ailes and o'reilly have denied these claims very vehemently. there can be some on opportunism but with the number of women coming forward -- this is not a fun thing women do. i don't think women that come forward come out with a badge of honor or are particularly more employable than they were before they made the claim. >> look at women that made these claims that are high profile and see what happens after. >> five women who received settlements after making allegations against bill o'reilly haven't worked on tv since then. >> what do you think in a situation like fox news will make a difference? >> i think it takes a long time, in fact. bill o'reilly is still there. >> he just redid his contract. >> just renewed his contract. roger ailes founded with pup
ear -- rupert murdock, bill o'reilly was the first big star and still today. you have the people there, all the executives who supported ailes and were there along with. they were an apparatus that followed his orders and everyone pinned everything on ailes. i think if you're a woman in that environment or man in that environment or anyone in that culture you look around and wonder what changed. they brought in new human resources person who put out a statement, here are the numbers to call. i think it's very intimidating to make those calls. i think it takes a long time. i don't think there's ill intent all over the organization, but they have not taken steps clearly to make people feel like it's a safe place to work. >> the timing emily brought up about these latest settlements coming after roger ailes, going to add smoke to the situation. sarah, thank you very much. emily, i appreciate it. look forward always. thanks to you, our international
viewers for watching us. for you "cnn newsroom" is next. but for our u.s. viewers, we have a lot of news. what do you say? let's get after it. >> if somebody inappropriately unmasked an american name you would want to know that. >> crooked scheme. >> no reason to believe anything illegal done here. >> if you're going to block neil gorsuch, you're going to block anyone a republican would nominate. >> this is not about a consensus nominee, this is about 40 more years of decisions. >> judge gorsuch. >> this is a 36-year-old guy who has no knowledge about policy areas. >> a lot of areas working diligently on behalf of the government. >> not a lot of regular orders when it doss making foreign policy. >> announcer: this is new day with chris cuomo andal s alisyn
camerota. trying to deflect between his team and russia, president alleging former national security adviser susan rice unmasked identities. >> president wants us to believe he's part of a crooked scheme but no evidence of wrongdoing. in fact, national security experts say a national security adviser requesting that an identity be unmasked was a reflection of how much traffic involving trump people and russia. it's a very busy day. 75 of the trump presidency, we have it all covered. let's begin with jim sciutto live in washington. give us all your reporting. >> reporter: good morning. the only public comment coming from rice so far is an aide speaking to us here at cnn calling the allegation that rice improperly unmasked the names of americans false. setting that aside, i've spoken
to senior intelligence physicians from democratic and republican administrations who say a couple of things. one, unmasking is not unusual done by senior national security officials to get more information about the intelligence they see. it is not illegal. there are protocols put in place after 9/11, processes for coming exactly this. most importantly it's not public. it is not leaking. that information is shared between the intelligence briefer and that national security official who asks for that information. this latest publicizing of this effort here and issues around unmasking appear to be the latest effort to back justify the president's unproven allegation that president obama surveiled him during the campaign. former president obama's national security adviser susan rice at the center of president trump's latest attempt to renew his unproven wiretapping claim and divert attention away from his team's contacts with russia.
seizing on susan rice request to unmask. tweeting he was spied on before the nomination and calling it a crooked scheme. allegations that she did anything unusual or improper false. the white house blasting the media for ignoring the ginned up scandal. >> media standpoint lack of interest in public revelations. >> as officials stressed unmasking names in intelligence reports is a routine procedure, different from leaking to the press. >> there's a procedures you have to go through, lawyers look over your shoulder. nothing unusual about unmasking.
