Skip to main content

tv   Erin Burnett Out Front  CNN  June 21, 2017 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT

4:00 pm
they will be ready. wolf? >> what a dangerous situation, indeed. all right, barbara star at the pentagon. thanks very much. that's it for me. thanks for watching. i'm wolf blitzer in the situation room. erin burnett out front starts now. >> out front next breaking news, new questions tonight about jared kushner. should the president's most trusted advisor lose his security clearance immediately? without a doubt russia hacked the 2016 election. it's a fact. why does the president not admit it. plus, president trump about to take the stage in iowa for a big victory lap. how many credit does he deserve for the gop's victory last night. >> out front this evening the breaking news suspending jared kushner's security clearance. that's what 18 members of the house oversight committee are asking for immediately in this letter.
4:01 pm
thes a ten-page letter signed by all the democrats on the committee, addressed to the white house chief of staff, reince priebus. the letter raises serious concerns about whether the white house is safe guarding classified information. it specifically raises questions about whether jared kushner, the president's senior advisor and son-in-law purposely mislead the person people. it points out his failure to disclose meetings with russian officials and foreign officials and it concludes he must be stripped of his security clearance immediately while this is investigated. it is a major demand because he is privy to this country's top secrets. he is in israel tasked with jum starting palestinian peace talks. just one of the many top secret jobs he is doing for the president of the united states. >> he is so great. if you can't produce peace in the middle east, nobody can. >> make no mistake, kushner is
4:02 pm
by the president's side in almost every top secret moment of his presidency. if kushner loses security clearance, it will hit the president directly. we begin with manu raju out front. what can you tell us about this letter? >> well, it really has to do with the rules that govern the access to classified information and the rules say that if they're credible and serious allegations that have been raised to suggest that someone may be unfit to have access to this information that their security clearance should be suspended while the allegations are investigated. i'll read you a little bit from this executive order and it says it provides in order to maintain access to information, security clearance holders must always demonstrate discretion and sound judgment as well as freedom from conflicting allegiances and potential for coercion. specifically, what the democrats are pointing to are four meetings that were not disclosed on jared kushner's security
4:03 pm
clearance form, meetings with russian officials, including with sergei kislyak and the head of a russian bank under u.s. sanctions. now jared kushner has -- the white house has not commented specifically on this. but in the past his attorney, jared kushner's attorney said it was not disclosed on the security clearance form initially because it was submitted prematurely. they said they are happy to disclose those meeting. they said jared kushner had those meetings because of the role he played on the campaign. >> now, in this letter, as you point out, that's ten pages and there is a lot of detail. it is obviously a very significant letter for jared kushner. but it also talks about general flynn. it calls out the fact he kept out top secret security clearance, even though intelligence officials had concerns he could be blackmail bid the russians. do these democrats want someone to be held accountable for that specifically? >> no question about that. and they want records to show why exactly michael flynn kept
4:04 pm
his security clearance, why exactly he was hired as national security advisor, even as these concerns were being raised. the questions they are focussing on in the 18 days in which michael flynn continued to sit in these classified briefings after sally yates repeatedly warned white house counsel that michael flynn could be susceptible to russian blackmail and democrats say they want records about those interactions. in order to get those records, they need support from republicans, including the republican on the committee in order to issue subpoena the republican tray goudy right now saying they received the letter but they're not commenting. >> i want to go straight to the white house. sara, any response from the trump administration on this letter? >> in keeping how the administration has dealt with most things regarding russia, they are not commenting. the white house was asked about
4:05 pm
this yet again today. she would not comment on it. they wouldn't comment on it earlier and the lawyer to president trump also isn't commenting on it. so not being very forthcoming on this particular issue. >> and in addition to that silence, the reality of it is and you see this every day with your reporting, the suspension of jared kushner's security clearance would be a big deal. >> it would be a big deal. we see jared kushner in a number of meetings. nearly every meeting with a foreign leader that passes through this white house. right now jared kushner is in a trip to israel where he is trying to advance the mideast peace process where his father has entrusted him to help navigate. if they were taken out of this equation, that would be a big deal. now, my bet is the white house isn't going to all of a sudden decide that they want to get behind pulling his security clearance. i'm sure they will sort of collectively roll their eyes at this request from democrats right now all we're getting from
4:06 pm
