tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN January 25, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PST
carolina. we spoke with rusty today. he is not entirely relieved. >> we're not planning to go back to everything as if business is as usual. we're going to continue to keep things tight, setting aside funds with the expectation that in three weeks shutdown could happen again. >> shutdowns are dumb. "ac 360" starts now. for the first time in more than a month, in two pay periods, 800,000 men and women who serve this country every day will be able to go to bed knowing they will soon have money coming in again. for all you will hear tonight about how bruising a day this was politically for president trump, it's at least a better day now for people like tsa officer ali morganfield was worried he might face eviction. it's a better day for malory
loragy who was rationing her insulin. it's a day for everyone we have had the privilege of getting to know during the longest government shutdown today. their lives got better today when the man behind that shutdown who said without evidence again and again that the people he was hurting supported him, finally did right by those people. he backed down and maybe we should have seen it coming all along. the president's language about the wall to put it nicely evolved. from wall to whatever you want to call it. from concrete to something else. to mexico is going to pay to i need you the american taxpayers to pick up the check. listen to how he described the wall today. >> we do not need 2,000 miles of concrete wall from sea to shining sea. we never did. we never proposed that. we never wanted that. we have barriers at the border where natural structures are as good as anything that we can build.
our proposed structures will be in predetermined, high-risk locations that have been specifically identified by the border patrol to stop illicit flows of people and drugs. >> i can almost hear it now. who will pay for those proposed structure structures? mexico is. i get it. the president doesn't like losing. he is trying to redefine victory. it doesn't sound like what he has been pitching for years now. >> we are going to build a great border wall. we will build a great, great wall. we're going to build a wall. don't worry about it. oh, we will build a wall. i promise, we will build the wall. it's not going to be a little wall. it's going to be a wall. it's going to be a very tall wall. very powerful wall. it's going to be such a beautiful wall. it's going to be so big. it's going to be so powerful.
it's going to be as beautiful as a wall can be. i've gotta make it beautiful because maybe someday they will name the wall the trump wall. who is going to pay for the wall? >> on that last part, the spin from the white house is that mexico will pay for it indirectly through increased revenue which importers, not mexico, will pay from an unratified trade deal. what about the concrete part? who would say they wanted to make a wall out of that? >> a wall. i build buildings that are 94 stories tall. that's tough stuff. this is so easy. i mean, think of it. some of you are in the construction business. think of garages. the concrete plank that goes 60, 70, 80, 90 feet, right, concrete plank for garage floors.
it's precast. you put a foundation. you put it up. you make it beautiful. >> sounds like a plan. it turned out it wasn't. >> it's going to be made of hardened concrete. it's going to be made out of rebar and steel. you could call it a steel fence, this wall or fence or anything the democrats need to call it. a wall, a fence, whatever they would like to call it. i will call it whatever they want. it's all the same thing. >> let's call it a wall, a fence, mexico will pay. the questions grew about whether any of this mattered to the president beyond just prevailing. which would have been nice to know for the public who have been going without vital government services and for people facing hardship and bankruptcy and eviction and worse. the president weighed in on what he did today and where this could go from here. jim acosta is at the white house with that.
