tv At This Hour With Kate Bolduan CNN October 27, 2017 8:00am-9:00am PDT
hello an happy friday. i'm ana cabrera in for kate bolduan. this morning president trump faces new scrutiny for potentially tinkering in an investigation he compares to watergate, an investigation that involves his former rival hillary clinton. sources tell cnn the president personally pressed the justice department to lift a gag order on an fbi informant that can now testify before congress on what he knew, what he learned, as part of an fbi investigation into russia's nuclear industry and its efforts it buy u.s. uranium assets during the obama administration. republican lawmakers are really leading the charge here. they want to know if russian donations to the clinton foundation had anything to do
with this deal being approved because clinton was secretary of state at the time and the state department was one of the agencies that had to sign off on the deal. that brings us to president trump's reported role in freeing this informant to testify. did he violate rules limiting white house influence on investigations especially if political rivals are involved. the white house a short time ago brushed off those concerns. >> it is not unusual for a president to weigh in. this president as you saw from everything that the jfk files to this particular ongoing investigation, is for transparency. and he believes, as many others do, frankly, that the fbi informant should be free to say what he knows. >> leading house democrat adam schiff wants answers. he tweets the president personally intervened with the department of justice to advance case against political opponent it's beyond disturbing. i intend to pursue in new probe.
that would add to as list of russia investigations going in all places at this point. let's begin in washington with cnn justice correspondent jessica snyder. you've been looking into exactly what has prompted now this gag order to be lifted for the president to testify. what can you tell us? >> as kellyanne conway pointed out this morning senator chuck grassley who first asked the justice department to lift the gag order in a letter last week. when it wasn't immediately lifted we know that president took matters into his own hands. gloria borger reporting that president trump directed his senior staff to lift the order on that fbi informant who says he wants to share what he knows about what he's calling corruption surrounding the approval of that 2010 uranium deal. hillary clinton was on the committee of nine agencies that approved it. so after the president's order, white house counsel don mcgahn
relayed the president's message to the justice department and wednesday night when that gag order was lifted. but here is why democrats are crying foul. the justice department has strict rules limiting any white house involvement in criminal law enforcement matters, especially when it involves the president's political opponents. and, of course, it was just earlier this week that the president talked about the uranium deal calling it the watergate of the modern age and dug in on it again today, tweeting this, ana, he said, it is now commonly agreed after many months of costly looking that there was no collusion between russia and trump. was collusion with hc, standing for hillary clinton there. there has not been a conclusion in the russian investigations still on several fronts but this week yet another probe was announced by congressional republicans. they're going to be looking into the reported millions of dollars that russia channeled to the clinton foundation at the same time that uranium deal was being
approved and whether or not it may have influenced hillary clinton in her vote. she says no way and her staff points out there were many other agencies involved in approving this deal but ana, looks like these questions among all the other ones swirling out there, this will continue to play out on capitol hill. >> muddying the waters and we need more answers. thank you for the update. our guest, jeffrey toobin chief legal analyst, chief correspondent dan na bash with me and kaitlan hughey burns for real clear politics. jeffery, the fbi informant we know was involved in an fbi investigation at the time that this uranium one deal was happening, he's going to testify before congress apparently the president wanted this to happen, told the justice department such and the justice department made the decision to lift the gag order. how unusual is this. >> what's really unusual and what's very troubling about this is the president getting involved in an investigation of his former and current political
rival, hillary clinton. it was because of watergate that richard nixon used the irs, used the justice department to investigate and harass his enemies that policies were put in place, not laws, policies that say that the justice department is -- should be allowed to do their investigations on their own, that the white house should not interfere. this was clear interference for political benefit and they are getting the political benefit because here we are talking about this years, years old investigation. >> talking about what they want us to be talking about. >> of a private citizen in chappaqua, new york, rather than an investigation of the president of the united states. >> a citizen in washington, d.c. >> private citizens now. but they're private citizens now but the allegations are maybe they did something wrong or illegal perhaps during the obama administration. >> correct.