them is silence. >> out front now a member of the house intelligence committee and good to have you back on the program. i appreciate your time. should jared kushner's security clearance be suspended immediately? >> based on everything i have seen, both from public reporting and otherwise in my work on the intelligence committee, i do think that there is great cause for concern in terms of jared kushner continuing to have a security clearance. so i think the white house should give it strong consideration. >> so strong consideration, i mean, obviously in the letter your democrat colleagues, they cite an executive order in which they say shows that his security clearance should be suspended. they say security clearance holders must always demonstrate trustworthiness, honesty, reliability and sound judgment as well as freedom from conflicting allegiances and potential for coercion. does jared kushner demonstrate all those things? >> i think he's fallen short
4:07 pm
based on everything i've seen and i'm glad my colleagues wrote that letter. i think the white house should consider revoking that security clearance of his. >> at this time. you know, the letter also, as you know, congressman, calls out the white house decision to allow general flynn to learn america's top secrets, even as intelligence leaders of course as we know felt that flynn was susceptible to russian blackmail. who is responsible for this failure, the failure pointed out in this letter that general michael flynn was in these top meetings day after day when the top members of this nation's intelligence establishment felt he was susceptible to blackmail? >> that's an excellent question and i think the buck stops with the president of the united states. ultimately it was the president of the united states who allowed michael flynn to stay in that job for as long as he did and, so, if there is somewhere to squarely place the blame, it is with the white house and specifically with president trump. >> and i just -- i do want to
4:08 pm
understand just one thing because when i asked you the question about jared kushner, you said the white house would strongly consider it. you know, revoking that security clearance. is there a reason why you're not willing to directly say you think it should be revoked? are you purposely trying to walk a nuanced line there to give them an out or no? >> no. if it was me, i would revoke it. but that's a decision for the president. and so i think they should strongly consider what my democratic colleagues have suggested. >> do you trust his judgment in doing so? >> president trump's? >> yes. >> well, i don't have much confidence right now in the white house or in president trump's decisions on hiring, so i'd have to say no. >> cia director briefed flynn when he was the national security advisor every day on the nation's top secrets and he did not answer senate lawmakers who asked whether he knew of concerns about blackmail and flynn. and i just wanted to play that exchange for you, congressman. >> did you have any indication,
4:09 pm
second-hand, any sense at all that the national security advisor might be vulnerable to blackmail by the russians? that is a yes or no question. >> it is actually not a yes or no question, senator. i can't answer yes or no. i regret i'm unable to do so. >> my question to you is from the investigation you have conducted thus far, do you think the director was aware of those concerns when he briefed flynn? >> well, before i answer that question, i'd want to do the due diligence of getting him in front of the house intelligence committee to ask him more questions about it. but i will say that by the time michael flynn was in his term as director, there were already media reports, public reports about some of the conflicts of interest he may have had. >> yes. >> and, so, i think anybody should have been aware, even without seeing any classified information, that there were red flags there. >> so i guess what you're saying
4:10 pm
is if the director was aware from his own knowledge within the cia or aware from those press briefings, whatever it might have been, should he face any sort of punishment or reprima reprimand? >> absolutely. but that's an assessment we will have to make. i'm not prepared to say that right now because he's not come before the committee. but if he fell short, if he knew about general flynn's issues and did nothing about it and continued to share these secrets, then there should be repercussions, yes. >> i want to ask you about one thing here that could be significant. russia tonight canceling a meeting between senior u.s. and russian officials that was due to take place in st. petersburg to talk about closening the relationship. they canceled it because the trump administration is expanding sanctions this week against russia for its actions against ukraine and crimea. does this sound like the actions of people who colluded? they're actually upping the
4:11 pm
sanctions. >> i think it was the right thing to do for the united states senate to overwhelmingly pass additional sanctions on russia. i am anxious to get that bill before the house of representatives so we could pass it also. i can imagine that russia is not happy with that. but, remember, this is a nation that aggressively interfered with our 2016 presidential election. so they have to be sent a clear and strong signal that the united states is not going to tolerate that. >> does this, though, on behalf of the trump administration make you feel more confident that the president himself did not have anything to do with colluding with the russians if he is willing to push this forward? >> i think it is a separate issue. where we go forward in terms of policy versus what happened in the past and who may have colluded with the russians in interfering with the 2016 election. >> congressman castro, good to have you back. i thank you. >> thank you. >> out front next, breaking news, the active head of the fbi
4:12 pm
tells lawmakers he has a trump policy. does that include meeting privately with the president? and the president in iowa at this hour. he is about to hold a campaign style rally taking credit for major gop wins in special elections last night. we are going to go live to that event in iowa this hour. plus donald trump's favorite kind of news anchor, one with nothing to say. will you be ready when the moment turns romantic? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away.