>> laltest justification a far cry from president trump's initial claim one month area that president obama wiretapped trump tower, an accusation that mr. trump has since attempted to redefine. and justify. >> even after his own fbi director refused the claim. >> i think you'll find interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. >> last week tried to distort comments about evelyn farkas. >> farkas said her comments wildly misinterpreted. the week before that house intelligence chairman devin nunes got wrapped up in the white house's diversion. >> the president needs to know these intelligence reports are out there. >> briefing the commander in chief and the media before his own committee about classified
information about incidental collection on the president's associates. >> i very much appreciated the fact that they found what they found. >> trump calling nunes announcement vindication. days later it turns out officials inside the white house were the original source of the documents shown to nunes. >> we believe this is nothing more than just an effort to roll more smoke bombs into an investigation that was making progress. >> now, there are legitimate questions about the protocols for unmasking names. those are open questions by both parties. also a question whether or not that unmasked information after it was shared with senior national security official was then shared with other officials or possibly leaked. but based on what we know now, the information out there now, chris and alisyn, we don't know that. the information by itself certainly not a crime or illegal. >> sure used for suspicion. >> that's interesting information. we want to bring in our panel to
discuss this. reporter editor-at-large chris cillizza, counter-terrorism analyst and former cia counter-terrorism official philip mudd. president trump has every reason to change the subject from whatever connections his campaign team was having with russians. today we're seeing this is an effort to do this. explain to us what susan rice did, if it is proven she had these names unmasked, why that is business as usual. >> sure. let's be clear. you say the president has every reason to divert the conversation. white houses since the beginning of time have the appropriate responsibility in some ways to spin the news in the direction they want to spin it. this is purposefully misleading the american people. that's different than spin. let's take this and put it in context. going back to the fall everybody in america knows we had questions, including questions from the white house, about inappropriate russian intervention in the american election, stealing e-mails, for
example, from both sides of the aisle. and going into january, president obama at that point on january 2nd sanctioned for this activity. what are you doing if you're susan rice at this point. you're reading information including intercepts about how russians are responding to these sanctions. and i'm going to guess in this situation you're seeing information in these intercepts that indicate russians talking to american person number one. american person number two. as the national security adviser you've got to be saying i need to know who these americans are who are interfering with the president's right to sanction the russians. so she says this is where unmasking comes in. i need to know who these americans are. let me flip this. if she said i don't have an interest knowing which americans are interfering, i think that would have been dereliction of duty. let's be clear. this is not spin from the white house. this is misleading the american people on something that is common practice in the intelligence business, alisyn. >> look, mr. cillizza, what we're seeing is white house avoiding the discussion of
russian interference. it has become synonymous in their minds with they did something wrong. that does a disservice to truth here because we need to know what happened with this hacking, who knew, who might have helped and who might have avoided it going forward. to that point white house wants to talk about unmasking and ignorance of this process, they did not want to talk about another weird meeting between someone connected to trump and someone connected to russia. this one happening in seychelles, founder of blackwater who happens to be the brother of betsy devos. his name erik prince. he's close to bannon. he has been known and connected to advising efforts for president trump in trump tower down in washington, d.c. he's a relevant person. what do you make of this meeting? >> add $250,000 to donald trump super pac.
that's not a small amount of money. what i make of it is where there's smoke and smoke and smoke and smoke, you should investigate whether there's fire. i'm not saying there is fire. but donald trump since the beginning said you know what, i didn't do anything wrong. then he should say, that's why we should have a full scale investigation into this. let congress look into it as much as possible. the problem here -- and phil and jim make this point obasically whether or not they are doing unmasking over here. it's an allegation in search of evidence. that's what it has been from the start, chris. he made a tweet on a saturday morning based on something he read in breitbart. that is a fact. the fbi, the cia, devin nunes, everyone who looks at this stuff has said there's zero evidence
that trump tower was wiretapped. ordered by the president, although he couldn't really do that. that allegation, that is separate from what we're talking about here. i think the goal is to try to conflate it, muddy the waters and say, well, at the end of the day i was sort of right, which is what trump is saying. on the facts, on the merits that's not right. >> jim, back to susan rice for a second. this is one of the things raising eyebrows about her from the white house as well as right wing media. she was asked about this and she said something to the effect i don't know anything about that. could she have said at that time, yes, i was quite concerned about some masked names i saw and i asked to know the identities? >> absolutely she could have. she could have explained at that point that's part of the job.