the president treated o etweete statement. >> reporter: the supporters didn't get a wall. the president is trying to present it as not a concession. he did just put that sentiment in a tweet a short while ago. it says, in the last half hour, i wish people would read or listen to my words on the border wall. this was in no way a concession. it was taking care of millions of people getting hurt by the shutdown with the understanding that in 21 days if no deal, it's off to the races. that last part about being off to the races, that's essentially restating what he said earlier today is that we could be right back where we were the last 35 daze with yet another government shutdown or as the president was saying earlier today, that he might declare a national emergency to go ahead and get the process started unilaterally. no matter how you slice it, this is obviously a concession, a surrender and a cave for this president. talk to a trump adviser that i talked to earlier who said this
was a quote, humiliating loss for somebody who rarely loses. this adviser said, i miss winning. >> how did we get here? a few days ago the president was demanding $5.7 billion for the wall before reopening the government. >> what happened here -- you were seeing this is you had republican senators, republicans in the house starting to peel away from the president. you were seeing calls coming in from republican leaders on capitol hill, like mitch mcconnell telling the president, this is not going in your direction. i believe the video that we saw this morning, the images coming out of la guardia, the northeast corridor where air traffic control was really just starting to come to a halt. you were starting to see some of the sick outs, folks not coming to work. the delays that were the result of that. that was starting to put pressure on this white house, we understand, from talking to officials and sources. that really put pressure on the
president to gend all of this. >> the president is trying to cast this as a victory on his part. do we know how his advisers, what people in the white house, how they are viewing it? >> it was strange. i was in the rose garden when he made the statement earlier today. it was just bizarre, surreal to see top white house officials from the vice-president on down applauding the president as he was making the statement today as if he had won something. this was as far from winning as you could possibly get. this was losing. yet, the president was getting support from his own team. i suppose that is a sign of loyalty from your staffers. there was a conference call in the evening between top white house officials here and surrogates for the white house. they were trying to present this as not a cave. i talked -- this adviser i talked to earlier who advises the president said this was a humiliating loss to the president and questioned whether the president would -- whether
it's a good idea for him to continue to pursue policies advocated like some top white house officials have been advocating, like stephen miller, this adviser said that perhaps today was not a cave but a grave for stephen miller's hard line immigration policies. >> jim acosta, thanks very much. want to dig deeper with maggie haberman. the president got the same amount of funding he could have gotten a month ago. why did he make this move? >> there were a bunch of issues going on. the broad one is that the president made a statement several weeks ago that he would own a shutdown. dps took him up on that and saw no reason to make a concession on something their base and the democratic house caucus members don't want to give in to, which is this border wall the president talked about for so long. and at that amount of money. he made a tactical mistake. he had to own it.and at that am. he made a tactical mistake. he had to own it.
the president's poll numbers were going down. remember what close attention he pays to polls. you had that warning from the faa about airlines and airport security and planes being able to take off and fly. this morning you had a ground stop at la guardia, the airport in the president's hometown. this caught his eye, as did pressure from republicans who were starting to break. while the republican coalition was showing cracks, democrats were actually holding pretty strong, which surprised among other people democrats who often fight among each other. they were able to stand together and not give and inch. ult pat ultimately, the president had to give in to where reality was. the shutdown was becoming worse for actual voters, actual people as you said at the top. so he is kicking the can down another couple weeks. i think we will try to work on some other proposals up until
then. he has left open the possibility of the national emergency declaration. we will see. >> he gave that long speech in the rose garden which was positioned as a victory lap, describing everything he didn't get as though he had gotten it. >> that's classic donald trump. we have seen him over and over in the course of the last now four years as a politician and certainly he did it before that as a businessman and entertainment figure. he will point to a loss and say, actually, i won and you lost. you are not understanding this. he repeatedly diverged from the teleprompter at that speech today. he added all kinds of things into it that comported with this vision and this view of the border crisis that he has been painting for many weeks now. he did not look comfortable. this did not look like a speech he wanted to take. it was taking medicine and moving on. >> stay with us. i want to bring in kiersten powers and senator rick santorum. whether you think the president
made the right call or not, the fact is 800,000 workers will get paychecks again. >> right. i do think he made the right call. the one thing that worries me is the coverage he is getting, he rolled over, he got rolled, he got played, all this stuff, is going to only aggravate him and make him more likely to not want to make another deal. he had to defy his base in this. this is what he originally tried to do, if you remember. he had decided that he was going to forgo getting the money for the wall. then ann colter and rush limb limbaugh went at him. he saw the democrats weren't going to give in. he didn't have a choice. in the end, i think it was the right thing to do. i don't think he should be shamed for doing it. i don't think there's shame in making a deal.