4:13 pm
ask your doctor about cialis. and get medical help right away. 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
4:14 pm
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? i did active duty 11 in july of '98. and two in the reserves. our 18 year old was in an accident. when i call usaa it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief. it actually helped to know that somebody else cared and wanted make sure that i was okay. that was really great. we're the rivera family, and we will be with usaa for life. usaa. we know what it means to serve. call today to talk about your insurance needs.
4:15 pm
4:16 pm
sglrchlts new tonight the acting director of the fbi about to meet with bob mueller. he will meet him within hours to discuss the russia investigation. this as he tells lawmakers that he has not and will not meet with president trump alone, like of course the fired fbi director jim comey did, unless mccabe has the okay. >> as you know, we have a well developed and long-known white house contacts policy between the department of justice, the fbi and the white house. and i am aware of what that policy is. i have talked to the deputy attorney general about that and any contact that i have, would have with the president would be approved by the deputy attorney general first. >> and jessica, this comes as this meeting between mccabe and mueller could be extremely crucial to how this investigation goes from here.
4:17 pm
>> yeah, erin. it is all about doling out resources so mueller could do a thorough investigation. so mccabe says he's already had many investigations with mueller and his team of investigators and mccabe is promising that mueller will be fully resourced. the two will be meeting some time within the next 24 hours. the special counsel's investigation is proceeding simultaneously and mueller has been meeting with leaders of those committees to work out par ram meters with each probe. ad senator feinstein talked to reporters after that meeting. she said investigating obstruction of justice is still on the table for her committee and she said if there are conflicts with witnesses, that's something they'll be working out with mueller. >> thank you very much, jessica. former nixon white house counsel john dean, mark preston and national security correspondent for "the new york times" matthew rosen berg. let me start with this issue of
4:18 pm
course of bob mueller met with leaders of the senate judiciary committee today, met with house intel leaders yesterday, hiring more lawyers every day. is his investigation picking up steam? >> you know, i think it is premature to say. look, it is a big investigation. we know that now. they need to staff up. a few weeks ago they were still looking for office space. their office didn't have a room where you could legally view classified documents. so they have got to get things in place. and, you know, there are constitutional questions here. there are obviously criminal questions and counter intelligence questions. they are still drawing up a budget. >> and do you have any sense as to when that will be, when we'll actually know the numbers behind this? >> no, i don't. i'm not sure they do yet either. but we know this is a big investigation. if you were in the trump orbit and you had any contact with russia, they're looking at that
4:19 pm
and there's the basic feature of the russian attempt to hack the election. >> the senate intelligence committee when it comes to who is doing what, this crucial issue, they said they won't look into whether or not the president himself tried to obstruct justice. they will leaf that to bob mueller so they're not stepping on each other. but we were told everything is on the table for them, including obstruction of justice. >> there's some areas that i won't go into that i think are very definitely that he can't interfere with us. he'll tell us that there are some we can't interfere with. >> is obstruction one of those areas? >> i think that everything is on the table. >> everything is on the table. let me ask you, john, how significant sit that chuck grassly, who is a republican, is not ruling out obstruction when it comes to the president
4:20 pm
himself? >> well, i think he's throwing a signal to the white house that they are going to have a full investigation. it's interesting that they're putting obstruction on the table. there may be 15 statutes that could be applicable here, and they have no prosecuting facilities at all. all they're doing is looking for information. while they're not an inappropriate body, they're not the most appropriate body to be looking at this, so it is a little surprise they're reaching out and saying, yeah, we'd look at obstruction as well. i think that's something they're more likely to accidentally stumble into rather than target. >> it is interesting when you look at chuck grassly saying this himself. when you look at history, when you look at water gate, right? what was the turning point there is when it was republicans who were willing to ask these questions of their president. and we haven't seen that from that many republicans here, but certainly chuck putting obstruction on the table. from that perspective alone
4:21 pm
could be significant. >> yeah. no doubt. and it is significant for three quick reasons. chuck is somebody who understands that there are three branches of government and congress has oversight of the executive branch of the administration. so the fact that he's doing that really i think has long-term consequences quite frankly because he needs to protect the santtyty of what congress does. by showing willingness to do thr this, it does alleviate concerns that decisions will be made on political thoughts or outcomes and the third reason is his willingness to be open about it now is that as matthew said this is a sprawling investigation. >> yeah. >> the idea that you could get it all out there now and wrap it up as quick as you can, that's a big thing for the country. >> you had your reporting on "the new york times," which i just mentioned and we played to congressman castro about michael flynn. you know, you're saying, look, top officials at the cia and
4:22 pm
every other intelligence agency came to the conclusion that general flynn was an issue, was a risk, could be susceptible to russian blackmail. during that time he was still being briefed daily. one of the people sitting there in the room as he was briefing him was the cia director, both sitting at the same time. he was asked directly whether he knew of all these flynn concerns in congress and i just want to play again briefly that exchange with ron white and here he is. >> did you have any indication, second-hand, any sense at all that the national security advisor might be vulnerable to blackmail by the russians? that is a yes or no question. >> it is actually not a yes or no question. i can't answer yes or no. i regret that i'm unable to do so. >> from your reporting, is it possible the sitting cia director briefing flynn did not know about cia concerns that flip could be blackmailed? >> you know, that's one of the big questions here. look, there are two options.
