tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN October 25, 2017 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT
breaking news tops the hour on a day the president tried to make the russian dossier about the clinton campaign. we have new reporting on what may have been his campaign's effort to get dirt on her. pamela brown has the latest. what's the situation? >> we've learned the head of came breakage an lit darks data firm working for the trump campaign reached out to julian assange during the campaign asking about hillary clinton's missing e-mails. assange noonld this on twitter confirming that he rejected the
request. the head of this firm, alexander knicks sent an e-mail to several people relaying he reached out to assange, but no one from the tump campaign was on the e-mail chain. wikileaks which is responsible for releasing hacked e-mails from the dnc and john podesta's e-mails last year, but not hillary clinton's e-mails, and we don't know if a third party ever obtained them. this establishes the closest known link between the trump campaign and wikileaks. we should also note "the daily beast" was first to report the leak. >> that was right around the republican convention? >> that's right. it was shortly after donald trump became the official republican nominee. and so the e-mail reachout happened around that time and then-candidate trump was on the campaign trail referencing
clinton's 33,000 missing e-mails. here's what he said. s. >> russia, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing. >> all that happening around the same time. the trump campaign today responded by distancing itself from cambridge an lit characteristics saying once he secured the nomination, one of the most important decisions we made was to partner with the republican national committee on data analytics. we as a campaign made the choice to rely on the voter data to help electricity president donald trump. any voter claims from any other source played a key role in the victory are false. not only are they distancing themselves from cambridge, but not denying that this e-mail reachout did actually happen. >> cnn's uncovered a couple things that don't square with
that contention? >> that's right. after trump won the nomination his campaign started series of payments to cambridge in july all the way through mid december, totallying just about $6 million. this is according to f.e. krechlt filings. jared kushner, the president's son-in-law who headed up one of his data operations and is now senior adviser said to "forbes" back in november just after the president won, he said we kept both data operations going simultaneously and a lot shared between them. by doing that we could scale to a pretty good operation, so he appears to be giving credit to cambridge with the success. i should mention brad pascal did tell 60 minut"minutes" that the didn't play a huge role. >> appreciate it. i want to bring in the panel. j i want to start with you.
you actually sort of embedded with the campaign in the final days and wrote an article about their data operation. was this cambridge involved? >> they had a full team of data scientists down in san antonio in trump's data headquarters. brad parscale was our host and spoke about the work they did and how their modeling was used to help decide where trump would travel based on where they thought the most gettable universal voters were. from what i understand from talking to people involved what the campaign, what you said is not accurate. i don't know if we've got our wires crossed when you talked to brad, i can tell you my understanding, which is pretty knowledgeable understanding of the inner workings of the republican national committee, is they did run the data operation. cambridge has been a debunked
company. they got involved with trump because the mercers and steve bannon. >> steve bannon was on the board? >> that's right. >> he was also the campaign ceo. >> which speaks volumes. >> he was actually inside trump campaign headquarters. the idea that they weren't involved -- >> let me finish. it speaks volumes that if bannon is ceo of the campaign, and they go with the rnc operation and not whatever this crap that cambridge is trying to sell which is ineffective and not accurate, once they found that out, you have a lot of campaign novices working on the trump campaign. once they found out this guy is trying to sell us this stuff, this isn't real. one of the payments that's $5 million in the grand scheme of things is not a huge amount of money. it was $175 million data operation the rnc put towards this. they did a test with this $5 million to do a tv buy.
