Skip to main content

tv   CNN Tonight With Don Lemon  CNN  March 30, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT

12:00 am
the russia investigation. special counsel robert mueller has focussed in on rick gates. new details revealed in court filings this week are giving us the first indications of how prosecutors are getting that from gates and using it to tie paul manafort, the former chairman of the president's campaign directly to russian operatives. so to sarah murray with this bit of news. what more can you tell us? >> reporter: we knew rick gates was cooperating with the special counsel and people looked at that as this guy is going to flip on his long-time business partner and try to get him cooperate or help the government build their case against paul manafort. but one of the things they're telling my colleague is when rick gates was working for robert mueller, they said we don't need you to help build
12:01 am
this case against paul manafort but what we need you to help us and provide details that work toward our core mission and that is investigating any collusion between the trump campaign and russians. that's the latest indication and a bright signal from mueller's team that yes, this is the core of their investigation, they are pushing forward on a collusion investigation. >> do we know how this is playing out with gates? >> reporter: this is interesting. we know this partly with sources like i said who are familiar with the conversations but also from the court filing that came out that didn't have anything to do with the gates case, it wasn't the manafort case but it was this other lawyer who pleaded guilty to lying to special counsel robert mueller about this interactions between gates and a russian intelligence operative. and what came out was them saying gates was in contact with this guy throughout the campaign, he knew the guy had ties to russian intelligence and stayed in touch and this is all pertinent to our investigation.
12:02 am
so it gives you this window into the way they're looking at collusion right now. >> what kind of information might gates have had access to that mueller would be interested? >> reporter: president trump wasn't a huge fan of rick gates so he wasn't in the inner circle but he was close to paul manafort, and he was working in the campaign at a time when interesting things were happening at trump tower. he was there in 2016 when there was the meeting in trump tower between paul manafort and some other trump campaign aides and a number of russian officials. so it's possible that rick gates has some kind of information about that. but he also stuck around after manafort was fired he was on the campaign for longer and then he went on to work on the presidential inauguration with tom barrack, one of president trump's close friends. so he could have information we're not aware of right now. >> i want to bring in our next
12:03 am
guests. hello, everyone, welcome to the program. we're learning more and more about robert mueller's focus. do you think rick gates is the lynch pin mueller needs to make the collusion case? >> no. he'll need more, but it's not just rick gates. so remember, rick gates, might have kept -- have e-mails, have documentation, other evidence that then leads to other people who may know more. sarah was reporting rick gates was not in the inner circle but as mueller is able to get more information about what might have been happening in the inner circle, some of that inner circle may begin to talk as well. this is how a conspiracy unfolds. we're watching it in 24/7 cable news time. which is some random case of some random lawyer, a court filing at 10:00 p.m. at night with like a little reference to a potential, you know, discussion between manafort and a russian intelligence agency or that they were friendly.
12:04 am
then leads to, you know, sort of disclosures about what gates may be saying. and this is just going to keep happening. it's at the oval office, we know that now, and we are heading towards, as i've been saying the unknown. is it a pardon or is it a firing? the idea, in my mind, the idea that donald trump lets this get much, much closer seems inconceivable at this stage to me. that one of those two things is going to happen. >> wow. okay. after manafort was fired, gates stayed on during the transition, and beyond. what would he have been in a position to know? >> well, a number of things, don. for instance, there has been investigation by mueller of what happened at the republican convention, the changing of the gop platform regarding sale of weapons to the ukraine. potentially the selection of
12:05 am
michael flynn as national security advisor, and the policies of the administration regarding russia. and as juliette said, a number of things regarding potentially the trump tower meeting and other contacts with russia. here's what we do know don, based on the reporting by cnn tonight. what we do know is that gates' attorney was told we want something more than manafort r in order to give you a plea deal. we want something that's going to help us move forward our main mission and eventually gates did get a plea deal. so what that tells us is that gates did offer something significant to mueller. mueller thought it was worth giving him the deal. we don't know exactly what it is, but we know gates is moving mueller's case forward for him. >> in a filing earlier this week, in a separate case, mueller let it be known that gates was in contact with someone he knew was a russian spy. doesn't that draw a line to the
12:06 am
russian orbit? >> it does. we know mueller is a tactical prosecutor and he started squeezing the tooth paste tube at one end and the tighter he squeezes, the more stuff that comes out. that's what we're seeing here. i think he's been putting the pieces of the puzzle together here. he's keeping it close to the vest. we're not sure what the next step is going to be. we've seen it in the court filings how he let a little information go and we're able to assume and put the pieces thoogt we know. there's nothing unusual about it. it's true he does not need gates to get manafort. that's a money laundering case. you don't need anything but the documents and the person in charge of keeping the records to do that. there's a reason rick gates got the plea deal he did, and the reason there have been charges not pursued against him. i think that tells a story.
