tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN January 30, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm PST
hi, there, i'm brooke baldwin live from the nation's capital for president trump's first state of the union speech. couple of hours from now he will be speaking before a joint session of congress. the country may get to see the memo that has now put the president at odds with his own department of justice. according to sources the president wants to go public with this memo as soon as possible but not before his big speech. the memo is classified and slams specific work by the fbi. last night the house intelligence committee approved
its release with republicans winning on a party line vote. the top official over at doj calls the move, quote, extraordinarily reckless. and democratic leaders say the memo is an attack on special counsel and robert mueller and the russia investigation in totality. with me now, phil mattingly up on capitol hill and our chief white house correspondent jim acosta. jim, let me start with you. what are you hearing from sources at the white house of what the president wants to do with this memo and other key notes you have ahead of his speech tonight? >> in terms of the speech tonight, brooke, we are hearing that the president will make some tough statements about north korea. i talked to a source close to the white house familiar with the speech earlier today, who said that the president will be making, quote, eye-opening remarks about north korea and the threat posed by north decrey's nuclear program, that he will be making strong comments about north korea in the state of the union address tonight. according to the source familiar with the speech this is the
portion of the speech expected to generate headlines tomorrow. that's something we're certainly looking to tonight. in terms of this memo, this nunes memo, what my colleagues at the white house are hearing is that the president is eager to get this memo released, that it's essentially consistent with what we heard from house speaker paul ryan earlier today, that he feels like let's get this out there, let the public be aware of what's in this memo but they don't want to distract the president and the public from his message tonight. the president wants to emphasize bipartisanship and unity in the speech at a time there isn't a lot of that here in washington. >> phil mattingly we're hearing at least a dozen democrats will not show up, planning to boycott the president's speech tonight? >> that's the current number. it's not unusual for lawmakers to use the state of the union to
draw attention to their political or policy causes. tonight will be no different. trying to point out sexual harassment victims, draw attention to that, flood-ravaged puerto rico, florida, houston. issues there. daca recipients will be in attendance tonight, even miss america, constituent of a north dakota senator, will be in attendance here. the shift that goes back a couple of decades now is the number of legislators who will not be attending at all. as you noted i'm told as many as 12 democrats will not be in attendance. as to why, take a listen to congresswoman barbara lee. >> i will not attend the state of the union because this president has not honored, nor respected the office of the presidency and has shown total disregard for our democratic institutions, from relentless attacks on the press to outrageous statements that undermine the intelligence community and the russia investigation and repeated threats to our judicial system. president trump has launched an
all-out assault on our democracy. and i did not make this decision lightly. >> brooke, obviously, the congresswoman laying out a myriad of reasons why she won't attend. if you go down the lawmakers not attending tonight, there are people going because they believe their district doesn't support the president, because they're offended by certain things that happen. barbara lee and members of the black caucus who were deeply offended by what was reported the president said, vulgar remarks in the oval office weeks ago. just to track back historically. again, lawmakers making the state of the union their political point isn't new to my count this is the largest number who have boycotted the state of the union since 1970. something that they need to do, something that they want to do to point this out. democratic leaders have made very clear no stunts during the state of the union. if you have a problem, don't
attend. they would rather that, than draw teengs some type of pillow test during the state of the union which, obviously, we'll be keeping a close eye on. >> no stunts during. all right. we'll talk to a senator who will be there. gentlemen, thank you very much. my next guest will be attending tonight's speech, paying close attention to buy america. senator baldwin, nice to see you again. welcome back. >> great to join you. >> senator sources are telling us this president will be leaning in more to bipartisanship. what could he say that would make you think he is an honest partner? >> well, we've heard a lot of words from this president, both during his campaign and his early tenure about buy america and hire america. he endorsed my bill but that's
taken no action. tonight as he talks about infrastructure and our desperate need to work on a bipartisan basis to rebuild crumbling roads and bridges, i want him to make a sound and solid commitment to buy america provisions. >> from infrastructure to immigration, senator baldwin, americans are watching. it comes down to these negotiations, 1.8 million or the 600,000 d.r.e.a.m.ers. how close are you to getting something actually done? >> obviously we got the commitment from mitch mcconnell to have an open, honest debate where these bipartisan plans that are being put together will get a vote and this will be an honest process. we know from -- i know from my