>> senator santorum, was it the right thing to do? >> kicking the can down the road is a reasonable course. it showed the president was willing to compromise. he is willing to concede to the other team's wishes in order to try to get a deal. to pick up on her point, it's important -- i have been watching the news all week -- all day long. they have been beating up -- he caved. this is from a immediamedia who the president won't compromise, he won't -- when he does, you beat him up for caving. you can't -- you can't have it both ways. you can't beat the guy up when he says, okay, i will have it your way, we will do what you want, sit down with you, we will negotiate. he caved. he cratered. he is a wimp. then say on the other hand, the president doesn't compromise. you can't have it both ways. >> i wonder, do you think the
media is attacking him unfairly? is this a cave? is it a compromise? >> i don't think that it's--i don't think it's a compromise. i think it's a delaying a possible deal and trying to work toward a possible compromise. i don't think this is a compromise. i think the senator has a point. i think that this -- this is something i hear from the white house. they feel like they can't win. they feel like he stands his ground and he gets attacked. if he goes ahead and reopened the government, he gets attacked for that. i think that he complicates his position when he gives a speech explaining the reasons why to your point he won and this was a victory and he turned it into something moving away from the workers and all about his campaign promises. i do think that there is at its core a fair point
damned if they do and damned if they don't. the president got himself into this with what he said. it's true the government is reopened. that was the goal a lot of people had been working toward. that has now happened. >> i would -- >> it's not just the left. i think you have -- >> i agree. i agree. he is getting it from both sides. from my mind, what the president has done is given an opportunity for the old-fashion politics to work. to sit down and make a deal. that's what the democrats said they would do. i would make the argument that now the ball is in nancy pelosi's course. she said she would make a deal. if the government were open. we would take care of these people suffering. now she has the opportunity -- she can make a deal. she can come together, she can buck her base and find a compromise. it's clear donald trump is willing to do that. the question is whether nancy pelosi can. >> i was going to say, it's not that unusual for politicians to
say they are winning when they're not winning. it's not that unusual for people not to get everything that they want and then to go out and try to spin it in the best light as possible. i don't even really fault him for that. i think that really if the democrats want to negotiate now, i think the wall is off the table. he will have to deal with that. they should -- when you negotiate, you should try to find a way to help the other person save face. even if you don't like him, if you want to have a deal, the goal is not to humiliate donald trump because donald trump -- or anybody, frankly, is not going to react well to that, nor is their base going to react well to it. i think that hopefully in getting a deal, they can find a way to get to yes in a way that makes both parties look good. >> senator santorum, do you think the wall is off the table? >> i'm not sure it's off the table. there may be elements of a wall or barrier -- this is really important. back in the -- in when i was in
congress, you actually listened to what the other side had to say. you are right, you tried to give them -- if you were going to strike a deal -- something they could look at their people and say, we got something. if the idea from nancy pelosi and her side is, we're not going to give him anything that gives him any quarter, then we will be back shut down or have an emergency declaration. neither is a good thing. >> i don't understand how the democrats could say, there's not going to be any kind of new barriers. in the past, they have agreed -- there's also fencing. if you accept the notion that some fencing is okay in some key areas, i would assume they would have to be open to some sort of fencing somewhere, even if just a little bit. >> yeah. the thing to remember, the democratic party has shifted a lot. i think it's a good thing. i think that they didn't used to be very good on immigration issues. they have listened to the base more and listened to latino
groups more. i think that their positions are different. people are changing and people are seeing things differently. even if they did it in the past, i'm not sure it matters. if you are going to negotiate, i think -- i think the wall is a non-starter. i think it should be a non-starter. even though i think this -- that this crisis is a ginned up crisis, if the compromise to get daca, something that's very important, is to give them some fencing or something along the border, yes, those are the deals i think that the democrats should be considering. you can't get everything that you want. i think the wall is just -- it's a bridge too far. it's something that he also said mexico was going to pay for. >> thank you very much. the arrest of roger stone. what robert mueller has him on him. the mysterious passages in the indictment. perspective from two men who
crossed paths with roger stone. they played a role in watergate. carl, i as my broker...invite here. what am i paying you to manage my money? it's racquetball time. ♪ carl, does your firm offer a satisfaction guarantee? like schwab does. guarantee? ♪ carl, can you remind me what you've invested my money in. it's complicated. are you asking enough questions about how your wealth is being managed? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. your mornings were made for than psoriatic arthritis. as you and your rheumatologist consider treatments, ask if xeljanz xr is right for you. xeljanz xr is a once daily pill for psoriatic arthritis. taken with methotrexate or similar medicines, it can reduce joint pain... ...swelling and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis.
serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, low blood cell counts, higher liver tests and cholesterol levels. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. your doctor should perform blood tests before and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. xeljanz xr can reduce the symptoms of psoriatic arthritis. don't let another morning go by without talking to your rheumatologist about xeljanz xr.
♪ junior achievement reaches young people all over the world to prepare them for the future of work. we go into classrooms and we teach entrepreneurial skills and leadership skills. when you actually create a business when you're in your teens, it raises your self-confidence. junior achievement is really unique because they inspire young people to think creatively. the citi foundation's pathways to progress initiative helped us reach kids in over 50 countries. citi has also loaned us their executives and their employees
to help us deliver our programs. our youth are three times more likely to become entrepreneurs and they're more likely to create jobs for others. they are going to bring an entrepreneurial spirit to making our world a better place. ♪ turn up your swagger game with one a day gummies. one serving... ...once a day... ...with nutrients that support 6 vital functions...
...and one healthy you. that's the power of one a day. how many times have we said this? on any other day this would be the lead in the broadcast. >> fbi. open the door. fbi. >> that from a cnn crew staking out roger stone's house. fbi agents at the home of roger stone, longtime trump associate. he was arrested today on a variety of charges. the charges tie him to his role in the 2016 campaign, wikileaks and hacked e-mails damaging to democrats. the indictment speaks to all of it. it suggests someone at the highest levels, perhaps the
candidate himself, were involved. it does so without naming names. mr. stone denies all the charges against him, it's important to point out. i want to walk through it. explain what exactly roger stone is charged with. >> simply put, he is charged with lying, trying to cover up his dealings with wikileaks when he was asked by congressional investigators about whether -- what role he had, what role members of the campaign may have had, was he communicating with anyone in the campaign about whether or not he had knowledge of what wikileaks had, any knowledge that they were going to be releasing any e-mails. it's what's in this indictment that's more important and certainly more startling is that they are accusing him of being the link -- the mueller team is accusing roger stone of being the link between the campaign and assange and how he was the go around guy.
he was talking to interest memes and communicating with senior campaign officials about that. >> was the president mentioned in the indictment? >> he is not mentioned. there is one line that is particularly interesting, that makes -- has been making a lot of us wonder whether or not it refers to the president in the way it's worded. let me read that to you. what they say, the government, is that a senior trump campaign official was directed to contact stone about any additional wikileaks releases and what other damaging information wikileaks had regarding the clinton campaign. what's interesting there is how they say the senior trump campaign official was directed to contact stone. the question is, who perhaps could be more senior in a campaign than donald trump at the time? it does not say anything else about the president here.
