tv CNN Newsroom with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto CNN May 7, 2019 7:00am-8:00am PDT
here'sshow me making it. like. oh! i got one. the best of amy poehler. amy, maybe we could use the voice remote to search for something that you're not in. show me parks and rec. from netflix to prime video to live tv, xfinity lets you find your favorites with the emmy award-winning x1 voice remote. show me the best of amy poehler, again. this time around... now that's simple, easy, awesome. experience the entertainment you love on x1. access netflix, prime video, youtube and more, all with the sound of your voice. click, call or visit a store today.
it is 10:00 a.m. in the east. i'm jim sciutto. poppy is off today. and the hour has arrived for president trump's former white house counsel, don mcgahn, to give the house judiciary committee potential evidence that the president obstructed justice. if he complies, house dems will get a look at notes and files related to several key episodes in the mueller report. if he does not, it will set up yet another constitutional showdown that could lead to another contempt of congress vote. the first is set for tomorrow against the attorney general himself for refusing to turn over the mueller report without redactions, along with the underlying evidence. staff for both sides will meet one last time some time today in search of a possible compromise. all of this brings me to cnn's phil mattingly on capitol hill. so how does it look for barr avoiding a contempt vote tomorrow?
is there any chance that these negotiations get somewhere? >> look, it's a heavy lift. and i think when you listen to what both sides have said, the justice department in their letter yesterday, house judiciary democrats, they have made clear this will be a good-faith effort twine the time-out staffs to try to figure out some type of compromise over the course of today, but the reality remains the contempt vote remains on the schedule for tomorrow, and what house democrats have requested, not just the unredacted mueller report but also all of the underlying materials including grand jury material, has been something that attorney general bill barr and his team have said they're not willing to do, particularly on the grand jury issue, saying they don't believe they have the legal grounds to do it. house democrats have said you can go to court and get that information. that's what we expect you to do. that's kind of a pretty major divide. because of that fact, because of where the negotiations have been in fits and starts over the last couple weeks, there's no real expectation at this point they will reach an agreement. the contempt vote still on the schedule for tomorrow. after that, if they do take the vote and house democrats have the votes for it, it would go to the house floor.
the back and forth we have seen not just in judiciary, but several other committees as well seems to be escalating even as negotiations continue. >> beyond the documents from mcgann, the question is will he come to testify later this month? they want to speak to him. will he? >> it's an open question. this is why the deadline that just passed a couple minutes ago, how don mcgahn and his legal team respond to the subpoena request for documents that were due today, a couple minutes ago, on three dozen topics is really interesting and indicative in terms of whether or not he intends to testify. the president and his team have made clear they're considering executive privilege. house democrats don't believe they have grounds on that because of the testimony that is now public from don mcgahn, because he's no longer a white house official, but what this all seems to point to, depending on how don mcgahn's legal team responds is this will likely also be headed to court. really interesting to see how this plays out throughout the course of the day. house democrats clearly want don mcgahn to testify. the white house doesn't seem too keen on it. how it ends up is probably going
to be in the hands of a judge. >> a lot of judges, a lot of courtrooms. phil mattingly, thanks very much. let's speak to a former federal prosecutor and former assistant watergate prosecutor, john sale. great to have you on this morning. >> good morning, jim. >> i thought this issue of subpoenas was settled in watergate. it went to the supreme court, nicken lost. subpoenas need to be enforced. >> subpoenas do need to be enforced. they're enforced by a court if they're resisted. the watergate case was very narrowly decided. it dealt with a trial subpoena for certain tapes. but the court did recognize that executive privilege is legitimate, and they said it's founded in the separation of powers. so it's an open question because here, there is a separation of powers, it's the legislative branch. and our system is going to work if it goes to court. it's not a constitutional crisis. because there are not two branches of government. there's a third. and if the court decides it, then i presume the president will honor the subpoena.
