>> will you come back please. >> certainly. >> thank you. >> i saw that tom price was right about obamacare. >> you believe people will be uncovered? >> absolutely no question about that. >> thank you for watching this morning. for our viewers here in the united states new day cons right now. >> president trump has to provide the american people with evidence. >> we'll be able to ask is there any truth to this. >> the president has asked for the investigation into surveillance to be included. >> former campaign adviser admits to a private twitter exchange. >> this is undercutting the trump agenda. >> 5 to 10 million people are going to have no health insurance. >> i can't answer that question. >> do you want to hear from paul ryan. >> his way or the highway. >> you're not going to make an
american do what they don't want to do. >> legal challenges to president trump's revised travel ban mounting. >> our biggest objection to the new executive order is that it's still like the first. >> this is new day. good morning, lawmakers demanding evidence of president trump's claim he was wiretapped by his predecessor. john mccain calling on the predecessor to prove his claim. he's a phone call away from the answer. mccain says prove it or retract it. >> so the house intelligence committee is giving the justice department a deadline of today to provide any evidence of this wiretapping claim by the president. now an adviser to president trump suggests there's machine
than just wiretapping. what she was talking about there? this as we're 50 days into the trump presidency. let's begin this house with joe johns at the white house. good morning. >> good morning. it's coming to a head this morning all the doubt and skepticism that the department of justice is going to be able to come up to anything responsive to this request especially when you have people like former director of national intelligence on the record denying the president's assertion. still this moment is important because of how it could effect president trump's credibility going down the road. >> there's one of two choices. either retract or provide the information that the american people deserve. >> measure mounting to provide proof of his claim that former president obama wiretapped phones at trump tower during last year's election. >> i believe the charge is true
and i also believe the president of the united states can clear this up in a minute. >> fwhoun of the president's top advisers illuding to alleged monitoring that she said may have involved more than wiretapping. >> all of this as the house intelligence committee is calling on the justice department to present evidence today to substantiate the president's wiretapping claim. >> i don't expect we're going to see any evidence. either the president quite deliberately for some reason made up this charge or perhaps more disturbing, the president really believes this. >> the committee has also been looking into possible ties between trump's campaign and russia. as former campaign adviser and
long time confidant admits to a private twitter exchange between him and the hacker that claimed responsibility for breaching the democratic national committee's computer network last summer and whom u.s. officials believe is a front for russian military intelligence. a tool used to meddle in last year's election. stone telling the washington times his conversation with the hacker were innocuous noting they happened after the dnc was hacked. it comes as the white house says it was aunaware that michael flynn was lobbying to help the turkish government during the u.s. presidential campaign. >> meanwhile the work goes on here at the white house. the president holds his first cabinet meeting all but two of his nominees have been confirmed. chris. >> all right joe. every time we want to say that
we'll double down. it's getting a little cliche. there's no reason to say it. you just saw white house counselor kellyanne conway alleging without evidence that surveillance of the trump campaign may be broader than even wiretapping. take a listen. >> with what the president has asked is for the investigation into surveillance to be included in the on going investigation of the house and senate intelligence committees are already doing. they have agreed to do that. that's smart. here's why. what is the existing investigation about? it's about the campaign's connection to russia and by the way, director clapper that worked for president obama was on television a week ago sunday. and he was being asked about the wiretapping and he said no one under his perview and that leaves a lot of people in the obama administration but he also said he had not seen a connection between russia and the campaign. >> all right now the reporter
conducting that interview is mike kelly. columnist that joins us now. good for you with this interview. you got everybody talking this morning. did you take it in the moment as kellyanne conway suggesting there may be more there or do you think she was just throwing things up into the air of the realm of the possible? >> i think the latter chris. i think she was throwing things up into the realm of the possible. but here's the problem. this isn't just anybody speaking here. this isn't like you and me at the bar suggesting that something may be going on here. this is the special council to the president suggesting that something may be going on so for that reason i think it's significant. >> and what did she make of the idea of the president being the one that can most quickly answer his own question? that he could pick up the phone and find out about what warrants were in place regarding him or his campaign. >> that's a very interesting question. what i think is going on here
chris is something even deeper. obviously there's the investigati investigation. now we're hearing from kellyanne conway that it might be a greater surveillance. she did not say where she came up with this idea but i think it's significant that the trump administration is employing the strategy to try to broaden this investigation. >> and by broaden is that a nice way of saying really distraction? because if they don't have any proof of these allegations and they are in one way the best suited to improve.