experience in the senate, comprehensive immigration bill got 68 votes. certainly when we deal with a narrower topic of the d.r.e.a.m.ers and border security, we should be able to get there. and that's exactly what we need to do. >> i hear you on the promise from mitch mcconnell. just from what we understand from the administration, john kelly, mark short, can can kirsten nielsen there were leadership on the hill, and the update was candid, but no progress. just on friday the president said if we need a little more time, we'll take more time, ultimately, senator, but the country wants to know, are you going to come back in a week and a half and be in the same situation as last time? >> the entire nation is frustrated with watching this president and the entire leadership kicking the can down the road whether it's on
d.r.e.a.m.ers or cr after cr, this president's actions today on ignoring the sanctions law for russia that pass ed the senate 98-2. which is copsin, my constituents want to see action. they want to see congress fighting for them. they want to see washington committed to helping them with their struggles, which is the high cost of everything. >> as a woman in congress looking ahead also to tonight, reading some of your colleagues may choose to walk out of the president's speech in protest of a man who has not exactly been shy in making misogynistic comments in the past. tell me why sitting in that room this evening is more important than walking out or just skipping it all together. >> well, you had an interview or just aired some comments by one of my great former colleagues when i was in the house about
that approach. i'm taking a different approach. my constituents are tired of seeing the finger pointing, blame game, fighting in washington, d.c. they want someone working on their behalf. they struggle to get ahead, sometimes living paycheck to paycheck. given that this will be a speech, at least in part, about what i hope will be a bipartisan infrastructure plan, i want to give my all to seeing something that will help which isconsin m forward. >> this controversial memo that the house intel committee voted along party lines to release this memo, critical of doj. speaker ryan said this memo should be out there, i'm quoting him, out there in the light of transparency, separate from the investigation of mueller and he should be able to carry it out. what's wrong with that? >> i am so disturbed and
troubled by this. first of all, the administration's own department of justice says that it is irresponsible to be releasing this memo. but beyond that, we have to take a step back and remember what this is all about. the russians attacked america's democracy. we've got to step back and let mueller do the job. it's outrageous in my mind that this partisan, political document sk released. and to see republicans criticizing law enforcement rather than stepping back and letting mueller and the fbi do the job they need to do. >> you mentioned also a second ago, just calling out the president, the white house move today, lack of sanctions in russia, what do you think that's really about? >> i have no way of knowing.
but it is very distressing to me when you see 98-2 in the senate. i think overall between both houses it was 517-5 in favor of this legislation that has mandatory sanctions. and i think there's a deadline there. the president seems to have miss this had deadline. he seems to be ignoring the law. and there's too many occasions where we've seen this president act as though he's above the law. >> last question, senator. i want to get this in about women running for office. emily's list has reported that 2500 women expressed interest.
now we hear these numbers, 396 women running for congress in 2018. do you think this is direct response to trump or about something even bigger? >> i think it's even bigger. i think we are much better governed when we have legislative bodies that reflect america. certainly with only 22 women out of 100 in the senate, we're not there yet. and i see that in other legislative bodies. but what i see, which is so heartening to me is people understanding that they bring their life experiences to the job and their perspective needs to be at the table. and i'm seeing this in wisconsin also. we won a special senate election and house state assembly election in wisconsin last week. women just doing an incredible job, running their campaigns, getting the training they need to do it and bringing their
values and their experience to jobs. it will inform their job performance and it's bringing about change. so i'm really heartened to hear the news from emily's list as well as other grass roots organizations helping provide women the chance to get the skills they need to run. >> interesting. you say it's about something bigger. we'll be watching november very closely. senator tammy baldwin, thank you so much. >> pleasure, brooke. thanks. >> my panel joins me next to discuss how the russian investigation will play into the politics of the state of the union. that's ahead. also we'll hear from a soldier who will be sitting in that audience this evening who happens to be transgender. what she wants the president to know about his attempts to ban her from serving her country. and later, melania trump appearing in public for the first time in weeks. the first lady's role in hosting the guests invited by the white house and where she's been. your insurance company
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.
