. good morning everyone and welcome to your "new day." at least one man is dead, eight others hurt after a van plows into muslim worshippers near a mosque in north london. police are treating this as a terror attack. >> an interesting aspect here is that the victims became the first responders and held their attacker until authorities
arrived. this is the third vehicle attack in the uk in the last four months. this is the first one in the uk that apparently targeted muslims specifically. british prime minister theresa may speaking about the attack just moments ago. let's begin our coverage there. cnn's phil black live at the scene in north london. phil. >> reporter: chris, good morning. we have exclusive video of the man witnesses say was responsible for this attack. this video was just just moments after they say he drove a white van through a crowd of people that had just emerged from a mosque in the earliest hours of monday morning. it was just after midnight. these people had just emerge friday the mosque observing prayers, observing the holy month of ramadan. they say he swerved directly, plowed through these people. there were witnesses who watched this unfold. they didn't just emerge, they took him out of the vehicle and wrestled him to the ground. they say he resisted, punching,
biting, swearing. he repeated you deserve this, you guys deserve this. british prime minister theresa may talked about this attack from downing street. here is what she had to say. >> today we come together as we have done before, to condemn this act and state once again that hate red and evil of this kind will never succeed. >> reporter: police were very quick to say they're treating this as a terror attack because it looks and feels so similar to other recent attacks in the city. it is the third attack in which a vehicle has been used as a weapon. the local community believes they were specifically targeted in this attack. back to you. >> phil, we eem check back with you. let's bring in the panel, cnn counterterrorism analyst phil mudd and cnn national security analyst, peter bergen. it's good to have you both here.
phil mudd, take us through the assessment of what happened here? what are you looking at? >> you look at what happened and why it happened. people are confusing the two over the past 12 hours. we know someone, evidently by his own words targeted a muslim community outside london. there's a quick translation of that to assume it is a terror attack. people on the investigator's side don't make that assumption initially. terrorism involves motive. what was he thinks? simple questions like did he have an ex-girlfriend in the area at the mosque, that leads into the discussion about whether it's terrorism. we should know that today. you've got to differentiate in the investigation immediately whether we think it was terrorism. i believe it was. and whether we know it was a terror or hate crime attack, we're not certain yet. as the prime minister suggested, i think we'll know quickly. >> peter, another important distinction, this is not, it appears what the others were in the past throw or four months in
london, islamic extremism. this is the opposite, retaliation perhaps and the target were muslims coming out of breaking the fast for ramadan. >> clearly terrorism is the intentional target of enemies in a state. that fits this definition recently. we saw in the this country not far from where i'm sitting in virginia what was a terrorist attack on the congressional republicans by somebody who had violent anti-trump kind of views. terrorism takes on all sorts of political hues, and the fact we're seeing what is, in fact, an anti muslim terrorist attack shouldn't be terribly surprising. britain, after all, has a fairly vibrant sort of neo nazi, far right wing, extremist groups. a british nationalist party. one thing i point out, why this mosque.
there are over a thousand in this united kingdom. i would guess this is a highly symbolic target. the finsbury park mosque has changed its leadership in recent years. but the fact is, trying to put yourself in the mind of the perpetrator, why this mosque. i would submit it is because of its well-known, high-profile kind of -- the fact that it's hosted quite a number of islamist militants in the past. >> well, he is alive. they will be able to speak to him. hopefully that curiosity will be satisfied. how about the how here, phil? we said this is the third, fourth vehicle-motivated crime of this sort. is that about simple convenience, or is there something else's solving? >> i think it is about simple convenience. it is the evolution of terror. back after 9/11 sitting around the threat table, al qaeda was
focused on replicating the 9/11 event because they wanted to recruit more followers and raise more funds from people who wanted to see another spectacular event. as we see it devolve you're seeing islamists use these kind of weapon, but copycaters on the other side say it's easier than getting a weapon in europe, easier than hijacking an aircraft, why not just get a car and mow down people. >> peter, i hear you, terror is terror, an attack where you mow down civilians obviously causes terror. however this does appear to be different in that, if he did not take his inspiration or directions from isis. if this is somebody who was mad about the other attacks, yet taking a page from the same playbook in terms of weapon.
