tv Cuomo Primetime CNN November 16, 2018 10:00pm-11:00pm PST
continues to rise. 630 names are on the list's last release by local officials but they caution it is difficult for them to pinpoint that number because so many people have been displaced. paradise is a town with a population of more than 25,000 people. they say some people could have evacuated to areas where cell phone service is unreliable. others, that i say, could have evacuated and not reached out to family members so they don't realize people are looking for them. anna goodnight who you just heard me speak with, she told me she hasn't looked at the list because she's afraid she will know names on it but, john, authority asks if you look at the list, please let them know. if you see anybody you know. because in the meantime they will make sure everyone is accounted for. >> kaylee hartung, thank you for your reporting. terrific job. the news continues, we'll hand it over to chris cuomo. cuomo "prime time" start tss now. >> i am chris cuomo and welcome to prime time. let freedom rein. the president can't just pull a press pass because he doesn't like certain questioning. the law is clear.
now what is not clear where we go from here. trump signalled how he'll respond and we'll test that for you ahead. is is the mueller probe about to end? trump says that's what he heard and that he's answered all the special counsel's questions and he did it all by himself. all those lawyers he's paying just watched. his big concern is perjury. is that something to worry about if you're telling the truth. we have a lawyer who worked in the trump white house. you'll hear his in a robust cuomo's court. and we have corey lewandowski. how hard is it for trump to hand back the press pass to cnn and to hand over the answers to the special counsel? friday is fun day. let's get after it. big step in the mueller probe. >> president trump announced today he's finally done writing out answers for the special counsel. take a listen. >> i write the answers, my
lawyers don't write answers. i write answers. i was asked a series of questions, i've answered them very easily. very easily. >> really? himself? he was huddled with a team of lawyers. for hours. over multiple days. they're paid to shape every answer given. him doing it alone is as likely as his claim that he isn't bothered by the probe after all those raging tweet he is sent yesterday. remember this one? total witch-hunt like no other in american history. all caps. the investigation has gone absolutely nuts. what's up with potus turning up the mendacity regarding mueller? cuomo's court is in session. jim schultz, return engagement, former white house attorney because he looked so fine last night and laura coates, former federal prosecutor, cnn legal analyst. good to have both of you on a friday night. thank you. laura coates, you've tutored me in this before. we know these questions, this set at least regard actions before president trump became president trump.
what do you expect has to be included that creates some exposure for the president? >> well, the number-one thing is that trump tower meeting. that's something that took place before the president was grated, inaugurated. before there was a trump transition team. before the president of the united states became the president of the united states through a campaign election. that's the point in time we see the most exposure for legal jeopardy where you have discussions between donald trump jr. and wikileaks and questions concerning whether roger stone was trying to provide information and what role he played on the campaign and the president's own words saying there was something to come, something expecting for the american people to see as the demise of hillary clinton and there seemed to be a correlation between these things and if you are mueller, you're asking yourself what was the connection? what did you know when? who relayed information to you? that's things donald trump can tell you. >> jim schultz, response and biggest concern?
>> i think that's exactly right. they're going to want to know what the president knew when he knew it for those issues that occurred prior to him becoming president. no question about that. make no mistake. there has been a characterization of those answers from other witnesses and the prosecutors have those characterization of the answers. they know what other people have said and they haven't shared that with the presidents so that's where it becomes tricky for the president because he doesn't know what characterization, what spin was put on this by others. >> that's why there's 0.0% chance he wrote those answers by himself and he would be foolish to have done that, anybody who has counsel, for good reason you use your lawyers and you need to, coates, because of people like you because you're setting perjury traps says the president of the united states. you're out to get him. you're tricky and you're sneaky. is that how it works? >> just shady. shifty.