12:07 am
it's interesting to me we're keeping focussed on russia, we're seeing the circle tighten around the president, the oval office. pretty soon it will be the oval office will begin to tighten in on him a little bit too as we get closer in on the investigation. so no surprises from mueller at this point. i think he's doing what a good prosecutor would do. >> i think juliette feels a similar way, i don't want to speak if you, if you don't believe that's the case say so. let me ask you about rick gates, can i or do you want to respond first? >> i totally concur. >> rick gates became close to president trump's friend tom barrack, who is a man who introduced paul manafort to the president. do you think there is scrutiny on tom barrack as well? >> absolutely. only because you have to assume that gates is talking about sort of how he came to the campaign, how manafort came to the campaign and what did they do
12:08 am
once they were in the campaign. so anyone in the orbit now is going to be a subject of inquiry by a really smart team of lawyers working on this investigation. and so what that tells us if we gist step back is, remember how this started, this started with donald trump's team saying there were no contacts with the russians. we are past that. that is a dead, lying story now. we are at a couple dozen contacts, most of them lied about originally, that are getting closer and closer to collusion. you can use the word collusion, but contacts that were about something. were they about protecting the president and his finances, were they about undermining hillary? directing cambridge analytica or were they about all of the above? that we don't know. what we do know, just reminding everyone, is that the president of the united states in his campaign, during the period in which they were trying to be the president of the united states,
12:09 am
were in direct contacts with russians and a lot of people in the campaign knew that. and the only question now is how much did trump know and how close will this get to trump or, of course, his family members. >> there's reporting today that mueller is also asking about meetings between jeff sessions and then russian ambassador sergey kislyak at the republican national convention and also at the mayflower hotel in washington d.c. what does that tell you? >> that tells me mueller is interested in whether or not there was an official act in exchange for something of value. in other words, i mnentioned, te gop platform was changed at the convention. there was a provision about providing arms to the ukraine. it was changed to be more pro-putin. you have to wonder why that was the case. there were reports it was done at trump's request and the reason is unknown.
12:10 am
so i imagine that mueller is very interested in finding out the circumstances of that, what jeff sessions and other members of the trump campaign were discussing regarding that, because it is a federal crime to promise any official act in exchange for something of value. it's called theft of honor services and there are a number of people, including the former governor of my state, that were in prison for that crime. >> illinois, i remember it well. chicago, those were the days. when i was there, it was bagoyavich, obama, mayor daily. today the attorney general pushed back against intense pressure by the president and republicans to appoint a second special counsel to investigate the the surveillance of carter page and the investigation of
12:11 am
hillary clinton's e-mails. what's this about? >> it's about a politically motivated stunt, don. flange cli there's been these alarm bells going off in the right about the surveillance of carter page and culminating with the nunes memo. no misconduct has been shown regarding the surveillance of page. they've been calling for a special counsel to be appointed. there was no basis for sessions to appoint a special counsel, which is only done when there's a conflict of interest or some other circumstance. sessions went out of his way to appoint an attorney to oversee the investigation of the inspector general of the doj. i have to say that is a politically motivated investigation. and only in the trump administration would we consider it a moderate step to have an
12:12 am
