to vladimir putin, knock it off. what does knock it off mean? >> did clapper come out in early october and say it's russia. >> what is it that we know? that russia is trying to interfere with the election results? do you think they wanted donald trump as president. >> did clapper come out in early october and say we know russia is behind the hacks, period, full stop. >> behind the hacks of the dnc? >> yes. >> let's complete the whole sentence. >> i'll let you complete it the way you want. is the answer going to come. >> he said that. yesterday, according to cnn, a cnn report that i read in the
news that the fbi said the dnc never exceeded to the fbi's simple request to allow fbi access. >> again, irrelevant. irrelevant. >> then why did cnn report on it. if it's irrelevant -- >> irrelevant to my question which is why won't the president-elect admit that russia was involved in the hacks. >> he gets his intelligence briefing today. >> he's had so much opportunity to know the answers around this. >> speaking of disparagement, speaking of disparagement, i really believe that there are those out there that are trying to just -- there are those out there who are trying to delegitimize his presidency, review the election results and you know it. >> he's helping that by refusing to accept the obvious about the intelligence community's conclusions about russia being behind the hacks. >> chris, we had a president of the united states in october who could have, when mr. clapper
said what he said, could have pushed back harder, but did not. what was he doing? he and hillary clinton and all of their teams were out there absolutely believing that she was going to be the next president. so let's not -- >> so shame on them. >> they politicized it. >> shame on them. >> because they didn't even understand america and what was going to happen. >> shame on them. why can't you divorce who is responsible for the hacks from the implications on the election? it seems to be creating -- >> it's not being divorced in the media. >> it seems to be motivating the president-elect to disrespect our intelligence agencies. >> that is not true. >> putting intelligence in kwoelgts and say, they ducked the meeting, they needed more time to put together the meeting. they never ducked the meeting. sean spicer said the same thing on this show. it seems like you can't divorce these two notions and it's creating a tough situation. >> i see you're very passionate about. >> sure i am. russia trying to hack during our
election being ignored by the president-elect, that's troubling. >> no, it's not. you're making conclusions up now. >> really? >> yes, you are. >> has he ever accepted that russia was behind the hacks? he did nothing but mock the intelligence community. >> y ear using words like disparagement. that's his opinion. you're giving your opinion. that's highly inappropriate. you just want to argue with me. >> not at all. i love you, kellyanne. you know it. i'm trying to put the facts out there and you're ducking the obvious. >> chris, by the way, not ducking a thing. not my style. here is the deal. the president-elect and all of us who work for him and the vice president-elect, i assure you, are against any foreign interference in the united states of america including through cyber security which obviously has not been a big priority for the last eight years. maybe that will change. number two, all the dnc had to
do was turn over the information the fbi requested according to, doorbell, please, ring, ring, ring, a cnn report i read. that's all they had to do. they refused to do that. we know all this because of the dnc e-mails. out want us to commit to a proposition to make everybody feel better about what? complete the sentence. >> that russia was behind the hacks. you didn't even say the word russia in the last minute and a half. >> i can say russia. i'll say russia a lot. you talk about the dnc. you don't talk about russia. why? >> if i get back the floor here uninterrupted, i'll talk about russia to you. >> please. >> let's talk about russia. in the last couple days of president obama's eight years of presidency, he's going to be tough on russia. seriously? i can't say it without laughing. that's why i'm not saying russia, trying to be respectful. expel 35 russian operatives after months before saying knock
it off, vlad. that's all he says. >> that makes it okay for the president-elect to deny rush's involvement. >> it doesn't make it right that we've been so weak on russia. >> what does that have to do with trump not admitting what the intelligence community is clear about. >> he gets his briefing today. >> he could have gotten a briefing whenever he wanted one on this issue. they were out there so early. >> chris, things are stated on your network and other places all day long that aren't factual. >> my friend, i deal with you. you deal with me i'm giving you a very simple question. >> why is this so important to you? >> here is why. here is why. because, as we heard yesterday in those hearings and as you well know. you know my respect for you is complete when it comes to your understanding of the issues. cyber security is a big deal. russia intervening in this election and getting away with it is a big deal. you need to be on the same page. so the leader of me and everyone in this country saying i don't