that's all you can characterize me as. in reality the questions that are being asked are open ended and i think jim was talking about the characterization. it's an important word choice. the president isn't entitled to know what other witnesses have said, whether he is corroborating them or contradicting them. that's not the standard for perjury. people can see the same thing differently and not be held accountable for perjury. that's like if someone was in court for a car crash and one said it's green and one says it's yellow, nobody is being convicted of perjury unless there's an intentional act of lying committed so there is a distinction to be made but a perjury trap is such a strong word and the one way to avoid it is tell the truth and not presume that by answering questions as the head of the executive branch which includes the department of justice somehow you are immune from doing that which every other witness is required to do. >> the president sees it a
little bit differently. here's what he said. >> i'm sure they're tricked up because they like to catch people, gee, was the weather sunny or was it rainy. he said it may have been a good day, it was raining, he told a lie, he perjured himself. >> do you agree with that characterization to use your world, counsel schultz? >> i think the president has reason to be concerned about the questions. i'm sure his lawyers have reason to be concerned about those questions as well and they will review those questions, the scope of those questions, how they're framed is very, very important and that is something they will take into account when they're assisting whim preparing those answers. >> it's interesting, what he said today, as behind as it may seem, we know he used his lawyers but he said they didn't help me, i wrote all the answers. imagine if he said that to a federal investigator across the table. so when they helped you prepare these answers. nobody helped me. i did it myself.
imagine the difference. >> that's not what he said. he said he drafted the answers and that very well -- >> he says the lawyers didn't write the answers, i wrote to answers. >> but those answers are going to get reviewed by lawyers before they're produced the other side, no question. >> no question. the point is he's not being honest and that's why his lawyers to their credit won the negotiation point of let us answer these questions in writing for exactly that reason. >> well, it's an ott thing to try to say you wrote it all yourself and you have no assistance of could be sell, i think he was trying to portray himself as being forth wright. it was so easy. the questions were so easy. and he said the questions swore easy there was no reason i couldn't answer them myself. then why go through the rigamarole of having to write out your answers? you don't even need a lawyer present. you don't need the take-home examination yet you have routinely and repeatedly refused to be questioned and avoid this
unnecessary ease of taking this take home test so it begs the question. on the other hand, what he has said in his written response -- and it's done by himself, will be vastly different than what his attorneys hand in and with good reason. they have to make sure what he is saying is make sure he doesn't step ten feet deep into their own legal jeopardy. that's their job. and the president touting his own skill at answering easy questions may come back to haunt him. >> >> all of us know a perjury trap is where prosecutors bring you in for no other ran than to try to trip you up so if they're just bringing you in, that's one thing, this is a very different context jim schultz, what would you have advised the president about statements about bob mueller? would you have tried to check him on the kinds of things he said about mueller being conflicted?
all the negative and nasty things he said. would you have condoned that? >> i said time and time again there needs to be -- that that rhetoric needed to be dialed back by the president but as it relates to the investigation itself he has every right to be frustrated by this. it's dogged him from the beginning, the democrats are using it as a political sword they'll continue to use it as a political sword. and he needs to defend himself. >> big question will be -- and i'll come back to both of you for an answer on this is will the answers to these questions help wind up this rope or will it create another layer of examination? that's what we have to wait and see. lawyer coates, thank you so much. jim schultz, twice is nice. great to have you twice. >> thank you. >> so the president is hoping his legal struggle with mueller goes better than his legal struggles with someone he appointed.
a judge that president trump appointed told him today "you lose. you may control what adoring fans believe at a rally but you don't control the truth, you don't get to take a press pass because you don't want to answer questions." hashtag, sorry, not sorry. the law is clear. 1964. the supreme court ruled -- work please, work please -- all right, who needs it? the court ruled the first amendment cover what is may be unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. in 1988 they found a protected speech that is critical of those who hold public office so the law is clear here and first
amendment rules are seen as a period of expansion. we're erring on the side of including more things in speech. however, what about when it comes to who gets a press pass in the white house? the without controls access but the rule that applies says the secret service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a source of physical danger to the president. the truth may hurt, but not that way. doesn't create a security threat. the relief today is only temporary, however, and based on the fact that the white house just pulled the pass with no due process, the judge said how this happened was, quote, shrouded in mystery. trump's lawyers argued that the president should be able to restrict press for any reason. that argument was offensive and expensive, these are doj lawyers, department of justice. that means they're making an argument against our interests on our dime. nice. anyway, is this thing working? great, friday night. his lawyers came up with no
precedent to support the capricious taking of the pass and they refused to defend that bs phone wars tape that sarah sanders said proved the reporter was in the wrong. it didn't. even the judge called her suggestion likely untrue. and said it was partly based on evidence of questionable accuracy and he was being generous. and important point -- this is not just about cnn, all right? these are the parties that join the suit. if he can go after one reporter, he can go after any and that's why you saw this team work going on, including fox. they even said he went too far. and all are going to have to stand up far free press because this white house is not ready to change. how do we know? listen. >> it's not a big deal and if he misbehaves we'll throw him out or stop the news conference. >> all right, no you won't. that's the point. you don't get to silence things because just you don't like them.