>> so what is a court likely to decide in this case based on executive privilege? because does executive privilege apply if there is evidence, for instance, the president obstructed justice? >> the real issue is whether or not it's been waived by allowing, for example, mcgahn to talk to -- >> the special counsel. >> the special counsel for 30 hours. the argument is it's already out there, he's waived it. on the other hand, the white house could argue that we shared it with the executive branch. that's not necessarily a waiver to the legislative branch. once again, the judiciary will decide. >> understood. okay. there are a lot of prosecutors. there's 600 of them, and i know you did not sign on to this letter, but these are prosecutors who served both republicans and democrats who take issue with the special counsel himself, robert mueller, for not making a decision. but also specifically rejecting barr's opinion here, saying that
there is no prosecutable obstruction of justice by the president. do you agree with that criticism? >> i didn't sign the letter because i agree with part and i disagree with part. >> what do you agree with? >> i agree that under the rules that mueller followed, it didn't say he may decide. it said he shall. so he should have said one way or the other whether he would have prosecuted the president. he could have said i would prosecute him, but i can't because of the olc opinion or he could have said there's not sufficient evidence. i think there, mueller didn't do what he was supposed to. on the other hand, i wouldn't sign it because i don't think prosecutor decisions are made by vote. i think that i don't care how many people say what they would have done, the buck stopped with attorney general barr. mueller didn't decide. a prosecutor decision is made by the executive branch, not by the congress. >> tell me about your review of barr's decision then, not to say that there is no -- there was
was no obstruction. >> in the mueller report, i have read it cover to cover, appendic appendicis, foot notes. they point out a lot of assertions there, the ten instances of obstruction, were not tested where they're factually correct. a quick example, from my watergate experience. don mcgahn talks about he wanted to avoid and he did avoid a saturday night massacre. jim, i was there at the saturday night massacre. i was fired. on national television. nobody got fired here. john dean, he got out of dodge. he got out of the white house because he saw what was going on. don mcgahn remained for 18 months. now, if he thought that this was a debt of corruption, why didn't he leave? so all i'm saying is -- >> isn't the only difference that those orders from the president were not carried out by the president's aides in this case? in other words, they thought he was issuing orders. the only reason the folks didn't get fired is because folks like
don mcgahn said no? >> well, the president takes a different view. the president says, and i'm not defending the president. the president says i thought there was a conflict. and that's what should be explored. now, maybe the president's not telling the truth. and maybe he is. but it hasn't been tested. the one thing about the mueller report that people are missing is i think they're a terrific group of lawyers, not a witch hunt, but they're prosecutors. prosecutors give one side of something. they're not judge, jury, and executioner. let me say one quick thing. in the four-page summary, if you want to call it that, that the attorney general wrote, that everyone is all over him for, he did throw in that, hey, on obstruction, the prosecutor is not -- the president is not exonerated. let me tell you something, i have been a white-collar defense lawyer. i'm in miami now, for a long time. i have never gotten an exoneration for a client. prosecutors don't exonerate. they absolutely don't.
i would love to get one. they prosecute or don't prosecute. >> understood. binary decision, as barr has said. jon sale, thanks very much. we have news just in just moments ago, the fbi director, christopher wray, pushing back on the use of the term spying when it comes to government surveillance during the russia investigation. that, of course, is the word the attorney general bill barr used last month during a congressional hearing with the president picked up on. >> well, that's not the term i would use. >> thank you. so i would -- i would say that's a no to that question. >> well, i mean, look. lots of people have different colloquial phrases. i believe the fbi is engaged in investigative activity and part of investigative activity includes surveillance activity of deshapes and sizes. to me, the key question is making sure that it's done by the book. >> very different picture, jessica schneider, is it not
from bill barr, who raised spying, says he's investigating now the investigators, the opening of this investigation, but wouldn't it be the fbi that would be investigating? if the fbi director says it wasn't illegal, where does that leave us? >> well, the fbi director, christopher wray, there dancing very carefully in this exact same committee hearing where it was william barr just about a month ago who used that term spying that of course sort of raised some eyebrows when he used that term instead of the term surveillance. the fbi director this morning just a few minutes ago saying that that isn't a term he would use. and then going on to say that all of the warrants the fbi secured, they were all adhered to. they were all gotten legally. they went through the court process. so let's take you back to a month ago when the attorney general made that -- gave that phrase, used the word spying when talking about some of those surveillance efforts. here it was.