>> is it real or sit smoke and mirrors. here we are in the second week of this debate and we don't have a firm picture of that so yesterday when i sat down with kellyanne conway talking about a wide variety of issues when she started to talk about this, i don't think this was just a kind of flighty comment. i think that this is a serious strategy on the part of the trump administration and you know what i think is also at work here chris, something also deeper here. there is an enormous disdain within the trump administration. you probably picked this up yourself that they don't feel accepted by the democrats.
that there's still a lot of push back over the fact that hillary clinton lost this election so with the trump administration is throwing up here is these variety of allegations where they're somehow trying to tarnish the democrats in anyway possible. the issue here though however is do they have any evidence for that? and i think that's still a major question. >> well, you know, it's interesting. you use the word earlier, strategy, tactics, what is your take on that tactic of saying every time the democrats criticize them to have kellyanne or someone from the administration saying this is sour grapes essentially. they seem to say that about everything that comes up that's negative for the administration as a whole. >> that's right. that's right. well, chris, there is sour graps. let's be honest. i spent time talking to democrats as well. they're sour over the fact that hillary clinton lost this election. how that will workout i think and whether these two sides can come together and basically accept each other is going to really i think play into how
this government -- how effective this government is. but for now i think the strategy is fairly obvious. both sides are trying to diminish the other and try to delegitimize the other so what i think reflected here in kellyanne comments is a push back against what they believe to be the democrats strategy to delegitimize the trump administration. >> the difference between what we saw when obama became president, right? there was obviously sour grapes there as well. you saw the birther movement come as a result. this is different. trump was such a big part of the birther movement. you have republicans asking a lot of the same questions. you have an fbi and two different, three different congressional inquiries and seems to play as sour grapes, no? >> i think you're right, chris. this is the big hurdle.
beyond that we have a president saying that a former president wiretapped him. this isn't just some sort of mission impossible movie that we can go watch, you know, to get away from it all. this is playing out in real time and this is, a real strategy on the part of the trump administration as a way of pushing back on what they believe to be the democrats attempt to delegitimize them. >> it's definitely got us talking. no question about that in large part thanks to you mr. mike kelly. thank you for letting us use the interview and coming on this morning. appreciate it. >> sure chris, take care. >> what are republicans on the hill think of this as they wait for evidence on the president's wiretap claim? joining us now is one of them.
do you put faith in that suggestion? >> this is a good example of why we need to have a serious investigation that deal with the serious issues but there's other speculations and comments here and there that, you know, i can't comment on those. i can't even keep up with them all the time but there are serious questions, fundamental questions that deals not only with potential wiretapping. how did they respond to that. a couple of weeks ago we were talking about clearly illegal wiretapping and illegal leaking of classified and sensitive pieces of information and
understand better than we do now. >> one quick point of clarification. you said whether or not russia tried to interfere in the election. the intelligence community put out a consensus report saying they know that russia did hack during at the election in order to disrupt the election. are you questioning whether or not that happened? >> not at all. i was in moscow last sumner august and i came home and said on multiple occasions they're going to try to interfere with our election. >> right. >> we started holding hearings in september. this is something we have been aware of and very concerned about for really several months now. >> when we talk about it's hard to keep track of it do you believe the president of the united states is a phone call away from substantiating his own claim ifs he wanted to and in light of the fact that he has not why don't you question them as whether or not they're just a tack you lar distraction.