it happens to security officials, not just related to trump, not just related to russia, but a whole host of intelligence reports these officials say every day. she didn't do that. certainly a lost stunt. >> do we know why in. >> did she lie? >> explain why? >> i don't know. i do know this, because i asked that question of people close to her yesterday. from her perspective she didn't know what specific unmasking devin nunes and others are talking about, in part because that is something she asks -- or asked during the regular course of her work as national security adviser. she asked to unmask names in multiple intelligence reports, some related to russia and some not. to be clear, remember, devin nunes when he first came out with this didn't say specifically russia but others as well. i noted this earlier in the broadcast, when you do ask these
questions they are meticulously logged by law. you can't do it in secret. there's a paper trail of it. we don't know what the explanation is for her comment there, but i do know from speaking to people yesterday close to her that she doesn't know specifically what devin nunes and others are accusing her of when it comes to unmasking because that was something seds in the regular course of her job. >> phil, what you call purposeful deception here. even if you assume susan rice is lying, being shady, doesn't want people to know what's going on. let's assume that. phil mudd she didn't unmask the names in the first place. she went through paperwork. she went through a paper trail that north africaed her did he semg -- >> my guess is that's not
intelligence committee but someone who wanted to divert from russia situation. the process jim was just talking about. when you're in the room and intelligence briefer gives you a document, top secret document that says, for example, russian official, russian diplomat caulking to u.s. person number one, that's how it reads. and you say in the case that i'm familiar with, you're the fbi director, i need to know who u.s. person number one is because i need to know who is communicating inappropriately maybe with the russian diplomat. that goes into a formal process. the briefer doesn't just say, well, that's john doe. you have to go back and make a formal request. your name is logged. when she made those requests, she had to know this is going to appear until the end of time, that her name was at that point potentially searchable. so to suggest that there was some sort of underhanded process here is not appropriate. she did what a lot of intel guys do. >> panel, thank you. >> thanks, guys. >> so much to get our minds around and you have really
helped us. >> these days it seems like you have to pay attention to what's not being talked about, because there's so much distraction going on. here is a point in that way, the trump white house is going after former president obama's law enforcement agency, why? attorney general jeff sessions is ordering the justice department to review police reforms that were put in place in the past eight years. cnn senior washington correspondent joe johns live at the white house with more. this was an eyebrow popper. go through this difficult process of finding admissions of fault, finding things that can be changed and now they want to undo those or question them or second-guess them? why? >> well, chris, it's important because it's number one a signal and perhaps a sign that the justice department under president trump as well as jeff sessions the attorney general is looking to reverse course or at least change direction on the issue of policing police
departments around the country. the attorney general put out a memo essentially telling the justice department that it wants a comprehensive review of, among other things, the consent decrees that the justice department has entered into with a number of cities around the country including baltimore most recently, which had so much unrest due to allegation of police use of excessive force. so the justice department now saying they want a comprehensive review of the reform activities. we actually have part of that memo for you in a grarveg. misdeeds of actors should not impugn or undermine work law enforcement agencies perform in keeping america's community safe. this is a campaign promise from donald trump to essentially take the handcuffs off of police
departments and this memo by jeff sessions appearing to be the first step. back to you. >> thank you very much for all of that reporting. so back to this story where the white house is using the unmasking of trump associates to support the president's unfounded wiretapping claims. those are two separate issues. congressman jim hines on the latest. ♪ can i get some help. watch his head. ♪
i'm so happy. ♪ whatever they went through, they went through together. welcome guys. life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you. but there's so much more to it. here's how benefiber® works. inside us are trillions of good microflora that support digestive health. the prebiotic fiber in benefiber® nourishes them... and what helps them, helps you. clear, taste-free, benefiber®. and what helps them, helps you. this this this is my body of proof. proof of less joint pain and clearer skin. this is my body of proof that i can take on psoriatic
arthritis with humira. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the #1 prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. want more proof? ask your rheumatologist about humira. what's your body of proof?