i'm brooke baldwin. thanks for being with me. back to this memo that criticizing the doj, democrats tried to issue their own memo to counter it, but republicans in the house committee rejected that. jim sciutto, david chalian, reporter for the washington post and cnn politics senior writer. welcome. thanks for having me. >> welcome to washington. >> thanks for having me in d.c. first, the memo was at the white house in some classified room. folks within the white house want to keep the president -- they don't want it to distract the president away from, of course, his important task at hand, this speech tonight. but that what do you know is the assumption that after the state of the union he's going to release it? >> if not immediately after tonight, in a five-day window
where he has the opportunity to review this all indications seem to be he would like to release this, by the way, against the protestations of his justice department. >> right. >> to me, you say the white house doesn't want him distracted by this, they don't want to distract from the state of the union. yet this is the backdrop upon which he will enter the house chamber tonight. russia investigation at large, this memo story of the moment hangs over -- so while he may not mention it in the speech at all and we're learning he wants to talk about immigration and infrastructure, but this is the back drop upon which the president enters that house chamber. >> i want to follow up with you on your conversation with adam schiff but it is live tv and we go where the news goes, dana bash has caught up with kevin mccartney. >> this is what happens when i catch you in the hallway. >> exactly. >> let me start with the mechlt
-- memo. is it your understanding that the president will approve the release of the memo as soon as, what after the state of the union address? >> no. how the process works is the intel committee, open it up so all members can see it. they then took it to the fbi, walk through it. they have to send it to the president. he has five days to review it, to decide yes or no. >> he doesn't have to take the five days? >> no. he has up to five days. whether he decides yes or no after reading t can't predetermine what he's going to do. he has to read it, look at it. >> really? you don't think it's a feta com plea that he's going to say, okay, release it? >> not at all. his attorney also look at it. remember we're separate but co-equal branches. we do our work, the executive branch will look at it now. we went beyond and reached out to the executive branch early, walked through what was in it, to see if there was anything they wanted redacted, anything they disagreed with.
from then they voted to move it forward. at the same time, chairman nunes made the motion -- the democrats didn't want anything out. they brought something new out. they made the motion to open that up to members. i have to go down and read that one. members will now be able to read that and the committee will get back together and decide whether to send that. >> let me ask you the same question that manu asked the speaker earlier today. since the democrats have a minority report, counter narrative, why not wait until theirs is approved, sources and methods are all a-okay and you can publicly release that so that you have parody? >> well, the democrats didn't even say they had a minority report until they went to the committee last night and removed what the republican majority said. >> they do but why not have them released at the same point? >> that's why we voted for them or the committee voted to make sure all the members can see it.
i think it's the responsibility and duty to put that information out there. one, as soon as possible. so, now that the democrats have one, republicans are actually the ones who made the motion for the members to read t i think they'll come back after reading it, look at it to see if that should be sent. the executive branch has not been able to look at it, the fbi, to see if there's things that should be redacted to protect individuals. it still has to go through that process. >> if your goal, you say, is to try to do your oversight responsibility and shine a light on institutional problems, why not do it in a way that gets the trust of all american people, in a way that doesn't look so partisan? aren't you defeating the purpose of what you say you're trying to do, which is have kind of adequate oversight and trustworthy oversight of other institutions? >> see, remember, separate but co-equal. remember how the intel committee was created. what was going on in the
executive branch where there wasn't a check and balance, what's happening in the cia, fbi and others. that's how the intel committee was created. >> i know but it was also created with the understanding and the culture that it is a bipartisanship. it's not like that anymore. >> i can go tit for tat with adam schiff every day, saying things that aren't even there. that's not my place. i think what the intel committee has responsibility to do, if they have knowledge, transparency to move it out. i think it is an open and honest process. the democrats had nothing before. they were voting to not let anybody see anything. and i think that was wrong. that's why the republicans are the ones who made the motion so members now could read what the democrats have. i don't see -- i don't want to predetermine what the committee will do. seems to me they're treating them very openly and honest and much different than reciprocal.