investigation. >> you're talking about him appointing prosecutor john huber to look into various matters as to whether the fbi abuse surveillance of carter page and the sale of uranium one and that. what do you think about this, them abusing their authority supposedly when it came to fisa and so on. what do you think of this? politically motivated? >> absolutely. the fisa process is not some willy nilly process that you get a warrant on simply because you go in and throw information up in front of a judge. it's a deliberative process. there's a great number of checks and balances to make sure the process is run an appropriate way. the judges who are appointed are not hacks somewhere out there. so i think all the talk about did they somehow abuse carter page, to me i'd be thinking if i
12:13 am
was carter page, what in the world is going on? i mean, there's clearly some reason i'm in here. there's some reason i'm in the records. there's some reason they have a judge convinced they ought to do surveillance on me. i don't know why we're pushing back, upset about carter page and apparently every rock we turn over there's another russia. i don't know why we're suddenly so worried about protecting krp. >> it's carter page, uranium one, hillary clinton's e-mails. it's 2016 all over again. >> it never dies. >> that's your response? it never dies? >> well, i just want to -- it's so politically motivated that you don't know what to do with it except for thank goodness that sessions didn't take it even further. but remember, these are article three judges who are given special appointments to serve on
12:14 am
a specialized court whose purpose was to actually regulate warrants of u.s. citizens because they were being abused at a prior time with the fbi in the 1960s. so the fisa court is the check. so the idea we're going to unleash a prosecutor to review whether these article three judges were legitimate with no basis, no basis, except for speculation by the president and maybe some members of his political team, is a really scary step forward. i'm confident nothing is going to come of it. it's one of those things you say in this era whatever because there's bigger fish to fry. >> didn't these same folks reauthorize the fisa process? >> four times. and all republicans. >> i know. listen, quickly because i have to go here. p is jeff sessions, is he on the
12:15 am
chopping block? he's on the cover of "time" magazi magazine. you know what happens with this president -- >> what are we going to do spank somebody with the magazine? >> i will tell you, don -- >> i really want to hear from michael on this one. go ahead, michael. >> let me tell you. jeff sessions has had his run-ins with trump. no secret of that. trump likes to get rid of people when they get more attention than he does. let me put one plug in, though, for rod rosenstein. i don't always agree with rod, i had the chance to serve with him, he's a good guy. i think he's a gate keeper in the organization now. he stood up when there was pressure to move on mueller. he's indicated he feels no reason to do that now. so sessions has his problems, he's on the way out now, i don't think it's a secret trump wants to remake his cabinet. what that ultimately does to the
12:16 am
russia investigation, i don't know. let's hope rod hangs around for a while. >> i have a new appreciation for magazines. that's why i get the online version. just ahead, robert mueller using rick gates to get to their central mission, and the president still calls the investigation a witch hunt and continues to claim there was no collusion. as we learn more about the investigation, will the president try to fire him? we'll talk about that next.
12:17 am
12:18 am
12:19 am
our breaking news tonight cnn learning that roy moorebert mueller's team is using help
12:20 am
from rick gates on the russia investigation. we're going to talk to scott jennings. gentlemen welcome. the white house has been denying collusion from the get-go but the web of connections between the trump circle and the russians is continuing to widen and deepen and go back earlier in time. how can the president continue to claim no collusion. >> because the president is practiced with lying with a straight face. that's what he does. but if you look at the evidence objectively, the signs of collusion are certainly voluminous and growing. it's not just the latest report about rick gates, the deputy campaign manager, talking with this russian intelligence officer, who was a long-time associate of gates and manafort. it's also that manafort had tied with a wealthy russian oligarch to who he owed a lot of money.