all right. president trump right wing media types peddling a fake scam. the suggestion former national security adviser susan rice improperly unmasked identity of trump associates, part of what the president calls a crooked scheme. an associate of rice says it's just plain false. joining us democratic congressman jim hines, serves on the intel committee, something accused of being a crooked scheme because of what happened to nunes. met last night. can you get back to work in earnest? >> i think so, chris. after a week of canceled
meetings and back and forth over this whole issue, we did meet yesterday. i'm happy to say it looks like we're under way. we've been promised access and lead has gotten access to the material that sent devin nunes off on his i guessi guess escap >> can't take anything seriously you have nunes who at worst lied at best confusing about what he got that information from and it seemed to be a naked attempt for a front run to the white house. why should anybody believe anything that comes out of that committee? >> for starters, we will be there. the minority opposition is in the room. we will not be there if we are denied access to witnesses, if we're denied access to
particular lines of inquiry. look, i understand that there's always going to be a little bit of a question around the chairman's motivations. this isn't the first time, you know, his objectivity called into question. you recall a couple weeks ago he and chairman on the senate side knocking down a "new york times" news story. so i understand that shadow exists. look, we are going to stay in this investigation because we don't have an outside commiss n commission. other the fbi and commission we're the only game in town. we might walk out if we can't do what we need for a good report. >> the fear is a propaganda arm of the white house. the next piece of evidence, brick if the wall of what phil mudd, a cia guy calls purposeful deception with this unmasking scandal, suggesting unmasking is leaking when it isn't.
suggesting susan rice undertaking this scheme of surveillance of trump folks, which is demon straestrably unt. if that's coming out and backed up by nunes, how is that oversight. >> i guess i've observed a republican could do all that, certainly a republican interested in joining to cloud the waters on existence of fbi investigation to trump administration links and possible collusion with the russians but backing up this absurd tweet about surveillance of trump tower. you can do that investigation or no investigation. what's more concerning to me, chris, when you have a president who relies on false hoods and lies, the biggest inauguration ever, 3 million fraudulent votes, my health care bill will cover more people, be terrific, beautiful, and wonderful, when your castle is constructed on utter falsehood, one of the things you have to do over time
is take all of the power out of the truth. you need to suggest that maybe susan rice's activities which everybody is saying if they occurred were perfectly proper for a national security adviser, you have to sort of say, oh, that's the other side of the story. all of this is republicans fighting democrats one more time. forget about the fact the fbi is investigating this administration. forts about the fact the president openly promotes false hoods because this is just another darn democratic versus republican fight. that's a huge win for a white house that wants to both distract the attention of the american people but also for whom doing away with an absolute sense of truth with any power to it is really important. >> so did this meeting in the seychelles between erik prince who has connections financial,
familiar familyial, did that look -- >> of course we'll look into that. let me step back, in the interest of truth, let me say something the other side has not been willing to say about the susan rice thing. there's not necessarily anything improper about erik prince meeting in the sheychelles, jef sessions talking, this is to determine if something was improper. as one of your previous correspondents said, the best way to get to the answer about whether there's anything improper is for the white house don't ask, don't tell the exact opposite of what they have been doing for the last couple months. guys, let's move on. in order to show you there's nothing here i'm not going to criticizes as a witch hunt, i'm going to do everything i can to
help it because the investigation will clear me and my people. of course the white house has acted in exactly the opposite fashion of a white house which knows there was no wrongdoing and which wants to move on. >> congressman, you know i'm on you about the integrity of the investigation not because of you necessarily but because of answers themselves being so important and what happened with russian interference, who knew, how we avoid it going forward. you always have a forum here to discuss what you think the public needs to know about the investigation. thank you. >> absolutely. this is why we always wanted an outside commission so you couldn't level these charges of partisanship, but we didn't get that. so again we're kind of one of the few games in town. >> jim himes, thanks for being on. >> thanks. >> chris, we're following breaking news from syria. reports of a gas or chemical attack, this days after president trump said the u.s. would not try to topple syria's leader. senator john mccain joins us live on this next. hey allergy muddlers are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool?