and this manipulation from sarah sanders. the court made clear there is no absolute first amendment right to access to the white house. that's what she said. that's not what the judge said. the judge said this. i haven't determined the first amendment was violated here. remember, this was a temporary relief. there is still the personal permanent relief that will be argued. he went on to say while he hasn't decided it, he believed cnn is likely to prevail. again, the law is clear. we know our rights. the question is whether the president will do what is right when it comes to respecting the free press and if he doesn't, he better be ready to fight and lose again. next up is the great debate. california democrat kamala harris isn't one to mince her words but comparing united states to the kkk?
so, let's talk about conference calls. there's always a certain amount of fumbling. a lot of times it doesn't work. we have problems. comcast business goes beyond fast. by letting you make and receive calls from any device using your business line. and conference calls you can join without any dial-ins or pins. (phone) there are currently 3 members in this conference.
i like that. i like that too. i would use that in a heartbeat. get started with innovative voice solutions for a low price when you get fast, reliable internet. comcast business. beyond fast. senator kamala harris had this line of questioning for trump's pick to head i.c.e. >> the klan is what we would call today a domestic terrorist group. >> why would we call them domestic terrorist groups? >> because they try to use fear and force to change political environments. >> and what was the motivation for the use of fear and force. >> based on race and ethnicity. >> right. are you aware of the perception of many about how the power and the discretion at i.c.e. is being used to enforce the laws? and do you see any parallels.
>> i don't want see any parallels. >> i'm talking about perception. >> i do not see a parallel between what is constitutionally mandated as it relates to enforcing the law -- >> are you aware there's a perception -- >> i see no perception that puts i.c.e. in the same category as the kkk. >> what say the great debaters? niger innis and symone sanders. symone sanders, too far? >> you know, i think -- what we didn't play, chris, was before that the question of the kkk came up because senator harris was referring to comments that the president's nominee made calling the democratic party a neo-klannists, which i'm not sure what that is. without context, yes, i think folks would argue that equating the kkk to i.c.e. is reckless and irresponsible but that's not what senator harris did and her spokesperson is on record saying that's not what she said. she was talking about the perception and it is a fact that there are many people out there across the country -- myself
included, that feel as though i.c.e. currently operates with surgical precision in terms of picking out and hunting down folks in communities across this country based upon the color of their skin. >> based upon their legal status. >> based upon their legal status but also the color of their skin. let's not forget joe arpaio who would literally have officers stop folks driving because they looked -- >> joe arpaio got censured by the courts and found in contempt because he refused to stop it but let's get to you on this, niger. is this a question of context? >> absolutely not. what it is is a perversion of history. it is senator kamala harris spitting on the graves of thousands of african americans that were terrorized by the most powerful political domestic terrorist organization in the history of our country. >> how so? >> it is her showing -- how so? is she spitting on those graves? >> yes.