>> i think political violence comes in all sorts of stripes. it can be far left, far right. it can be islamist. it can be neo nazi. we've seen a lot of this in this country. dylann roof who killed nine people at an african-american church was a neo nazi. i would say that's an act of terrorism. he isn't being charged with terrorism for reasons that involve that he wasn't formally allied to a designated terror group designated by the state department. the fact is these acts are terrorism. whether they're prosecuted as a hate crime or simply murder, when we look at these kinds of attacks, they're clearly terrorism. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. we'll continue to follow all the developments. now to our other top story. listen, it makes sense that the special counsel might be looking at the president's firing of the fbi director. what does not make sense is all
the spin that's coming out about that from the president of the united states and now his lawyer, the two contradicting each other in the latest effort to delegitimize the russia investigation. cnn's joe johns live at the white house with more. joe. >> reporter: good morning, chris. a familiar form of damage control, and it started with a presidential tweet. the president's legal team trying to clear up any confusion about whether the president believes he's a subject or target of an investigation, though the special counsel apparently is essentially looking to see whether there's enough evidence to start an obstruction of justice investigation. >> the president is not under investigation. >> the president is not under investigation. >> the president is not and has not been under investigation. >> reporter: president trump's personal legal team denying he's the target of a probe despite the president's own tweet, seemingly acknowledging that he
is being investigated for firing fbi director james comey, taking a swipe at deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who appointed the special counsel and characterizing the purported investigation as a witch hunt. >> trump has a compulsion to counterattack and is very pug nauseous. i don't think it serves him well, i don't think the tweet helped him. >> reporter: the president's attorney jay sekulow offering this explanation. >> that tweet was in response to a "washington post" story that ran with five unnamed sources, without identifying the agencies they represented, saying that the special counsel had broadened out his investigation to include the president. >> reporter: before appearing to blame social media for the misunderstanding. >> it was 141 characters. there's a limitation on twitter. the president has very effective utilization of social media. >> reporter: sekulow conceding in a different interview he could not know for sure. >> no one has notified us that
he is. i can't read people's minds. i can tell you this, we have not been notified there's investigation of the president of the united states. >> it is in the best interest of the president and this country to have a full investigation. >> reporter: despite the confusion prompted by friday's tweet, the president continues to attack the special counsel's investigation. >> what's happening here is the president wants to take down bob mueller. they're essentially engaging in a scorched earth litigation strategy beginning with trying to discredit the prosecutor. >> reporter: the top democrat on the house intelligence committee insisting sunday that the russia investigation is just beginning. >> i think there is evidence. i'm not prepared to say there's proof you can take to a jury, but i can say there is enough that we ought to be investigating. >> reporter: jay sekulow also said in the week ahead the president might address whether there are recordings of any conversations he had with the fired fbi director james comey. chris and alisyn.