12:21 am
they had discussions with guccifer 2.0. we know that george papadopoulos, who was a campaign adviser had had discussions with a professor linked with the kremlin. on and on and on. i mean, there's more than 70 reported contacts in 2016 between the trump campaign and the kremlin. so, you know, it certainly is very strong circumstantial evidence of collusion no matter how much trump and his minions may deny it. >> three people closely associated with president trump are now cooperating with robert mueller, all of whom had russia ties, michael flynn, rick gates, and george papadopoulos. is it becoming absurd for trump to call this a witch hunt? >> well, it's not a witch hunt when you consider the fact that russians have been indicted by mueller for meddling in the elections. so the investigation is worth it
12:22 am
if that comes of it. i think we're speculating tonight on the court documents. no one has been indicted of collusion -- >> you can't be convicted of collusion. >> that's the question tonight -- >> you can be impeached for it. >> your question is how can donald trump continue to claim no collusion, no collusion. until it reaches him or someone he believes was acting on his authority, that's what he's going to continue to claim. that doesn't mean this investigation is invalid. it's uncovered valuable information about what the russia was trying to do with our democracy. but i think the president is in his rights to say he doesn't have any knowledge of or believe there was any collusion. >> go ahead, max. >> you made an important point that collusion was not a crime. of course, that's absolutely correct. so therefore it's not like robert mueller is going to bring charges of collusion because
12:23 am
collusion does not exist in the criminal code but it is something that congress can impeach for. it's a high crime or anything that congress says. and the more you develop there was collusion between the trump campaign and the russians, the stronger that makes the case for possible impeachment, depending on what the special counsel's investigation comes up with. >> robert mueller wants to interview president trump, but as he gets closer to making all these connections between trump circle and russia, do you think trump will be less inclined to sit down and talk to him, max. >> we just had john dowd the president's lawyer quitting because he was frustrated that he was telling trump not to talk to mueller and trump apparently so full of himself that he insists on talking. i hope he does. he has an obligation to the american people to explain this damning evidence that's collected against him, not only in the area of collusion but also in the area of obstruction of justice. where you're seeing presidential
12:24 am
action. it may be harder to prove direct action in the collusion. but i think trump has the obligation to sit down and explain it. from a defense perspective that's something that his lawyers are advising him not to do but trump knows better than any expert so he's going to do what he wants to do. >> there are reports that the trump administration is becoming increasingly nervous about the mueller investigation. do you think we could get to a point -- this is a question i've asked everyone -- where president trump would feel he must fire mueller? >> i certainly hope not, because i think that would be the functional end of his presidency -- >> what do you think republicans would do, scott? >> i don't know what they would do because we don't know when in our political future time line it would happen. we don't know who's going to be in control of the congress, say
12:25 am
if it happens after november. but i have heard from enough high-ranking republicans that it would be the beginning of the end of the trump presidency. i believe he's hearing from enough senior republicans this would be the most unwise thing can you do. might be he be upset about it, yes, continue to complain about it, yes. but that would be putting us into the twilight zone that i don't believe he wants to go into with his own party in washington d.c. forcing their hand to grind this presidency to a halt. it would be a disaster if he did it. >> max i want you to respond but i think i know where you're going to go with it. you say how you don't believe republicans have backbones. samantha was on earlier and she said privately to her they've made it known to the white house this is a red line to not cross. but in actuality do you think republicans would revolt? >> i'm skeptical given how many
12:26 am
lines trump has crossed with racism and praising vladimir putin. and the republican party has gone along with it. if they discovery backbones, i'd be pleasantly surprised. if trump is, in fact, innocent, it would be extremely fool hearty and unwise to fire mueller, and that would set off the political -- whatever republicans say or do it will set off a political storm and the biggest crisis since watergate. that doesn't mean that trump is going to do it. just imagine what if trump is guilty, what if the crimes are so bad he's willing to fire mueller to cover it up. i don't think we can exclude that. that's why i'm concerned about the possibility even though there is some push back from
12:27 am
congress that at the end of the day trump may decide he has to fire mueller anyway because he simply can't allow all this stuff to see the light of day -- >> max, scott, thank you very much -- >> let me say one more thing. >> quickly. >> to fire mueller means he would fire other people in the justice department above mueller. he would have multiple vacancies. and i know the white house is warned there's no way you'll get high ranking justice department officials confirmed in a scenario like this. it would be unprecedented for republicans to do something like this, to grind a presidency to a halt, and i think the president and the white house have been advised of that. it would create just a situation that i don't think he wants to open this door. >> gentlemen, thank you so much. when we come back hope hicks leaving the white house today and the president is told by allies he doesn't need to replace her. but with so much chaos swirling there, doesn't he need a communications director more than ever?