try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. ♪ ♪ wanna get away? now you can with southwest fares as low as 59 dollars one-way. yes to low fares with nothing to hide. that's transfarency. except when it comes to retirement. at fidelity, you get a retirement score in just 60 seconds. and we'll help you make decisions for your plan... to keep you on track. it's your retirement. know where you stand.
to keep you on track. does your makeup remover every kiss-proof,ff? cry-proof, stay-proof look? neutrogena® makeup remover does. it erases 99% of your most stubborn makeup with one towelette. need any more proof than that? neutrogena. essential for him, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and
cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™".
children. hundreds of others injured and these numbers are very preliminary. what caused this? right now seen as a gas or chemical attack. cnn's barbara starr live at the pentagon with the breaking details. the pictures we're seeing this morning are harrowing and really point to the worst of intentions. >> good morning. these pictures horrifying indeed as they emerge in northern syria. this is an area where regime and rebel forces have fought for years. we don't know who is responsible for this yet but what we do know is the assad for years has dropped barrel bombs on its own people in this area often filled with chlorine gas, a weapon of terror, that can cause kinds of respiratory symptoms and distress you see in some of these pictures emerging from the area. so we don't know who but we do know who has done it before. this comes a couple of days after the trump administration gave the world a signal that it
will no longer try and push bashar al assad from power. the question being raised now, is this paving the way for the assad regime to act with impunity even more than it already has. very serious matter. when the u.s. says it's not going to push assad from power, it basically steps aside. perhaps in the view of some gives him the ability to carry out these kinds of attacks. it is something that is going to be very difficult for u.s. forces. they train other militaries around the world in human rights. if the u.s. doesn't step up on this human rights question, it's hard to see what may come next, what kinds of attacks may come next. alisyn. >> barbara, thank you for spelling it all out for us thorthoris morning. joining us now senator john mccain, chairman of the arms committee. good morning, senator frf good morning, alisyn. >> this apparent chemical or gas attack on the syrian people
where we know at this hour 11 children have been killed under the age of eight. >> weaver se've seen this movie, when barack obama said they would have a red line and they crossed it and he did nothing. bashar assad and his friends the russians take note of what americans say. i'm sure they took note of what our secretary of state said just the other day that the syrian people would be determining their own future themselves, one of the more incredible statements i've ever heard. the involvement of hezbollah, iranians, russians, and, of course, the barrel bombing and precision strikes by russian aircraft into hospitals in alep oka alepo. i'm sure they are encouraged to know the united states is withdrawing and seeking a new arrangement with the russians. it is another disgraceful chapter in american history and it was predictable.
>> so senator, what do you want to see president trump do? >> i want to hear him say we're going to arm the free syrian army. we're going to dedicate ourselves to the removal of bashar al assad. we're going to have the russians pay a price for their engagement. hezbollah also involved. all players here are going to have to pay a penalty and the united states of america is going to be on the side of people who fight for freedom, and we will not sit by and watch chemical weapons being used to slaughter innocent women and children. you might remember when the pictures were smuggled out before by a wonderful man named sazar, chemical attacks, didn't we learn a lesson when barack obama refused to do anything. >> senator, that is completely different from what the administration is saying. you paparaphrased what secretar
tillerson said, nikki haley said our priority is no longer to sit and focus on getting assad out. >> well, the united states of america is known to help people who want freedom and democracy. none of us are arguing for american troops on the ground there to fight against bashar al assad. but we certainly believe we can fight isis and help people struggling against one of the great brutal dictators in history, bashar assad and his minions. there was a story about the torture of thousands and thousands, murders of thousands and thousands in damascus. these are war crimes on the sale of nazi, germany, or pol pot. >> why isn't the trump administration saying any of that? >> you're asking the wrong guy?