buy it. i believe julian assange, intelligence, we don't really know. that's troubling because they know it was russia. it raises this question that i don't understand why you want to raise which is why would trump shelter russia? >> let me ask you a question. he's not sheltering russia. don't say that again. >> how is he not? >> what has the current president done vis-a-vis russia -- >> i don't understand how the answer to the question is to blame the current president. >> i'm not blaming the current president. i'm asking a question. we're all frothing about russia. do you think president obama's legacy vis-a-vis russia. >> let's say the legacy with obama and russia is the worst, it couldn't be worst. how is president-elect trump helping by ignoring russia's role. >> the russians didn't want him elected because he has said very
clearly during the campaign and now as president-elect that he is going to modernize our nuclear capability, he's going to call for an increase in defense budget, he's going to have oil and gas exploration, all which goes against russia's economic and military interests. donald trump got elected in part because people want a tougher leader in the white house, a tougher commander-in-chief. let me ask you a question. as two fully recovered attorneys talking to each other right now. what's the end result here? what are the damages that you're talking about? >> what are the damages that i'm talking about? >> what's the nexus? i think you want your viewers to believe that the election results, it all came down to 70-000 plus plus in three states. it's so much more than that. >> kellyanne, i get your explanation for why you don't want to acknowledge the obvious about russia. i'm saying it's an interesting political calculation. if you want to keep relitigating the election, that's on you. if you want to entertain your critics you beat in the
election, that's on you. >> i don't want to relitigate the election. we won and that says a lot. that finishes many sentences. >> to me it finishes it completely. i'm saying that should not in any way compromise your desire to point the finger at russia and blame them, and these intercepts that the intel agencies got with the kremlin celebrating trump's win somewhat go against what you just said. >> that's ridiculous. >> you don't believe the intercepts? >> what i don't believe is that people are celebrating that donald trump won. >> then you don't believe it because they say they have intercepts from russian higher-ups. >> you want to talk about what i don't believe. here is what i don't believe. i don't believe that in october when clapper said what he said that cnn didn't shut down conversation about everything else and focus on this issue. if it's so important now, why wasn't it so important then?
>> so shame on us, too. >> should it have been that you thought the election result was going to be different and so it didn't matter as much and it matters more now. >> that's pure conjecture by you. i don't want why you want to get into of this. >> because i watched all your broadcasts, and the road to 270, not the road to the popular vote because there's no prize for that. the road to 270 was very clear if you watched kn. it was so obvious it was going to be a blowout. that's why you're doing it now. >> that's not my agenda. my agenda is to ask you questio questions. >> the fifth time i'm going to tell you, we're against any foreign government hacking or interfering with the united states. >> by whom? >> we're politicizing intelligence. >> by whom? >> by anyone. >> like who? >> by anyone. >> like russia? how about russia? that's who the intel agencies are dealing with right now. that's who you're apparently
ignoring. that's what i'm asking. >> i'm not ignoring them at all. we have great respect for the intelligence communities, they will be here this afternoon to brief the president-elect and he will have that preefing along with his vice president-elect and his intelligence and security advisers, and he will receive that information. remember, the moment you mention russian hacking and the election, the same sentence, you know what the impression is for a lot of the viewers. >> i do not think a political calculation should be fueling your recognition of a cyber threat of this magnitude. that's my answer to your question that you asked me a few minutes ago. >> let me ask you a question, since this is your topic. >> this is the topic. >> the topic du jour for you. there are a lot of other topics, why minority leader schumer has now promised to only confirm one department head or cabinet appointee per week. really? president obama had seven cabinet nominees confirmed on january 20, 2009, the day he was
inaugurated. he had five more -- >> decisions as democrats should be scrutinized and they will. >> he had the courtesy of having them confirmed on day one. why? because we as a nation must function. president george w. bush came in through a supreme court decision. >> those kind of politics get played. hoe about scotus with scalia's seat? they won't have a vote. they went back and forth. mcconnell played some weird pant mime about it. >> now you're pontificating. >> kellyanne, if you don't like what i say, that's on you. if you ask me a question, i'll answer it. >> are we going to get the same courtesy that president obama and president george w. bush got? they will in fact give confirmation. >> we'll see.