12:28 am
12:29 am
12:30 am
12:31 am
internet providers promise business owners a lot. let's see who delivers more. comcast business offers fast gig-speeds across our network. at&t doesn't. we offer more complete reliability with up to 8 hours of 4g wireless network backup. at&t, no way. we offer 35 voice features and solutions that grow with your business. at&t, not so much. we give you 75 mbps for $59.95. that's more speed than at&t's comparable bundle, for less. call today. one of president trump's top aides leaving the white house today for good. the president saying good-bye to
12:32 am
hope hicks. she was white house communications director but gave the president lots of moral support as well. he'll no doubt miss her. i want to bring in cnn's political analyst david gergen and olivia neutsy. thank you both for joining us. hope hicks's departure is a critical time for the white house. and the battle for the job is big. you wrote an article, inside the cutthroat battle to be the next hope hicks. the real story is the blood letting between two early front runners, both former fox news contributors. fill us in on what your sources are telling you.
12:33 am
no kellyanne conway. >> kellyanne conway is mentioned, is part of the discussion there. and he's also brought up names like bill shine, the former fox executive. but the real fight is between the two officials. it's just this toxic culture in the west wing and the communication shop in particular that's been there since day one of the presidency. we all remember that press conference with sean spicer about the inauguration. it kind of set the tone but no one can replace hope hicks for the president. she occupied the office next to the oval office was his right hand woman, which was an overused phrase by the media when we discuss hope hicks. but she is sort of an extension of him in a lot of ways. i think it will be very unusual for him to be in an unfamiliar setting, as washington is for him, in the white house without
12:34 am
her there, she was there since day 1 of the campaign, since before that even. >> i've only met her once, but very kind. you said an extension of him. she was a nicer version of him if she was an extension of him i have to say. david, what olivia just said in the post hicks area it's a vast unknown for his aides who worry the president will unravel without her. do you think there's a real shift we're about to see here? >> i think it depends whether he finds a successosuccessor, some house aides are encouraging him not to appoint a new communications director or a new chief of staff. which is dumb. for 40 years presidents have had directors and strong chiefs of staff. in both cases you want the
12:35 am
discipline of ge geting your message discipline, the same kind of sense that works in a campaign works in the presidency. and you want somebody who's stra tee gi -- sta tree strategic. to think with mueller closing in you have the significant decision coming up on iran, the north korean talks, plus midterms over the horizon. this is a crucial time in the life of this presidency. not that other months we've seen haven't been important but you do need top-flight people. now i think the harder problem is replacing someone who has the trust that hope hicks had, and the kind of relationship. someone who could talk to the president straight at times. >> jimmy carter tried this.
12:36 am
he didn't have a chief of staff. he eventually hired one two years into his term. he said not having a chief of staff didn't work for him because there's too much to do as president. i think you agree with that, right? >> absolutely. there was a time republicans believed you had a pyramid structure. this came out of isha seseisenh. the president would have all these different people reporting to him, it was a disaster under carter. jerry ford tried it for a while, it was a disaster. the staff gave dig cheney, the chief of staff a gnarled bicycle tire showing how bad it's been. >> this president makes de decisions on his own, do you think the president is better off without some staff from your reporting? >> when you say better off, what
12:37 am
do you mean? what does success look like from a communications perspective from this white house? tax reform rollout that was considered a rare success. but a communications director, david could speak to this better than i could, it's a lot of long term planning, a lot of planning how you roll out different policies trying to figure out what kind of traveling, public events you do, what kind of access the press gets to the president. it's not just tweeting. but because the president does throw everything off course that nobody on his own staff is prepared for him to say without any warning, that's why people have this idea he does not need traditional staff, they're irrelevant. in a way they are, a former white house official described it to me as being on speed in that press shop because you jump from one topic to the next to the next.
12:38 am
but i don't think that means he does not need staff. i think more than any other president recently, this president needs staff to be a barrier between his impulses and the public. >> go ahead, david. >> one more thing, communications director is also the coordinator of the entire executive branch in terms of communications or daily conversations with the communications people in the agencies about what you're going to say that day, what may be happening on national security or you're pushing some big initiative on the domestic side. it is a crucial role and if you don't fill it, i think it's idiotic to not fill it. make sure you have a strong chief of staff and communications director. we'll see whether he does it or not. when we come back the president congratulating rose ann barr on
12:39 am
her rebooted television show. but with a country to run, why is the president paying attention to how many people are watching a tv show?