>> that would be interesting if we hear more about that. let's bring in our political panel, cnn political analyst david gregory and john avlon and associate editor and columnist at realclearpolitics, a.b. stoddard. david gregory, not just the tweet continuing confusion about whether or not president trump is under investigation. it's jay sekulow's own words yesterday which contradict each other. let me play that for you for a moment. >> should we take that tweet from the president as confirmation that the president is under investigation? >> let me be clear. the president is not under investigation. >> now he's being investigated by the department of justice because the special counsel under special counsel regulations reports to the department of justice, not an independent counsel. he's being investigated for taking the action that the attorney general and deputy attorney general recommended him to take by the agency who recommended the termination. >> do you understand whether
he's being investigated or not? >> a lot of gymnastics here. look, we have a president who in all of his unusual behavior provides an open window into what he's thinking and into what's going on. he told us rather directly, via his favorite mode of communication that he's being investigated and he doesn't like it and he doesn't think it's fair. he thinks that people are conflicted who are doing so. so the president's lawyers can go out and spin all of this and try to make up for the fact that they have in the president a client who is talking, who should not be talking about he's fighting this as a political war. the presidencies real value in fighting the politics of this, undermining those who are coming after him, undermining those investigating this. he never takes on the underlying offense which is russia's interference with our election. he wants to take on all-comers to suggest this is an impure
process, this is a left wing process, conspiracy in cahoots with the media. that's how i think he hopes he will ultimately undermine credibility in this over time, whatever the outcome is. >> also, john, we got a little instance here of the media getting caught up in the con trail of the jet, right? everybody is getting caught up in the noise and the contradiction and the tweet versus the lawyer. this is a non-troversy, the idea of whether mueller is looking into is almost a forgone conclusion. mueller would be remiss not to be looking at it. the idea the president's counsel can't read anybody's mind and hasn't been note identified, that's not the standard. all they have to do is pick up the phone and know in one call whether the president is the subject or target of any type of probe. >> the problem is, given that fact, the logical conclusion that jay sekulow tried to spin
desperately this weekend an absurdity. among other things, it proves he's not very good at his job because he couldn't keep consistent. he's got a tough job. all the president's lawyers do. they're tearing their hair out over the president's tweets. whether he's fighting a political war or pr war, he keeps undercutting his own legal counsel, his own justice department on a whole array of subjects. sekulow was spinning desperately and didn't have a good weekend depending the president. >> hold on a second here. this is an important distinction. the president is not the target of an vapgs or wasn't until recently. >> that's a big distinction. >> but what comey was looking at and what mueller is looking at are very different. when comey told the president, you're not the subject of the investigation -- i don't know what he told him. >> i think comey testified to that. >> he was very nuanced about how he talked to the president and
why. this is different, a.b. i think your question is, well, what's mueller doing? mueller is looking at whether or not the president and his actions with comey, what that means which is different than what comey was doing, he wasn't examining his own removal. >> my question is simpler than that. the president had not been a target. comey told him that but maybe something has now changed according to the president's tweet. >> well, in trump world, as we know, we all are speaking english here and we all use the same nouns, but what's true on friday, they don't want you to believe is true on monday. so that's why i actually think that the president, who thinks jay sekulow does a great job defending him on tv, why he elevated him in this legal team that he has, probably agreed that he should go out and say he's not under investigation because probably people close to the president told him on friday night and saturday it's not a great idea to talk about being
under investigation. there is a difference between being a real target in an investigation and just being wrapped up in the gathering of facts. it's not just what he told james comey. the problem for president trump is he also got two other intelligence officials that we know of, dni dan coats and admiral rogers, into these discussions about whether or not you could sort of pull back on michael flynn. if there are two or three more -- we don't know what we don't know. it's not fair to say there's no evidence -- >> i think this is a meaningful distinction. you can't compare what comey told the president to his current situation with mueller. they're apples and oranges. >> mueller is looking at everything. >> that's the point. >> we're in a position where we're working with mattimore sells we have that are in the public domain and reporting that is based on talking to investigators, others close to mueller, others in the justice department.