>> there was an unusual moment you whispered something into the speaker's ear during his press conference this morning. what was that about? >> oh, there was a question earlier about this take. and he was answering it, but i wanted him to also talk about how he did go to the fbi before this was released so they could see it, to make sure. because i think there was a question out there about that. just like your question before, you want to make sure there's transparency and take politics out. regardless of who wins the white house, there's a real concern -- it's not about that but when i look at something different, when i look at these texts and others, you want to make sure your government is honest. you want to make sure your elections are honest in the process as well. if you uncover anything that is going to raise more questions, don't hide that from the american people. that's why we're not talking about something different, not that memo, the texts and others. >> one last question. you are part of the team lead ing immigration negotiations
right now. >> yes. >> any breakthroughs on the horizon that you can talk about? well, we agreed to really focus on four areas. i think we made some progress yesterday. last week when we were shut down, we didn't have meetings so we're back at it again. the staffs are meet iing again today. this is bicameral, with steny's staff, and cornyn. we all came together. we'll have ups and downs as we go through this, have difference of opinion. let's make the commitment that we stay at the table and solve the plob. >> you going to have a deal by the time the february 8th deadline comes along? >> that's why i didn't want the continuing resolution so short. this is a complex issue and emotions are on both sides. i don't want to set a date -- i know we need it as soon as possible but i want to get it right. if we can get it together before then, i'm all for t i'm pushing every single day to have meetings.
this say problem all of america knows has to be solved. >> thank you for stopping. >> thank you. >> brooke, back to you. >> thank you, dana. thank leader mccarthy as well. speaking of going tit for tat with adam schiff on tv. for everyone tuning in, learning about this memo, what are they trying to do, undermine the doj and mueller investigation. what is this all about? >> notable description, talking about bichltpartisan interest and transparency. attack on mueller investigation and fbi. coming from multiple directions, mccabe. mueller. it's a deliberate and pretty coordinated effort undermine this investigation. have you to see the fisa memo as part of that. fisa court approves, follows the
law, passed after 9/11. it's pretty ease toy get a fisa warrant i should say. most of those warrants are approved. what devin nunes is alleging here is that when a warrant was issued for carter page, trump campaign foreign policy adviser, that somehow this famous dossier compile bid the former british spy was involved in that and, therefore, it shows abuse for the foreign surveillance law. the fact is we know that the fbi would never seek a warrant based on outside intelligence. they just don't do that. i've spoken to people who have asked for these warrants saying you have to have your own intel. and a judge wouldn't approve that. keep that in mind. it's part of this broader thing. that doesn't mean you can't have questions about the fisa process. normal people, americans at home might want to know something
like several thousand have been approved and 12 have been declined. pretty good success rate in front of a judge. are there legitimate questions about it? for sure. is this political effort that's going on right now the bipartisan, sober assessment of the way the fisa court works? i think you could pretty much say no. don't take my word for it. filter out if you can -- then i'll shut up -- what you heard from republicans and i heard from democrats earlier today. appointed by president trump, issued a letter to nunes last week saying one, extraordinarily careless to release this against classified information but two, more importantly, we are unaware of any misuse of the fisa process. justice department, we've not seen evidence of this. i would listen to them and tune out the other. >> isn't it also especially significant, appointing you all that, obviously, this would be the president if he does -- dana asked is this a feta com plea