>> what do you see as the trump doctrine for how to deal with these issues internationally frf i don't see any doctrine right now. i do have great confidence in the security team around the president. mattis, kelly, and our new director of national intelligence dan coates and mcmaster. i hope they will develop a strategy, stand up and give the president the advice and counsel i believe he needs and could get from that team. >> senator, if i can paraphrase what i've heard, sometimes you up set the apple cart in iraq or libya, there are other bad reply can you go -- repercussions. maybe the devil you know is easier to live with. >> that contradicts everything america has stood for throughout our history particularly the 20th century. it was ronald reagan who gave
assistance to the afghans who were able to prevail and get the russians out of their country. this is -- we stand for freedom and we help people who are being persecuted and murdered. it does not mean we send the marines. it does means there's many ways of assisting including the court of public opinion. one of the things that won the cold war was radio-free europe. so we just seem to be without a message that has resonated for the last century and should be in this century, that is united states of america stands for freedom and help the oppressed and murdered and those who are being under assault as the people of syria are today. >> one last question on this. france, other countries are trying to tackle this. today they are so appalled by what we're seeing in the aftermath of these pictures. so france is calling for an emergency meeting of the u.n. security council.
ambassador nikki haley has just been named as president of that for the month of april. so do you think there is any possibility of the u.s. coming together with allies and actually taking some action against syria? >> the russians have veto power in the security council so you'll hear a lot of rhetoric and a lot of great sloganeering from new york but it requires american leadership. that's the one lesson we should have learned over the lack of leadership or the obama administration's, quote, leading from behind. when you lead from behind, bad things happen. so it requires positive, dynamic american leadership. i want to emphasize again, not american troops but american assistance both morally and materially. >> okay, senator, i want to move on to other news of the day. that is, as you know the trump white house has talked about what they say or they say they see as a controversy of the former national security adviser susan rice unmasking a name,
someone on team trump, that was somehow caught up in some incidental collection of surveillance. they say that this is a controversy, it shows she has done something wildly out of the bounds of normalcy. is this business as usual for a national security adviser to ask a name be revealed, an american name, if she wants to know more or is this a controversy? >> i think the circumstances indicate there's a possibility that request could have been politically motivated. but we need to get to the bottom of it. as i've said and i'll probably say many more times because i'm kind of boring, this is a centipede. more will drop. seychelles, why do we need a direct committee to get through this because there's lots more
shoes that will drop. i can't make a judgment on what i just heard. she did have the authority to do it, what was the motivation for doing it i think is the question. >> what we've heard from the reporting, if she saw a masked name that said american number one had these conversations with russians at the same time that president obama had imposed sanctions, wouldn't that arouse some curiosity on her part? >> all i can say, alisyn, i don't know enough to reach a conclusion except to say this is another aspect of this multi-dimensional scandal. this is one of the bigger ones that we have seen in a number of years. that's why we need the select committee to get to the boechl it. i have great confidence in richard burr and senator werner of virginia but the dimensions require a broader scope if we're going to get to the bottom of all of it.