but what we can know for sure is that mueller was put in place because there was an existing investigation into this broad question of russian collusion and then the president has taken actions to potentially impede that investigation -- >> and he's going to look at that, too. in miss testimony joe manchin said to comey, do you believe this rises to obstruction of justice? he said, i don't know, that's bob mueller's job to sort out. he then says, i'm sure the special counsel will work towards to try to understand what the intention was there when he got fired and whether there's an offense. >> the president has been uniquely concerned about whether he is in legal jeopardy. that's not an unfair concern. as the president, what he seems to gloss over is that this entire investigation of his campaign, those within his orbit or him, himself, at all is going to impact him and trust in his administration. but he continues to look at it
so narrowly and so do his lawyers which continues to get him in so much trouble. >> let's stop being alice in wonderland for a moment and get back through the looking glass and talk about something real that we know it's happening, though it's in secret and also don't know much about it, and that is the senate republicans' health care plan that should be revealed soon. democrats say they're prepared to obstruct this. from what they know, the scant details they have, they think it's dangerous. >> even republican senators say they're troubled by the process, this has been done entirely behind closed doors. hypocrisy is the unforgivable sin in politics. the fact this is being conducted entirely behind closed doors, echoes all the republicans' complaints and concerns about the way obamacare was done. even republicans have trouble. mitch mcconnell doesn't have that many republican votes he can lose. he realizes this is a delicate dance he can do. this ends all the wrong signals
with no transparency about the substance of a bill with massive impact on the american people. >> panel, thank you for helping us parse all of that. >> republican matters, the russia investigation matters every bit as much after what happened in our election. trump's attorney, jay sekulow, caught up in the malstrom of spin. he's going to be on the show. we'll put the questions to him about what matters to you. >> so what should you believe? president donald trump's tweets or what his attorney says? we ask a member of the house intelligence committee which one to go with next. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life.
it's not just a car, (work sfx) it's your daily retreat. the es and es hybrid. lease the 2017 es 350 for $329 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. with the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides. right now save on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed. looking for a hotel that fits... ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over 200 sites to find you the hotel you want at the lowest price. grazie, gino! find a price that fits.
and buy things from, well, everywhere. how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. the ppt has repeatedly called the russia probe a, quote, witch hunt. he tweeted this, after seven months of investigations and committee hearings about my, quote, collusions with the russians, nobody has been able to show any proof. sad. joining us is democratic congressman jim himes a member of the senate intelligence committee. good morning. >> good morning. >> there's a question about
whether or not the president himself is being investigated by bob mueller. do you know the investigation for that? >> i don't, for a couple reasons. number one, the fbi investigation, department of justice investigation is independent of the congressional investigations, as it should be. the second thing is and i marvel about the amount of conversation about whether the president is under investigation or not. we know from jim comey's investigation back in martha there's an investigation into the possibility of -- i use that word advisedly -- the possibility of links or connections, collusion between the russian effort and the trump campaign. >> that's people around him. don't you think there's a difference if the president of the united states is actually being investigated to, random, as he calls them e satellites around him? >> maybe it starts with the people around him. comey told apparently the president three times that he wasn't personally under investigation. think about how an investigation works. it starts with evidence of a phone call. it starts with paperwork. it starts with interviews.
you have no idea where that investigation is going to lead. my point is simply that there's no way to know until an investigation is done who, if anyone, may have been either under investigation or possibly accused of wrongdoing. >> "the washington post" has reported that the president is being investigated. his lawyer, his legal team, jay sekulow, was asked about that this weekend, and his answers were confusing. he said different things on different shows, sometimes within the same interview. here is how he explained it to chris wallace. listen to this. >> you don't know that he isn't under investigation now, do you? >> no one has notified us that he is. so i can't read people's minds, but i can tell you this, we have not been notified there's an investigation of the president of the united states. nothing has changed since james comey's testimony. >> the final point, would they know if he was being
investigated? >> not necessarily. it's not the practice of law enforcement to tell the subject of investigations, unless they have to, that they're under investigation. you can surmise -- one of the frustrating things here is you've got growing levels of investigation. we started with the russia hack. then we go into the question of whether there was any collusion yet to be determined. of course, the president's actions, his own actions in firing comey and admitting that part of the reason he fired him was to get the pressure of the russia investigation lifted, none of us know for sure, but it would be odd if bob mueller weren't asking the question can an obstruction case be made here? >> one of the things you have asked for is you want to know definitively if there are audio tapes from the oval office or the white house, if the president has taped over his conversations with james comey. have they been turned over to you? >> they have not been turned over, the house intelligence committee has asked those tapes, if they exist, be produced. >> when will you get the answer? when is the deadline?