certainly, that line has many of us wondering whether or not they are referring to the president here. >> there's two other questions. one, when did roger stone decide to do the richard nixon victory sign? i have a feeling it was a while ago. i would love to know his thought process on that. what are we learning -- roger stone and his attorney, they have been critical of how the fbi raided him, saying, there was no point in doing that. you didn't need people knocking on the door at 6:00 a.m. in the morning. you could have called his attorney. why did they do that? >> i think roger stone from everything we know in the conversations our reporters have had with him, he was hoping the fbi would call him and tell him to surrender. it could be because that's what he wanted to do, put on a show with his surrender, give reporters a heads up and he was going to show up and put on a show as he did today outside of court. the fbi had other plans. they say in court documents that they were worried he was going to flee, he was going -- had they given him a heads up he was
going to take off. the other concern was that if they had given him a heads up they were going to arrest him and they wanted him to surrender, he was going to destroy evidence. when you look at the video, the way in which the fbi proceeded, it's almost like they were going in to arrest a violent gang member. you don't normally see these kinds of apprehensions in these kinds of cases. i think also the fbi wanted to send him a message. i think he has been harsh on the fbi, on the mueller team for obvious reasons. i think they did not want to give him a heads up. they did what they did this morning at 6:00 a.m. >> thanks very much. with me now sam nunberg. also, jeffrey toobin who wrote that great stone profile "the new yorker" some years back. does the indictment comport with what you know roger stone to have done? >> it does in terms of the fact that -- the indictment does not
say that roger directly had contact with russians, which is what roger has said. it also says to me between the lines, being there obviously, i'm fired on a sunday, roger quits that friday. i look at this as tragic because i feel as if he wanted to engraestay relevant in that campaign. he was doing things that were not in his best interest. they weren't because they made him a target. >> this line that shimon pointed out, from the -- a senior campaign official was directed to contact stone about future wikileaks postings. given you worked in the campaign, who would be in a position to direct a senior trump campaign official to talk to stone? >> i read all these indictments. i have been through hours of voluntary and the grand jury. i started following this. mueller is very particular. it could be, for all we know,
the president. i don't -- short answer, i don't know. there's a point that they made that is clear not to say it was a senior trump campaign official. >> it's intentional. it's not an accident they used that word. >> absolutely not. the use of the passive voice there is so relevant. i don't -- i don't know who else it could be. isn't that -- you have been around donald trump a lot. isn't that the kind of thing he would say? go ask roger what's going on. >> look, i have no knowledge of donald trump asking roger -- >> i understand that. >> i don't want to accuse the president. what i'm saying is that if you gave me multiple choice, he would be one of the people i think that could be there. jeffrey, i don't know. >> it's a small campaign. there weren't a huge number of senior campaign officials. then to have somebody -- what other -- dynamics of the
campaign -- maybe so, trump didn't necessarily want corey lewandowski or hope hicks knowing he was talking to roger. i don't know who it is. >> do you know -- who else -- who were the senior campaign officials? >> i would assume are manafort or gates at that time. they are there. if you go down, maggie haberman reported, you have -- it's steve bannon. steve will say that this was something i did because roger had asked me to contact him. i think that's the argument. what i think -- you can talk better to this than me is the narrative building out here. the narrative. now we have close to the campaign -- we haven't got to the transition. there are questions about that. >> how big a deal is this? sarah sanders is saying it has nothing to do with the president. >> this is an enormous deal. this is something who is an indispensable figure in donald
trump's political career going back to the '80s was trying to get him to run for president. someone who he had a very hot and cold relationship with. sometimes they have been angry at each other. sometimes they have been very close. they have been in contact over the years. also, it's important to establish that there was a relationship between wikileaks and the trump campaign. it is important to point out, as sam said, there is no even suggested proof in the campaign that the russians were in touch with roger or even that wikileaks was in touch with roger. although, roger boasts about that. most of what the indictment concerns is roger going to intermediaries. jerome corsi, who is a conservative writer, the people he was in touch with who he thought was in touch with wikileaks. that's what he lied about
allegedly. >> do you think roger stone would flip on the president or senior campaign officials? >> at this point -- >> he says he would never. >> i don't. it depends how he is treated in the public sphere by rudy, by jay, by the white house. i think that if they want to throw him -- if they want to treat him the way they treated michael, maybe enough is enough. i don't think that he -- he has a very strong affinity and respect for donald trump and a loyalty to him. people can only take so much, especially after this. >> it will be interesting for us to watch is how the white house deals with him. great to have you. appreciate it. more on roger stone's indictment. we will dig into the mystery surrounding the indictment. we will hear what he has to say about today's fbi raid. if you have moderate to severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla.
otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.
roger stone professed his loyalty to donald trump. he said he will never testify against the president. >> what was it like when the fbi showed up? >> not surprising. >> you weren't surprised at all? >> the indictment says you were coordinating with senior trump campaign officials. who were the officials? >> false. >> no indication who those officials were? >> they don't exist. >> roger stone sticking with one of his rules, admit nothing, deny everything.