>> for the same reason i don't question every accusation made. we had people saying there was collusion between the trump campaign and russian government and intelligence agencies. we don't know that yet. that's something that we should understand as well. >> you're right though the president could release this information. in fact a committee has asked for this as well as other evidence to be released and we're hoping that evidence would be released before our first public hearing next week. it's important for the american people to know. if they come back and say this is true they deserve to know that. if they say there's no evidence to support that they deserve to know that as well. either way we want to get to the bottom of this and answer these questions and tell the american people. >> one point of curiosity is whether or not you see the wiretapping claim as equal to others that are under your basis of analysis right now. >> well we don't know because we don't know whether this or any of the other claims are true. >> do you really see it on even
par when you have the president come out of this with a tweet and says he just learned and there's speculation as to where he got it from media groups and he has the ability to make a phone call and get you answer the after accusing a former president of a felony and calling them bad or sick. do you see that as the same as these known contacts between staffers and russia. >> there's other things. here's the thing i would put in priority and that's what we know happened and that is there was very sensitive information. information that reveals some of our methods. information that reveels some of the tactics. if i were to put it as pry priority i would say that's one of them now because we know that illegal activity took place. after that you had various accusations and we should look into those once again. it's hard to say this one is more important than that one. they're all equally important and american people deserve answers to all of them. >> i hear you that people deserve answers but i don't
think that all speculation is created equally. if you want to talk about leaks of course you do. leaking has nothing to do with wiretaps. the wiretaps have only come from one place, the president and a series of tweets. there's been no other allegation made in that regard that i know of. can you put any more meat on the bones? has any agency raised it or brought it up independent of what the president said? >> we agree on that. that is that we have the president of the united states making a very serious accusation against the former opresident o the united states. that's an important issue and it's something that we have asked for the president to release any information regarding that and to do it as quickly as he can. once again hopefully by our public hearing next week just as we asked for other evidence to be declassified so we can bring it before the american people and explain it to them and tell them what we know at this point.
>> he could declassify it immediately. nobody has more authority than he does. if he wanted to do that he could have and if it was so important why wouldn't he prove it himself and it's getting equal weight. that's going to be a continuing question. let me ask you about something else. do you believe you will get a vote to the senate on the obamacare replacement bill next week. do you think you can get through the house that quickly? >> i do. that might be contrary to the public entment or thinking now but as a republican we campaigned on several key issues and one of them of course was replacing and improving the american health care replacing the aca and giving people access and giving them greater access and hopefully drive down the cost now it can be improved on.
i understand why some people have concerns but at the end of the day i believe we'll get this done. >> do you believe, this is the $64,000 question that we have a hard time getting members of your party to answer. do you believe that people are going to lose coverage when this comes out. >> well, we don't know. i would also add often times it's run. look how they scored balm care. >> they were right about certain parts and wrong about certain parts. >> exactly. it's hard to speculate on a score we don't have and then we look at the analysis and say do we think they're accurate? generally speaking there's this. the former president and administration compelled people to buy health care coverage that they couldn't afford. we hope to drive down the costs so that more and more people choose and can afford health care. now how the numbers play out with a cbo we'll see and maybe comment on at that time but
until we see it it's hard to comment on it. >> congressman stewart appreciate you being on new day as always. be well. >> weather, more than 100 million people right now all up and down the east coast under a winter storm watch and warnings ahead of this potentially historic march blizzard. winter weather already leaving it's mark. take a look. this is a home near rochester frozen from the moisture of that lake effect snow off lake ontario. chad meyers with us with the latest forecast with his boots ready to put them out. read do head out there? >> ready for tomorrow. it gets here at 2:00 in the morning and snows until about 8:00 in the morning and it's going to continue to snow. blizzard warnings across parts of the northeast and blizzard watches up toward boston. we won't get as much snow on the cape. just significant mixing with rain and snow mixing in. the snow starts in new york city. it's already snowing in d.c. by
this time tomorrow morning. snowing heavily in new york right now. 8:00. there could be thunder snow with this. this is a volatile system. could put 1 to 2 inches of snow on the ground every hour for many hours and then by wednesday it's completely gone. people say as good this going to be a miss. the most you could get is 23. the most in boston is 25 or 23. the least around 9. that's not a miss either. look at 24 inches potential if it's all snow. now there's some potential that it mixes in with wet snow or rain that keeps your numbers down. still as much potential but not as much total piling up. >> all right. i like a little sliver of hope there but i'll be seeing you in those boots soon enough. new accusations about
surveillance at trump tower senator chris murphy of connecticut joins us next. the ultrasound that can see inside patients, can also detect early signs of corrosion at our refineries. high-tech military cameras that see through walls, can inspect our pipelines to prevent leaks. remote-controlled aircraft, can help us identify potential problems and stop them in their tracks. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.