>> by comparing what i.c.e. is doing in upholding the constitution of the united states and the laws of our land and trying to pursue those who are breaking those laws versus the klan that was actually trying to burn the constitution, erode the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment of the constitution written for black americans so that they could be considered full citizens. the klan as an organized arm of the democratic party -- >> all right, all right, now we've gone -- now this is a bridge too far. >> why it is a bridge too far. >> senator harris -- >> what did i say that's untrue, symone. >> senator harris is on record saying she's talking about perception. when the nominee sitting in the hearing said you should not equate -- she said i'm talking about perception. but to say that, you know, she's spitting on the graves of black people. >> yes, she is. >> i think is just very ridiculous language and not
what's happening. >> let's push past the hyperbole and get to the policy. do you believe that whether or not eyes should be abolished. is that a legit question for democrats to be asking in your opinion, symone? is that something under you should be considering? >> i think for democrats that have come out on record that said they want i.c.e. to be abolished people should be asking those folks. but an overwhelming number of democrats have said we need to fix our broken immigration system and when it comes to i.c.e. perhaps we need to revisit it and there are many democrats, myself including, that believe i.c.e. is not operating inside its mission. it's not fully funded. it doesn't have the resources and directives and other sight it needs to carry out a stop properly. their job not to enforce the border. there's a separate entity to that. >> are you open to that suggestion? it's not about abolishing? that the last thing we need is less people keeping the border
safe but in terms of their mandate and how it's executed, would you be open to reviewing? >> i have strong libertarian instincts and any government entity needs proper oversight, supervision and direction. but that is not what the extremists in the progressive movement are doing. they are demonizing the thousands of decent i.c.e. officers that are trying to enforce our laws, including senator harris with her perception comparison of the klan to i.c.e. don't run away, symone. it was disgusting. >> i'm not running. it's on the record. >> and she is spitting --i will say it again. spitting on the memories of those who fought in the civil war and the civil rights revolution against the klan that terrorized black folk for over 100 years. >> just so we don't conflate history, to be clear -- look, senator harris is not apologizing for anything, i
think we can be sure. she's been clear about her position. >> because she has apologists like you symone defending this. >> did you just call me an apologist. >> i sure did. >> i think you need a history lesson, sir. >> oh, please, give it to me, symone. i want it. >> i think there's room to have a conversation of the lack of oversight that this government entity has and how they're carrying out their mission. there are questions and concerns many folks have. >> and niger walks that walk about oversight and being clear, making sure there's no violation within a mandate but, you know you were quick to say talk to the people who say they want to get rid of i.c.e. but i'm saying as a party you have to figure out who you endorse for positions of power whether it's congressional leadership or who will be on the ballot in 2020. they have to be straight because i think you're looking for a nice beating on that issue if you talk about abolishing i.c.e.
>> i think the overwhelming majority of democrats and even potential people that might want to throw their hat in the ring for president have been clear that it's not just about i.c.e., it's about our immigration policy as a whole and we need oversight and if you ask folks about what changes need to happen, sure, i.c.e. is part of that conversation but it's a smaller piece than the whole. we literally have -- the more meat on the bones the better. i talked to nancy pelosi, and i have to be honest, niger, i don't know if you heard the interview, i said you haven't gone toe to toe with trump, you let him run the fear and loathing and we saw it was a ruse, he stopped talking about it after the election day, the caravan caravanished as we're talking about it now but it's not funny, the demonizing he was doing that. you weren't in high dungeon about that the way you are now but let's stick apples to apples and she said i told the candidates wow won't beat him on his lies, you won't beat him during the campaign, now we'll take him on so i want to see what the democrats do. let's assess where we are.
blue wave, trump says no, no, no, i won, too, you don't make enough about my two seats that i won in the senate. niger, here is my point, he should have won more. this map was all about you guys, you have democrats sitting in states they don't belong in anymore. tester, he's from montana but that place isn't voting the way tester is now. you lost. joe manchin, all about trump, you lost that race. i think you should have won more. arizona, that's flake's seat, you should have won, you lost. why do you deserve a pat on the back for two seats when you should have had five. >> i won't spin here. the reality is even in seats that we won, that republicans won -- >> tight. >> be it georgia. >> tight. >> be it the battle in florida. extremely tight. way, way to tight for comfort and there is one thing to spin on air and give a particular perception, it's another thing what's going on behind closed doors. what's going on behind closed doors i guerin see the that