but the point we now have a new president with lots to investigate, but this committee is rather going back into really ancient history now. these -- you're talking about 2009, 2010, and i don't think there's any doubt that this all comes from the nexus of fox news and the white house who are pushing this story, not because there's any pressing national interest to deal with it. >> democratic senator richard blumenthal sees a pattern of behavior here. listen to what he says. >> what's so striking about the president again intervening in the department of justice, is it's part of a pattern of politization of the department of justice. he fired jim comey, he's interviewing u.s. attorney candidates in the southern district in new york where he has property, and where there are investigations into money laundering by his associates, so this skind of interference in the department of justice is
deeply troubling to me. >> he's calling foul. he brings up some other examples. what can they do about it if democrats are towing this line? >> well, look, call him out on it. that's -- you actually saw that senator blumenthal during a hearing with the attorney general jeff sessions really press him on one of the points he made there on the president of the united states being involved in the selection of u.s. attorneys. it's not, as you would say, illegal. there's nothing criminal about it. >> important to point that out. >> something that president the don't usually do when you have a president coming from the private sector, where some things may come up before as u.s. attorneys office. >> a lot of businesses in the jurisdiction. >> in new york. and elsewhere where he has properties. yes, it is incredibly unusual. but i do think to go back what jeffrey was saying about that we're talking about what the republicans want us to talk about, you know, you have a point. we are.
we are. and the republicans for the past nine months have had a lot of trouble figuring out the right needle to try to thread to kind of punch back politically on the notion of russia. particularly because those republicans who are leading the committees that are investigating russian involvement in the 2016 election are really interested in knowing the answer to that and they're not towing the trump line it's not true, that it's a hoax and so forth. there is giddiness among many republicans that they have found one thing that they can bring back up, and it just so happens that you do have the chair of the -- going to come of it but if i'm a democrat and i get the answer and it's something that
proves that there was nothing untoward, maybe that's a good thing. >> well, and maybe -- >> another thing for all of us we want to know the answers. >> here's the thing, as jeffrey pointed out, this is not a new thing. this deal happened years ago during the obama administration. wasn't this even talked about, this uranium one deal was talked about during the campaign. >> sure. it was talked about during the campaign but there were so many other things involving the clintons that the trump campaign went after, so there was a saturation, perhaps, but it's important to point out republicans have been in charge of the house for at least six, seven years now. >> right. >> and -- >> they could have done an investigation earlier, right. >> that's what democrats are arguing. why now, why this. the republicans on this committee interested in probing this are saying well, we need to know what -- whether the fbi -- whether members of congress knew about the fbi investigation during this deal and so i do think that looking from a political perspective, the president certainly i think gets
a lot out of this because it is so complicated, right. i think most americans are kind of looking at this and saying, why should we know about this when you have other things going on and then you have it on partisan lines. an issue that's going to animate both sides from a partisan issue. >> you brought up the word watergate. >> as did the president. >> that's what i was going to ask you about. the president says the uranium one deal has the potential to be a modern era watergate. does it? >> based on the evidence that is public so far, absolutely not. there is no evidence of any corruption at all. i mean the person who gave the money to the clinton foundation was out of this business by the time this uranium deal went through. the idea there's some quid pro quo pay for play, seems wrong. but, you know, remember how important control of congress is. you know, adam schiff tweets today the democrat from