if they do, they should be scrutinized and criticized. >> what do you think is more important, the topic you want to cover ad infinitum and/or us having a secretary of the treasury, commerce, state and defense on day one or close to it. >> i think they all matter. this goes away easily if the president-elect would accept what is so obvious to the intel community. one other topic, paying for the wall. this morning the president-elect put out two tweets, one said just to get it done quickly, we're going to pay for it and mexico will pay it back. then he changed it to the word later, they'll pay us back later. and then you said this isn't coming from us. it's coming from congress. they want to look at funding it for themselves. so assuming that's true, is that what the president-elect wants? does he want the united states to pay for the wall? >> no. the president-elect has made very clear two things. he's going to build the wall and mexico is going the pay for it.
congress, bau because that's wh things are paid for, congress is investigating the possibility of paying for it to make it more speedy and then having mexico pay for it after the fact. that's what congress is doing. mr. trump has always been very clear. nothing has changed. he's building the wall. mexico will pay for it. he ran on that. you can take that promise and he'll keep that promise. in fact, he's already discussing ways to get it done. this is a guy since he's been elected in two short months, chris, is getting things done, putting together an a-plus cabinet that even detractors has credited as being a cabinet of serious people who are going to get things done. u.s. employers deciding they're not going to ship jobs over mexico, they're going to keep them here. that happens on a fairly regular base business. >> jury is out on -- >> he's not even the president yet. the jury is not out on all the unfinished business that he's
inheriting. that's very clear to us. i'm happy to come back on and talk about that some time. >> you are welcome any time to come on "new day." >> all right. i'll see you monday. >> whenever you want. you can even come into the studio. i'll make your coffee myself. >> thank you. but i have a meeting with the president-elect momentarily and i'm sure he's watching. >> i'm sure he is. and we appreciate his viewership. >> thank you. >> be well, kellyanne. >> god bless you. bye-bye. we have a lot to discuss. that was a calorie burner. let's get to the bottom line. david trucker senior correspondent for "the washington examiner" and host of podcast examining politics and "washington post" reporter josh rogan. josh, i'll start with you. you watched this exchange between kellyanne and chris. is it that they fear so much the delegitimizing of the president-elect that they are so reluctant to talk about what the intel agencies have concluded,
that russia was involved in meddling. >> i think chris got to the core of the issue. these are two separate things. you canned a mitt the russians did the hacking without conceding it affected the election. for the trump team and for president-elect trump they can't divorce those two issues and their surrogates aren't permitted to divorce them. what i thought was newsy out of the interview was kellyanne conway saying the russians didn't want trum to win. that's the new line. this was started by tom cotton in yesterday's hearing. now it's being adopted. >> the evidence suggests otherwise. >> of course the russians wanted trump to win. vladimir putin has a long history of contention with hillary clinton. he thought she interfered with his election. it's clear that the russians wanted trump to win. this evidence just bolsters that. >> david, let's bring you in here. usual i'll get attacked by the left because i'll say i don't care about the motivations for
the hacking because you have to deal with who did it first. that's how you do your defense strategy on it. the right will attack me today for going after kellyanne conway on this. how do you reconcile these positions that he doesn't want to acknowledge russia did it because he doesn't like the political implication. by fighting the political implication he puts himself in this terrible national security position of ignoring what's so clear to the intel community. >> right. it's not just about this topic. i think that's what creates such an impression here. let's remember where we were in the campaign all the way through. donald trump throughout the campaign said really nice things about vladimir putin unlike almost every republican you can find in washington. whenever anybody would bring up the facts that vladimir putin basically is a quasi dictator, that he imprisoned jury roomists, probably had political opponents killed orr injured, donald trump would brush it off by saying, look, we do bad things also. this goes back to his
attemptality a russian reset part two or three to cozy up to vladimir putin because maybe he can charm him in a way that bush and obama were unable to do. it makes it appear as though there's more to it than just the acute -- the obvious. it was obvious in your interview, there, the acute sensitivity to the idea that the election wasn't as strong for trump as they want -- as they think it is. it goes beyond that because of the relationship that he has tried to establish with putin and the unwillingness to admit that russians are adversarial to us and our interests around the world and seeking to do us harm. >> we're tiptoeing around us. is there some there there or is this just about wanting to reset the relationship? vladimir putin could be an important ally, mr. trump believes, or is there some sort of sub text here that we should know about?