that the president is going to release this? there was the notable answer from kevin mccarty, but let's be real. he's going to release this, all signs point to yes? >> yes. >> that would be defying his own doj? >> yes but -- >> yes but? >> if tonight's reviews go well, this is a man who understands brandings and good ratings and once this memo is released this will step on his good show. >> great point. >> if tonight's speech, he thinks, goes well he might stretch it out a day or so. >> sit on it? >> yes, until thursday morning maybe. it depends on if fox news, which he watches, tends to push release the memo, he may feel the need to respond to them. >> this is a president who repeatedly, time and time again, has said that this investigation is a witch hunt, saying over and over again privately he has been
mistrustful of rosenstein. this memo whether it's released tonight, tomorrow morning, what have you, there will be a pile-on from rosenstein by republicans who time and again -- >> he will be in the cross hairs. >> that's exactly right. republicans have been saying over and over again they want to discredit this investigation, don't see it as legitimate and he would be an easy target. >> another piece of this whole story is house speaker paul ryan who came out today and said hey, let's release it. this is what else he said. >> there are legitimate questions about whether an american civil liberties were violated by the fisa process. there may have been malfeasance at the fbi by certain individual s. it's the job of the executive branch to get to the bottom of that. >> what is paul ryan's role in all of this? >> similar to kevin mccarthy, and what jim was saying, it seem as though the role is to try to
give a nonpartisan bend or spin to what devin nunes is doing as a real partisan. >> are you buying it? >> no. no, no. but that clearly is what his role is here. what about the larger role of paul ryan, sort of dealing with a divided conference, encountering problems that john boehner encountered, who is no longer on the job because he encountered it. does he give cover the right wing element that wants to join the fox news crowd on this and drum this up or does he try to present a truly more bipartisan or unifying approach to the investigation instead of undermining it? i think the evidence is clear, he's going with where the energy is. >> he tried to straddle the fence in noble fashion. i don't know who actually buys it to say it raises legitimate questions and please don't use
this memo to color or attack the mueller investigation. because we would never do that. >> that's what it's being used for. >> that's exactly what it's being used for. we're only a week past the secret society in the fbi mistakenly on a texas that was misinterpreted. this is part of an ongoing flood of this stuff. >> trying to balance. on one hand saying he would release the memo but don't attack or fire the deputy attorney general. but the rationale for the memo is built around trying to fire the deputy attorney general. so he is trying to straddle a fence in which there really is no fence. >> yes. >> let's get to the top democrat on the house intel committee, adam schiff, who jum talked to a while ago. >> you read the underlying context and when you look at that, it colors these allegations differently? >> absolutely. absolutely.
that's what we set out in the document we prepared, what the republican members don't want the country to see. it pokes holes in this memorandum. they don't want the country to know how misleading their document is. >> what's your takeaway from the democratic perspective? >> the justice department repeated his argument there, which is in that letter we were just talking about a couple of minutes ago, it said, by the way, mr. nunes, you haven't even read the underlying intelligence that is behind your claims, these allegations. what is the underlying intelligence to the folks at home? intercepted communications, whatever was used to back up this request for a warrant, to monitor an american who, by the way, talking to russians, carter page. that's another thing. if you want to separate partisan interpretations of whether or not this shows malfeasance, et
cetera, the justice department, one, many haven't seen what's behind the warrant and so on and that a lot of folks have an ax to grind you might say. >> lastly, news on steve bannon, his second appearance before the house intelligence committee expected for wednesday has been scrapped according to four sources familiar with the matter. what do you think of that? >> you could have a real innocent reason, as the republicans are heading off to their retreat and didn't have time to do this. or you could have a whole host of other things. there's the mueller investigation has been trying to talk to him. they might have had their wires crossed between the committee, congressional committee and the mueller folks. >> juana summers, final word from you on any of the above? >> when steve bannon does appear before that committee it will be the biggest thing to see where this investigation will go.