california, he's going to do a probe of the president's intervention. he can't do a probe of anything because he's a democrat and -- >> has to be initiated by the majority republicans. >> he can, you know, do google searches but there is not a lot that democrats can do in the house of representatives. >> and in the meantime you talked about the narrative switching republicans sort of grabbing ahold of another narrative involving russia pointing fingers at democrats, done the same with the dossier out, that we've learned that russian dossier was funded by the clinton camp, by the dnc. and yet we also learned dana that debbie wasserman-schultz the head of the dnc during the campaign and that john podesta the head of the clinton campaign, went before congressional investigators who are looking into the russia investigation and basically said they didn't know anything about this dossier until we all learned about it publicly, so who on the dnc or the clinton camp would have actually known
about these funds going to this research? >> the answer to that is super awkward for the democrats because it just so happens that the man who did not only know about it but was -- we now are reporting that was kind of went out and hired this group was a man named mark elias who happens to be the personal attorney for john podesta and was in the room with when john podesta was saying i didn't know about it. john podesta, you know, he probably almost certainly told the truth. he didn't know about it. he was the campaign chair. debbie wasserman-schultz as the dnc chair was more removed from it. mark elee asand others did know -- elias and others did know there was payment involved by the clinton campaign to get this information and has been out there for months and months and we're just learning about it now, is just -- it's bad politics and it's just bad policy frankly. i mean if we're talking about
transparency and you have the democrats demanding to know things, and i'm not equating the two, just talking about the approach and strategy, demanding to know things about what the trump campaign did or didn't do with russia and then on the other hand you know that the democrats were involved in something that has been a part of that conversation and they haven't said anything, as you said earlier, not a good look. >> they should have -- they should have said there's nothing -- unlawful or even improper about doing opposition research. >> we talked about it. >> by not disclosing they were the ones who paid for it -- >> a lot of them are saying yeah, we should have done this. they're proponents of doing it. >> which goes back to who knew what because there have been some people who have been questioned. thank you all for coming in. i owe you. didn't have as much time to break it all down. >> no. i love listening. it's great. >> always more to discuss. we'll have you back. we have breaking new details
we are also following today in the isis ambush in niger where four u.s. troops were killed. cnn is learning why the soldiers were separated in the fire fight. after weeks of teasing a big reveal, president trump making a last-minute decision to hold back some of the classified jfk documents. what's behind that 11th hour move. we'll discuss. . you wish to know how to protect your sterling credit score. my credit is off to a good start, but i worry my information was hacked, which kinda freaks me out. well, unfreak yourself out and download the free creditwise app from capital one. creditwise gives you a credit score, and alerts you to changes. even if i'm not a capital one customer? nooooo! yeah, and it's free for everyone. thank you. gravity, is a fickle mistress. what's in your wallet? ♪ hungry eyes ♪ one look at you and i can't disguise ♪
without the noise, fuss or fumes. exclusively at the home depot and ego authorized dealers. welcome back. we have exclusive new details about the ambush that killed four american soldiers in the west african nation of niger. we're hearing directly from a nigerian soldier one of the first on the scene after that attack. that soldier also saw the american green berets the day before the ambush. he says they were wearing t-shirts and baseball caps, they didn't have sufficient weapons on them. i want to bring in cnn's david mckenzie in niger with the latest details. what more do we know? >> well, i first want to bring
you new details from u.s. officials that we've just got this information. now according to those two officials, four of the -- the four u.s. soldiers killed were in the same part of that separated convoy during that ambush. they were all separated from the rest of the u.s. soldiers and presumably other nigerian soldiers and three of those soldiers, other than sergeant la david johnson were recovered by u.s. special forces part of the original kill or capture team, who were going to go after the high value terror target, according to one of the u.s. officials. more details coming in, but exactly what went down and possibly how those special forces were tragically killed in this deadly ambush, ana? >> david, when it comes to the details of what that scene was like, paint the picture, based on this report now from the soldier who apparently arrived on scene during the fire fight?