you should do better than the rnc and the entire machine, let's see when your test does. they wound up buying d.c. cable for the trump campaign. that was the nail in the coffin to say you guys don't know what you're talking about. bannon agreed with that even. everyone used the rnc. the idea the trump campaign was using cambridge is a fallacy the cambridge wants everyone to believe because they're trying to sell their company. we did all the stuff for the trump campaign, and it's not accurate. >> it was on the record. they testified to the strength of cambridge's models to our face on the record. there's pictures in the magazine. you can see the whole thing. there's nothing mysterious or fake about it. the rnc had their own data operation, it was much bigger. i don't know how involved they were in cambridge, but clearly it was an important part of the campaign. but. >> they've also been on the
record in the "new york times" about this before. i think some of the cambridge digital kids were in san antonio working with brad. they were doing prospecting, not any persuasion to the voters. a company that wants to sell themselves, which is convenient for the press to make this link. >> you're able they paid $5 million and had employees there. you're saying in the grand scale of things, 5 million isn't much. >> the role they played inside this campaign is way oversold. >> can we celebrate what we have now confirmed is there are political consultants law firms, that go out and act wildly skbg out and contact julian assange and the russians. hillary's got to deny she knew they did it, but we know they paid $20 million. >> we're going to get to that story.
>> my point is these guys are all to mike's point, they have consultants that are doing all this and selling advertising. whether it's true or not doesn't matter. >> you don't pay a firm like that, over $5 million if you don't believe in what they're doing. this is the latest of several attempts to collude. keep in mind there was the famous june 9th meeting in trump tower during the campaign where donald trump you jr., jared kushner, and paul manafort met with a russian lawyer lobbyist seeking dirt from the kremlin. they called it the crown prosecutor, misnomer, on hillary clinton. on july 27th donald trump gives his last press conference of the campaign where he asks for wikileaks or russia rather to hack hillary clinton, which, in fact, they were doing and they
did. now we have cambridge reaching out to wikileaks which your intelligence community says is the vehicle the russians used for this cyber material. that's pretty tight. during the campaign, 137 times donald trump praised wikileaks. that's collusion. >> on the hillary clinton story, i'm assuming you're going to be saying the lawyer who was hired is not the campaign and therefore may have done stuff on their own. >> i'm not saying that. he's an agent of the campaign. if he hired that firm, he hired that firm. campaign would be responsible. >> you don't buy cambridge was some rogue people that reached out to wikileaks. they were a contractor to the campaign in the same way. there's nothing wrong with getting opposition research and hiring investigators to do that, but that is true. there is something wrong with reaching out to wikileaks, i
believe, which was in possession of stolen material that the russians hacked. makes a huge difference. >> but they were communicating with the mercers who were the biggest supporters of trump. the idea this is some rogue group of people that aren't somehow connected to people who are decade to electing donald trump. they don't have to have been the biggest operation or the most influential. point is they were there, they were somebody a reporter was brought in to meet. they clearly were part of the trump campaign. they don't have to have been super powerful or even good at their job. >> this entire discussion has been very in the weeds. we're not going to get to the facts of it on this panel tonight. now, the one who may get to the facts is robert mueller. the problem that the trump campaign and the trump administration now have is that this is another drip, drip, drip, another dot on the leopard when it comes to this ongoing investigation to colluding with russia. it is a story that despite attacks at a gold star family,
nfl players, does not ever go away and it continues taking away his credibility and the trust that the american people already don't have in him. >> i'm with jimmy carter. >> there's a hell of a place to be for a republican. >> there's a lot of things i would disagree with, but one i think you will maybe admit, junction a campaign spends $5 million on it doesn't mean they think it's well-spent money. if that's the case, hillary clinton's campaign was the best-run campaign we've ever seen. >> if they were paid but not doing data analytics, what were they doing? reaching out to assange. i think we know why they paid him. terrible at data analytics, but they got paid. >> they reached out to assange in june. i don't think they were even part of the campaign. that's when cruz was winding down who they worked for.
cambridge came in with bannon and the mer series. if this happened in june, it may have been before they were part of the campaign. to her point, we don't know the facts in this whole thing. >> a lot to cover tonight. an item i reported concerning the conspiracy theory about the white supremacist rally, talking about the rally, jason kiss ler said he originally voted for trump, in fact, he says he voted for president obama and attended an event. i apologize for misspeaking. the dossier and hillary clinton's connection to it. the president surprise i am prompt at you press conference and the claims he made.
directv has been rated #1 in customer satisfaction over cable for 17 years running. but some people still like cable. just like some people like banging their head on a low ceiling. drinking spoiled milk. camping in poison ivy. getting a papercut. and having their arm trapped in a vending machine. but for everyone else, there's directv. for #1 rated customer satisfaction over cable switch to directv. call 1-800-directv.