republicans and conservatives, those who want to keep this count ray constitutional reap -- republic. and not become some western european style democratic socialist entity are very concerned about our electorate and very concerned about our upcoming elections. >> reality is perception and symone the way you should be seeing it and what i've heard from your side is, no no, it's not about the fear of becoming a socialist republic, it's about not becoming an autocracy, that people rejected trump because they don't like the strong man talk, this is america, this isn't the philippines. what does that mean to your side in terms of how the capitalize? >> i think it was in addition to that chris i would say it's about the issues. look at nebraska. who expand and medicaid through a ballot measure when the republican governors would not, democrats now control -- now sit in the governors seats in michigan, wisconsin and pennsylvania where we didn't do too well in 2016 but are vital if we want to do
well in 2020 so democrats should look at the midterms and say we have a fighting chance and to borrow something my good friend tad divine said, as long as donald trump is president, we have a fighting chance. everywhere. we have to show up. we have to bring a message. that's what happened in the midterm election. we didn't get caught up in talking about donald trump. democrats talked about health care wages and the economy for middle-class americans and putting a check on the president when it came to the united states house of representatives. >> one of many silver linings in this election is an exit poll showed in florida where desantis won showed that 18% black women voted for desantis, the republican candidate, now governor-elect. that's a good sign. >> which exit poll was that? >> rasmussen. >> rasmussen? >> which exit poll? hmm. >> for republicans in the conservative movement, they have to find that gold or else we'll
be in trouble in 2020. >> pick the right polls otherwise you're looking for fool's gold my brother. thank you for being with me. symone, thank you. niger, equally, thank you. best to both of you. yesterday the president went bananas about mueller. he just did. now today he tried to project calm, bragging about how easily he answered the questions and all on his own. does corey lewandowski agree with that? of course he does. but can he justify it? we see, ahead. ♪ that's gillette clear gel. it goes on clear and keeps you fresh all day. and it doesn't leave white marks on your shirt. gillette clear gel antiperspirant. welcome to emirates mr. jones. just sit back, relax and let us entertain you... ...with over 3,500 channels of entertainment, including the latest movies and box sets from around the world. ( ♪ )
we even have live sports and news channels. ( ♪ ) and your free wi-fi will start shortly. enjoy your flight mr. jones. world's best inflight entertainment. fly emirates. fly better. world's best inflight entertainment. ♪ the whole world's coming together now ♪ amazon's black friday sale is on now! with deals in every department, low prices and free shipping on millions of items. the amazon black friday sale. on now! ♪ when the mailman delivered to the north pole? and we all had a front-row, shoulder-top seat at the parade? let's get back there. santa's wonderland at bass pro shops and now cabela's has what we've all been missing. with the arcades, rc trucks, crafts, even a picture with santa and it's all free. plus get extras for the family with a personalized christmas card package now only $5.
so lionel, what does 24/5 mean to you?rade well, it means i can trade after the market closes. it's true. so all... evening long. ooh, so close. yes, but also all... night through its entirety. come on, all... the time from sunset to sunrise. right. but you can trade... from, from... from darkness to light. ♪ you're not gonna say it are you?
a federal judge trump appointed sided with freedom today. our chief white house correspondent jim acosta is now back in and that press room breathed a sigh of relief i would assume in many instances because they now know something certain about their own ability to engage. but the president isn't backing down. what happens next? let's bring in corey lewandowski. good to have you here. former trump campaign manager. certainly understand the head and the president and co-author of trump's enemies. there should have been a whole chapter on me in that book given by what i hear from you guys. but nothing. good to have you as always. so let me ask you, do you think the president gets it? after the ruling today. it didn't seem so from what i heard, it didn't feel so from what sarah sanders tried to do in twisting the judge's ruling. >> look, i think the president understand what is the judge said and the judge said that this was not an issue of the first amendment, to be clear. this was an issue of due process
and it's my understanding -- and i'm not an attorney -- the judge reissue it had hard pass press credential to the cnn correspondent on the fact that he was not give an due process for that removal. so what the white house said is is he going to put a series of policies and procedures in place to dictate what the rules are in the press room. that doesn't mean you have to only ask one question at a time but if you don't follow the process they will have the opportunity to removing the press pass maybe. >> what's very important, tonight cbs white house correspondent major garrett, who i have great respect for, says there is no absolute path for the free press just to have no decorum in the room. and this man has covered the white house for a long time and he says he believes decorum should take place in the press room. >> starts at the top, my friend.