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
kellyanne conway, listen to what she said. >> there are many ways to surveil each other now, unfortunately. >> do you believe that was -- >> there was an article this week that talked about how you can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets. any number of different ways and
microwaves that turn into cameras, et cetera. so we know that's just a fact of modern life. >> sure. >> all right. how do democrats feel about that accusation made without any evidence? let's talk to chris murphy from connecticut. it's a fact of modern life. >> it is indeed. the internet of things allows us to hack into things but making the connection to surveilling the trump campaign, you say? >> i say this is all an intentional strategy, right? when the news starts to get bad for the trump administration they, you know, very intentionally and consistently try to say something out rages you, put it out there so that everybody picks it up and stops covering the bad news for the administration. >> what bad news are you talking about? the new polling. showing his numbers are going way down. >> numbers are going down. a new poll and people are going
to lose coverage. and the connection between the trump campaign and russia. there's a lot of bad news swirling around this administration. >> just to be clear you say the truth, again, there has been no collusion proved at all between the campaign and the russian hack. we have to learn more with the intelligence committee hearings starting next monday but his poll numbers have started going down in the daily tracking polls since he made the wire tapg claims. so it seems counter intuitive to double down on something like that. >> his poll numbers are going to go up and down and i don't know if you can attribute one to the other but, you know, what we do know is that we are learning new things every week. the trump campaign said for a long time that they had nothing to do with the change of the republican convention. the insertion of it into the platform. we now know they directed it. it might have come from trump himself. >> there is no evidence to show
that. yes the platform changed but you're making a connection that isn't proven to be there. >> the person that did it said that he did it on behalf of trump the candidate right? so i don't know where the truth is. it just seems as if it's shifting every day. >> i want to get your take and dive into obamacare and whatever will replace it because clearly obamacare as we know it will not be. the fact is this year in 2017, the silver plan premium expected to go up 25%. it's going up 116% in arizona. parts of this are not affordable for a number of americans. something needs to change. the question is, what should democrats role be in changing it? is this your moment to sit back and criticize or do you want to play and should democrats play a more active role in this replacement so that it helps the
most americans and they should be working to rewrite this law. there's plenty of ways in which you can do that. so they're more willing to enter this marketplace as a choice for consumers but let's be real and explaining to the american people what a disaster that is. >> try to make this bill on friday. our job is to work to show the american public how disastrous it is. why is that your job?
why is it ever your job to communicate rather than saying we know this is going to change. that's who i'm working with to make better. >> right now there is not an opening because republicans have crafted this bill in secret. if they want to work with us they know where we are. >> it's all online. people can read it. less than 100 pages. >> they're trying to rush the bill through and the american public doesn't understand it so it's my job to explain to the american public this will kick millions of people off their insurance. >> it truly is all up online and people can read it and it's not nearly as long as the balm care bill was. >> well, remember the balm care bill was debated over the course of a year, right? the american public are busy, right? they don't have the ability on a
week's notice to understand a complicated health care bill. this is being rushed through so that the american people won't understand what is happening here and i do think it's my responsibility to try toex plain to my constituents and people throughout the country what will happen to their insurance rates so we build pressure on republicans to come work with democra democrats. there's not enough pressure to reach across the aisle because they think they can rush through a bill they won't see or understand before it's passed into law. >> we'll see if there's more bipartisan action. >> i'm ready. >> thank you. >> nice to have you on. >> all right. there's a lot of news going on this morning. we have tensions rising in the koreas. will she be pursued as a private citizen? the north continuing it's progression.