. president trump weighed in on revelations about the clinton campaign and dnc involvement that led to the allegations about president trump and russia. according to the reporting , that research initially was funded by an unknown anti-trump republican source, a source familiar with the matter says hillary clinton was not aware of christopher steele's dossier until buzzfeed published the document earlier this year. the source says she was
disappointed the research wasn't made public before she the lost election at the top of the news comes after the law firm representing the hillary clinton campaign and the dnc acknowledge its clients role in paying for opposition research on donald trump that helped fund the dossier. back with the panel. kirsten, i think the president's calling this watergate of the modern age. >> probably not quite. i don't think that's quite where we are with this. look, i don't think that there's anything wrong with hiring somebody to do oppo research whether they were the a british citizen or not. the problem is if it's a foreign government. >> why not admit it early on? >> great question. i think ken vo gol was on. >> the lawyer was basically saying it wasn't a dossier yet. >> it was a memo. so they were playing legal word games with them.
i don't think that's okay. they should have been honest because they didn't do anything wrong. >> lawyers shouldn't talk to people. there needs to be a translator. mr. trump is an international businessman. he's very rich. so, of course, his opponents both in the republican party and the democratic party are going to want to know the business deals. that's campaign 101. >> now we have paul's phrase earlier, an agent of the dnc and the clinton campaign using a british spy who we're going to find out paying russian sources in contact with the russians to come up with a dossier. we now have a smoking gun. >> i want to know if it's true. >> i agree with you. >> if the russian government has compromising information on my president. >> the question at my hand whether there's been influence on the election, the obsession with tying the president up.
now we know that president clinton's campaign went and worked with the russians to try to sabotage the election. >> we're investigating the russians for christ sake. is our president compromised by a hostile foreign power, he sure acts like it. >> this is amazing. we've found out the dnc and the clinton campaign were lying for months with a straight face. when they get caught, abusing the law firm the dnc currently hires and pays, and that the sources they were trying to get information from was russia, this is just semantics. those are much stronger ties than some things -- >> mike, are you intentionally misunderstand what we said? it feels like you are. let me clarify. there's a difference between the government -- that's what i said.
i don't think you can work with a foreign government that is trying to influence the election and that's not what happened. he's a retired spy. he was hired to do this opposition research. >> would it make a difference if he was used by the russian government? >> totally, absolutely. >> to spread disinformation? it's very possible. >> and you don't defend them lying about it. >> obviously they're covering something up. why would you lie this long about something like this? >> this dossier has become this taboo thing that nobody wanted to be associated with. the clinton campaign was run by people who are seasoned political veterans, they knew enough not to make direct calls to assange themselves. they knew to do it the legal
way. there's this rather blatant inconsistency and hypocrisy going on with people who want to be outraged by in connection between the clinton campaign and this dossier and yet don't want there to be an investigation of the trump campaign, the president of the united states currently, and the collusion with russia. >> there is an investigation. >> that to me is a much bigger issue. hillary clinton is hawking books. president trump has a "the nuclear codes. >> you're saying in the hypocritical? >> i don't know if there was or not but those are the types of words we've been hearing for the last smochlts there's an investigation, there's been literally zero evidence whatsoever that there's collusion between the trump campaign and the russians, and yet people will come on air and say it as if it's fact. and now when there's evidence
that may or may not mean something gets thrown to the determinations they're the ones who are suddenly like, what are you talking about? this is she man ticks fr this is semantics. >> how many more trumps can come out of the volkswagen? >> it's not evidence of collusion. >> but it smells zion there is a real investigation going on. >> sure. >> just because we don't know what's going on in that investigation, that's all it means. >> that's right. i've said this before. first of all, the russians clearly tried to get involved in our election and they're an enemy of america and we need to do something about that. and we need to attack that. but the clinton campaign was run by professionals. the trump campaign would not collude with the rnc. there wasn't anyone in the trump campaign that was able to do something like this. so i find the idea of collusion absurd on its face. a lot of the allegations are trying to connect dots that are