>> i think there was spying that did occur. yes, i think spying did occur. >> well, let me -- >> the question is whether it was predicated, adequately predicated. i'm not suggesting it wasn't adequately predicated, but i need to explore that. i think it's my obligation. >> so senator jeanne shaheen from new hampshire doing the questioning of william barr there a month ago. then today, getting to ask now the director of the fbi that exact same question. whether or not he believed it was spying. and jim, the director this morning just a few minutes ago saying that is not the term he would use. and then he went even further, among additional questioning from the senator shaheen, she asked in general, do fbi agents secure warrants for any type of surveillance? to that, the director answered wr yes. then she went a step further and said for this particular surveillance, of course, talking about carter page, who had been part of the trump campaign, but at the time the surveillance
began was no longer partf the campaign, she said specifically for that surveillance, were there warrants issued. the director said this is public knowledge, yes. we went through the warrant process. finally, do you have any evidence that any illegal surveillance by the fbi occurred? that was the question from the senator. and director wray saying i don't have any personal knowledge or evidence of that, no. >> but he also said, just to be clear, jessica, bill barr raised the possibility that those warrants were not adequately predicated. in other words, they didn't have the justification to do it. do i hear the fbi director correctly there saying all the warrants issued were issued correctly, therefore it was adequately predicated? >> yes, and senator shaheen went very carefully point by point here to make sure that that point stood out. she said, in general, do fbi agents go through this warrant process? the answer was yes. and then specifically, for this surveillance of carter page that went through the fisa courts, did that go through the right
process? the fbi director there saying yes, it went through the exact process that it had to go through. so not only discrediting the use of the term spying, but then also saying no, we went through the proper channels here and got the proper checks to get this warrant. >> that is quite a remarkable contradiction there. jessica schneider, thanks very much. with me is democratic congressman ro khanna of california. he serves on the oversight, budget, and armed services committee. thanks for taking the time this morning. >> jim, good to be on. >> so that's quite a moment there. you remember the consternation and outrage when the attorney general said under questioning from the same senator, jeanne shaheen, a month ago, there was spying and now i'm going to investigate whether that spying was justified on the trump campaign. you have the fbi director there saying no, these warrants were issued and sought legally. it had the proper justification, et cetera. does that mean that question of spying is closed? or illegal spying, i should say,
is closed? >> it should be. it's another instance of one part of the administration contradicting another part. i mean, it's pretty remarkable that the fbi director is basically contradicting the attorney general. and what we all know is this was a counterintelligence operation. i mean, any american would want to make sure if there was foreign interference that the fbi would investigate that. the campaign, the trump campaign, wasn't a target. what they were concerned about is whether russia was infiltrating american democracy. >> okay. i want to get to politics today, because i'm sure you noticed gallup has a new poll out about the president's arrival rating. now the highest by gallup's terms of his presidency. this has bieen a pretty balance poll throughout. up to 46%, seven points up from march. these numbers struck me as well, when you go party by party, republicans supported approval for this president has been high, 90% to 91%. but look at democratic approval, doubling, 6% to 12%.
i wonder how concerned you are about those numbers as we head to 2020. >> they are the highest they have been for president trump, but i'm not concerned for three reasons. first, they're still well below 50%. >> four points below. not far out of the margin of error. >> most presidents to get re-elected, you have to be over 50%, especially for this president. he has to win pennsylvania, michigan, and wisconsin. we won governors there, we won house seats there. i think the democrats will look good heading into 2020 in those blue states. finally, and the most important thing, even though the president keeps touting macroeconomic statistics, most americans haven't had an economic boom in their pocketbooks. their wages haven't kept up with the cost of living. >> but listen, you have 3.8% unemployment at this point. you have a stock market way up. folks will be looking at their retirement accounts. those are going to look good. people have money to spend. i just wonder if you're concerned, as the democratic
leadership is concerned, nancy pelosi has talked about this publicly, that focusing too much on investigations will turn voters away. and i wonder if you see a signal about that in the president's approval rating, even in the midst of all these investigation headlines over the last couple weeks. >> jim, two points. first, most americans get that the tax cuts were skewed to the wealthy. and they haven't seen an increase in their pocketbooks. while people who have a lot of stock invested, they may be doing well, ordinary working-class americans aren't getting the pay raises they deserve. >> their 401(k)s are doing good. >> but not everyone has 401(k)s. to your other point, i think nancy pelosi has proposed a $2 trillion infrastructure bill. chuck schumer proposed it, donald trump proposed it. we're ready to work on that. here's what happened. ask mitch mcconnell is he willing to support the president? ask the president's own chief of staff whether mick mulvaney is
willing to support the president. the problem is the democrats are willing to take action. it's the president who isn't able to get his own party on board with a $2 trillion infrastructure. >> we had an interesting moment on this broadcast last week. ted lieu coming out of the barr hearing said that even though the democratic leadership is not interested in pursuing impeachment proceedings, that many members of the democratic caucus are, and that he and others support going forward. would you agree with going forward with impeachment proceedings based on what you know today? >> i'm not there yet. i'm where nancy pelosi is, that we have to first do our job. we have to have bob mueller testify. let's hear from bob mueller what the evidence was, what his view is on the conclusions. let's hear from don mcgahn. let's have the committees do their work. i don't think we should rush to judgment or open that kind of a proceeding before first doing our work. and i think the majority of the democratic caucus is there. i have great respect for ted lieu. but i think nancy pelosi has her pulse on the democratic caucus.