>> well, he came in just as a fi fire fight ended and it was a soldier who we spoke to and saying after word got out presumably to the ground troops here. he said that when he arrived on the scene, the american and the nigerian soldiers were back to back, he said they were fighting presumably to the death, he was really amazed by their bravery and certainly said that he believed they should have had more support but we'll only know when more detail comes out. ana. >> david mckenzie in niger, thank you for that update. republican lawmakers here at home are just catching their breath after yesterday's razor thin passage of that budget bill that happened right as this show was getting started and new they have to sprint to an even more ambitious goal. the party's signature promise of
delivering tax reform by the end of the year. are they any where close to having a plan to get the votes? new jersey republican tom mcarthur who voted against the budget had this to say, a quote, i know and they know that there were people that voted yes only to keep the process going forward, but who disagree with the fact that we don't have a deal yet. cnn's sunlen serfaty is joining us on capitol hill. lawmakers say we will get details on the gop tax plan next wednesday? >> that's right. that's when the legislative text of this bill is set to be leased. this vote on the budget clearly reveals that they still have not settled many of the underlying issues that republicans have within the party about this bill. you have 20 defections on the budget yesterday. that was only two votes short of potentially killing the budget. so that really gives leadership a good sense of where they are right now. quite frankly they don't have the support they need. so as they work through these issues and negotiations continue
among the -- one of the chief issues the state and local tax deductions, a lot of republicans from high stakes -- high tax states like new jersey and new york want to see that preserved. issue over the 401(k) contributions, talk those could be capped. the president really has been all over the map on this and inserting himself a little bit into the negotiations specifically on 401(k)s. first tweeting that he was against it and then saying maybe something will be worked out, he will be using it as a negotiating tool and this is something that speaker of the house paul ryan was asked about yesterday in a press conference up here on capitol hill, essentially asking if it's easier if the president stayed out of the details. here's that exchange. >> are you at all concerned that this rollout next week when you detail these tough choices, that he's not going to maybe like some of them and tweet something about it? >> he's going to be in asia.
number one. just kidding. kind of a joke. >> a little moment of levity up there you could say, but certainly a moment of honesty i should say from the speaker indicating that he doesn't want anything to rock the boat on this, especially not the president's famous tweets that do a lot to up-end negotiations and they do have an incredibly ambitious schedule they want to hold that will be unveiled next wednesday. after all the details get worked out. they will push for it in the house and senate. leaders on both sides. they would like this to be passed by thanksgiving. that's incredibly ambitious even if everything goes perfectly for them. >> of course, having flashbacks to the whole health care debacle for republicans. we wonder what's going to happen if this is going to be different. sunlen serfaty, thank you for that. still ahead here in the newsroom, we are digging into the thousands of once classified files on the jfk assassination. we have new info and there are also new questions about lee harvey oswald. hey, it's me, your dry skin.
i'm craving something we're missing. the ceramides in cerave. they help restore my natural barrier, so i can lock in moisture and keep us protected. we've got to have each other's backs and fronts. cerave. what your skin craves. and fronts. accused of obstructing justice to theat the fbinuclear war, and of violating the constitution by taking money from foreign governments and threatening to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president,
then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer, and like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet today people in congress and his own administration know that this president is a clear and present danger who's mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons. and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it.