all over the place. the democrats can connect dots as well. all of a sudden that's out-of-bounds and we can't talk about that. stories about assange and cambridge start popping up in the press as soon as these stories start coming out, it makes you wonder about the timing. >> paul, go ahead. >> the clinton campaign apparently conducted opposition research, as every campaign does, on their opponent. they got back apparently this very salacious and infamous dossier, which they never used, didn't even reach the press until after the election was over. they never used it for whatever reason. i have no idea, i guess they didn't have confidence. the contrast is, the trump campaign met with russian lobbyists and lawyers being told before the meeting we have dirt from the crown prosecutor of the kremlin on your opponent, and mr. trump jr. said, if that's
what it is, i love it. but rather vit later in the summer. slugd on the timing of the research, that is collusion. coming up next the president's taking on party unity, suggesting it's a gop love fest. we'll talk about that ahead. a daily struggle, even if you're trying your best. along with diet and exercise, once-daily toujeo® may help you control your blood sugar. get into a daily groove. ♪ let's groove tonight.
♪ share the spice of life. ♪ baby, slice it right. from the makers of lantus®, ♪ we're gonna groove tonight. toujeo® provides blood sugar-lowering activity for 24 hours and beyond, proven blood sugar control all day and all night, and significant a1c reduction. toujeo® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. it contains 3 times as much insulin in 1 milliliter as standard insulin. don't use toujeo® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar or if you're allergic to insulin. get medical help right away if you have a serious allergic reaction such as body rash or trouble breathing. don't reuse needles or share insulin pens. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which can be life threatening. it may cause shaking, sweating, fast heartbeat, and blurred vision. check your blood sugar levels daily. injection site reactions may occur. don't change your dose of insulin without talking to your doctor. tell your doctor about all your medicines and medical conditions.
the senate foreign relations committee and both senators from florida. he called the gop a love fest. >> we have great unity in the republican party. that's okay, look, they have to do their thing. we have great unity. if you look at what happened yesterday at the meeting, we had i guess virtually every senator, including john mccain. we had a great conversation yesterday. john mccain and myself, and not the military. i think we had a -- i called it a love fest. it was almost a love fest. maybe it was a love fest. standing o vacations. >> they came after a punishing week as any president had from his own party. by the same token, the administration has reason to believe the president had a good day today. kate lynn, the president says the republican party is united behind him. how real is that?
>> well, that might be wishful thinking on behalf of the president. after the lunch on capitol hill with senate republicans, he essentially said they were singing his praises. this comes after 24 hours of the president fending off attacks from members of his own party, including senator jeff flake who got on the senate floor and delivered this blistering 20-minute critique of the president hours after bob corker of tennessee said the president was debasing the nation. and that was just on tuesday, anderson. we've also seen senator john mccain criticize the president in recent days and former president george w. bush who was pretty much silent during the barack obama years in office. so if it's unity the republican party wants, it largely depends on who you're asking, because we see a lot of senators trying to stick by the president overall
because they're desperate for a legislative accomplishment here and all eyes on on tax reform at the moment. >> the president placed blame on the press for the dysfunction within the gop. >> that's right. the president was asked after he had been criticizing jeff flake on the south lawn as he was departing for texas if he shouldn't be more civil and he says the press por treys him as an uncivil person and he cited his ivy league education. he also disputed what a pregnant widow of a fallen soldier said about their call this week, just to name a few. >> appreciate that. more on the president's surprise press conference. back with the panel now. kirsten, what did you make of
it? >> look, i thought about this a lot. his claims that the party is unified. it is if you look at the voters. it is a party of voters who supported the president over the members of congress. and i think, yes, he's had very high-profile problems with a couple senators this week, but overall he really has a problem with a handful of people. we're talking about three or four people. and the rest of them -- >> most of them are leaving. >> a lot of the people that are standing behind him also probably have problems with him, but ultimately are voting the way he wants them to vote. atlas fight going on in the republican party. there's no question there's a fight going on in the republican party. it seems like donald trump is winning right now. >> he is, but he needs to unite his party. he should have done that last year before he was even elected.