>> especially towards the end of the campaign there was a lot of reporting about links between the trump campaign and the kremlin. the fbi looked into it, harry reid was pushing this very hard. they didn't find much. we can't go beyond the reporting to say there is a link or some sort of conspiracy. that hasn't been proven. people are still looking into it. especially democrats this congress. the favorable view that donald trump really wants to make a reset with russia, sure, that's possible. the fact that he's attacking the intelligence community, siding with assange, praising putin, that seems very weird. it's making a lot of people both inside the system and outside the system very uncomfortable. >> you wiped up in the same place. to echo what josh said, i haven't seen anything compelling that puts trump in a compromised role with any ruks entity. this posture is such a blatant refusal to deal with what's obvious, it fuels the skepticism.
kellyanne, smart as hell, was wise to not touch assange and any type of suspicion about russia. there's no good answer about what's motivating this except, we don't like how it sounds. >> chris, this is making republicans on capitol hill very upset. >> very nervous. >> what they were telling me yesterday, and i talked to a number of them. once donald trump is actually the president in a few weeks and has his team in place, he's going to take a different approach to the intelligence community because it's going to be his team and he's going to be in charge. what does concern republicans is, look, they're now in charge of the government or are about to be in a couple weeks. anything on the national security front that makes americans less safe, attacks that happen domestically or in the west are going to be on them. americans are going to look to them and wonder what the heck they're doing. especially because they have been dealing -- some of these republicans have been here through multiple administrations, have seen other presidents try to woo putin or treat him softly and seen it go nowhere. they're trying to express to the
new administration don't get bamboozled and start recognizing putin for who he is, a bad guy who is uniquely capable of doing bad things to us. they'd like to see him do things about it, try to fix it in ways obama didn't. >> josh, very quickly. you have new reporting about the secretary of defense. share it with us if you would? >> seems to be trouble in paradise. james mattis was nominated about a month ago. what several transition sources tell me is that mattis has been rejecting all the names given to him by the trump transition team. >> why? >> he doesn't like the people they're suggesting. he wants more control over the process. he wants never-trump republicans to be included. the trump transition team doesn't want that. overall this is the two sides squaring off. there's going to be a dynamic between a very powerful defense secretary and a white house that's very insular and paranoid. they're trying to figure that out now. there is a clash. it could all get resolved.
u. breaking news. the final jobs report of obama's presidency is here. cnn's christine romans breaks it down. >> the last jobs report of the presidency. 2.2 million jobs overall for 2016, 156,000 net new jobs in september. november was revised higher to 200,000. that's what the job growth looks like in the final year. altogether pour the president presidency, a net 11 million new jobs. i looked at the numbers for the first year when president obama was in office, 5 million jobs disappeared. remember how ugly that was? the next seven years of the administration slowly climbing back. that's what it looks like for the unemployment rate. terrible days where the unemployment rate was above 6%, above 10% at one point. now 4.7%.
that's higher than the previous month. why? 184,000 people came out of the shadows, out of the sidelines and started looking for a job. that meant the labor market got a little bigger, so the unemployment rate ticked up. let me show you the sectors. health care, this has been a strong performer consistently. 43,000 jobs there. food services, bars and restaurants, manufacturing had a bit of reversal and posted job gains there. that's been one area of the economy lagging as you know. we saw 17,000 manufacturing jobs added. >> fascinating to see that tick back up. christine, thank you very much. stick around, we'll play you clips from this new documentary about debby reynolds and her daughter carey fisher. this is how hollywood remembers these two legends after their death. we'll talk about this next.