>> the letter requesting the tapes was late june. >> june 23rd. that's this week. do you believe there really are audio tapes? >> i have no idea. again, all i have to go on are the president's tweets which are -- what's the right way to characterize the president's tweets, uncertain and confusing. you hear in the past there have been recording devices in the oval office. we'll see. >> jay sekulow says something will be announced this week about that. so stay tuned for that. >> also. you're looking at -- you also wanted james comey' memos, the memos he took, contemporaneously be turned over. have you gotten them? >> no. my understanding is there might be hesitancy on the part of the fbi to produce those. i would assume if there were hesitancy, it would be because there would be an active investigation that involves the use of those memos as part of a department of justice
investigation. we'll have to see whether they get produced or not. >> okay. where is the house intel committee now on all of this? how far out are you to being able to conclude definitive things? >> we are a ways yet from being able to conclude anything really. we're under way. we've got jeh johnson coming before the committee next week. i spent three hours on friday reviewing documents. we're a long way from a conclusion. that's a really important point. i was very sad to see devin nunes, the chairman in california saying he's satisfied there were no links, no collusion between the trump campaign and the russian effort. i know, since i'm a member of that investigation, that he doesn't have the basis on which to make that claim. it troubles me because from the president to devin nunes to democrats on my side presuming an outcome, we just don't know. this is serious enough that people should stay quiet until we have enough evidence, until
these investigations have gotten to the point to form a conclusion. >> you hear from the rnc to the president on down, they say you've had almost a year. what's taking so long? why can't you say anything definitively yet? >> on the congressional side, we haven't had seven months. the congressional investigations have been under way since january or february, so that's a couple of months. comey suggested that the fbi investigation which started with -- remember, seven months refers to the russian hack which is where it started. long ago, well over a year ago the fbi had evidence there was a russian lack. this notion that this has been going on too long is just crazy. we're talking about the very core of our democracy here. i really wish people would take a step back and say let's do this right rather than doing it quickly. and whether you're the president of the united states, the head of the rnc or activist democrat, let's stay quiet on what may be the outcome. putting a thought out there about what the outcome may be, if you're not actually bob
mueller or inside the fbi, all you're doing is putting your own credibility at risk. >> congressman jim himes, thank you very much. >> thanks, alisyn. >> we have the investigation and then we have this parallel political process of talking about the investigation, as we were just hearing in that segment. this is a particularly difficult task for the surrogates and now the attorney of the president. what's the right way to defend these tweets and still keep the public informed? we have a debate for you next. you do all this research on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them.
for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10 to 25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis
most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait.
the joke here is what do you call it when the president's tweet is confusing confusion and his own people don't know how to defend it. we call it monday. but this is actually a very serious matter about the understanding of the probe of the russia investigation. here is the confusing part. >> there should be no confusion, no confusion, the president is not under investigation. >> but it is confusing -- >> the reason that jake is right, it is confusing, is because jay sekulow, the president's attorney who you saw there on this matter is contradicting the president. the president tweeted, quote, i am being investigated for firing
the fbi director. so what's going on here? is this a legit line of questioning or another smoke screen to undermine the probe. let's bring in former south florida u.s. attorney kendall coffey and former deputy director matt schlep. >> the discussion from sekulow saying the exact opposite of what you heard him say to jake. >> you don't know that he isn't under investigation now, do you? >> no one has notified us that he is. i can't read people's minds, but i can tell you this, we have not been notified there's an investigation of the president of the united states. so nothing has changed in that regard since james comey's testimony. >> that's a different non-issue because there's no mystery. they want to know whether or not the president is being looked at by mueller, they could pick up the phone. clearly this white house doesn't have any problem meddling. he said to chris wallace he is being investigated. he said it more than once. what do you make of all this,
whether or not he's being investigated? legit issue? >> it's a fair issue. we're all americans and we care about our presidency, the fact that the president of the united states is actually being investigated, that's a very, very serious thing. but i think we're at the point now where, sadly or not, we have to accept that in some form or another, there's an inquiry going on and part of that inquiry, call it a matter, an inquir inquiry, an investigation, is whether something done by the president of the united states could be seen as an act of obstruction. that's our reality. we can't spin away from it. >> why isn't it as simple as that, matt? why all this twisting by sekulow and the president? why play this game? >> i think the frustrating part of all this is the leaks keep happening. after this story was knocked down, the president was being investigated by the fbi, there was a new leak saying that he was now being investigated by the special counsel. i think, chris, the problem here is definition of terms.