he got 45% of all the primary votes. 13.3 million votes, that's a ton of votes, but it's still 45%. 55% of republicans voted for someone other than mr. trump. if you're advising him, you say we have to unite the party, boss. he got 88% of the republicans in the election. he's down to between 70 and 80 in the polls. >> what does it matter? >> the first primary coming up in 2020 is in new hampshire. he's below 50% there already. >> come on, paul. nobody's going to run against him. >> wait, say it again. >> no one's going to run against him that's credible. they'll destroy him in a second. everyone needs to hear this message. the republican party is now trump's party. it's not for international trade deals or illegal immigration amnesty. paul, you want to just name
call. >> that's not name calling. >> the party changed dramatically and it's picking up voters. >> ed and i agree, america. >> you put up maxine waters and bernie sanders. trump is picking up voters with people that say we prefer to have a president who's on the side of the american worker and the american people. that's what happened. and guys like flake admitted, one, he said, of course, i'm going to vote for trump's agenda. i'm going to have to vote for it because i'm not that liberal. the second thing hex is he didn't vote for him. i misspoke. he said he didn't vote for trump and so he probably voted for mcmullin. but the reason he's not running is he can't win because he's not a republican where the voters are. that's good. take care. great service. >> do you see party unit? >> i look at it differently.
the senate set the government down before he came to office. the president would sign every bill they send him. he has so far. he's been signing bills. they're not the big marquee bills. but the idea donald trump came to washington and suddenly the party started fracturing is not the correct narrative. there has been fighting inside for a long time. jeff flake is going to leave and i don't put that down to bannon or breitbart or down to the president. >> i agree with mike. the republican party was fractured way before trump. that being said, you now have the it the lar head, the symbolic head of the republican party who spends an enormous amount of time beating up on other republicans. yesterday they published the list of something like ten republican senators he attacked.
his secretary of state, his attorney general, all republicans. he spends more time attacking republicans than he does attacking the leader of north korea. >> that's paid a price and that's why republicans aren't your frie unified in washington. the only place i see unit is in their desire for trump to stop tweeting and attacking them. >> the interesting thing is a lot of the criticism that's coming from corker, from flake, these guys actually vote with trump. they voted with him on health care on the most important issues. the issue is tone and what he is doing to the country, the division, the hostility, the dog whistles to the races and the discrimination that's going on, the legitimizing of people thank they are better than others, that's what's bothering republicans. the trump administration passed the deadline to impose the sanction on top russians for meddling in the election. republican senators are demanding on explanation. that's next.
control? this guy. check it out! self-appendectomy! oh, that's really attached. that's why i rent from national. where i get the control to choose any car in the aisle i want, not some car they choose for me. which makes me one smooth operator. ah! still a little tender. (vo) go national. go like a pro. steve chooses to walk over the26.2 miles,9 days... that's a marathon. and he does it with dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort to keep him feeling more energized. dr. scholl's. born to move. will people know it means they'll get the lowest price guaranteed on our rooms by booking direct on choicehotels.com? hey! badda book. badda boom! mr. badda book. badda boom! book now at choicehotels.com
looking for clear answers for your retirement plan? start here. or here. even here. and definitely here. at fidelity, we're available 24/7 to make retirement planning simpler. we let you know where you stand, so when it comes to your retirement plan, you'll always be absolutely...clear. ♪ time to think of your future it's your retirement. know where you stand.