so, it was supposed to be this big release, a deadline that was set decades ago. president trump even teased a big reveal, but what we got is "inside politics." the -- is incomplete. the president has access to some of president kennedy's assassination files but president trump agreed not to release hundreds of documents after request from national security agencies. the president says they are still coming tweeted jfk files are being carefully released and in the end there will be great transparency. it is my hope to get just about everything to public. even the new document dump is fodder for those conspiracy theorists. tom foreman and jefferson morley, the author of "the ghost the secret life of cia spy master of james angleton the
cry's counter intelligence director at the time of the kennedy assassination. tom, i want to start with you because you've been pouring through the thousands of pages of documents released. one of the biggest conspiracy theories was addressed in the document dump whether lee harvey oswald was connected to the cia. what did you learn? >> kind of addressed. look at this image from the document dump that says what was asked about that. during the course of this conversation there was a warren commission was doing its work a direct question, was he working for the cia. is that what happened. and yet, there was no answer. it basically gets cut off after that. is there any information involved with the assassination of president kennedy which in any way shows lee harvey oswald was a cia agent and then it just stops there. there's no answer. so, you know, i'm telling you if you're one of the conspiracy theorists you're like there's the evidence. >> right. >> if you're not you're saying
there's a question that doesn't tell us anything. >> what it almost does feed that conspiracy that they're trying to cover something up when they don't provide the answer to that very specific question. jefferson, why would that have simply cut off there? why wouldn't the answer be included in this document release? >> because the relationship between the cia and lee harvey oswald was and is remains to this day a very sensitive subject that the cia would prefer not to talk about. and what we saw yesterday when we were supposed to get all of these records, was a continuation of the secrecy, the unnecessary secrecy, around jfk files. you said at the top of the show that hundreds of documents remain secret. by my count i think it would be more accurate to say thousands of documents remain secret. and so it was really disappointing. i think president trump had the impulse to release all of these but the cia and fbi prevailed on
him at the last minute to withhold most of them. >> and our sources are telling us that it really was down to the 11th hour he was having people come to him saying we can't release this because of x, y or z, there's a national security issue, there's a security issue perhaps with the identities of some of these people who are in the documents who are part of these investigations, so jefferson, you've done so much research and investigating yourself into how the cia operates and specifically this case, why would the cia wait until the very last day when they've had 25 years. they've known this deadline was coming all this time. >> this is straight out of the cia playbook which is to release some trivial information, keep the most sensitive information public, and play for time. so what they did was they persuaded president trump to keep secrecy around these records for six more months and from their point of view it was for a good reason. there's very embarrassing
material in here about the cia's role in the jfk story. they're trying to keep that out of public view. >> tom, let me ask you about another interesting finding that we found in these documents as you were going through. tell us about this apparent death threat called -- that was called in prior to oswald's murder. >> this is the first time we've ever had a record that says there was a direct call to the fbi. this was from j. edgar hoover saying last night we received a call in our dallas office from a man talking in a calm voice saying he was a member of a committee organized to kill oswald. now there were a lot of death threats from a lot of people in a lot of places at that time and jack ruby to be sure said he was not part of a group out there but many people have suspected maybe they were involved. another part in the papers where there's somebody out there opining about the idea that ruby and oswald were in concert and
ruby made it possible for oswald to commit the murd ir and killed oswald to cover his tracks. this is the first time we knew the fbi was speaking to the idea that they were directly called and told that oswald would likely be killed or could be killed by a group. >> jefferson, how do you read that? should we take from this that oswald wasn't adequately protected? >> absolutely. the behavior of the dallas police was atrocious in bringing that man out at that time and ruby penetrated this security perimeter very easily, perhaps with help from dallas police, so they had a lot to be embarrassed about and this document just shows that, you know, they were well warned ahead of time. >> tom, there was this back and forth with an alleged cuban intelligence officer who claimed to have known oswald? >> yeah. this was an intercepted conversation between two cuban intelligence officers. one of them said to the other