i think it all gets fuzzy. the question is this -- when i come on your show -- i've said it for months. team trump is being looked at for collusion with the russians. there's no question that donald trump and everybody around him is going to be part of what kendall just talked about, this matter, this investigation, trying to figure out if it's anything to this. it's a very different thing that he's the target of the investigation. >> nobody is saying that. >> chris, it all goes back to this leak. what i encourage cnn to do -- i think "the washington post" is a perfectly legitimate source to go to, but run it down yourselves. who is this leak, what are they saying? it all gets fuzzy. >> let's call a spade is a spade. the idea you're upset about leaks is when they're against you. why make this about leaks? either the information is good or it isn't good. that's always the standard. this isn't about leaks. this is about the substance of
the matter. >> that's right. actually i was against those leaks, too, i said it on your show dozens of times. the fact is, let's find out what this information is. you guys are trying to figure out why the president tweeted as he tweeted. it all goes back to this question about whether or not once again these investigators, different investigators this time, have leaked the fact that the president is being investigated. >> i don't think that's an issue at all. you want your situational integrity. no white house i've ever been involved with gave information the way this one does, if you want to worry about leaks, maybe you should start there. >> i agree. fair point. >> comey telling the president that he wasn't the subject or whatever he used about the investigation, comparing that to what mueller might be doing. comey could not logically have been looking at his own ouster because it hadn't happened yet. so what does that have to do with whether mueller is looking at this situation which comey said on the stand he is sure he is, which makes perfect sense,
that he would be? >> if that's aimed at me, i would say we're reliving the same nightmare which is investigators working for jim comey leaked that the president was being investigated. jim comey had to personally knock that down for the president three times. then everybody reported he's not being investigated. then there's a brand new leak and now they're saying the president is being investigated. jay sekulow is right to say, hey, why don't you just tell us? >> first of all, jay could pick up the phone and know as counsel for the president. the idea that it's a mystery or unless he's told, which is very unusual, by the investigators himself, he can't know. that's a specious premise. >> it's not. >> of course it is. kendall, let me bring you in on this discussion. the idea that, well, comey said he wasn't being investigated but there were leaks that he said he was. do you see that as something that sheds doubt on whether or not it is knowable that mueller would be looking at the firing
of comey? does that mean anything to you? >> in an odd way, the comey era is almost old news. we have a new investigation now. mueller is looking at everything. there's no reason to believe that the president is excluded from this broad examination. >> the idea that it was leaked, does that matter to you, does that change your perception of whether or not mueller would be looking at the circumstances surrounding comey's firing, or do you theys think that's a mat fact? >> the leaks are disturbing, nobody on the law enforcement side likes them either. what we have now is a serious investigation where the president needs to listen to lawyers and act like somebody who is dealing with a serious legal matter. trump being trump may have gotten him elected, but trump being trump in the midst of a serious investigation could get him in a lot of trouble. >> matt, the reason i'm coming after you about the leak thing, it smacks of a partisan spin. if you're worried about the intelity of the investigation on
that level, there shouldn't be leaks, okay, fair point. are you worried about the president of the united states trying to undercut the legitimacy of a functioning process of our democracy which is this inquiry? doesn't that bother you as an integrity issue as well? >> look, i have said a bunch of times that i think the president ought to comply with the investigation. we ought to bring it to a close. if they can't find collusion with the russians, i don't think there's much political consequences here. i agree. i think go along with the investigation, comply with it. i think the frustration is, it's nice to know what's true and what isn't true. i can see why people who are involved in these things get frustrated when they have to read about it in the paper instead of their attorneys. >> matt sclapp thank you very much. kendall, good to have you here. prosecutors vowing to try bill cosby again. next in an exclusive interview with cnn, we'll find out what
we can push buttons and make cars appear out of thin air. find love anywhere. he's cute. and buy things from, well, everywhere. how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. prosecutor are vowing to retry bill cosby after a jury comes back hopelessly deadlocked in his aggravated indecent