4:23 pm
we know that the cia shared the same concerns that the doj and fbi and department of justice, that's what drove sallyuates to go talk to the white house. we know the cia had those concerns. there were 21 days between when he was confirmed to when flynn was fired. as you also know from what we've been told, he did not tell trump. neither one of those are great options if you're the cia, if you're this administration. there is nothing illegal there, obviously, but there is an issue over, you know, what exactly is going on there. what were the politics around this, and that's something that's really still outstand sglg it is a very serious question. and it also raises the question about how this is getting wider in some ways and not narrower when you hear about more names and more questions. >> and you have multiple committees right now in congress looking into this.
4:24 pm
>> plus mueller, yeah. >> and you have director mueller in and he's staffing up and putting senator people on it. look, the best thing for president trump to do, i mean, i think the best thing for him to do is to really open up the books and say, listen, get this over as quick as possible, instead of going on twitter and trying to pick fights with members of his own administration, whether that's the deputy attorney general or going directly after robert mueller. >> next, the breaking news, live pictures of president trump speaking in iowa. he is about to take a victory lap for his party's big election wins last night. we will be there live and is there any question that russia meddled in the 2016 election. they all agree, this is not a question anymore. it is a fact. but the president of the united states and my guests aren't so sure. why? who's the new guy? they call him the whisperer. the whisperer? why do they call him the whisperer? he talks to planes. he talks to planes.
4:25 pm
watch this. hey watson, what's avionics telling you? maintenance records and performance data suggest replacing capacitor c4. not bad. what's with the coffee maker? sorry. we are not on speaking terms. what's with the coffee maker? i feel it every day. but at night, it's the last thing on my mind. for 10 years my tempur-pedic has adapted to my weight and shape, relieving pressure points from head to toe. so i sleep deeply but feel light. and wake up ready to perform. even with the weight of history on my shoulders. find your exclusive retailr at
4:26 pm
4:27 pm
4:28 pm
breaking news, live pictures. that's the president of the united states obviously. he is speaking at a community college in iowa addressing farmers in cedar rapids. and from there he is immediately going to go to what is being billed as a victory rally. we will be there with you live. you see that room gathering. these are the crowds that the president relishes. it is the first time he will be speaking publically since those high profeile wins last night. sara murray is out front. >> reporter: today president trump is hitting the road for a rally in iowa, a chance for this embattled president to do one of the things he likes best.
4:29 pm
saver the sweet taste of victory. >> i said, i think i'm going to win this state and i won the state easily. breaking news, donald trump has won north carolina. that was unbelievable. you remember ohio, oh boy. it was supposed to be close. it wasn't close. >> it wasn't actually trump who notched a win tuesday evening. that would be karen handle who picked up a house seat. but trump and his aids are still rejoicing, noting a race that was billed by some as a referendum on trump's presidency broke for the gop. trump tweeting, well, the special elections are over and those that want to make america great again are 5-0. all the fake news, all the money spent equals zero. the president also chastising the democrats saying democrats will do much better as a party if they got together with republicans on health care, tax cuts, security, obstruction doesn't work. and trump allies relish the win.
4:30 pm
>> they want to make this about donald trump, great. it's about donald trump and he's winning. >> democrats are 0-4 on special elections. but they're still insisting hope is alive and arguing the midterm election map could still work in their favor. >> there are lots of congressional districts that are currently held by republicans that are not nearly as ruby red as either of these two districts last night. and, so, cutting down that margin should actually give comfort to lots of democrats and should actually scare a lot of republicans. >> but the gop victory this week could relieve some pressure on republicans readying for tough votes. in particular, unexpected senate vote on the republican health care plan. the white house making clear the ball is firmly in the senate's court. >> obviously, the senate is the -- is where the action is right now. >> so much so, that a senior administration official admitted the white house hasn't even seen the senate health care bill in its entirety.