t-mobile one save you hundreds a year. right now get two lines of data for $100 dollars. with taxes and fees included. that's right 2 unlimited lines for just $100 bucks. all in. and right now, pair up those two lines with two free samsung galaxy s7 when you switch. yup! free. so switch and save hundreds when you go all unlimited with t-mobile.
oh, how waso good!en house? did you apply? oh, i'll do it later today. your credit score must be amazing. my credit score? credit karma. it's free. that's great! um hm. just whip bam boom, it's done. that apartment is mine! credit karma. give yourself some credit. ♪ can i get some help. watch his head. ♪ i'm so happy. ♪
test firing missiles, ramping up it's nuclear program. let's discuss this and much more with cnn chief international correspondent. one of the turns of irony here was the north celebrating the impeachment in the name of justice. >> well, yeah, the name of justice yes you can sort of enjoy the irony but what's really important is this happened in south korea which is a major u.s. ally and rex tillerson is headed that way this week and he'll be having a summit as well. all of this within the frame work of an aggressive north korea. it's the rule of law and liberal democracy. that's the process. there will be a snap election and it's considered her opponent in the democratic party will win
but what to do about north korea. i had william perry on my show over the weekend and he said look if he was advising rex tiller is on he would say let us try to get a back channel to bring north korea back from the brink. they have a weak hand and is playing it shrewdly and we don't know the result of the north corner policy review but he knows more about the north and has been there and studying this for decades said we're heading toward a train wreck with or without a policy so this is really, really important. one of the most important foreign policy potential crisis on the horizon for the u.s. and of course for the whole world. >> also you're joining us from london, across europe elections
may change the landscape so much. a man that called for banning the koran and muslims from immigrating. he could likely win. what's the outlook. >> well i met him many times since the early 200s and this has been his absolute policy. it's antiislamic and they should all go home and we should close the boarders and ban the koran and all the rest of it. he was looking strong but over the last few weeks the polls have started to tighten significantly and over the last few days the current right prime minister was actually ahead in the polls but there has been a major situation going on in the streets of the netherlands and germany over the last few days instigated by the turkish government trying to lead rallies and bring their foreign minister officials and others over to europe to lead rallies
for the turkish constitutional referendum and that caused a load of unrest in the netherlands. that's the latest one but we believe that still the government is hanging in there and the builders may get a lot of votes but he will not go into government because none of the other established parties will form a coalition with him and in the netherlands you can't rule without a coalition. >> right. so you have the animosity toward this group of emerging refugees in europe and then the sympathy for the same group. that takes us to the 7-year-old. everybody got to know her here in america because of her treaties for mercy to these people. there's a documentary coming out called cries from syria and, you know, this is very important to you. what should people know? >> well it happens today that unicef has come out and said that 2016 was the most deadly year for kids.
something like 650 children were killed because of the war and about 800 plus were recruited into fighting and many of them were killed near schools and other such things and so yes this is sort of a plea for the way the u.s. has put the breaks on syrian refugees and all the things going on which has really up ended policy and politics in the west so it's important to remember there's this war still going on and remember also that the syrian war started literally byes a sad releasing a heavy vengeance on children who as pranksters started putting innocent things on school wars. they were arrested and tortured and sent back to their parents mutilated and that started the
first load of protests against the regime six years ago this week and that's how this war started and assad released all the al qaeda and islamic people from jails to fight this war and now he calls it a war against terrorism and it's complicated and still going on chris. >> thank you very much for all of those headlines. when we come back, protests overnight in ferguson, missouri, this is all after new video comes out. it's part of this documentary that is certainly make a lot of headlines and raising questions about what happened before michael brown was fatally shot by police there in ferguson. we'll have the documentary maker who moved to ferguson and live there had for two years to make this film, we'll have him join us next. there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room,
i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. they offer free cancellation if my plans change. visit booking.com. booking.yeah. 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.
