tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN January 23, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PST
whom he can hire and whom he can fire. >> the president has -- >> hold on. here is the president of the united states only moments ago. >> spanning decades really. we're very proud of it. the stock market is reacting the way it is. thank you all very much. very proud of this. thank you. [ inaudible ] >> not at all. >> did you talk to him? >> no, i didn't, but i'm not at all concerned. thank you very much. no, he didn't at all. he did not even a little bit. he he's going to do a good job. we're look at it. we're looking at a lot of things. let's see how it all works out. >> are you concerned about -- [ inaudible ] >> thank you all very much. >> thank you, all. thank you very much. >> it won't be a trade war, by the way, only stock increases for companies in this country.
that's what happened today. if you look at solar and you look at the washing machine companies, that's really what happened today. you can have people getting jobs again and we're going to make our own product again. it's been a long time. thank you
all very much. >> we're going to take it. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. couple of key pieces there with the president, speaking specifically about this story with regard to his ag, jeff sessions, and conversations had with regard to the fbi director and his deputy. and was anyone threatened to resign or threatened to resign or not? cnn correspondent brown is with us now. i heard the president say that christopher wray, the fbi director, did not threaten to resign, which is different from some other reporting we've had. because it was all about wray and having sessions, basically the president pressure ray to get rid of mccabe. what did you just hear?
>> reporter: right. he also said that the attorney general, sessions, did not bring up his interview with robert mueller's team last week. the attorney general was here at the white house yesterday, meeting with the president. you just heard the president say there that he's not concerned with what his attorney general might have told the investigators. the white house today has come out and said it's being transparent, that it's being cooperative with the russia probe and expects the probe to wrap up soon. but sessions is now the 13th person, brooke, close to donald trump, in his circle, that's been interviewed by robert mueller's team and third cabinet level official in the trump administration to be interviewed by robert mueller's team. it's no surprise that investigators wanted to sit down with him for the first time. this san interview that took several hours. because jeff sessions did play a role in the trump campaign. he recused himself from the russia investigation because he did have contacts with the
russian ambassador, sergey kislyak that hadn't been zploesed and also played a role in the firing of james comey, the former fbi director. investigators want to learn more about that in terms of the russia probe. it's a strong indication, brooke, that this russia probe is ongoing, that the white house came out a while back and said that the investigators had wrapped up interviews with witnesses at the white house, but clearly, they are still interested in talking to other people around the president, brooke. >> let's underscore that last point, the fact that this did not require a subpoena. this was last thursday, mueller's team interviewing the attorney general jeff sessions. he is key not just because, as you pointed out, him having a front row seat to any kind of russian contacts during the campaign but also during the firing of james comey during the first couple of months of this
administration. >> exactly right. you'll recall at the time the president brought in the attorney general as well as the deputy ag, rod rosenstein, and wanted to get their thoughts on a justification for firing james comey. then you have this reporting out that the attorney general reportedly had pressured the fbi director, wray, to change his top leadership. i would imagine that investigators will want to look into that, to see why that is, why he was pressuring the fbi director to do so. certainly, there are a lot of questions surrounding some of his actions and the involvement he has had with parts of this investigation. but certainly this is the first time they've interviewed him, brooke. it may not be the last. >> pamela brown at the white house, thank you so much. let's dig deeper now. the director threatened to resign. we heard the president sayi ini wray did not threaten to resign. here is what a source is telling cnn.
the attorney general, jeff sessions, pressured christopher wray, to make staffing changes, including his deputy director andrew mccabe. wray reportedly threatened to quit if that pressure continued. he has been a frequent target of the president and of the president's allies and these are just a couple of tweets president trump has sent out since july specifically about deputy mccabe. jessica schneider is with me now on this. and so did sessions explicitly call for mccabe to be fired? >> according to attorney general jeff sessions he did put this pressure on christopher wray, who then pushed back, threatening to resign. this is the narrative coming from republicans, the white house, you saw from the
president's own twitter feed. it's part of their contention, and has been for many weeks now, that the fbi is politically motivated. what's interesting to note is that when this news broke, fbi director wray felt so much pressure to make those staffing changes at the highest levels, the white house did come out with a statement where they praised fbi director wray, but then they turned part that have statement into an attack on other senior fbi officials. in fact, a spokesman referred to them as politically motivated senior leaders and, really, it was deputy director andrew mccabe in particular. he has come under a lot of pressure from the president. you saw it in those tweets there, for his handling of the clinton e-mail server investigation. and, of course, over the past few years there's been a bit of issue or turmoil and questions because of the fact that mccabe's wife accepted political contributions during a statewide run in virginia from a political pac connected to terry
mcauliffe, close friend of the clintons. we know that there have been issues or questions anyway about deputy director andrew mccabe. all of this came to a head. sessions told wray he wanted a fresh start when it came to leadership. we heard from senator mark warner today. here is what he said. >> one more example of this administration, the president and through his agent, the attorney general, trying to interfere the fbi, follow the law and help with the investigation into the russian interference in our elections and possible collusion of the trump administration or trump campaign. >> did he pressure wray on his own accord or did the president have something to say about that? that remains to be seen.