4:31 pm
that's exactly how senators and their top aids want it. they have made it clear to the white house, the more hands off trump is during the process, the better if r the bill's prospect. >> out front now, our panel. all right. jackie, we've got the president going to be coming to this rally any moment. he is wrapping up some comments as i said at a community college there in cedar rapids. then he will be going here to this rally in a place, iowa, and the kind of setting that he loves. how important is this rally for the president? >> i think this is going to put wind back into his sails. he's had a tough couple weeks, and he does love these rallies and he loves taking credit for good things that happen that may or may not have anything to do with him because the fact of the matter is and particularly in georgia, karen handle won that seat.
4:32 pm
it had very little to do with donald trump, who she barely mentioned if at all during her campaign down there. but in terms of this is friendly territory for trump. it is friendly people. i think we'll probably hear if the past is any kind of guide, we'll probably hear narration about all of the winning that has happened and, you know, we'll see campaign trump, where he is most comfortable. >> and as we watch everyone getting ready here for the president, you know, it is like a flash back right to the campaign. but these are the moments that he has enjoyed the most. you know, he went on twitter. he took credit for these wins last night. kellyanne conway actually came out with a tweet. thanks to everyone who breathlessly and claimed this as a referendum against potus. winning. >> is he justified to take this as a victory lap? >> sure. i think even if he would have
4:33 pm
lost, he probably would have taken a victory lap or even if karen handle wouldn't have won that race, he would have said, well, if she mentioned me, maybe she would have won that race. so, yeah, i think we'll see classic donald trump tonight. he will be boastable. there is so much crowing going on with republicans for that win down in georgia. and, listen, they did win. karen handle pulled it through. you had a top surrogates out there in the last kind of days of that campaign. tom price there. basically rallying republicans to do what they always do, which is to vote for republicans and rally around the flag. i think that's what ended up happening. that district a ruby red district. there was an outlier campaign in terms of 2016 and hillary clinton did very well. but typically that's a red district and those voters are socially conservative, religiously conservatives and
4:34 pm
not enough democrats in that district to make it competitivc. >> it's a big win for the president whose approval ratings are abysmal. 0-4. democrats are 0-4. the president about to approach this rally and we can now report at this moment he is going to be holding his first re-election fundraiser before he's gotten anything passed through congress at the trump international hotel in washington next wednesday. so he is now, you know, full roll ahead at those sorts of events. >> well, let me just say first of all, after being so critical on donald trump on so many occasions, i think this is one occasion where we say he deserves to take a victory lap. any president in his shoes would be doing exactly what he's doing, impressing voters with the fact that republicans won all four states.
4:35 pm
and you can't get away from the fact that in georgia this was seen as a test of whether the resistance by democrats was going to overpower the republicans or whether the trump vote would hold. his vote held. so this is a deserved victory lap. now the democrats can say, yes, but in all four we narrowed the difference. this time it's down ten points or more in some of these states. and that's true. it is also true that, you know, off the air elections like this are not good predictors of what's going to happen in 2018, a critical off year elections of that year. but, but, you know, what's really important is that donald trump has seized the narrative back, that he's doing better with the voters than democrats think he is. it should be a wake-up call for democrats. it is possible that he could actually get re-elected if democrats aren't careful. >> going ahead, i think it is important. he is going to have this fundraiser before he had that health care vote as they're
4:36 pm
scheduled to, jackie. one thing to you before we go, what do the democrats need to do here? these are bad losses for them. 0-4. "politico" quoting one democratic insider today saying we no longer have a party capable of riding the wave. we have 80-year-old leaders. this isn't a party. it's a giant assisted living center. are democrats going to take this seriously? >> ouch. >> obviously the comment is a nasty won. but the loss after loss after loss and this president scoring victory after victory. >> it's true. i'm not a democratic strategist, but i can say democrats do have the power to change their leaders. they do have elections and right now you haven't seen a real -- if not nancy pelosi who has been really someone who has been attacked today, who? they haven't been able to answer that question. no one else has built the coalition she has been the democratic caucus. one of the things you hear from democrats in d.c. is that they don't have a solid economic
4:37 pm
message or a solid message to coale leless around. >> out front next, it is a fact russia meddled in the election and one top official tonight says vladimir putin personally ordered it. >> orchestrated cyber attacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election. >> so why does the president refuse to believe it? and health care show down. senate republicans set to unveil their bill in just hours. what do doctors think? we have a special report out front. ve there? p3 it's meat, cheese and nuts. i keep my protein interesting. oh yea, me too. i have cheese and uh these herbs. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein. that one right there. ♪