>> do you see the scandal as possible connections or the scandal as susan rice asking for names to be unmasked. >> one side views it as a scandal, the other side -- that's why we need overall look at it. i think the dimensions are large. it's far, if indeed there were names revealed, those people have to be held accountable, too. the connections with the russians. would you and i read a novel who said somebody in the seychelles met with intermediate area russian. i don't think so. >> you're talking bought "washington post" reporting about erik prince, the brother of betsy devos, who flew to the seychelles for some sort of secret meeting arranged by uae. what do you make of that, senator. >> i make it as another shoe and another aspect of this unfolding
drama that is going to be with us for a long time. that's why we need an overall investigation of all aspects of it. it's hard for me to draw conclusions from yesterday's headlines. >> when you told cnn -- just give you the opportunity to clarify -- you said if susan rice did this, it would be a dereliction of duty. do you still feel that way? >> if she did it with the intent of revealing these names for political purposes. you've got to -- i've got to add the end of it, too. if she did it for political reasons. you can only find that out with a thorough investigation of all the circumstances surrounding her finding out this name or names and the way that it was used. >> meaning an independent investigation? >> yes, yes, yes. i have called for it for some time. >> let's talk about how the senate is now poised to use,
quote, the nuclear option to get judge gorsuch onto the supreme court. are you comfortable these rules, this precedent will be broken and forevermore it will just require 51% majority instead of 60 as had been the case? >> i think it's a dark day in the history of the united states senate. it's going to happen. it's interesting that republicans were dead set against it when my former colleague harry reid invoked it with the judges, but now it seems to be okay. what we should have done is what we did in 2005, and that was a group of us got together, 14 of us, and said, look, we won't filibuster except under extraordinary conditions. and now we're so polarized now, including between the two leaders, mitch mcconnell and chuck schumer that there's no
communications anymore. if you can do this with 51 votes, what do you think the next nominee is going to be like? what do you think will happen when eventually democrats are in majority in the senate? that's doing to happen sooner rather than later. i hope later. >> the tables always do turn. senator john mccain, thank you very much for being on new day. nice to see you. >> thank you. >> fun fact, today is equal payd payday. what does that mean for women in the workforce and what ivanka trump is saying about it next. but there's so much more to it. here's how benefiber® works. inside us are trillions of good microflora that support digestive health. the prebiotic fiber in benefiber® nourishes them... and what helps them, helps you. clear, taste-free, benefiber®.
christine, today is equal pay day. tell us what that means for all of us. >> the significance, to earn the same amount as their male counter parts, women to work one year and part of the next year, too. that extra time ends today. women earn 80 cents for every dollar men make. that works out to be $10,000 less per year. for a 20-year-old it amounts to $418,800 over a 40-year career. the gap has been slowly narrowing. it will be 44 more years until pay is equal between men and women in america. the issue here is not that women choose lower paying occupations. even in the same job categories men make more. women working full-time in engineering earn 82 cents for every man.
in sales 67 cents and look at this, just 56 cents. experts disagree on why women on average make less. how to fix it equally difficult. some way congress needs better transparency on pay. others say more support for working parents. men and women. let's be honest they hit their peak at work at the moment they're growing their families. getting support from high profile women today, including ivanka trump tweeting a reminder that women deserve equal pay for equal work. we must work to close the gender pay gap. >> appreciate it. jared kushner very much in the spotlight. seems to be secretary of everything. right now he is in iraq. but he's got a big to-do list back at the white house. what exactly is kushner's role?
and is he the right guy for any of these jobs? next. go, go! [ rock music playing ] have fun with your replaced windows. run away! [ grunts ] leave him! leave him! [ music continues ] brick and mortar, what?! [ music continues ] [ tires screech ] [ laughs ] [ doorbell rings ] when you bundle home and auto insurance with progressive, you get more than a big discount. that's what you get for bundling home and auto! jamie! you get sneaky-good coverage. thanks. we're gonna live forever! you get sneaky-good coverage. thanks. he's a nascar champion who's she's a world-class swimmer who's stared down the best in her sport. but for both of them, the most challenging opponent was... pe blood clots in my lung. it was really scary. a dvt in my leg. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. my doctor and i choose xarelto®
xarelto®... to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner... ...that's proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt and pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. here's how xarelto works. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least six blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective... ...targeting just one critical factor, interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures and before starting xarelto® about any conditions,
such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. you've got to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from dvt and pe blood clots. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know. that $100k is not exactly a fortune. well, a 103 how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. i told you we had a fortune. get closer to your investment goals with a conversation.