christopher wray, according to you are source, did threaten to resign over this pressure to get rid of his senior staff. brooke? >> on christopher wray, you also have some news about staffing changes under him. what is that? >> the two other posts we talked about, that's not at issue here. what we have learned in the past few minutes is that christopher wray's chief of staff, also james comey's chief of staff, he will be leaving the fbi. his post of chief of staff in the next few weeks. christopher wray put out a statement about it, saying that jim rubicky notified me he will be leaving the fbi to accept an attorney opportunity in the private sector. it's interesting that this announcement of this -- james rubicky leaving the fbi, even though christopher wray said he told him back in december about
it, it's interesting that it comes on the heels of this latest reporting that chris wray did face pressure to get rid of other top officials at the fbi. yes, the news we're learning is that the chief of staff who was there under james comey, chief of staff for christopher wray, he will be leaving in the coming weeks. brooke? >> jessica, thank you. let's go to legal experts for analysis on all of the above here. i have with me asha rangatha, senior lecturer at yale and senior managing director at berkeley. first, asha, beginning with you and the ag, jeff sessions and the fact that we learned he was questioned by mueller's team last wednesday. put his role in context here. as a key witness to these russian contacts during the campaign and also in james
comey's firing. underscore for me the value of his role in this whole investigation. >> there are definitely two key areas. one is in the potential obstruction of justice investigation that mueller might have over the firing of james comey. the second is the russian investigation into any kind of coordination between members of the trump campaign and russia's election interference. it's important to underscore that those are two separate things even if the russia investigation ends up not turning anything up, for example, the russia case is separate from that. i would add, brooke, i think there's a third possibility here, one that perhaps might be used as leverage but i think there's an open question whether mueller might also be questioning the attorney general over potential false statements or even perjury because of many of the conflicting statements that he has given in his congressional testimony concerning his own contacts with russian officials.
so three main areas they'll really want to grill sessions on. >> that's where i wanted to go next. not only sometimes conflicting, jeff sessions has this history of not recalling things. let's take a snapshot. this is one day. he was before the house in november of last year. roll it. >> i don't recall such a conversation. i don't recall it. i don't recall. i don't recall. i don't recall. i don't recall it. i don't recall that. i don't recall how that exactly occurred. i do not recall. but i did not recall this event. i don't recall. i don't recall at this moment, sitting here, any such discussio discussion. >> you see the point we're making here. plus the attorney general had to return before the senate joushry to correct testimony. jeff kramer, what is different
about a mueller interview versus what we just saw on capitol hill testimony? >> the difference is that the mueller investigation, we've already seen this, is actually going somewhere. the congressional interviews are happening before mueller and they'll continue. whatever former director mueller finds will either be the subject of a report to congress or, as we've already seen, further indictments closer to the white house, perhaps, r things that tag along other indictments we've seen. it's two different things. one is going somewhere and one, frankly, is just for sure. >> to stay with you on the point about going somewhere, what happens if sessions tells mueller he can't talk about certain conversations with the president, citing executive privilege that has not been invoked yet. >> yeah, it's interesting. we've seen and we saw with bannon on the hill, the white house telling him not to talk. >> right. >> when they invoke privilege, at that point the courts will
become involved. once you have that independent arbiter, that's going to be tough. we've seen that before, going back to the nixon administrat n administration. the nixon administration tried to use privilege to protect the tapes. that didn't work. this will be a similar situation. i think that's a play that the white house wants to use as a last resort. we're not there yet. but for the attorney general to invoke privilege essentially on behalf of the woit house would be unique. hasn't happened yet. we'll see what happens when the president's son and son-in-law get interviewed next. arguably the story of the day, with regard to jeff sessions, urging of the president, how he had been pressuring the fbi director to fire his deputy director, mccabe. moments ago we saw the president denying that wray ever threatened to resign over any of this. after everything that happened with comey, the fallout from comey, how unbelievable is that? that kind of meddling with the
fbi? >> it would be a pattern of behavior, which he has already done with the firing of james comey. whether it's direct or indirect, trying to pressure wray to fire his deputy director is essentially trying to force the fbi that there's levels of corruption at the highest level of the fbi and the director would be in the position of having to throw his own agency under the bus. i can see that he would take a stand against doing that. if he did not believe that firing his deputy director was warranted. the fact that the attorney general is trying to push this on the fbi director, first that