one, that oswald must have been a good shot and the other one replied oh, he was quite good and asked how he knew this, he says here, i knew him. all of this continues to feed into, though, basically this web that has been building for decades and decades of really sort of loose ends and unconnected leads and innuendos and possibilities. the one thing that has always been missing for those who want to look purely at verifiable facts, is a clear line to explain how this conspiracy worked and who was actually involved. for all these many, many theorys that are out there which i'm sure are absolutely growing, based on this information. >> on that last little snippet we just pulled out, jefferson, what do we know about oswald's connections to the cuban government? >> september 1963s oswald went to mexico city, seeking a visa to travel to the soviet union and cuba and in that time he had
contact with the soviet and cuban consulate there and those are presumed to be intelligence officers. the cia was survey veiling oswald at the time. they were well aware of those contacts when they happened. the information about oswald's contacts with the soviet and cuban intelligence officers was forwarded to the top of the cia, to james engleton, in fact, who i write about in my book. so the oswald's presence in mexico city was very well known to the top of the cia six weeks before president kennedy was killed. >> what we don't know yet, though, about those contacts, is the content of all of those contacts. because honestly if i called the french embassy today, just call them, that is a contact. is it a meaningful one? i don't know. that's what we still don't know. >> we still have pieces of the puzzle that are missing and we had hoped to fill it all in with this document dump. maybe we'll get those answers
eventually. tom foreman and jefferson morley, such a fascinating conversation. >> thank you. >> our goal is not war. that was the direct quote from defense secretary james mattis standing a few feet from north korea this morning. it comes as some democratic lawmakers are pushing a bill to block the president from launching a preemptive strike against the north. i'll ask one democratic senator if he supports this legislation next. first if you have a garage full of used sports equipment collecting dust this week's "cnn hero" has found a creative way to give those soccer balls, the old tennis rackets, new life. >> a lot of kids learn the importance of work ethic on the sports field. >> set, go. >> there we go. good job. do it again. >> sports were the most important part of my childhood. i thought it was a given for kids to play sports but so many kids can't afford to play sports. millions of dollars of sports equipment not being put to use either being thrown away or wasting away in garages, and i
thought why don't we create a food bank for sports equipment. >> to see max's equipment and how it's really making a difference go to cnnheros.com and don't forget next week the top ten cnn heros of 2017 will be revealed. we'll be right back. look at this... a silicon valley server farm. the vault to man's greatest wonders... selfies, cat videos and winking emojis. speaking of tech wonders, with the geico app you can get roadside assistance, digital id cards... or even file a claim. do that.. yeah, yeah that should work. it's not happening... just try again. uh, i think i found your problem. thanks. hmm... the award-winning geico app. download it today.
and how can you measure the value of one? today trusted answers from trusted sources are rare and precious commodities. and when industries are undergoing massive transformation, opportunities are only opportunities if you can find an answer that separates fact from near fact. thomson reuters provides you the intelligence, technology, and human expertise you need to find those trusted answers. the answer company. thomson reuters. new this morning, defense secretary james mattis visiting the demilitarized zone, the dmz, an area that separates north korea and south korea and his main message is one of diplomacy actually saying that is the key to ending a nuclear crisis with north korea. listen. >> our goal is not war, but rather the complete verifiable
and irreversible denuclearization of the korean peninsula and we stand shoulder to shoulder with you, with your soldiers, and with your people, in confronting the threats posed by the kim jong-un regime. >> secretary mattis is in the region now paving the way for president trump's much anticipated visit to asia next week. and it comes amid escalating tensions between trump and north korea's kim jong-un with the north renewing its threat this week to test a nuclear weapon above ground. let's discuss, with democratic senator ben cardin of maryland joining me in new york, the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee. so thank you so much, senator, for being here in person to discuss this. as we are coming back from break, we talked about the many foreign policy concerns you have personally. first in north korea, i know there have been a couple democratic bills that have now been proposed that would essentially prevent the president from launching a preemptive strike on north korea without congressional approval.