all right. president trump's senior advisor and son-in-law is jared kushner. he's presently in iraq with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. he's learning about this job he now has. kushner's plate filled with a variety of domestic and international issues. is he the right guy for any of this? let's discuss with the author of trump nation, the art of being the donald. tim o'brian and cnn contributor emily jane fox. good to have you both here. you dig into who kushner is. the people that know him will say smart guy, good to deal with when you are doing these development deals. no inference that any of the things he's doing right now is anything he's done before or that he's particularly well suited for. did you find the same? >> that's just em perically true. the only things we have to judge
him on at this point i think are two things, what happened when he took over his father's real estate business and he made a rash and possibly disastrous purchase. he overpaid for it. it's a bit of a ball and chain around the kushner's family portfolio. step two is what happens since he's come to the white house. trump has had a chaotic first 120 days. jared kushner was meant to be a person in that process to be a trusted advisor. but mostly what we've gotten is a lot of back and forth and not good, basic management in a purely nonpartisan way, just around the process. and now on top of all that you're giving him a massive portfolio. you are giving him the middle east, the overhaul of the federal government and turning him into a jack-of-all-trades for his father-in-law. i think the only thing at this point that recommends him to the
job is the fact that he married the president's daughter. >> emily? >> it's also hard to understand what his role is versus, say, the secretary of state, rex tillerson or the chief of staff, reince priebus. what's he different differently than the secretary of state would? >> for donald trump there is no greater qualification for any kind of job than being family. so i think he is overstepping the bounds of a typical white house advisor. but donald trump wants his family to be the one advising him. there is really no greater trust than someone who is related to him. >> what's the downside? you have your secretary of state. this is a bit of intrigue. is he taking over for tillerson? we don't have any great coordination of that. but him being a son-in-law, why is it not a good thing to have someone you trust, who is a smart kid, you don't have to question his loyalty. he's there and we don't assume
he's going to set policy, right? >> i think that's a fair assumption to make. i think as sources have explained to me, he's not making policy here. he's really a ceo of the united states of america, really. he's glad handing with foreign leaders, taking trips when asked. one person explained it to me as this, donald asks him to do something and he says yes. that's why you have seen him amass so much power so quickly because president trump is really interested in having him in all these meetings and really wants his take in all these things. is he qualified to give that advice? i don't think we have seen that qualification yet. >> one republican told us yesterday who said that basically the role he serves is to be trump's ears in the room. so he comes home and says to president trump, okay, here's what i got. here's what i learned: you will want to say this, perhaps, or handle this in this delicate
way. that's a good role. that you understand why president trump would trust him to be that. but then it does beg the question is, so, is that different from what rex tillerson will be saying to iraq? >> you had john mccain on. he said he's not sure there is a trump doctrine when it comes to foreign policy. if you want a test case projecting forward of why jared kushner might matter, let's put north korea on the table. what is the chain of command? is rex tillerson in the loop? is jared kushner? who is the first one to get to the president? the president himself is deeply ill-informed on foreign policy. who regulates him? probably the first person in that mix is going to be kushner and is kushner going to be a good first glance? >> hopefully you want an adviser
who is smart enough to know what he doesn't know. 36 years old. you give him a little bit of the benefit of the doubt there. if we judge by what we have seen, this notion that kushner and maybe his wife, you know, ivanka could be a modulating device seems to have fallen woefully short unless kushner and ie voon vanka agree with al crazy tweeting trump is doing. what is your take on that? >> i don't think they agree with everything and i think they do voice their disapproval. >> but they may have shown zero effect on getting him to do anything differently than what he wants to do then. >> i think they know better than anyone else that their father or father-in-law is going to do what he's going to do. i think people often overestimate what their power is, but i think they're more realistic over the control they have over the president.
>> what do you think of that? what is ivanka's role in this? >> both of them grew up with fathers largers than life. they both had to learn to grew up around that and live wit. i think they're both very controlled personalities, but they are also a little out over their skiis. who wouldn't give up an the opportunities they're getting, but that is a separate issue on whether or not they are qualified. >> look, again, he values family. i don't think anybody has got a problem with that. it's just where you put family. these are unvetted positions. they have always been controversial because they don't go in front of any confirmation process, but usually the people who occupy them are known. that's what's so different is there is a bunch of people in there that nobody has ever heard of before and they're learning on the job. >> and they've still got