preet, how solid do you think the government's case is? >> it's incredibly solid. i would say it's a slam dunk. with respect to the five counts that relate to false statements, lying to congress, they are incredibly strong. my favorite, if i could use that phrase, not to make light of it, is the allegation where the special counsel claims that roger stone on one day claimed that he never texted the intermediary who is person two in the indictment on the same day he texted 30 times. you have the statement. it's clear. it's not ambiguous. then you have presumably they have the actual texts. that's a lie that's provable. >> you hear from a lot of the supporters is that these are procedural crimes. >> they are serious crimes that go to the heart of what the justice system is about.
from time to time, people come before a grand jury or before a special counsel or before congress. as jeff knows, the only way you can get at the truth ultimately is if people are held responsible if they lie in the course of an investigation. the lies here went to the issue that the special counsel was investigating. to what extent was there some kind of coordination with or collusion that people like to use, conspiracy with by and between people in the trump campaign and folks who were either with the russian government or getting information from the russian government like it looks like wikileaks was. >> do you believe when he says he is not going to flip on the president, do you believe that? >> i do. i don't think he is a good witness for the prosecution. he has lied so much during his life. he sort of relishes being a bs artist and someone who tells people what he wants to tell them.
i don't think he would be a great witness for the prosecution. i think he is going to go to trial. he has a better shot of getting a pardon than he does of flipping and becoming a good government witness who doesn't get a long sentence. >> you think that's what he is banking on? >> he didn't tell me that. i just saw him very recently. he did not -- he didn't say that. he really thought he wasn't going to get indicted. they thought the storm had passed. i was with him and his lawyers in florida two weeks ago. they were -- they thought this thing was over. they were wrong. now we will see. >> maggie, what's your sense of where the president is in all this in terms of, is he rattled? it wasn't a huge surprise that stone has been indicted. >> do you remember there was a tweet from the president a couple of weeks or months ago or decades ago, because the weeks
are so long, where he tweeted negatively about michael cohen, that michael cohen was weak because he flipped and roger stone is strong and he is not doing that? i think that's where his head is. he is looking at it as this is a problem. i don't think he wants to deal with it. my understanding is he talks more about michael cohen privately than he talks about roger stone. let's not pretend the president is not disturbed by this. roger stone has been the president's closest political adviser on and off. as jeffrey said, they have been friends and foes at various points. they have had a fraught but durable relationship over a very long period of time. roger knows a lot about donald trump. that will always make the president feel anxious. i do think that the president feels pretty confident that stone is not going to turn on him, that he is not going to cooperate with prosecutors. stone never said he anticipates a pardon.
certainly, people around the president believe that roger may think that. people around roger think that roger may think that. >> there's another factor at play here, which is that paul manafort is looking at ten years in prison. his financial crimes, given the way the federal sentencing works, he is looking at a very long time in prison. this is a very different case. there's no money involved in this case. even if stone is convicted, i think he is looking at two or three years, which he figures he can do if he has to. it's just -- it's less of a life or death matter than for manafort. >> preet, do you agree the question is who the person was who according to the indictment directed a senior campaign official to reach out to stone? >> it's an important question. i'm trying to understand it was in the indictment. it could have said a senior campaign official spoke to -- directed someone to speak to -- spoke to roger stone to ask questions about what wikileaks had. >> the fact that it's -- mueller
put in he or she was directed to speak to stone. >> the passive voice when nothing else is passive. it wasn't necessary. it's an odd word choice. they don't say who it is. i'm not sure why it's in there. nothing that mueller does is unintentional. they are recareful. . >> is that supposed to race questions about the president? >> i don't know. it's very clear in the circumstance of when you say that the president directed something, viewers will recall there was a sentencing memorandum with respect to michael cohen on the question of whether the president directed him to make certain payoffs.
i believe also it must be the case that the mueller team has it solidly that someone was directed and they probably know who that -- i'm sure they know who that person is. the fact they put it in there, it wasn't necessary, but they don't name the person is odd to me. >> the senior campaign official who according to this indictment was directed, do you think that person is cooperating? we don't know? >> it would be my guess that's how they know that that person was directed. it also stands to reason that the person who is doi inin inin directing was the president. we're just speculating. it would be natural for the president, upon hearing roger stone has information, to say, find out what he has. i know what jeff is going to say. he is right. what i said now maybe sounds very sensational. but it's not a crime. it's not a crime in the circumstances that we understand to be true at the moment for the president to say to someone, find out what roger stone knows.