i'm talking about the one specifically with senator mark ki and congressman coners in the house. is that legislation you would support. >> it's good to be with you and glad to hear secretary mattis to point out our objective is to find a diplomatic answer to the crisis in north korea. a military option is certainly not what we want to do. it would -- we should be able to find a way to avoid the use of military because it will be catastrophic. what these bills are attempting to do is make it clear to the president we don't want him to do preemptive military strikes. that would be -- particularly nuclear, would be unthinkable. >> you support this bill. >> i support making sure we don't do a nuclear first strike and i don't want to see any military operations in north korea unless there's an immediate threat against us. >> is that something republicans would be on board with as well? do you think this legislation has teeth? >> i think that there is concern among both democrats and republicans that we have a policy that looks at what we can
do through diplomacy, to restrict and hopefully one day eliminate north korea's nuclear ambitions. we need to make progress where we can. we need to figure out ways we can at least freeze what they're doing currently. working with china, we think we can put the pressure on north korea to change their way. again, using military, particularly the united states were to initiate it, could lead to escalation and catastrophic consequences. >> we've seen more and more sanctions imposed on north korea and, in fact, you guys in both the house and senate passed those extra sanctions on not just north korea but on russia as well which the president signed. this was a couple months ago. i know that this was top of mind this week as we learned that those extra sanctions had not been implemented because they were stuck in the state department going through its review. well, yesterday we learned the state department completed that review after you and senator mccain sent a letter asking what is going on. do you think we would have ended up at this point had there not been the extra pressure
provided? >> i think we moved it along a little faster than otherwise it would have been. they're late in getting us the information. we now have it. we now need to make sure it's implemented properly. there is a review process that is contemplated by statute and there are ways in which we can make sure that they are effectively implemented working with our international partners. that's what we expect from the administration. senator mccain and i will be following this very, very closely. >> i also want to ask you about niger and really the u.s. role in that part of the world, because as we're learning more about what happened with these four americans who lost their lives in that ambush situation in niger, i know your colleagues on the senate armed services committee came out of their briefing yesterday expressing great concern about isis getting a foot hold in this part of the world. what do you see as the american role moving forward combatting terrorism there? >> the senate foreign relations committee will have a hearing on monday with secretary mattis and
secretary tillerson so we'll have an opportunity to at least ask questions in this area. i'm very concerned about what military operations we're doing, particularly where congress has not authorized the use of our military. there are legitimate questions as to what our military goal is all about. we want to eliminate isis anywhere they may be anywhere in the world. that's a threat against the united states, that's a threat against global security, but we want to make sure we don't use that as justification to have military presence where it's not helpful. then there should be congressional authorization. the authorization the administration is using is outdated and they should come to congress and the american people and be specific as to how our military needs to be used. >> you're talking about the authorization to use military force shorthand aumf. will we see a new bill? >> i think it's a little early to tell, but i think congress has a responsibility -- >> do you want to see a bill?
>> oh, yes. i don't believe the current authorization that's being used by this administration and the previous administration, covers circumstances like niger, circumstances like what we're doing in syria. we should have a specific authorization from congress as to what force is permissible in fighting isis. >> do you support more boots on the ground there? >> no, i do not. i don't think we win the war against isis with boots on the ground. what we do is support the local military because you don't want this to be a campaign against the united states. this is to liberate countries and they need to do that with their own resources with the help of the united states. >> i also want to ask quickly about the iran deal because i know you and senator corker my understanding have been at least in discussions about how to move forward, perhaps in a bipartisan way, now the ball is in your court to take another look at the iran nuclear deal you were not a fan of it when it was passed initially when it came to fruition, where do those negotiations stand? >> i think we have a general
understanding that congress will not take any steps that would put the united states on path off violate the nuclear agreement. as long as iran is complying with it we want to make sure we rigorously enforce the agreement, go after iran on the nonnuclear violations congress has passed, enhance sanctions, see the administration rigorously work with our allies to impose sanctions against iran for its ballistic missile violations, support of terrorism, human rights violations. >> is there any way to do that without blowing up the original deal? >> absolutely. the original deal deals only with the nuclear requirements, does not deal with the nonnuclear. it is perfectly acceptable and we can work with our european partners, that's what we want to do, to make it clear to iran if they continue to support terrorism we will continue to impose sanctions. >> you're thinking of doing something outside that original deal, keeping that intact but doing an add-on? >> we've done that. we've actually already passed additional sanctions.