>> thank you, all, very, very much. next here we'll talk to a transgender soldier invited to the state of the union as an vieted guest. her message to the president as her future in the military hangs in the balance. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. for your heart... your joints... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement
in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. going somewhere? whoooo. here's some advice. tripadvisor now searches more... ...than 200 booking sites - to find the hotel you want and save you up to 30%. trust this bird's words. tripadvisor. what can a president [ do in thirty seconds? he can fire an fbi director who won't pledge his loyalty. he can order the deportation of a million immigrant children. he can threaten an unstable dictator armed with nuclear weapons. he can go into a rage and enter the nuclear launch codes. how bad does it have to get before congress does something? gathered here are the world's finest insurance experts. rodney -- mastermind of discounts
♪ we use so why do we pay touters thave a phone connected. when we're already paying for internet? shouldn't it all just be one thing? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you can get 5 lines of talk and text included at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. choose by the gig or unlimited. and now, get a $200 prepaid card when you buy an iphone. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfnitymobile.com. when the president delivers his state of the union address, a transgender soldier will be
sitting in the audience. the sergeant has served in the army almost 19 years. now her military future is in doubt. i had a chance to speak to her before she left for washington. >> i have read that you described your life lately as, quote, hanging in the balance. can you tell me what you mean? >> well, when the announcement was made that they may decide to go back to banning trangender service members, myself included, that raised questions about what is going to happen to me. am i going to be fired or let go, will i have the opportunity to continue to serve my country. and for others who are enlisted or commissioned in the military, would they have the opportunity? >> what message are you hoping to send just by your sheer presence in that chamber? >> the state of the union is an
important part of political process that demands accountability on our elected officials. i look forward to the opportunity to attend, be part that have process and be one of those faces in the crowd, one of those people that demands accountability from the government. you know, we all have a say when we have the opportunity to vote. this is our chance to hold accountable those people that we elected to office. >> let me play for you a little bit of what we heard from republican leadership, what they had to say when president trump first announced the tran sgende military ban by tweet. >> concern here in the house was whether or not the military would be forced to pay for the surgical procedures. i share those concerns. >> based on consultation he has had with national security team came to the conclusion that it erods military readiness, unit cohesion and made the decision based on that. >> it's been a very difficult situation, and i think i'm doing
a lot of people a favor by coming out and just saying it, as you know, it's been a very complicated issue for the military. it's been a very confusing issue for the military. and i think i'm doing the military a great favor. >> you say you are the first member of the military who has received gender reassignment surgery, actually paid for by the military. what do you say to those critics, including the president himself, who tweeted about the tremendous medical cost and disruption you could cause? >> what i would say is that retaining the best and brightest has a cost to it, whether it be providing a medical procedure or sending them to a school so they can be better trained. that's part of your business, to take care of your service members. as far as the cost of this, it's been refuted at this point. i think we've all determined that the cost is not actually an
issue. it's very negligable. as it applies to my surgical procedures, i went out of my way to find a surgeon who was willing to waive their fee. dr. christina gent did the surgery at no cost to me. the military paid only for the operating room and the anesthes anesthesia fees. >> my heart goes out to you and all the brave men and women who serve the military. we'll see you at the state of the union. >> absolutely. and the soldier's host, congressman kennedy, will be delivering democratic response to the president's speech. tonight's speech will be the very first public appearance for the first lady in weeks. melania trump and her role at the state of the union after canceling her trip to join her husband in davos. ♪ ♪
hi. i'm the one clocking in when you're clocking out. sensing your every move and automatically adjusting to help you stay effortlessly comfortable. i can also help with this. does your bed do that? oh. i don't actually talk. though i'm smart enough to. i'm the new sleep number 360 smart bed. let's meet at a sleep number store.
new dueling lobster tails has two tails that'll fight to be your favorite. one topped with creamy shrimp and scallops, the other... steamed with lemon and herbs. and no, you're not dreaming, classics like lobster lover's dream are back too, along with decadent new lobster truffle mac & cheese. but enough talking about lobster- let's get to eating! - because lobsterfest won't last. so dive in today at red lobster!
moments ago the first lady tweeted about tonight's state of the union and the 15 people seating with her sheechlt tweeted i will be joined by an honorable group of americans, sitting with me are heroes who have served our nation in times of need, families who have suffered at the hands of evil and citizens who have embraced the american dream. visiting holocaust museum before going to florida. had people wondering whether it was a sign of displeasure over allegations between the president and a porn star. kate bennett joins me. ladies, hello. with just what we know about tonight who is going to be with her. >> a variety of guests with her.