12:40 am
12:41 am
12:42 am
12:43 am
president trump revealing his sweet spot for tv ratings especially for the "roseanne" reboot. i want to talk about that with charles blow, andre carpetter and amanda bauer. the president was in ohio to promote his infrastructure plan but it was more like a campaign rally because he spoke about the ratings of the "roseanne" reboot. watch this. >> look at her ratings. look at her ratings. i got a call from mark burnett, he did the apprentice, he's a great guy. he said, donald, i called just to say hello and to tell you, did you see "roseanne's" ratings? i said, mark, how big were they? they were unbelievable. over 18 million people. and it was about us. >> it was about us. i mean, us. he's a middle class person like -- anyway, i don't know.
12:44 am
maybe he's talking about him and his supporters. is this what we want our president to be concerned with. >> stormy daniels got 20 million viewers it was also about him. >> shade. >> it is. but the idea of being obsessed with television, though, is really strange. and, you know, i saw online somebody said they had done an accounting and he tweeted about ratings like 260 plus times and human rights, their counter point was three times or something. the obsession with television is the problem. even trying to put people in the cabinet because they are good on television. trying to the find television personalities who could be part of the cabinets. we cannot have a television presidency. >> we do. he's a reality television star. amanda, like it or not, maybe he knows something that a lot of people don't, and that's why he
12:45 am
became president. he worked the media, he knows television. >> sure. i'm not surprised that trump and "roseanne" are sort of on the same wavelength. to me she was trump before trump was trump. she's crass, strangly tolerant of nazi references. and she likes fast food. i don't say that to hate on her. when i watched that show as a kid, it was refreshing to me because her house looked like houses my friends had and i had, it was far more relatable than things i'd see in "full house" so it's necessary we see honest depictions in real life and it's funny. i think everyone is getting spun out about the ratings. it was a one-off thing. i think many people were curious to find out why dan is still alive more than anything else. let's see how it goes.
12:46 am
it's a smart show, there's funny jokes and it's an honest depiction of life. maybe we need more of that. >> andre, i'll give you the last word on this because i have to get into the next block. >> "roseanne" is in touch that most americans know, like the president, she knows what hardworking folks are dealing with much unlike the other folks in hollywood. she's relating to a seg m of the population which feels like they've been left behind, which is what donald trump dialled into. >> she's a multimillionaire. again not hating on roseanne. but i'm sure some of the writers of the show have a lot to do with it. and i understand it wasn't her idea to redo it, it was the woman who plays her sister or daughter, the one on "the talk"
12:47 am
i think it was her idea. >> the crassness and courseness, my first thing was watching her do the national anthem, so i'm not holding her up as a model figure. i think appointment a way to see that's not pandering that's why that succeeds. >> i have to get to the break. we'll talk more when we come back. (male #1) it's a little something
12:48 am
i've done every night since i was a kid, empty my pocket change into this old jar.
12:49 am
it's never much, just what's left after i break a dollar. and i never thought i could get quality life insurance with my spare change. neither did i. until i saw a commercial for the colonial penn program. imagine people our age getting life insurance at such an affordable rate. it's true. if you're 50 to 85, you can get guaranteed acceptance life insurance through the colonial penn program for less than 35 cents a day, just $9.95 a month. there's no medical exam and no health questions. you know, the average cost of a funeral is over $8,300. now that's a big burden to leave your loved ones. add to that credit card balances and final medical bills, and you've got plenty of reasons to call for free information about this valuable coverage. it's easy and affordable to help cover your final expenses through the colonial penn program. as long as you're 50 to 85 you cannot be turned down because of your health.
12:50 am
your premium never goes up and your benefit never goes down due to age. plus, your coverage builds cash value over time, money you can borrow against. so don't wait, call now for free information and a free gift. all i did was make a phone call and all of my questions about the colonial penn program were answered. it couldn't have been any easier and we both got the coverage we should have had for years now. mm-hm, with change to spare. (laughing) (colonial penn jingle)
12:51 am
tonight one of the students who survived the parkland, florida school massacre taking on a powerful host at fox news. 17-year-old david hogg standing up for himself after a public attack by laura ingraham. yesterday, laura ingraham mocked david hogg for being rejected by multiple colleges. in response, david hogg called for a boy scott on her advertisers. singling out 12 companies that ran ads during her broadcast this week. there they are on the screen. is this a smart thing to do, hit her where the money is? >> he's been very effective. i'm a free market guy, everybody has a right to pull ads.