security video is raising questions about what happened in the hours before michael brown was shot to death in ferguson, his in 2014. the new video appears to show brown inside the ferguson market and liquor store t. same store he was accused of robbing several hours later. cnn can't confirm the video authenticity. it does appear to challenge the account from police that brown robbed the store moment bfrs s he was killed by darren wilson. it's part of this documentary stranger fruit that premiered at the south by southwest festival. an attorney said the video was edited and doesn't tell the whole story in a statement. that attorney says i can now confirm that the uncut video shows the clerks throwing a bag
back to mike brown. the film maker edited it out. joining us now, that film maker jason pollock. also with us cnn political commentator mark lamont hill. jason let's start with that investigation that you edited this video to show what you juaned it to show. it's not the full truth. the full video is going to be released by the store. >> i would love to see it. we show the entire exchange. we show the exchange from behind the counter. we chose to use that camera angle so that you could see the counter clearly during the entire exchange. there is no, at no time does the little bag come back across the counter. you can clearly see what happens. anybody that sees it sees what happens. the store clerk gave michael the bag over the counter himself. why would the store clerk put
the box in the bag and then hand it to michael if that was not what he he wanted to happen. >> but just to be clear -- just to be clear, what the attorney says is you're going to see him hand that bag back. i guess that is a suggestion that brown -- >> you can see the video. that's the thing. >> you used all of it you're saying. >> absolutely. you can see the whole event. michael walks in the store. throws the bag. you see him walk in the store and throw the bag. we then cut to the back angle so that you can see the counter. because we wanted to make sure that you could see the counter. you couldn't see the count frer from the side angle. once the bag hits the count we are cut to the back angle so you can see the whole back angle which is a much better view and then you see the exchange and see them hand him the stuff. why would they hand him the stuff. you don't steal by being handed
stuff from the clerk. we asked a lot of people in this community. you can buy weed at the store and there's a lot of people in the community that barter with the store all the time. michael is not a drug dealer. what happened at that store is common place. the young people at the store didn't want to tell the old guy at the store what was happening and they still don't want to tell the old guy at the store what's happening so they lied to him and now he's like to the lawyer and he didn't know what happened the night before and it's in the second half of the video. the st. louis county police wanted us to see that made it look like there was some altercation that looked like michael robbed when in fact michael had a close relationship with the store and regardless of what the store says that video shows that. also this is not about the video. my film is really about the physical evidence that shows that darren wilson ordered michael brown. the video is a distraction.
>> just to be clear. a lot is your suggesting and not our reporting. >> let me just say something -- >> let me bring in the panel. i'll get back to you in one second. if taken on its face as in the document it would go to the suggestion that mike brown wasn't there to steal he was there to do a transaction which may or may not have been legal. what's your take on that. >> first of all that's very important. i spent a lot of time with them and there's a ton of suggestion that the store was shady so there's evidence to support that. one of the things it speaks to is mike brown's character. darren wilson didn't know mike brown was accused of stealing from the store but in mike brown's mind he thought he was being stopped for that. this suggests even in mike brown's mind he didn't have that intent or expectation. but attend of the day regardless of what happened in the store there's another bigger question