why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. it's my decision ito make beauty last. roc® retinol, started visibly reducing my fine lines and wrinkles in one week. and the longer i use it, the better it works. retinol correxion® from roc. methods, not miracles.™
>> no. no one knows how to use those anymore. >> wow, that was a clip from "bright lights" the debbie reynolds and carrie fisher documentary that appears tonight on hbo. this is a little more than a week after the mother and daughter movie stars passed away one day apart. so let's discuss it with nischelle turner, entertainment tonight host and cnn contributor and chloe mellas, our cnn entertainment reporter. the timing is uncanny here. this documentary was obviously already in the works. it was supposed to air in march, but they moved it up because of their deaths. what an interesting, co-dependent. >> yes. >> and complicated relationship they had. >> you're so right, alisyn. they had a very tumultuous relationship. it was very public that they weren't getting along when she was a teen. then they became best friends. debbie reynolds is the one who
moved right next door to carrie fisher. they had a small sidewalk separating their homes. in this documentary you'll see they finished each other's sentences. >> nischelle, my friend, few know how deeply encyclopedic your knowledge is of what has happened in hollywood. can you think of a parallel to where two people pass away in such close proximity and there happens to be something ready to go to tell a story about these two that many didn't even know? >> no. absolutely not. i was thinking about that just the other day, chris. when they did die, and we knew this documentary was coming out, i said at one point, guys, this is going to get moved up because we all want to see it. i have not -- i can't remember anything like this. it's almost like it was destined to happen in this order because it's mind-boggling how everything has kind of lined up in the progression of this story with the two of them. >> it's the perfect way to tie
up everything this weekend for them. yesterday they had a bunch of celebrities visiting the compound in los angeles where they both lived side by side. you had gwyneth paltrow, jamie lee curtis, alex trebek as a memorial viewing. today is their joint funeral. to have it end this weekend with this documentary, it just kind of nicely ties everything up for hollywood royalty. >> nischelle, mothers and daughters have complicated relationships. that's not a revelation. but these two in particular, obviously they're a hollywood life legends that we've all followed. for debbie reynolds to die -- her son describes it basically of a broken heart, that she didn't want to go on without her daughter. >> todd fisher has spoken extensively about this, and we did see -- we saw this all play out in front of us in public. debbie reynolds said at one
point there was a ten-year span where carrie fisher did not speak to her. ten years went by where they had this real angst with each other, and then they made their way back to each other, and they became inseparable. todd described it, too, as a mother's undying love for their child. i think it was interesting because when carrie fisher had her daughter, billy lord, she really made a conscious effort for that not to happen to them. billy was her world. they were super close and didn't have those same issues. she was like, i'm not going to go through this same thing with my daughter. debbie reynolds also said i want to be very close to billy. she didn't want those issues happening. i love the way they really repaired and mentioned and at the end of the day they are together. at the memorial yesterday that chloe was talking about, meryl streep was there, gave a eulogy and sang krshcarrie fisher's
favorite song "happy days are here again." at the end everyone singing along. >> i assume the family was consulted about moving up the date of the documentary. i hope this helps them a little bit with some closure. >> chloe and nischelle, thank you very much. we'll look forward to watching the documentary. "newsroom" with carol costello begins after this very quick break. have a great weekend. when you hit 300,000 miles. or here, when you walked away without a scratch. maybe it was all the times it got you safely out there. or all the times it got you out of there. maybe it was the day your baby came home. or maybe the day you realized your baby was not a baby anymore.
every subaru is built to earn your trust. because we know what you're trusting us with. subaru. kelley blue book's most trusted brand. and best overall brand. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
good morning. i'm carol costello, thank you very much for joining me. president-elect donald trump coming face-to-face with intel chiefs he's been slamming for weeks. the director of national intelligence, the heads of the fbi, cia and nsa will brief president-elect trump on a new report detailing russia's cyberattacks and meddling in the u.s. elections, that includes intercepted conversations of russian officials celebrating trump's win, even congratulating each other. the classified reports going as far as naming go-betweens that russia used to deliver hacked e-mails to wikileaks. our team is covering the story from every angle possible. we begin with cnn justice correspondent evan perez in washington. good morning, evan. >> reporter: good morning, carol. oh, to be a