12:52 am
but he gets it both ways, when he wants to be treated as an adult and people take a swipe at him, he wants to be treated as a child. people that pay troe niez those companies can feel free to not pay troe niez them as well. even though i am not a huge fan, i think he's becoming a bigger and bigger factor in the news lately. >> you think he should be able to be criticized, charles, a teenager but a child but yet he's an activist? >> i think he's teenager, child, but also victim, right. i think you give broad latitude to people who are talking out of their pain. and when that's happening, suck it up. you may not agree with them. the mother of one of the guys who was killed in benghazi, she spoke at the convention, you suck it up. if she's attacking you directly hillary you suck it up. when they asked hillary clinton about that, she said she deserves to be able to say what
12:53 am
she wants to say. the facts may be different -- we may understand the facts differently but she did deserves to be able to say it, whether you agree or not. but also laura ingraham is a horrible human being and that was a low blow. i wish i had a 4.1, 4.2 gpa when i graduated high school, that was not the case. >> charles, you and i agree on something. >> that is not the kid to attack. >> what you said about giving latitude i agree with that. i use that example last night of the benghazi mother. the nra is mad at me, i don't care. when someone is in that much pain. like the young man that came on last night from sacramento. he's in pain. so he wasn't ready for an interview. so you wish him well and you let him go. whenever he comes back -- you give people latitude. you don't criticize them.
12:54 am
you know what i'm saying. let me read this for you amanda. here's what i want to say, she apologized -- laura. any student should be proud to have a 4.2 gpa, including david hogg. on reflection, in the spirit of holy week, i apologize for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of parkland. for the record, i believe my show was the first one -- she went on saying her show was the first one to give him a platform. do you think her apology was sincere? >> a couple things. i don't think you should have to hear from your advertisers or check your calendar to see easter is coming to know what you posted was mean, unchristian and just plain stupid. let's say you hate the parkland kids, which i think the way a lot of people have piled on them, ridiculed them, mocked them is revol voting arevolting.
12:55 am
put that aside. if you are a republican voice like laura ingraham who reports to want to tragic people to the cause, i cannot think of a worse way to drive young people away from republicans than to laugh in their face when he didn't get into all of the school that is he wanted to, because he did also get into some very good ones. so i just don't understand this. not only is it counterproductive, but it's just so mean spirited to do. and this is this new trend -- i don't know if it's brought on by trump or maybe it was always kind of there and it wasn't nearly as pronounced in conservative media, not everybody, but some voices. and man, like i'm with you guys on a lot of these issues. i have fought for ted cruz, fought with jim, but this kind of attitude, i'm not on board with it. and if you're losing me, trust me you're losing a lot of other suburban mother types. >> mic drop and scene. >> can i say, amanda i'm reading your book. it's good so far. >> thank you, charles.
12:56 am
>> what's the name of it again? >> it's coming out in may, called "gaslighting america why we love it when trump lies". i can't wait to talk more about it. >> good night. thanks, you guys. good night, everybody. thanks for watching. hi, i'm bo jackson. for years, i was the king of both football and baseball. but now that i'm getting older, my body is starting to slow down. that's because after the age of 40, your body produces less free testosterone, making it harder to get in shape. thankfully, i found alpha king from force factor. (avo) and now every man in america can claim a complimentary bottle of alpha king by texting buzz to 809-809. force factor was recently named gnc's breakout brand of the year, and alpha king is their latest scientific innovation. it contains an exclusive new male vitality ingredient
12:57 am
to help boost free testosterone, delivering more energy and more lean muscle during workouts. soon everyone will notice the new you. i couldn't believe the results i achieved with alpha king. i feel like a new man, and you can, too! (avo) if you're ready to up your game, claim a complimentary bottle by texting buzz to 809-809. that's b-u-z-z to 809-809.
12:58 am
but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪
12:59 am
1:00 am
the russia special counsel trying to connect the dots on collusion. now a focus on the campaign aide in talks with the intel agent before the election. >> important work remains to guarantee the defeat of the violent extremists. >> we are coming out of syria soon. let the other people take care of it now. >> a disconnect with the president and pentagon.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on