♪ time to think of your future we can now repair complex at saortic aneurysmsare, without invasive surgery. if we can do that, imagine what we can do for varicose veins. and if we can precisely treat eye cancer with minimal damage to the rest of the eye, imagine what we can do for glaucoma, even cataracts. if we can use dna to diagnose the rarest of diseases, imagine what we can do for the conditions that affect us all. imagine what we can do for you.
tonight senators on both sides of the aisle are finding out if the white house is purposefully delaying sanctions after a deadline set by law. top senate republicans including bob corker tell us they're trying to get information after the delay. president trump signed the bill into law. earlier i spoke to independents center. here's our conversation. >> senator king, it's been almost a month since these sanctions were supposed to have gone into effect. do you know why they haven't been implemented? >> no and i think it's frustrating. this was passed in the first couple days in august. the president signed it and the deadline was october 1st.
i haven't heard a thing. i'm going to be talking about to bob corker later this evening and i know he's concerned. senator mccain is concerned. this wasn't an optional law, this is something congress passed by an overwhelming majority. so far the russians aren't paying any price for what they did to our country last year, and they should. >> the white house is pointing to finger at the state department saying the sanctions are undergoing interagency review and will be announced soon. does that did you teo it for yo? >> one of the problems at the state department, there's literally nobody at the top echelon, this isn't because of any delay this congress. these people haven't been nominated. secretary tillerson is about it, other than that there's nobody running any of the departments and divisions over at the state department. so i'm sure that's slowing it down. ultimately this is the responsibility of the white house, and i hope and believe that it will be implemented in short order.
>> the story that broke yesterday about the dnc and the clinton campaign paying for opposition research in the dossier, does that change things at all? >> i don't think so. my understanding has been right along that the original work, the original investment, if you will, was made on the republican side. i don't know by whom. and then the democratic side took it over when mr. trump was the nominee. opposition research is part of every political campaign these days unfortunately. it's not very shocking this this took place. my understanding sha the clinton campaign didn't hire this guy directly. they hired an opposition research firm which in turn picked up on the work that had already begun. >> the president says his visit to capitol hill was a love fest, and that there's great unity within the republican party. from what you're hearing from your colleagues, is that true? >> i think it is. it depends on what you're talking about.
i think when it comes to tax cuts and tax reform, there certainly appears to be. i don't know what it is. we don't know what the plan is going to be. i'm reporting now to a reporter, as an outsider, not a member of the republican caucus, i think there is consensus, and they want to move forward on that particular agenda item. where it goes after that, i think it's going to be item by item. >> from your vantage point, will the impact from the senators actions from capitol hill, do you think it's going to have a shift away from the president or is that simply something that people might be able to do. >> there are a lot of people that are sort of down about these two guys leaving. i know them both, jeff flake came in with me five years ago and bob corker's been here, this
would have been his third term. very capable, thoughtful guy. and i think the message that's sort of disturbing is if you're independent minded and tried to reach out and solve problems, that can cost you your seat politically, that's a dangerous place for us to be in because we need people who are willing to reach across the aisle and find solutions. if that's a punishable offense, that's a bad sign. and i heard a lot of people talking about that this morning. >> appreciate your time, thank you. >>, yes, sir. the obama area uranium deal under fire from a big connection to russia. i couldn't sleep and get up in time. then i found aleve pm. aleve pm is the only one to combine a safe sleep aid plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. i'm back. aleve pm for a better am.