assault. jean casarez has more. >> reporter: he said it was difficult for him. he felt the weight of the world on his shoulders and truly felt personally responsible for the fate of his client, bill cosby. >> there are no winners here. we tried a case for a week. the jury deliberated for 50-some hours without a verdict. as i've said many times before, as long as you can leave that courtroom with your client presumed innocent, then i'm satisfied. >> do you believe bill cosby drugged and assaulted women for decades? >> i don't, because he swears to me he didn't. >> i was in the courtroom when the judge sat on the bench on saturday, jury had not come in yet, and he told the entire packed courtroom, this is a hung jury. there are no surprises, there
was no emotion. everyone was just stoic. the jury filed in. i saw a young man directly at andrea constand. when they sat down, i saw a female juror close to her give her a very strong, sad look. i saw a box of kleenex was passed. i didn't know what that meant. i could assume, right? mr. mcmonangal told me on saturday two female jurors were crying that he saw from his vantage point. i want to tell you, dolores, andrea constand's lawyer, saw andrea walk into the courtroom and andrea was calming them down saying it's going to be all right. from everything i've heard, that's andrea constand. she's the strong, calm force that calms everybody down and very religious, very spiritual, always has been, even during that time. >> so now what?
what happens to this case? >> well, the prosecution kevin steele stood up and say we're going to try this. the judge said okay, i do, too, within 120 days. >> the question is what do they do in those 120 days. this judge made a ruling early on that was influential, denying the believability, credibility of all these other witnesses. that may be something that's contested as well. >> a lot of the accusers there said they feel so good for having brought so much to light, but they believe more prior bad act witnesses, other victims should be able to be in the courtroom testifying. >> jean, thanks for floepgsz it for us. a u.s. fighter jet has shot down a syrian warplane. this happened here raqqa. the u.s. military says the syrian jet dropped bombs near u.s.-backed fighters prompting this action. this is the first time since the u.s. began fighting isis in 2014 that the u.s. military has downed a syrian warplane.
russia is calling this an act of aggression and says u.s. officials did not use established communication channels to notify them before downing this warplane. we have some encouraging news for you as well. an update on last week's congressional baseball ambush. house gop whip steve scalise, doctors say his condition is improving. he's actually been officially upgraded from critical to serious. the hospital says he's more responsive an speaking to loved ones including his children who spent father's day with hi. meanwhile, former congressional aid turned lobbyist matt mika shot multiple times in his chest and arm and suffered a massive drama is now expected to make a full recovery. >> that's such good news on all fronts. >> still a long way to go for both gentlemen. we will stay on it. absolutely. of course, we talk a lot about the russia investigation, but is it important to voters? i sat down with a group of
our 18 year old wase army in an accident.'98. when i call usaa it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief. we're the rivera family, and we will be with usaa for life. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly.
the russia investigation has loomed over president trump's administration. how do voters feel about it? i sat down with a group, democrats, republicans and an independent from ohio, florida, georgia and pennsylvania and they shared their views on the investigation and the president's relationship with the truth. how many of you, show of hands,
are troubled by what you've heard thus far in the russia investigation? was that a half hand or no hand? >> no hand. >> why aren't you? >> all the evidence reporting that there is no collusion. i think we need to look a little further at these investigations going on now, should clarify things. >> i don't see how that's any different from what russia has done and what we do and meddle in everyone's election. >> do you think there's something noteworthy about how many of the trump campaign team did meet with russians? >> i think every incoming president's campaign meets with international cohorts. >> countries that are considered adversaries. >> is russia really adversary? we are involved in a war with them. i get it, but i'm not troubled by it. >> it's a crime to not disclose
contacts with foreign entities on your application for clearance. >> absolutely. >> and it appears we have multiple members of the trump administration who have done that. so we can't just allow a pass on that. whether they hacked a voting machine or not, it's more they were targeting the voters directly through a propaganda campaign. they were using social media to manipulate people's thoughts and behaviors and that's a disturbing thing. there's a right to due process in this country because where do all the trump people go to get their reputations back if they're found to be innocent of all these charges? i think it's unfair. >> do you believe james comey? >> i do not. >> why? >> when he felt strongly enough about the torture memos, he threatened to resign. in the hearing when he testified, he said had he not been fired, he would still be the fbi director. it tells me a lot about where he is and how much he believes trump really did wrong. trump has denied any collusion.