he recused himself and that mccabe was in charge of the hillary clinton investigation. andrew mccabe is likely a witness in the obstruction investigation. and so i'm guessing that andrew mccabe is a witness and, as we discussed, so is the attorney genera general. >> not to mention the fact that mccabe was set to retire in march. why would they want him out if that is the true version of events? why would they want him out so, so badly just ahead of time? asha and jeff, thank you so much for that conversation. we'll stay on all of that. also ahead, breaking news. offer off the table. senator chuck schumer now yanking the offer he made president trump a week ago involving funding for the border
wall. also were campaign finance rules violated? new allegations involving the trump campaign giving this porn star hush money. a watchdog group is formally seeking answers from the doj. you don't want to live with mom and dad forever, do you? i'm making smoothies! how do i check my credit score? credit karma. don't worry, it's free. credit karma. give yourself some credit. when you can squeeze one in wbetween friday and monday at hilton?n there's a vacation at the end of every week.
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. the winter of '77.uring i first met james in 5th grade. we got married after college. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester,
loyalty and asked for investigation into his fired national security adviser michael flynn, at the time, to be dropped, times reporting that comey was interviewed by the mueller office last year. jeff kramer, dana bash is standing by. no surprise that mueller would be interviewing comey. what does it tell you where the investigation is right now? >> reporter: exactly where you're going with that question was where i was going to go with how this looks, brook, which is jeff sessions the fact that they've been talking to special counsel suggests that special counsel robert mueller is getting toward the end of his investigation.
that could be a month, two months. we've seen this with the special counsel with robert mueller's investigation, littler fish first, then bigger and bigger fish and the bigger fish are the ones that we're seeing interviewed now. also, again, james comey, as somebody who had, you know, kind of laid the groundwork on this investigation is a very different kind of witness than anybody else. but james comey, as somebody who is a potentially very important witness on the question of obstruction of justice, that is, you know, a real key thing to look at. because if robert mueller is seriously exploring the notion of obstruction of justice, whether in firing james comey or maybe in the now infamous statement that trump aides rode on air force one coming back
from europe to respond to reports that don junior had had this meeting with russian lawyers in 2016, whether there was any obstruction there, that is all something that james comey, obviously, can help with and because of his contemporaneous notes he had taken while still as fbi director, it's a very specific kind of ball game with him. >> i remember when we sat in d.c. when those notes were made public, and read all the notes he wrote down. then flash forward, jeff kramer, to jim comey being called to testify on capitol hill. what more can he reveal to mueller's team that we, the public, did not hear? >> i think could be some items because he was in the room, some
nuances that perhaps didn't come out before. what is very important, as you indicated a moment ago, are the contemporaneous notes that james comey took. that's very powerful evidence. these investigations are linear in a sense. we've seen it. they go from one person to the next to the next, working their way up. it's also a mosaic of sorts, if you will, different pieces that really tell the narrative. james comey has a unique perspective on what that narrative is. i agree with what you were just saying. we're now getting near the end of this investigation. there's only a handful of relevant players left to interview and then mr. mueller will decide what he wants to do. >> how about the president? you were talking about the little fish, two medium-sized fish, now sessions. we know mueller. do we know anything more about the president speaking to mueller's team. >> we don't, in terms of how the internal negotiations are going between the president's legal team and robert mueller's team. what we have reported and do
still believe is the case for fr our sources is that there is a real split among people who have influence with the president on whether or not this is a good idea. i've talked to several people who have told me that they have made it clear to him and those around him that it would be horrible for him to do -- to just sit down with robert muchlt eller in any way, shape or form for a whole host of reasons. one, because they think that it would be a perjury trap for him and also because the president and a whole other list of reasons. but there are those who think that he should try to cooperate. and one of those people who are suggesting that maybe it's a good idea, we're told, is the president himself, who thinks, you know what? i've done hundreds of depositions in my time as a private citizen. why not this? obviously, those who are -- >> little different. >> -- saying don't do it are way
different. >> we've heard the president say over and over and over again, no collusion on the russian meddling part of the investigation. on the obstruction part, jeff, what has he said? >> he has been silent -- mentioned a few times on obstruction but collusion is an interesting word but has no legal substance. obstruction is -- i don't want to say the goal but if the president decides not testify, invoking his fifth amendment. but he is unique in the sense that he has had these civil depositions. it's safe to say that having a witness, any witness testify before being interviewed by mueller's investigators where this witness is used to just saying things and not worrying about if they're true or not, that's fine to do in the political realm. that has criminal consequences if you do it before robert mueller. they may try to go by question and answer. that's a safer way to go.