linger chg is still did darren wilson have to kill mike brown? i always said no and this actually speaks to that i think. >> well, t right, we have to unpack several different things here because they did an investigation of this and they wound up clearing the officer so it's not a lingering question as far as the police are concerned. but should it be a lingering question. >> i get it's a lingering question for you. i'm not saying it's not -- >> it is a lingering question for a lot of people in the world. >> i'm just talking about the investigati investigation. >> i take your point. i'm just saying investigatively. it's been looked at. he was cleared but what do you make of the suggestion that there's more there than the reckoning of how mike brown was painted and what lead up to the altercation. >> it still shows him as a drug dealer anyway if this is true. >> how? >> it's common for people to
barter. >> he was given marijuana. >> that doesn't mean he's a drug dealer. >> that's a drug deal. it doesn't matter how it's done if i give you drugs for something that's a drug deal you >> mr. pollack, i have two questions for you. how do you know in the first place that there was any drugs in that little yellow envelope? >> because you can smell it. >> you can see them smelling it. >> you want to answer my question? >> i did answer that question. >> hold on, chris. >> i'm not going to interrupt you. >> all assumptions on this guy's part. >> assumptions? look at the video, sir. they're smelling the bag. >> what does that mean? >> as far as i know, somebody -- i can't lock somebody up for smelling the bag. that's an assumption on your part. the second thing is, the second
video is part of that drug deal from the first place. did you have somebody in the store both times that you spoke to regarding what happened? or is this an assumption in your head? >> go ahead and answer, jason. >> michael was in the store ten minutes before. he was handed two boxes of sig real lows in the store. you think it's a coincidence, ten minutes later he went in the store and asked for the box of cigarellos? >> if you're going to be a man -- >> excuse me. >> you better know exactly what the evidence is you're talking about and not assumptions. >> microphones work. we can talk a little lower. >> this reminds me of the inauguration. >> there we go. >> when people look at an empty field and donald trump said it's the biggest field in the world. >> all you talk about on your twitter site is how michael brown is innocent and the police
officer killed tamir rice. that's what you're all about. you have no evidence of anything and that robbery still occurred. >> continue your white supremacy on the air. >> i'm a white supremacist now. >> jason, you don't have to be a white supremacist to ask questions. >> to harry's point, you're right. we can't prove what's in the bag anymore we can prove he's a drug dealer. we do look at circumstantial evidence. if someone is sniffs a bag, it's probably not baby powder or cologne. >> you don't get a nickle bag for $200 of cigarellos. >> it's two boxes. >> $20 based on what i heard. that's based on the evidence. again, ultimately this doesn't necessarily change what happened
on canfield, but it does raise questions. we don't know all the information. >> it doesn't raise anything. >> maybe not for you. i've been dealing with you since the beginning of this case and nothing raised questions. >> and i've been proven right because the officer walked. >> you've been proven right? >> just because an officer walked doesn't mean you're right. >> you make up all the evidence. >> there's a bullet in the top of michael brown's head. >> this last word has been awesome, by the way. >> i'm interested in the conversation -- the tone came back down, so i was more interested in the conversation. to harry's point, this is a big point for people. they'll say hands up don't shoot. >> harry is lyingnd everything he's saying is a lie right now. >> jason, relax. >> you're a liar and a fraud. >> this doesn't help us. >> let's have the conversation the way you're having it some of the time, you make a point, get a counterpoint. you don't need insults on the
show. plenty going around already. >> i'm telling the truth. the viewers know you're lying. >> our viewers are smart, they make their own judgment. you don't have to tell them. >> specific to this case, it did wind up being factually not a fact in the investigation. >> correct. >> how do you deal with that? >> if you read my book "nobody," i concede that point. i make the argument hands up don't shoot has been proven by the investigators. i do make the point that what happens in the store, there's always been considerable evidence that perhaps it wasn't a robbery. this video simply supports that claim that's already been made. >> it was a robbery. it was still a robbery. a forcible taking of anything is a robbery. because it was a drug dealer trying to get his cigarellos back? >> harry, how do you sleep at night -- >> i sleep at night fighting guys like you.