i take the president at his word. >> i completely disagree. he is a liar, a repeated liar over and over and over again. i don't know how you trust him at his word for anything. he is the president of the united states. >> are you comfortable with his connection to the truth? >> i -- do you want to take that? >> pass. is that your answer? you're passing? >> the president has said things that have been untrue. and i think, again, this goes back to his quirkiness. he is very eccentric. you have to understand this is how celebrities are. they live in this alternative world. >> you're going to pass on his connection to truth and when he misrepresents things because he's a celebrity?
>> has anyone here haven't lied before? who hasn't said a lie before? >> you don't think that president trump is more given to untruths? >> more than any other president. >> it's just the nature -- >> you think that president trump lies at the same rate as other presidents? >> well, i don't know that we could do the math on it but -- >> fact check -- >> all presidents have an interesting relationship with the truth. >> fair but fact checkers have put him in his own category zbleps said a lot of things that aren't true. >> this is the problem i find with a lot of trump supporters or people backing trump in any way, this argument that it's okay for him to lie because he's a celebrity. we should expect him to be able to go and do this. yet we were just talking about comey or the other people and you're saying either he's truthful or not. because he lied back here, i can't trust him here. >> do you see the double
standard she's talking about? >> i hold everyone to the same standard. >> i don't think so. >> where trump has been untruthful is wrong. he shouldn't do that. i just don't think that's any worse, per se, than most other presidents. >> so you think president obama, let's just use him -- >> okay. >> misrepresented facts as often as president trump? >> no, definitely not. >> that's the case you were making. >> that doesn't mean he didn't lie. >> when you're very, very famous, you live in this bubble, this alternate world. >> that's not how the rest of the world sees it this is the president of the united states. not let's give him a pass because he's a celebrity. >> is it acceptable to you? >> it's not acceptable but it's understandable in some circumstances. >> so when he tells you there's nothing to see here with russia collusion, there are no ties, do you believe him or not? >> not necessarily. that's up to me to find out what is going on, as an educated
person that wants to read up on what's going on. that's up to me. >> what did you take away this time? >> that the people who support president trump feel they like what he stood for in the campaign, in terms of the agenda, that he's going to be business friendly, that he's going to bring back jobs and be america first. they like it so much that they're waiting to get to that. they're holding their breath to get to that stuff and willing to overlook or at least press pause on these other things because they're hoping he can work his way around to getting to the agenda that they voted for. >> the guy who voted for gary johnson, it's interesting that he sees all of this as understandable without actually knowing any of the things that have actually happened yet. that's one of the problems with all the noise in this. people are making conclusions before we know any fact zblts guy who voted for gary johnson, who you heard, one of the most vocal people, he feels so many people are attacking president
trump that he sort of has to be on president trump's side as the underdog. >> interesting stuff. tomorrow, tune in. we play a little word association with them. one word they would use to describe president trump. we're following a lot of news today. president trump's attorney will join us live in a few minutes. let's get right to it. good morning. welcome to your "new day," monday, june 19th, it's 8:00 am in the east. at least one man is dead in london, eight others hurt. british prime minister theresa may is calling the attack a terrorist attack. >> bystanders sprang into action until help arrived. third attack in the uk in the last four months but the first to target muslims. let's begin our coverage with phil black live at the scene in london. what have you