>> ro khanna, always good to have you on. thanks very much. >> thank you, jim. still to come this hour, the dow takes a hit as the trade war with china heats up. look at that, down more than 300 points. we're on top of it. >> plus, mayor pete buttigieg confronts his lack of african-american support head on. >> and mike pompeo snubbed a meeting with angela merkel. why? dad, we need to talk about something important. you don't need to go anywhere dad, this is your home. the best home to be in is your own. home instead offers personalized in-home services for your loved ones. home instead senior care. to us, it's personal.
home instead senior care. forget about vacuuming for weeks. the (new) roomba i7+ with clean base automatic dirt disposal empties the roomba bin for you. so dirt is off your hands. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba. there is wisdom in how nature protects and it inspired an all-new toothpaste from burt's bees®. it fights cavities and freshens breath. made with ingredients you can trust. for a smile that's a true force of nature. new burt's bees® toothpaste.
street is therefore nervous. the dow is down more than 300 points, just under 300, as the trump administration threatens more tariffs and china's top negotiator is set to arrive in washington this week. joining me now, chief business correspondent, christine romans, and cnn international correspondent matt rivers. christine, it's a key week here. bethe sides are pretty far apart. >> they're moving farther apart. what we heard from the american team is they thought that the
chinese were backsliding. that they had made some promises in these ten rounds of negotiations and then suddenly those promises, they wouldn't put them on paper. that was a real problem for this administration and for the president. look, the president has already punted twice officially on this deadline to move tariffs from 10% to 25% on $200 billion worth of everything from food to bicycle helmets to shoes. the kinds of things you go out and buy. and he was patient in january. he was patient in march. now he's not patient anymore and he's given american businesses five days to realize that he wants to put more tariffs on. >> quickly, who pays for tariffs? >> the american companies who import paper tariffs. the president always says he's taxing the chinese government. he's not. it's the american companies. >> matt rivers, you have the top chinese negotiator coming to the u.s. later this week. i mean, is this a last ditch effort to rescue these talks? where do we stand? >> i think it shows that the
chinese really want a deal to happen. after the president's tweets, there was a lot of speculation the chinese might just call off the talks for this week entirely. we really weren't sure which way they were going to go, but the fact that the top chinese economic negotiator is still leading that delegation to d.c., i think shows you a couple things. one, it shows they're taking this tariff threat from the president extremely seriously. they don't want these tariffs enacted. i think the other thing they're doing is showing they want a deal to happen. china wants to come to some sort of a deal, and they know unless they have their top guy there in d.c. who led the negotiations from the beginning, that no deal is going to happen. beijing is going to say they don't want to negotiate under threat, but at the same time, they didn't cancel these talks, and that means something. >> christine, china cheats in these trade talks. they steal u.s. secrets. that is agreed. but what the u.s. is essentially asking china to do is change its entire economic strategy. >> right, and that's a hard sell
inside the chinese power structure because china has risen to become a developed country essentially with a state-run economy, and it's elements of that state-run economy that the americans disagree with. you know, they don't think you should have to sign over your intellectual property right when you want to do business in china. they think you should be able to crack down on property theft and cyber theft of trade secrets. these are things american businesses have complained about for so long. it's a contradiction for business. they hate tariffs, hate tariffs. they also don't like the way china plays in the global stage. so they have also profited from outsourcing so much of their manufacturing. this is in a funny position here. >> and difficult to stick their heads above the ramperts. thanks very much. >> presidential candidate pete buttigieg is asking for help again for reaching african-american voters. what does he need to do to gain
youfor you to get engagedlly love forto rachel.day this year? but if you're not "ready", you know who else likes jewelry? momma. get engaged this mother's day or get mom something special. jared. last year, the department of veteran's affairs partnered with t-mobile for business, to help care for veterans everywhere. with va video connect, powered by t-mobile, men and women who serve can speak to their doctors from virtually anywhere, and get the care they deserve, so they can return to their most important post. best friend, quarterback, or just dad. the va provides the care, t-mobile provides the coverage. woman: ahh! need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites and lets you see how your baggage will affect the cost of your flight, so you can be confident
you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done. eh, not enough fiber... chocolate would be good... snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar. glucerna. everyday progress let's see, aleve is than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills. so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain. hmm. exactly. and doug. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner?