>> how do you sleep at night? >> don't have to make character assassinations. >> the argument is if he made an exchange and then he comes back later to pick up the things he's already paid for, even if it's through weed, the argument is it's not strong armed robbery. >> of course it's a robbery. >> take for a minute the legal technicality. if you and i make a deal. >> o.j. went to jail for ten years trying to get stuff back that belonged to him. >> stay with me. even if what i'm dealing with is an illegal substance, if i come back to pick up the stuff i paid for through the weed, i'm not robbing you. >> yes, you are, if you're forcibly taking it from me. >> you're missing my point. >> does it show it was a forcible taking or not. >> that's the point. >> what we're rejecting is the claim -- >> the second video shows that. >> jason, just to be clear, i know it's tough because you're
on remote. we don't need to do it in terms of insulting who is making what argument. >> you know what's tough? what's tough, chris, i've been living with the brown family for two years and what's tough is i see the world through their eyes. what's tough is -- >> you're lying to me. >> what's tough is what people like harry are saying. they are crying at their houses, by people like harry and what they're saying. i'm personally hurt by the offensive comments from the radical right to destroy this young man's character. that's what's the problem. >> we know where you're coming from. >> jason, there's a lot of pain to go around. i'm not questioning the source of your pain and what you've been exposed to. the most helpful thing is, you put the facts out there, make the arguments on the basis of what you think you know, no reason to attack each other. plenty of that already and it hasn't groton us anywhere. thank you for coming on the show. we'll see what happens. we'll have you back on the there's a material discrepancy. >> great, great.
>> poppy? >> all right, guys. also this week, president trump's new travel ban is set to take effect. it's going to happen on thursday. it, of course, has a chorus of critics who say this is the same bill, different wrapping paper, same executive order. they say this discriminates against muslims. will it hold up to the court challenges that took it down on the first try? >> joining us to discuss, andre segura with aclu and dan stein, president for the federation for american immigration reform. nice to have you both here. this takes effect on thursday. let me begin with you, andre. we did not see the protests, thousands of people at the airports, et cetera. this is different. the question is so what extent is it different? that's an answer that will only come from the courts from these challenges. i would pose to you there is no mention of religion in this one, for example. you guys still want to fight this. >> right. and the first one, to be clear, there was only one mention of religion. we're arguing beyond that.
courts allow you to look beyond the four corners of a document to say there was discriminatory intent. >> you're looking at intent. for our viewers, correct me if i'm wrong, when the president said during the campaign that he will institute a muslim ban. legally that's a hard argument to make, that intent before someone was in office is what is part and parcel -- >> this is directly connected to what he wanted. i'm going to have a complete and total shutdown on muslim immigration. this is what he's trying to do through this, proffered security rationales. we know in the original order, that carries on to the second attempt in which they waited to do and stripped it of certain things to pass legal muster. it's clear, the president has not said anything genuine to change his original rationale. it's still pretty much the same thing. >> dan, what do you say to that? you can also point to rudy giuliani's campaign, someone who is very close to the president
and said, the president called me up and said how do we make this muslim ban legal? does that hurt them with this second attempt in the court system? >> we think the trump administration has done an excellent job in tightening up the original drafting, excluding permanent resident aliens and others to, in the four corners of the document, rely on a evidence i have basis of statutory authority, talking years, decades of practice, ratified even by the ninth circuit. the president has this delegated authority from congress. by excluding permanent resident aliens and eliminating any reference to religion, this thing is buttoned up and airtig airtight. part of the reason they went back and redrafted the executive order, they wanted to make sure an eight-person supreme court uphold the constitutionality of this ban. we're totally confidentiality this will be upheld. >> david miller came out on fox news about a week or so before this second executive order was handed down and said
fundamentally you have the same policy outcome for this country and said these are, quote, minor technical differences. >> eliminating lawful permanent residents from the ban is a huge change in the substance as well as the procedural due process arguments constitutionally. in the end, if the hawaii representatives, the state of hawaii's arguments were to prevail to the supreme court, it would turn the entire statutory basis of our entire immigration law on its head and hamstring congress and the account from restricting emergency basis for a whole range of reasons never considered by a federal court before. this goes to the very essence of sovereignty, what a nation is. both congress and the president's authority are at their highest ebb in the drafting of this resolution to keep us safe. >> we're tight on time. sorry we don't have more time for you.