written question and answer that answers can be reviewed. putting the president in a room with experienced prosecutors, i think that's fraud material. >> michael zeldon is joining us, one of robert mueller's former aides, legal analyst for us here at cnn. michael zeldon, to you, now knowing that comey sat and was interviewed by the mueller team at some point last year -- and we have talked many, many times about those memos and how he says that trump was asking for comey's loyalty and how the president was pressuring him not to -- you know, to drop the flynn investigation, take us behind those closed doors. what would that back and forth questioning look like? again, how would it have differed from what we saw on capitol hill? >> previous guests are correct that the setting is much more controlled with mueller than it
is on the hill. comey testimony that mueller will want to get is all about the white house conversations he had with president trump, with respect to letting go of the flynn investigation. now since comey has testified in the first instance you have a cooperating flynn. flynn with perhaps some knowledge of what the president may have told him about what he's going to try to do with respect to protecting him and you have comey informing mueller in a more concrete way what it was that the president told him and then, of course, you have jeff sessions who, likewise, has knowledge of that oval office meeting. all of this stuff seems to coalesce under the obstruction of justice inquiry, which is one of the three or four lines of inquiry that mueller had. >> what does it tell you that
they've already questioned comey? you hear one story from the white house, that they thought the investigation would wrap up in the fall or early part of the year. comey has been spoken to. we now know that the attorney general has been spoken to. what does that tell you about the speed and breadth of the investigation? >> it tells you that the work stream that mueller has that relates to obstruction of justice seems pretty far ang along. there are other witnesses to speak to, for sure, but because -- sessions has a broader mandate for mueller because he's got papado pochlt ulos and the other collusion issues but comey and flynn and sessions all coalesced in part around this obstruction of justice part. so it's possible that mueller is
closing in on his determination about what obstruction looks like, whether it's a criminal offense, in his mind, an impeachable offense or if it amounts to nothing. of course, the $64,000 question will be will mueller speak to the president? >> right. >> under oath and will the president be truthful? that will be the last sort of brick in the wall in his outcome determine active thought proces process. >> that is the question. i was just asking dana and no one knows what he will or will not do. flynn has been talking, cooperating for at least a couple of months. is he providing any kind of road map? >> i think he easily could more than papadopoulos. but flynn has now cooperated.
we're not sure what he's saying. it's certainly a road map, a fairway to put it. but if you're mueller, you're gathering thaul information from people who are cooperating and people you've interviewed and using that to inform your last half dozen interviews. flynn is crucial there. interestingly, what we saw when flynn was indicted is the white house come out as trying to distance themselves from flynn. it all ties together of the thread of the white house trying to distance themselves from people who have been indicted, and trying to minimize the fbi, saying they're political. it all comes down to, perhaps, the white house making pardons or whether or not the president is going to cooperate. it is a pattern of practice and flynn is absolutely part of that. >> stand by, everyone. we're about to get white house reaction to all of this breaking news. you're watching cnn.