people that range from veterans who, you know, are wounded in service to a coast guard rescuer who helped with the hurricanes to this terrific police officer from new mexico that we did a story on here at cnn who adopted the opioid addicted baby. it's a large group of people. she's hosting a reception at the white house for these 50 people and friends and family beforehand, something new. showing extra care and time with them, really welcoming them to washington. >> secondly the question i want to get to which is, what's up? >> well, i think kate and i would want to get in that question, too. >> where did she go? why didn't she go to davos? >> we haven't heard from her publicly but we've sort of heard from her. we haven't seen her with the president since new year's eve. we saw that strange inauguration anniversary tweet that didn't mention the president, the strange trip to florida for 24 hours. there are lots of things she does that are private. at the same time beg the
question, what's up? what's going on? you can't sort of have it go both ways and allow her privacy by all means but at the same time doing things that raise eyebrows within these weeks of headlines that include porn stars, alleged affairs and payouts. we have to ask that question. >> looking at first ladies past, there are multiple examples of first ladies who have stood by their man at low points. >> her silence has spoken a thousand words. >> you do? >> i'm interested tonight to see if he comes out and praises her in any way. you look back at if you look back at president obama, he talked about the let's move campaign. we've seen a steady stream of republican and democratic candidates praising their wives'
work. if he doesn't single her out about an incredible mother and a force in his life, that would be telling. >> you look at the past though where she has stood up and stood by him. the grab him by the you know what moment on the bus. billy bush. thor women, the allegations of sexual assaults. she stood by him. this seems different why? to either of you. >> i think it is because she is first lady now. she's trying to establish herself. she can't just say there is boy talk. and the fire and fury book. they said that's a book of fiction. but the silence this time is different and i think it is because she has a lot to lose as first lady. >> and she's tough too. she's seeing everything written about her. she is humiliated. they have a young son.
it is very personal. the worst part of the whole stormy daniel thing is baron was a few months old and any mother would find hard to look past. so it is deeply humiliated for her. i don't think even the clinton marriage felt this. people are sympathetic toward her. >> we're getting a little color for this lunch. wolf blitzer, lunch at the white house. i believe this is from the president. you govern with all the instincts of a business person but you have to add much more heart and soul into your decisions than you ever would have thought before. so i believe that's from the president. is that correct? correct. there you go. so from the president himself ahead of the big night at the state of the union. just wanted to get that in
there. you make a great point. we'll be looking to see if and how the president mentions her with all the special guests. we'll be looking for your reporting. coming up next, congress takes action after the former doctor from usa gymnastics was sentenced to 175 years in prison for child sex abuse. what is being done to keep it from ever happening again? your. so, that goal you've been saving for, you can do it. we can do this? we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement while saving for the things you want to do today. nana, let's do this! aye aye, captain! ♪ and as you go through life -whoo! -♪ tryin' to reach your goal
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 energy conscious whopeople among usle? say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing. any moment now the senate is expected to vote on a tough new law designed to protect amateur athletes from sexual abuse. this new bipartisan slegs aimed
at forcing athletic organizations to swiftly report any kind of sexual abuse and establish preventive policies. it also extends statute of limitations for victims to sue abusers. this crackdown follows the sentencing of the usa gymnastics coach larry nassar. he was sentenced to 175 years in prison. more than 150 women came forward detailing their abuse at his hand. >> those reforms, which i would like to speak briefly about, are only possible because these women have been so courageous. they decided to come forward. they shared their pain and they did everything they could to see that what happened to them would never happen to anyone else again. today would not have been possible without the women standing here. >> we can now confidently say that future generations of children participating in sports
will be safer. >> larry nasa arrest will be back in court tomorrow in michigan to face even more of his victims. he is pleading guilty to three counts of criminal misconduct in a separate case. >> before i let you go, i want to check in on the dow seconds before the close. you see all the red. it is down more than 300 points. shares of health care companies dropped sharply on the news that the heads of amazon, berkshire hathaway and jpmorgan chase plan to get into the health insurance business. today's down turn is not an ideal back drop as the president prepares to give his first state of the union address. which as we're told from sources is expected to be heavy on his accomplishments, creating jobs in this country. the dow is up 8,000 points since the president took office. thank you so much for being with
me. we'll send it off to jake tapper taking on our special coverage taking on state of the union right now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com if you drink every time president trump says russia, you will have a very sober state of the union. president trump saying he wants america to see that secret republican memo alleging fbi abuses, but the president doesn't want you to see it until of a his be state of the union speech when he makes his case for bipartisanship first. also, breaking news. president trump expected to make eye opening comments on north korea this evening. will his remarks ratchet up tensions with that nuclear power? plus, democrats in search of direction. the party planning no fewer