>> right. that is an important point. even though it's -- it would be embarrassing, it would be i think inappropriate, but to say as someone might, go ask roger what the heck is going on with wikileaks, get that information. >> that's not illegal? >> that is not illegal. >> on its own. >> yeah. but it is part of -- why it sounds like it could be the president is this is the same person who was saying i love wikileaks. he never recognized that -- or never acknowledged that wikileaks was involved in a criminal enterprise. they were doing his business. >> thanks very much. with roger stone, it's not only shades of nixon but the color pallet. see that's funny, i thought you traded options. i'm not really a wall street guy. what's the hesitation? eh, it just feels too complicated, you know? well sure, at first, but jj can help you with that.
jj, will you break it down for this gentleman? hey, ian. you know, at td ameritrade, we can walk you through your options trades step by step until you're comfortable. i could be up for that. that's taking options trading from wall st. to main st. hey guys, wanna play some pool? eh, i'm not really a pool guy. what's the hesitation? it's just complicated. step-by-step options trading support from td ameritrade so are all these. they work together doing important stuff... like keeping your vital organs running and what not. the hitch? like you, your cells get hungry. feed them... with centrum® micronutrients. designed to nourish and revitalize you... at the cellular level. restoring your awesome... on the daily. feed your cells with centrum® micronutrients today.
on the daily. not long ago, ronda started here. and then, more jobs began to appear. these techs in a lab. this builder in a hardhat... ...the welders and electricians who do all of that. the diner staffed up 'cause they all needed lunch. teachers... doctors... jobs grew a bunch. what started with one job spread all around. because each job in energy creates many more in this town. energy lives here. you see clear skin. cosentyx can help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur.
roger stone's political career dates back to richard nixon as evidenced by the tattoo on his back. stone's affinity for nixon was on display after he appeared in court today. echoing nixon's double fisted victory sign. see what becomes of roger stone. we know how history remembers nixon. nobody knows it better than john dean and carl bernstein. it was incredible to see roger
stone giving the signature nixon victory sign today. he knew that would be a photo that everybody used in reference. this is a man who has a bong shaped like richard nixon's head in his house, as far as i understand. i'm wondering what today surprised you or made you think about. >> when i think about today is how important it is that we get a real report from mr. mueller that tells us every aspect of his investigation, particularly surrounding the president of the united states, and how crucial it is that the american people hear from mueller everything that he knows about trump. stone is a bit player in the sense that he is a self-agrandizer. he is a huge player because of his proximity and relationship to the president of the united
states as that one part of the indictment makes clear, if it's the president, as preet was speculating, who was being referred to there. what we need to keep our eye on is the difference in watergate and what we're witnessing now is that we had hearings at which the american people learned about what happened in the nixon white house. we have had no such public hearings, leaving us with nothing but mueller to put all this together for us. so today, look, first of all, roger stone was not a major player in the nixon presidency. he was 19 years old and 20 years owed at the time of watergate. he was a junior scheduler in the nixon campaign. he would like you to think otherwise. he is a consummate bs artist. at the same time, he is up to his neck, obviously, in the
wikileaks business and with the president of the united states. >> john, in a book roger stone wrote about watergate, he had choice words for you in it, obviously, given i wonder what went through your mind when you saw him today. >> he has never been one of my favorite people. he has tried to . >> he is a dirty trickster. he seemed to take the worst lesson from watergate and think they are the real lessons that one should employ, and now he has finished it out by getting a charge of lying, obstruction of justice and witness tampering. i noticed with great interest today that they disowned him, just to put out a tweet how young he was and he was a junior scheduler and while he portrays