this president made a practice of disrespecting anyone he doesn't like. there's no one in that press room who comes close to addressing the president of the united states the way he addresses anyone he doesn't like. how sad, that the press has to be mindful not to play down to the standard of the president of the united states? and to be clear on the law because as you know i am a lawyer. the judge didn't say this isn't about the first amendment, he didn't rule on the first amendment but he said cnn is likely to win on the arguments which are pretty clear, we are on the side of expansiveness to the first amendment, as frustrating that has may be sometimes. he ruled on the fifth amendment because this was a tro and there was no process. the president violated two amendments. in my upon. one was ruled on today but the bigger point is the one you are making. decorum. the president says we should have decorum when in the last two weeks he's gone after black female journalists, he's gone after anybody he doesn't like, he calls them the ugliest names
in the world and now you'll say major garrett from cbs says there should be no absolute free pass? nobody said there should be but there shouldn't be for the president, either. shouldn't he act better than he does. >> chris, what i think you have to remember is the president has no obligation to hold a press conference or call on individuals but when you start a question to the president with "i'm going to challenge you" which is how jim started the question. they asked him to hand the microphone off. jim has had the opportunity to ask the president hundreds of questions over the last three or four years. this president answers hard questions. >> sometimes. often not. won't come on here. >> these questions and all questions cob asked in a manner which is respectful to the office of the president. >> how can you talk about jim acosta or anyone without first manning up and saying, look, the president's got to change the way he speaks. i'm going to challenge you is a triggering phrase when the president of the united states
says you're a nasty person. you're a bad person, you're the enemy of the people. come on, corey, it's not even a close call. >> here's the problem. the media has gone from reporting the news to making the news. they inject their own opinions on matter as they ask questions so that's not what it's supposed to be. >> the problem is there are lots of problems but you'll only own some of them that work for you. you can't say that the president isn't the one that is most violative of any sense of decency and decorum when it comes to our media culture. you can't say it. you've never heard a reporter say anything disrespectful to the president's face. you've never heard a reporter say to him "you're a bum. you're a liar. i think you're evil. they would never say that. but he would." >> chris, i think that it would serve both parties, both the press and the president and his administration very well to take these press conferences off
television and have real discussions, real dialogue and real issues being resolve sod that you're not on camera, neither the reporters or the press secretary, who's ever giving the briefings so they can report what was transpiring but i don't know why there would be pushback of taking those off television. >> i think the more transparency the better. i think he should have to come on all these; he should say all right, fine, i'll give that audience its respect. all we can control is what has to happen and thats is s what the law is about and the law was clear, the president can't pull a pass because he doesn't like what you're asking him. he'd like to. he said i'm going to make up rules and if he misbehaves i'll throw him out. it's not going to happen. you don't get to judge behavior. the rule for the secret service is whether or not you're a security risk, not a risk to his political health. >> but chris it's too bad we're in a day and age where we have to put specific rules in place -- >> we don't have to.
he wants to. he pulled the press pass. >> you can not have a free-for-all. you cannot have a free-for-all. >> it's one guy. >> one guy who refused to give up a microphone. >> he was asking a question and you sent the intern. to take it. you can criticize how he handled it. but to pull his pass? >> i'm not disagreeing with you. >> the judge said it was wrong. >> the judge said he was not given due process and the judge ruled he -- >> it was unconstitutional. >> well, he's been reinstated into the press pool. >> but why did it take a court of law for the president to do the right thing? why did the white house have to be told by a judge don't use infowars bs with america. don't use their tapes don't use their doctored tapes. >> there are all kinds of rules to get into the white house. >> security rules, not promise to say what the president wants. let me ask you something else. >> old on, let's be clear. jim was not banned from the white house. he was banned from coming in
without an escort. >> whatever. he wasn't allowed to do the job the way he was doing it before. >> as long as he had an escorting. >> he couldn't get into the main room. he doesn't need an escort. he's a journalist, he gets his badge like everybody else, he does his job. you like it, fine, you don't, too bad. fine, that's freedom of the press. the president was saying i did all the answers to the question myself, they were easy. why doesn't he hand them in? >> i think the president has met with his legal team. they've gone through and i'm sure the president did answer the questions himself. >> why don't they hand them in to mueller? >> let me tell you -- look, i've already said i'm not an attorney. >> you don't have to be one. >> i see absolutely no benefit of the president having a conversation with bob mueller, submitting questions. he's gone above and beyond what he's had to do. >> he has not. >> he's willing to submit the questions because he know there is has been no collusion. >> then hand the questions -- hand the answers in.