when it's time to toddlers see things a bit differently thanks to pampers easy ups while they see their first underwear you see an easy way to potty train pampers easy ups our first and only training underwear with an all around stretchy waistband and pampers superior protection so you'll see fewer leaks and they'll see their first underwear pampers easy ups, an easy way to underwear pampers
witness katy perry swish. witness katy perry... aaaaaaw look at that dog! katy perry: with music videos and behind the scenes footage, xfinity lets you witness all things me. more news out of washington. house republicans are looking to the sale of uranium mining company approved by the obama administration. the sticking point is the buyer of that company which turns out to be russia's atomic energy: >> i think the uranium sale to russia and the way it was done, so underhanded with tremendous amounts of money being passed, i actually think that's watergate modern age. >> it's a complicated story, a lot of interconnected threads. let's turn to tom foreman. >> complicated is the word,
anderson. did hillary clinton give 20% of the united states supply of uranium to russia for donations to the clinton foundation? it flows out of the sale in 2010 of this company, uranium one, which controlled about a fifth of america's uranium to a russian firm called roz tom. the u.s. part of this deal had to be approved by the committee of foreign investment in the u.s. which has comprised of nine agencies including the state department, and at that time, hillary clinton was the boss there, anderson. >> so a lot of this was looked at during the campaign. why is it coming back again. there were donations also to the clinton foundation. >> it was all talked about before, but the hill newspaper came out with a report showing the fbi was investigating a
subsidiary for possible money laundering, bribes, all aimed at giving the russian government more influence over the u.s. nuclear industry while this deal was being approved. so some members of congress want to know why they weren't told about this. further more, the hill stace russians were channelling millions of dollars to the hillary campaign. did hillary clinton help this deal along in any fashion? her staff, people who worked there say emphatically no, she had nothing to do with approving the uranium deal. it was handled at the staff level and clinton herself calls the allegations baloney. >> devin nunes wants to launch an investigation. >> he's an informant who played crucial role in that fbi investigation. his attorney tells us this man
has a lot of information about corruption surrounding this matter, and he says to inform manhattan was stunned when the uranium deal was approved. if he testifies, we'll get to hear it first hand and see how well his statements sand up to questioning. is this watergate modern age? >> we'll find out. this has more teeth and more legs. that was a great explanation by cnn there of what this is. when i worked in congress in 2006, sifius is a committee that denied the cousin dubai from buying u.s. ports. it's a long, la borous thing to investigate. this was expedited. it went through the obama administration in 90 days with democrats in congress and no oversight hearings. and the republicans at the time said what's going on here? many americans might be learning tonight and not realized that
20% of u.s. uranium is now owned by russia. that all happened under the obama administration with hillary clinton as the secretary of state while. >> it was approved by multiple government agencies. >> all under the obama administration. it's like a committee of people of the cabinet of barack obama with her sitting there as secretary of state. >> this is published three or four months ago. all of this stuff came out years ago. there was a front page story in "the new york times." the element about this that hasn't got any attention and i think it's important is this story was generated by steve bannon working under the auspices of the family who produced the book clinton cash was given to new york times reporters, took this realized there really is a story here and it generated a front page story in "the new york times" above the fold just after clinton
announced her candidacy. the purpose of the story was to impugn clinton's character which is did and what's interesting is it's coming up now at the very point at which russia has become a problem for donald trump and by congressional republicans surfacing this now, i think it muddies the water and draws attention away from trump. >> the new company that bought this you're rain yum has no license to export. >> the urine yum is not going to russia. >> they have no license to export. that's point one. point two, those are nine cabinet and sub cabinet agencies that sit on that, including the justice department, of which the fbi is part. so if they had concerns they should have raised it at that level because they had a seat at the table. the treasury department chairs that process, by the way, not state or justice. and finally s hillary didn't even vote on it. she didn't attend the meetings on it. she delegated it sensibleel to someone else who knows more about this. to the assistant secretary who
said hillary clinton never intervened with me on any sifous matter. so no intervention. she didn't vote on it. and they can't take -- >> hang on. this is a point you'll want me to make. mrs. clinton did wrong was she didn't disclose the donors -- the head of this company was donating money to the clinton foundation. bill clinton was getting money from a russia aligned -- >> $145 million total which is a lot of money. >> hang on. hang on. >> there was a deal that clinton foundation was supposed to disclose foreign donors and in this case they did not. what made it a viable story. what it doesn't show was there was any kind of collusion. >> the guy that made those donations, he made them 18 months before hillary was even secretary of state and three years before this deal. >> but they knew she was running for president. >> at the end of the day it's two -- two things are the problem. it's crooked hillary.