himself as a nixon aid, it was after nixon left office that roger worked with him and for him up in new jersey during his post presidential period. i'm not surprised. he's a consummate liar. he would be a terrible government witness. his only hope is a pardon and if he has information that could hurt trump, trump might do that. >> it's interesting that they seem to publicly live by the same code, denying everything, counter attacking whenever possible. you can argue nixon did it behind the scenes when certainly donald trump has done it very publicly. >> well, there's been a vast cover up. everything russian is being
covered up and lied about by the president of the united states and those that served with him who have gone down this road and who we now see are under indictment. they have lied. why does everybody keep lying about the russia the same way that witnesses in watergate keep lying about what happened in the watergate break in and what happened in a vast campaign of political espionage and sabotage run by those close to the president of the united states to undermine the democrats campaign for president of the united states. we have real similarities there but we also have the difference between watergate and what we see now which is the system was allowed to work in watergate and republicans helped make it work and we're not seeing that now. >> he told him to stone wall it
and plead the fifth and anything to save the plan, richard nixon. that's a direct quote in the middle of the watergate investigation. >> it's from one of the nixon tapes on the afternoon of march 22nd. i had just left the meeting the day before i had warned nixon there was a cancer on his presidency. he is meeting and huddling with mitchell. plead the fifth. do anything you have to do to save the plan. it was really a rather brutal conversation, used very effectively against rachel at the criminal trial against him on obstruction of justice. >> incredible. >> thank you. i want to check on chris and see what he's talking about at the top of the hour. >> the coverage you have given us so far is very impressive. we'll try to add on to it with some depth of the people that meter here. we have roger stone tonight. we'll be talking this. it's amazing to me that council was letting him speak after being indicted. >> that's for sure. >> i'm sure he's been warned to stay away from the merits of the
case, but there's plenty to discuss. we also have kristen davis on the store. she has known roger stone for a very long time. >> she worked for him. >> she did. she also spoke to the mueller investigators, stone has not. what are her concerns for roger going forward? he's shown a lot of confidence given what's in this indictment. >> looking forward to that. thank you very much. an update on the family we told you about tonight, a couple concerned that their electricity would be turned off, electricity that their daughter harper needs to stay alive.
a couple in kentucky we were introduced to last night. she quit her job as a social worker to care for 15 month old harper that was born prematurely. she needs a breathing tube to live and her parents were worried their electricity would be turned off. since we aired the story there's been an outpouring of love and support for the family. they have a go fund me page and they were floored by the donations that came in including $1,000 from somebody that was a total stranger. the couple tell us they were very touched by the comments that they got from people that
donated including this one, i'm quoting, hello, saw your story on cnn. i being a father of a premie baby that didn't make it. when i saw your child it reminded me of my child. i can understand the fear as a parent and love you have for your child, god bless you and your family, don't lose faith and in this difficult time, hopefully this amount helps. we send our thoughts to harper and her parents tonight and to all the families effected by this shutdown. we hope there's better days ahead. don't miss full circle on facebook. you have to vote for some of the stories that we cover. it's on every night at 6:25 p.m. eastern every weekday night at facebook.com/anderson cooper full circle. that's it for us. hope you have a great weekend. the news continues, though. i want to hand it over to chris for cuomo primetime. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo and this is primetime. the central crime that launched
the russia investigation is linked to the trump campaign. that link is roger stone. robert mueller believes he has tied him to the dnc e-mails stolen by the russians and dumped by wikileaks and they do seem in this indictment to have a ton of evidence that there may have been lies told to congress by stone. stone says they have got nothing and he is here to tell you that directly. the indictment is also a window into the campaign and multiple parties that may have made efforts to coordinate with stone's efforts. here are big questions. who are the officials that stone talked to. who was the senior official that he interacted with and most importantly, who was the person that directed that senior official to go to stone for help about what else he has to damage hillary clinton. the white house insists the charges of the