4:38 pm
♪ ♪ for those who create their own path. always unstoppable. lobster and shrimp are teaming up in so many new dishes.fest, like coastal lobster and shrimp, with shrimp crusted with kettle chips. or new, over-the-top lobster and shrimp overboard. but it can't last, so hurry in. when i feel controlled by frequent, unpredictable abdominal pain or discomfort and diarrhea. i tried lifestyle changes and over-the-counter treatments, but my symptoms keep coming back. it turns out i have irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, or ibs-d. a condition that's really frustrating. that's why i talked to my doctor about viberzi... ...a different way to treat ibs-d. viberzi is a prescription medication you take every day
4:39 pm
that helps proactively manage both abdominal pain and diarrhea at the same time. so i can stay ahead of my symptoms. viberzi can cause new or worsening abdominal pain. do not take viberzi if you have no gallbladder, have pancreas or severe liver problems, problems with alcohol abuse, long-lasting or severe constipation, or a bowel or gallbladder blockage. pancreatitis may occur and can lead to hospitalization and death. if you are taking viberzi, you should not take medicines that cause constipation. the most common side effects of viberzi include constipation, nausea, and abdominal pain. stay ahead of ibs-d with viberzi. and in this swe see.veryday act, when we give, we receive. ♪
4:40 pm
4:41 pm
new tonight, the former homeland security secretary taking on president trump. johnson says it is a fact. he said in testimony today that the russian president vladimir putin interfered in the u.s. election. >> in 2016, the russian government, at the direction of vladimir putin himself, orchestrated cyber attacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election. that is a fact, plain and simple. >> that's a fact. and of course it is something the white house and the president himself has not acknowledged. >> could have been china. could have been a hot lot of different groups or somebody sitting on their bed that weighs
4:42 pm
400 pounds, okay? i this i the democrats are out ping it out because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country. >> steve king and, congressman, good to have you with me. i appreciate you coming on the show. you have joined the president i know in the past. you have questioned the conclusion of russian interference at times and, you know, you have heard jay johnson saying it is a fact, plain and simple, that putin's government was mind the hacking. he joins 17 intelligence agencies. >> i don't know if it's all of them saying the same thing under oath. but i have heard from the intelligence community. and i'd say this, then show us the evidence. i have heard the statement and jay johnson made a very clear statement that he hammered out. that's a fact, plain and simple. but show me those facts. all i have heard is those opinions of the facts from the
4:43 pm
people that are former officials that were all under president obama. and, so, there is no reason for this to be classified and there is further more the dnc didn't allow the fbi to go in and investigate their computers. there was an intermediate contractor there and the suspicion is growing in me about the credibility of some of the intelligence -- parts of the intelligence community, especially after james comey confessed to leaking very important documents to "the new york times." >> so let me just make this point. obviously, as you say evidence. it is evidence of course that all these officials have seen. but you say they're former under president obama. not all of them, congressman. some of president trump's administration have said the exact same thing. they have seen the intelligence and the prove. they are definitive. here are three of them. >> this was an aggressive action taken be i the senior leadership inside of russia. >> certainly i think russia was involved in the election. >> i don't think there is any question that the russians were playing around in our electoral
4:44 pm
processes. >> so it's the secretary of sate, the cia director and of course nikki haley to the un. these are current officials who work for donald trump. are they wrong? >> but we're presuming they have seen this evidence. >> you just heard rex tillerson has seen it, says there is no question. >> did he testify he's seen this evidence and did he tell us what it was? >> he testified he has seen the evidence and he said he had no question from it. >> i'd like to add a follow up question on that. what was the evidence that you saw? was there a report from the intelligence community, or was it actual documents that showed the hacking efforts that allegedly came out of the russians. i'm not denying that happened. i don't know why we found out about this leaks from the intelligence community. then we find out one of the head people is confessing he intentionally leaked information to his political advantage and to the disadvantage of the president. so we need more credibility than we've been seeing and we need to see evidence in front of us before i can accept this idea.
4:45 pm
>> but what would -- what more do you want when you have all of the people in the intelligence community saying it, including donald trump's cia director? they are all saying it. what would their motive be to lie or to on i ha-- >> i'm not asserting they are lying. i understand how this government works and i'm one who sat in on the intelligence of the weapons of mass destruction that saddam hussein had. i went out to the pentagon and sat in a classified briefing. i've got a feel for how this intelligence gets interpreted, presented and i also am around people that will accept the definition or the analysis of the evidence and describe it as evidence. so i just think that it shouldn't be classified. the american people should know what is this evidence, how did the russians try to hack into the dnc? we also heard jay johnson say it didn't affect the election.