>> look it up online. >> crooked hillary, the money moving all around. no. she's out of office. and the second thing that's true is the fbi, the story the hill wrote -- they're not carrying water for the trump campaign. the hill said, wait a second, the fbi was in this in a way that nobody ever knew and it wasn't disclosed. what's the story? >> hillary shut -- >> we don't know because the state department runs are the fbi. isn't that what you all said we should look into whether the president -- you've been calling -- >> this is an attempt at interference. wouldn't it be one of the things -- >> it's been looked into. >> it's important to remember is that this happened at a time when they were trying to do the russia reset, so this was also part -- we're thinking of it in today's world, right, where we're looking at russia as someone who tried to interfere with our election who has basically become a major enemy
of the united states and at that point they were trying have a relationship with them and so that would be an argument for why they might approve a deal like this. i don't think there's anything wrong with investi investigatin it. like you're pointing out, the person who supposedly was doing this pay off, he also sold his stake in the company -- >> i spoke to the ceo who said he's a huge clinton fan. gave a lot of money to the clinton foundation, considered bill clinton one of his vows. what i don't think it showed -- >> appreciate everybody on the panel. thank you. more ahead when we come right back. how do we say that this fall,
new one-a-day couples pack gives you both nutritional support you may need. for her to prepare for a healthy baby and for him to support healthy sperm. be in it together. time now for the ridiculous. who is hungry because tonight we're taking you to a quaint little cafe. mac and cheese. here is the owner. >> most of my stuff from here is made from scratch. i make business cuts every morning. we make pastries. >> business cuts. also on the menu, chicken and waffles and that's where the trouble starts because weent recently a customer saw boxes of pop eyes being carried into the kitchen. he couldn't believe the restaurant was using somebody else's fast food chicken for its chicken and waffles. it turned into a whole thing. it must have been some kind of mus understanding, right? >> i love pop eyes chicken. i love it. i think it's the best chicken
out there. >> okay. fair enough. the restaurant owner freely admits she gets the chicken at pop eyes and she has a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why. >> my kitchen is not set up for frying. we're an old building. i don't actually have a proper kitchen back there. walk through the front door with it. seriously, if i thought it was an issue i would put it in a brown paper bag. >> the clues are absolutely everywhere. there is even one on the menu. it's called pops chicken and waffles. the dish sells for about 13 bucks. so you can imagine the uproar over this, right. i've just been told there really isn't much of an uproar. >> it doesn't make that big of a difference. that went with a winning choice. it's like a win win. >> all right. some people must be upset. this would be like going to a fancy restaurant, ordering a fresh burger and outcomes a big macwhich actually i would love. so let's be honest, at this
point everything is derivative of something else, right. even the name pop eyes is derivative unless the actual sailor man built the company from the ground up. fun historical fact, though. pop eyes isn't named that spin after binging old salt. a gentleman named alvin copy land senior opened pop eyes in 1972 with the original name chicken on the run, which is an objectively terrible name for a restaurant. who wants to imagine a chicken running away from some cook with a butcher's knife. not me. after several months of lackluster performance that restaurant opened up with the name pop eyes. 45 years later here we are. >> i think it's so crazy. i'm a tiny little restaurant doing what i do. we didn't do anything wrong. i did something i thought was the best product i could bring in anywhere, anywhere.
>>ism bad for her. give her a break. it's like they say good artists borrow. great artists steel. and make the best chicken and waffles this side of the ridiculous. you all come back now, you hear. thanks for watching 360. time to turn things over to don lemon. cnn tonight starts now. breaking news on the russia investigation. this is cnn tonight. i'm donl lemon. remember when candidate trump said this about hillary clinton's e-mails? >> russia, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing. >> well, maybe somebody was listening. we're learning now that last summer at right about the same time wikileaks julian as sang was contacted by a company linked to the trump campaign seeking access to e-mails from clinton's private server. that's according to four sources familiar with the outreach. assange tweeting today i can confirm an aro