so you don't miss your favorite show. and with just a single word, find all the answers you're looking for - because getting what you need should be simple, fast, and easy. download the xfinity my account app or go online today. welcome back. i'm brooke baldwin. it's a busy afternoon of news. number one, we'll get you back to the breaking story, the fact that we've now learned that the special counsel in this russia investigation, robert mueller, has interviewed the fired fbi director, james comey. more on what we know on that in a second here. the other piece of news in the wake of the government finally reopening and back in business for now is the fact that we've learned that chuck schumer has withdrawn his offer, the one he
offered up to the president last friday in that oval office meeting, withdrawn the offer on funding the border wall. back to dana bash on what you're hearing from your sources on the move. why would he do that? is it about saving face with the base? is it more than that? >> my sense and my understanding in talking to source is that it is more than that. minority leader chuck schumer went to the white house and by many accounts, democratic and republican accounts, he offered the president a lot of what the president has been demanding. the biggest prize in that offer was full funding for the wall. then everything fell apart and republicans and democrats are back to square one in getting a deal done to allow these d.r.e.a.m.ers to stay in the
united states legally. i think it's probably fair to say it's negotiating 101 that you don't start from a place where you're giving the other person everything that they want. you kind of go back to the basics of what each side wants and that's a reality of where we are right now. >> going back to ground zero? >> back to ground zero. exactly. if you kind of take a step back, there are a lot of people and you alluded to this, brooke, in the democratic base, who are not only angry now that they think that the democratic leadership, mainly chuck schumer, caved too soon and really got nothing for what they did with the shutdown. even before that, they thought it was -- many people thought it was crazy to be negotiating anything to give the president anything in return for what is a 70, 80% issue, meaning that
people in this country think that this specific subset of undocumented immigrants. >> no brainer. >> young people who came -- is a no brainer. all of that is an important backdrop. and just the basic human nature here, that schumer is not happy. he was really angry about the fact that he had at least the outlines of a deal with the president himself, went back to the capitol and a few hours later, chief of staff calls and says never mind, because they were getting blowback from the base. his m.o. is, if you want to do business like that, okay. let's do t all those factors, the base, this human nature and how you negotiate is all tied into this decision to say, okay, we're not starting with the wall right now. >> offer rescinded. given that, we have reaction from a republican to leader
schumer's move. this is jon cornyn. let's listen. >> thankfully the democrats realize the mistake they made in shutting down the government over thisresolved issue of daca, but they've kept additional hostages, money that should be appropriated the rest of the fiscal year to support our military and to give some predictability to our nation's national security. and also they're holding hostage the money that the house passed, $81 billion for disaster relief for the victims of hurricane irma and hurricane harvey as well as the wildfires out west. i hope the democrats realize we're serious about working on a bipartisan solution to the daca
situation. the leader said we'll take that up in a fair and open process and we will. meanwhile they need to release these other hostages that they took on the daca issue. >> dana, we'll leave it there. thank you so much. maybe the senate republicans made good on mcconnell's intention but the real big question is the house and how it moves forward there. we'll tackle that in the coming weeks. meantime, back to our breaking news here. we've now confirmed here at cnn the fact that the former fbi director, james comey, has been interviewed by the special counsel in this whole investigation, robert mueller. what that means as far as the speed, the breadth and depth. and the key question into what they're looking into, can they prove it? we'll be right back.
at cnn. special counsel mueller has interviewed comey about his detailed memos and the meeting's had with president trump. you remember he asked him for his loyalty and asked for investigation into fired national security adviser michael flynn to be dropped. michael zeldon, jeff cramer. michael zeldon, first to you. in this interview between comey and mueller, comey shared these memos of personal conversations he had with the president. how would that help that obstruction case? >> comey gets the call from the president, wants his loyalty, wants him to step down. he gets nervous and says dear files i just had a conversation with the president.
he made me nervous for the following reasons. then he gets fired. and then he leases those memos and those memos find their way to mueller, who now has contemporaneous memory of what happened in those meetings and comey live in person to ask him about it. so essentially, he has a piece of corroborating evidence and piece of live evidence about the nature of the president's objection instructionist, if that's comey's words, behavior. it's a double bang for the buck, if you will, that mueller has with comey and his memo. >> jeff cramer, to you, what would that tell you with the fact that mueller is pouring through these memos and how can he determine they're all truthful? >> contemporaneous notes are powerful.