4:46 pm
i'm happy enough to look into this. i believe there is more than a kernel of truth in it. it probably happened. but it shouldn't be hard to prove if it's so convincing to people and why would it be classified. >> so you're willing to say it probably happened, but you are not willing to be definitive. they said part of the reason they can't give some of these details is because it would compromise their sources and our ability to stop these sorts of attacks in the future. is that not good enough for you? >> well, then i'll come to a classified briefing and sit in there and they could provide all of that. i think that that should be the race. by the way, we're watching an america all wrapped up about a russian investigation, trying to find a way that was tied to some of the people that were satellites in the trump campaign. and while this is going on, then if we're going to dig deeper into this investigation, first of all, we don't know there were any crimes committed by people in the trump campaign, but i think we need to expand this investigation if we're going to have an investigation and robert
4:47 pm
mueller has gone past his first dozen of the people he's hired, we ought to be looking at the things we know are crimes, suches a the else peonage that took place under hillary clinton. how was it that james comey could present a summary of the prosecution of hillary clinton on july 5th of last year and at the end of that reverse all the things he said and say i'm not going to call for charges. it's calling for us to go back and rake through all of that again, and i don't want america to be tied up with investigations. i want to move forward. but if we have to, then we need to go back further and get to the bottom of everything. >> when you raise some questions like you do, and you -- you know, you're a lightening rod in many ways, you said a lot of things that, look, gotten people pretty upset. >> all true. >> one of them was actually recently. you made a lot of headlines after the shooting of steve scalise, who i know is a good friend of yours and he's doing better tonight. after the shooting, though,
4:48 pm
congressman, you came out and said president obama shared some of the blame. that president obama schaffered some of the blame for steve scalise being shot. i wanted to play for you what you said and the reason i wanted to do is because after you said it, congressman will heard responded. so you are going to hear yours and then you are going to hear what he had to say. here it is. >> i do want to put some of this at the feet of barack obama. he contributed mightily to dividing us. >> i agree. oh, i do agree. >> brought our differences rather than the things that unify us. >> pointing fingers doesn't help, right? so we all should be talking about politics the way we want everyone talking about it, instead of pointing fingers. >> do you have any regrets, congressman, that that wasn't the moment to point a finger and to try to blame someone for a shooting. >> i would say instead that some of the statements that were published i made were made on
4:49 pm
site on location near the ball field shortly after i learned of the shooting. but i am not going to excuse any of that away. in fact, those statements were supported by the facts that later poured out. we didn't know he had a hit list that named six members of congress. we didn't know, at least i didn't know at the time that he had asked jeff duncan and ron are these members of congress practicing here, are they republicans or democrats and he got the answer back they're republicans. so these things confirm what i have said. >> but you said former president oba obama, do you have any regret for that comment? >> erin, the answer is no. but those also i have made those statements were nearly eight years. when president obama made the issue about professor gaits and officer crowley, i called him out on that then. when he made the statement about arizona's immigration law and he said that a hispanic mother and her daughter could be going out
4:50 pm
for ice cream and pulled over, he made an issue of it. you could go to george zimmerman and the tray onmartin case and see how he >> what about mexicans being rapists. would that contribute to being divisive also? >> we heard what donald trump had to say about that. you can interpret that, the implication was of everybody, but it wasn't. he clarified that statement. and i don't know that was a very healthy thing to say either. but we had a president elected in a perfect position to heal the divisions in this country, and barack obama failed in that regard, and 73% of america thinks we're further divided than we were before he became president. and i think we need to go the other direction. we have to speak about these things accurately. what i said on that ballfield, about that politically motivated shooting is exactly on target
4:51 pm
and most of the public agrees with me on it. >> thank you very much, congressman king. i appreciate you being on the show. next, jeanne moos on the news cast with no news on a network trump calls a beauty. and the big health care reveal hours away. doctors diagnosing the problem, "outfront." >> can i say it's broken? it's unequivocally broken.
4:52 pm
when you're close to the people you love, does psoriasis ever get in the way of a touching moment? if you have moderate to severe psoriasis, you can embrace the chance of completely clear skin with taltz. taltz is proven to give you a chance at completely clear skin. with taltz, up to 90% of patients had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. in fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. do not use if you are allergic to taltz. before starting you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them.