>> chris, chris, let's find out what the ig says as they're going through -- >> what. >> -- what ig? >> the department of justice inspector general who said peter strzok and lisa page had a plan. >> they issued their report. >> that's not true. >> what are you talking about? the ig came out with a report. >> part of it. part of that report is done. the criminal referral for andy mccabe has not been followed up. james comey lying to congress, called perjury hasn't been followed up on. as it relates to bob mueller, this president says you can continue your investigation, he's done nothing to prevent it from happening rod rosenstein has complied -- >> she should comply ask hand in the questions and see what happens next. >> corey lewandowski, thank you for answering the questions on cuomo prime time. appreciate it. have a good weekend. >> have a good night. the president loves to say he has a hot white house. everyone wants to work in it, right? wrong. we know that's not true. i'll tell you who doesn't want
to work it. somebody married to somebody famous and important. there's a story that's gotten too big for me to ignore so i'll take it on with don lemon next. people are really excited about the new iphone xr! and it's incredible camera this weekend join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr, on us! i can bearly contain myself this weekend join t-mobile, get the iphone xr on us. ♪ ♪
♪ the best are back. applebee's bigger, bolder grill combos. now that's eatin good in the neighborhood. now that's eatin good you ok there, kurt? we're about to move. karate helps... relieve some of the house-buying... stress. at least you don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. call geico. geico... helps with... homeowners insurance? been doing it for years. i'm calling geico right now. good idea! get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be.
if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections
or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach. a book that you're ready to share with the world? get published now, call for your free publisher kit today!
all right. you hit me on twitter at @chriscuomo, see if you agree or you don't. but this next story, there's something about it that really bothers me, but it's in the news too much. can't ignore it. george conway, who just happens to be married to white house counselor kellyanne conway, is all over the president. here's what he said to yahoo news skullduggery podcast about why he withdrew his name for consideration for a job in trump's doj. >> it's like the administration is like a [ bleep ] show in a dumpster fire. and i'm like, i don't want to do that. i don't know. and then it's like -- then you got the comey firing. and then you've got him going on tv saying, i had russia on my mind. and it's like, oh, no. >> that's how i am when i hear him talking about this stuff when his wife works for the president. let's bring in d. lemon. how do you feel about it, don? >> he's trolling his wife. how do i -- honestly, you want to know how i feel about it? >> always.
>> i don't really care honestly. >> see, i do. >> i don't really care. i just think that it's all the theater of the absurd, and i just think if it matters that much, i don't understand why they're even together. look, that's just what i'm saying. >> people can disagree about politics. i have no problem with that. i have no problem with -- >> this is not politics, chris. i keep telling you this is not politics. this is about right versus wrong. >> but that's not what he's talking about. >> lying versus telling the truth. he's basically saying every time he trolls the white house is that what you're saying is absurd and ridiculous. you're lying to the american people, and his wife is the person who comes out. she is the spokesperson. >> right. so isn't he disrespecting his wife? >> you just made my point for me. >> right, but he's married to her. how do you do that? >> well, she's an adult. he's an adult. they can say what they want. >> no, they can't. they're married. you respect the relationship. you and i are boys. if somebody was coming -- i would never dog you like that. we're friends. you're my friend.
my loyalty is to you. i'm not going to go out of house. >> it doesn't mean we have to agree, though. >> yeah, but i'd say it to you. i wouldn't say it on tv. >> yes. if we disagree on fundamental things, chris, we would probably not -- we can have a difference of opinions on things. >> right. >> but if you disagree on the fundamentals, what is right, what is wrong, what is true, what is false, what is reality versus what's not reality, what is a fact versus an alternative fact. if you disagree on those things, then i can't even be friends with someone like that. i heard someone on the radio the other day, and they were friends with two people in the administration, right? and i'm just not going to give names. >> i gotcha. >> and they said, i've been friends with them for years, and what am i supposed to do, not be friends with them because i disagree with them? well, yeah. if your friend is espousing policies that are detrimental to women, that are detrimental to gay people, that are detrimental to minorities, whatever, and is on the wrong side of history and is seen as racist and on and on,
then i think you need to rethink your friendship with them and -- >> all right. i get your analysis about that. >> so i think it's the same thing with a relationship. >> yeah. see, that's where i'm different than you on this one. >> okay. >> they're married. and if he had that big of a fundamental problem, maybe they wouldn't be married, but they are, and they got beautiful kids. they've got a beautiful family. >> i see them out. i wish them the best. but you were asking me my opinion. >> i know. i always want it. >> i couldn't do it. >> i always want it. >> it's interesting. have you heard about the kansas guy, the guy on the council who is talking about being part, on tape, of the master race? >> yes. >> we're going to debate that. >> good. call it out. i love it. i love it, d. lemon. i'll see you in a second. >> see you. >> i love that d. lemon. but come on. marriage? a little different than whether you're just friends. all right. so the press won a big battle against the president today. it did, but challenges lie ahead. and there are some points that we must all be on the same page about, and that's the closing argument next. ♪
comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business.