it's not just jim comey saying something and perhaps the president saying the exact opposite. these notes, which were written before he was fired, before mueller even got his job as special counsel, they were written at a time when comey couldn't have known what would play out. they're powerful from an ev degsry standpoint. also the shall is not what jim comey thought. although that's important. it's what's in the president's mind? did he intend to obstruct? jim comey can help put some color on that, his son can put color on that as well as the son-in-law. what was in the president's mind? here we see the president took certain actions. it is not really a long shot to try to gather the intent he was trying to obstruct the russian
investigation. also when he wanted comey to let go of the flynn investigation. that's an important point that will play out down the line. >> this is also where sessions fits in. remember, comey, after these requests from the president, went to sessions and he said, can you please put a stop to this? we have a longstanding policy in the justice department where the white house steers clear of our investigations. this fellow, president trump, is violating that, making me uncomfortable. tell him to stop. you get not only contemporaneous memos but the request by comey to the attorney general to say this is wrong. it does fit into a nice package of evidence for mueller does it constitute obstruction? but you have three components in it now. >> and we now know as of today
that mu. ll. r's team sat down with the attorney general last wednesday in what would only assume all of those points were brought up in that investigation, that questioning. back to the memos and one man's word over another. the am president has vehemently denied quite publicly that what comey wrote in those memos and later testified to on capitol hill is wrong. so what happens when it's comey's word versus the investigator's word? >> who do investigators believe. it's safe to say -- or logical, at least, given his background as a career procesecutor, truth teller, anyone that has worked with him would say that. he has a lot of voracity going his way with respect to the investigators. whereas president trump, historically, hasn't been a
friend of the truth too often. that factors into it. that's just the prosecutor's decision. we also have a legal hurdle to overcome here. in any sort of criminal prosecution, u.s. attorney's office, the law is clear. no one is above the law. you can indict somebody if you've got the evidence. here, legal scholars are differing on whether or not a sitting president can be indicted. now, you're indicted. i don't know if you continue to sit. that point the 25th amendment might come into play. robert mueller has an individual on his team that you don't hear about a lot. current deputy solicitor general, by and large the best supreme court aappellate lawyer in the country. good guy to have in your team when you're deciding whether or not to indict the president. >> do you want to jump in? >> yes. one thing, of course, is that we do not know what flynn adds to this.
we've got the memo, sessions testifying to comey asking the president to ask him to cut it out. this is hypothetical. the president said to flynn at any point, look, don't worry. i'm going to get comey to back down on this thing, another piece of evidence to add to mueller's investigation about what to do and it's right to say there's constitutional conflict about whether or not the sitting president can be indicted but there's no constitutional conflict about whether if the president has committed a crime in the eyes of the prosecutor, it can't be referred to house representatives. >> thank you for your expertise and thinking about this case as it moves forward with the special counsel in his office. gentlemen, thank you. up next, new developments involving allegations that the trump campaign paid a porn star
hush money. a watchdog group is seeking answers, including was there a violation of campaign finance rules involving this woman, stormy daniels? also ahead the white house daily briefing. we'll take that live. ed to show you something i've been wo- ♪ "9 to 5" by emily ann roberts ♪ james r. and associates. anna speaking. james r. and associates. anna. (phone ringing) baker architects. this is anna baker. this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but you're ready to bet on yourself today. spend your life living. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com.
and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.
capitalizing on her new fame. the owner won't tell us how much he paid her or how much she made but booked her as soon as he saw published reports on the alleged affair. >> talked to her agent. they said the only thing she has open is this saturday night. i said done. at that point i didn't realize it was the inauguration anniversary or the other stuff going on. i'm not a showman. i'm a promoter. tonight is a performance burl burlesque, if you will, a strip tease show, whatever you want to call it. there's no politics involved. i happened to be dumb lucky for when it's happening. >> let's get to the political part. as for the alleged hush money, this watchdog group says it may have violated campaign laws pair of federal complaints to seek if
michael cohen, president's alleged attorney, $130,000 payment was unreported in kind contribution to the president's 2016 campaign. we go to mark geragos for this, cnn legal analyst and attorney. mark, calling on the justice department to fully investigate. white house saying meanwhile all of this is baseless. do you see signs of campaign violations here? >> the only way it's a campaign violation is if they used campaign funds or it was routed through the campaign. they don't have to go very far. jared kushner's lawyer is abby lowell, who represented john edwards finance contribution in paying off his mistress. so, he's well aware of separate
llc, routed the money $130,000. by the way, the $130,000 makes some sense. the reason that rings true to me is my guess is that she said i want 100,000 net into my pocket and her lawyer took the 30,000. >> mark geragos, i wish we had more time. >> i'm your designated adult film star expert. >> add a new job title for you, my friend. we are out of time. i'm going to move on and just leave it there. i'm brooke baldwin. this is breaking news. sources tell cnn that special counsel robert mueller's team interviewed james comey as first reported by "the new york times," the fbi director whom trump fired back in may.