>> right. >> that i think is a little bit easier situation for us to deal with, with our european allies. there are gaps in the nuclear agreement that relate to what happens after the termination dates. that's going to be up to the parties to negotiate. congress can't negotiate that. >> senator ben cardin, thank you very much for providing some clarity and some instruction for us. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> the governor of puerto rico is now threatening there will be hell to pay there as two new investigations begin into that big money government deal to restore power which landed in the lap of a company with just two people on the payroll. stay with us. we'll discuss. attention homeowners age sixty-two and older. one reverse mortgage has a great way for you to live a better retirement... it's called a reverse mortgage. call right now to receive your free information kit with no obligation. it answers questions like... how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to
receive your money and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with led light absolutely free! when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home... and here's the best part... you still own yohome. call now! take control of your retirement today! the open enrollment period is here. the time to choose your medicare coverage... begins october 15th and ends december 7th. so call unitedhealthcare to learn about... a plan that could give you the benefits you're looking for. it's the aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. what makes it complete?
it can combine medicare parts a and b, which is your hospital and doctor coverage... with part d prescription drug coverage, and more, all in one simple plan... for a low monthly premium or in some areas, no plan premium at all. an aarp medicarecomplete plan offers you benefits like an annual physical, preventive screenings and most immunizations... all for a $0 copay. you'll also have access to a local network of doctors and much more. you can get routine vision and hearing coverage, a fitness membership to help you stay active, and worldwide emergency care. for prescriptions, you'll pay the plan's lowest price, whether it's your copay or the pharmacy price. or pay as low as zero dollars for a 90-day supply of your tier 1 and tier 2 drugs, delivered right to your door. in fact, our medicare advantage plan members saved an average of last year. now is the time to look at your options. start getting the benefits
of an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. with 40 years of medicare experience, unitedhealthcare offers more than great benefits. you can count on us to answer any questions, help schedule your appointments... and with renew by unitedhealthcare, our health and wellness experience, you can earn rewards for making healthy choices. open enrollment ends december 7th. to learn more about the only medicare advantage plans with the aarp name, call unitedhealthcare now... or visit us online. we make it easy to enroll, too. so call or go online today. [sfx: mnemonic]
>>. >> right now president trump is meeting with interior secretary ryan zeenky at the white house can they reveal a deal with the power company from his hometown awarded a $300 million contract to restore power in parts of puerto rico. here's puerto rico's governor just this morning. >> certain questions have a risen from this contract so it is my job as governor to make sure there was clarity and all of the process was executed appropriately. if there is wrong-doing, you know, in this process or any process, there will be hell to pay. >> cnn's martin savage is in san juan. tell us about the two new inquiries involving the power company white fish and how they got the contract.
>> there is a couple of them. a lot of people are looking at the contract. they are becoming white hot for obvious reasons here. how did a tiny company get such a big contract and was there some undo influence in the process of them winning that bid? the governor is feeling the heat as well. he put in a request to the department of homeland security, the parent company of fema to review the contract. that's under way and he hopes to get an answer by next week. he asked his office of management and budget to look into that and he wants to hear an answer by the end of the day. we were just told they expect to get some review by the end of the day today. there will be a news conference when they do. it's a big deal. >> we know you will be following it. we will be checking back in. president trump's latest controversial move in the russia investigation. the white house said he used the proper channel when democrats say it's a troubling pattern. accused of obstructing justice to theat the fbinuclear war,
and of violating the constitution by taking money from foreign governments and threatening to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer, and like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet today people in congress and his own administration know that this president is a clear and present danger who's mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons. and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it.
>> welcome to inside politics. thank you for sharing your day with us. democrats call it political meddling. president trump intervenes to help republicans secure testimony for an fbi source with information about an obama era iranian deal with russia. >> what's so striking about the president intervening in the department of justice is it's part of a pattern of plititization of the department of justice. >> a street level look at america's opioid crisis and the big question now that it has the president's attention. will there be new money to match the promises of help? >> this is the medical crisis of our time. the aids epidemic of our generation, but worse. another thing i don't understand is