beyond fast. all right. a judge made the law clear to the white house. the press has the right to ask what it wants, all right? now the question is what happens next? and i argue the real trouble may lie ahead. here's what the president said right after the ruling. >> it's not a big deal. what they said, though, is that we have to create rules and regulations for conduct, et cetera, et cetera. we're doing that. we're going to write them up right now. it's not a big deal. and if he misbehaves, we'll throw him out, or we'll stop the news conference. >> denying due process is a big deal, and of course the president can leave whenever he wants or he can choose not to come at all. he just can't force us to leave when he doesn't like the question. again, the law is clear. press passes are denied if someone is deemed a security risk. the truth may hurt trump, but
that doesn't make it a security risk. in fact, the truth actually increases the security of everyone else because letting the powerful say whatever they want and letting them silence what they don't like, that's a risk. trump may like leaders who do that, right? you've heard him talk about kim, duterte, putin. but america has never cottoned to strong men. and then today he said this about the first amendment. >> i will say this, look, nobody believes in the first amendment more than i do. >> ironic given he is losing a court battle in which he is fighting to abridge free speech. but as always, president trump saying something doesn't make it true. the truth is in his actions. this goes also for his call for decorum. >> what a stupid question that is. that's okay. i know you're not thinking. you never do. you are a rude, terrible person. you're creating violence by your questions. that's such a racist question. >> that is this president's idea
of decorum. be clear about this. the current state of play is that we in the media make sure not to stoop to the level of the president of the united states when it comes to decorum. how sad is that? but here's the proof. you've never seen anyone in that briefing room ever address the president in any way like the way that he routinely addresses them. there's an old expression. news is what the powerful don't want to talk about. everything else is advertising. we saw today that our laws protect our right to speak truth to power, to ask what they don't want, and not to just let the powerful, even the president, spew what is, in effect, advertising. trump has rallies for that. for everyone else, let freedom reign and let the questions fly. trump doesn't have to answer them, but he can't stop them from coming. to paraphrase the president himself, elvis may have left the house, but jim acosta and cnn will be back in the building. that's all for us tonight.
thank you for watching. "cnn tonight with don lemon" starts right now. i'm giving you an extra minute of show because you're pretty. >> well, er. it should be er than you. so listen, i appreciate that. i was at the barber today. >> fresh cut. looks nice. >> you said something i thought was pretty profound, and i thought it was right on the mark. it was surprising coming from you. i think you said -- and correct me if i'm wrong -- a gentleman called in, and he said, oh, why do you always go after one side and that you're not fair to -- you're always pointing out one side. you said, that's because one side is in power. you can't give a false equivalence to balance, right? it's not like the jets versus the rams or whatever because one is in power, the other one isn't. it's not like two sporting teams. and i think people get that
mixed up all the time, especially when we're talking about this. when you're talking about jim acosta even at the white house, right? the president is in power. he deserves to be challenged, and that's not always done in a nice way. >> yeah. and, look, one of the main problems we have -- and i don't know how we get past it to be honest -- is if you're not going to be honest, it's hard to be civil. >> yeah. >> and you can't say that jim acosta, hey, man, he's too aggressive. okay. maybe. maybe not. >> you can debate that. you can debate his style. >> if you feel, hey, you got to be more respectful when you talk to the president, fine. but then you better apply your sense of civility and standards to the president. and when he talks to the people in the media and people he doesn't like, like they were dogs, then you better call that out. and his people won't own it. and that's the problem. even corey lewandowski, and i respect him for coming on the show. i really do. it's important to hear the voices that are close to the president.