4:53 pm
tell your doctor if you are being treated for an infection or have symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz. including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. now's your chance at completely clear skin. just ask your doctor about taltz.
4:54 pm
breaking news. white house staffering being briefed tonight on senate republicans' health care bill, expected to be unveiled tomorrow. martin savidge talks to some doctors about their cure for the broken system. >> reporter: washington state. an hour west of seattle. like anywhere in america, a place where people need health care, and a way to pay for it. kristen gunnerberg is a surgeon,
4:55 pm
peter layman a primary physician. different doctors. different politics. >> i voted for gary johnson. >> reporter: the libertarian. >> the libertarian candidate. >> i voted for donald trump. >> i voted for hillary clinton. >> reporter: you might think there's little they agree on. wrong. they believe the current health care system is unsustainable. >> can i say it's broken? >> reporter: yeah. >> it's une givably broken. ask any patient. is it a system that they're happy with and serves their needs? >> reporter: they say doctors are stressed to see more and more patients to make ends meet. patients are frustrated because they can't get an appointment to see a doctor. when they finally do, only get a few minutes. it's all about numbers. >> we're looking in the wrong direction. we need to be looking at how do you provide quality care for patients without driving up price? >> reporter: that's the democrat
4:56 pm
doctor criticizing obamacare, and the trump doctor says the new gop plan is just as bad and will cover fewer people. >> well, i don't think it's better. i think we're probably on the wrong track. >> reporter: and the other doctor posted a letter online, begging please go back to the drawing board and start again. the problem, they say, is not all the talk about which party's health care plan is better. it's that washington is having the wrong conversation. we're spending too much time talking about how do we cover people with insurance, rather than what? >> rather than talking with patients about the price for care, and what is really -- what is the real cost? >> reporter: the skyrocketing cost of everything in health care. they say it's what makes it unaffordable, and there by inaccessible. and because they daily battle with cost versus care, doctors have a lot of good ideas on how to fix things.
4:57 pm
except whatever democrats or republicans discuss health care reform, the doctors say there's always something missing, which they noticed again in a photo of trump and his team. >> there were no physicians, not one. >> reporter: what about the doctor appointed secretary of health? tom price, they say, has for a long time been more politician than physician. >> why wouldn't we come to you? you're all on the front lines so to speak. >> front line practicing physicians have a long history of not necessarily being at the table. and i think it's a shame we haven't been, because if we had been more involved from the beginning, we might be in a different position. >> reporter: erin, i should point out they don't want to come across as dumping on health insurance companies. they do believe health insurance has a role to play. it's just not the whole solution. and the doctor want to be actively part of the discussion, because they knew more than
4:58 pm
anybody, whether it's obamacare or the latest republican plan, when it comes to health care in this nation, we just can't keep going the same way we're going. erin? >> martin savidge, thank you very much. hours away from seeing what's in that republican plan. and now finally figured it out. president trump's favorite kind of news anchor. it is the silent kind. here's jeanne moos. >> reporter: here's what the news sounds like when the anchor doesn't make a sound. for four minutes. bbc's flagship news at 10:00 was silent, except for breaking news announcements run amuck. during those four long minutes of technical meltdown, hue sat there calmly, tweeted one viewer, kind of absorbing, like a lava lamp.
4:59 pm
after so much bad news lately, tweeted someone else, wasn't it lovely sort of time-out from all the craziness? no matter how many times they played the graphic saying breaking news, the news remained broken. a show editor blamed it on a technical system crash seconds before airtime. the veteran anchor told radio 4 -- >> there was so much going on in the director's gallery, that nobody bothered to tell me that i was on air. i have to say, i sensed that i probably was, so i tried to behave myself. >> reporter: he played with his mouse and scribbled, prompting everybody to ask what did you start writing, help? >> i was listening to all this pandemonium in the background. >> reporter: we do know one guy who especially appreciated four minutes of silence from the bbc. >> where are you from? >> the bbc. >> here's another beauty.
5:00 pm
>> reporter: and after the meltdown ended -- >> tonight at 10:00. >> reporter: actually, edwards' only sign of stress was his post news cast tweet. a double dragon ale, i think i'm going to enjoy that beauty, followed by cheers. jeanne moos, cnn. new york. >> a beauty. anderson's next. so with just six months to go until the iowa caucus, the president is in iowa for a campaign rally. good evening. i'm john berman in for anderson. the event is happening right now in cedar rapids. the president about to speak. when he does, we'll bring it to you live. he's on the road trying to extend the after glow of a pair of republicans in special congressional elections. much of it