oh. well, we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance, because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. [ loud crash ] yeah. he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. i need help. so the black voters who know me best, the people of south bend, helped return me to office by an overwhelming margin. but out here, people are just getting to know me. and trust in part is a function
of quantity time. >> that was presidential hopeful pete buttigieg seeing a problem as he campaigned for 2020. his crowds in south carolina showing very little diversity in a state where the electoral is overwhelmingly african-american. let's discuss with keith boykin. buttigieg conscious there that he's not energizing african-american voters which he'll need to win the nomination. why is that? >> well, i think it's important acknowledgment on his part. black voters made up 61% of the vote in south carolina in 2016. any candidate who hopes to win in 2016 is going to have to get that vote. i don't think people know who pete buttigieg is right now. people don't know any of the candidates right now, 22 candidates right now or something like that, and people are just now getting introduced to them. joe biden right now is leading in the black vote. he has a history because he has
a long record of working in african-american communities, but also because he was associated with the most popular african-american president. the only african-american president, barack obama. so that actually helps him and works in his favor. >> i'm curious, he has said that once african-americans get to know him, as they did in south bend, indiana, where of course, he's mayor, that they end up supporting him. so is the key in your view as you were saying really whether they know him as opposed to what they know about him? >> it's both. even if they do like him, remember, there are other candidates in the race, three african-american candidates in the race. and joe biden has the support being associated with barack obama. so there's no guarantee they're going to drift to pete buttigieg even if they learn more about him because there are other options. remember what happened in 2008 and 2016. in 2008, hillary clinton was leading in the black vote, all the way up until iowa, when barack obama won the iowa
caucus. suddenly, the black vote shifted to barack obama. but there's no guarantee that even though biden is winning the black vote now, he'll continue having that after next year. >> we forget history quickly. >> we do. >> unassailable front-runners. this issue about lack of excitement and name recognition for a candidate like buttigieg, kamala harris, african-american, but she and cory booker to some extent, face a similar problem. >> they do, and again, they're facing the barack obama problem from 2008 in that people, either they may like the candidate or they don't know the candidate, but they don't think that candidate can win. i think a lot of black people in 2008 had that same sentiment. we may like obama but we're not sure if he can win. i think the issue with kamala harris is she talks about electability. she made a great speech about that the other day to the naacp, and she countered the narrative that you can't win if you're not a white male. one of the great arguments against that is the fact that the two people who got the most votes for the presidency in our history, one was barack obama in 2008 and 2012, and second was
hillary clinton. neither one were white men and they both got more votes than donald trump. it's not clear just because she's not a white man that she can't win, and you can't also ignore the fact she's a senator from california. once people get to know her, we start having debates, people have a better chance of understanding and weighing how the candidates stand up on the stage. >> that could provide one of those turning moments you talk about, right, where the unassailable leader may no longer be so unassailable. keith boykin, great to have you on. >> just minutes from now, the president will join the first lady in the rose garden to push forward her be best campaign. today marks one year since melania trump launched the platform to help children focusing on their wellbeing, their social media use, as well as opioid abuse. but her campaign has also done something else, put the spotlight on the very different contradictory message that her husband is sending, particularly online. the attacks are frequent and they're widespread, from special
counsel robert mueller to the mayor of san juan, puerto rico, even the late senator john mccain, who he attacked just this past march, going after senator mccain for his vote against repealing and replacing obamacare. trump would later go on to call mccain last in his class. is that be best? and look at the 2020 democratic field. he called joe biden sleepy. bernie sanders crazy. elizabeth warren, pocahontas and goofy. beto o'rourke, he calls him a flake. kirsten gillibrand, a lightweight. you get the idea. but when it comes to the first lady's be best initiative, it does not seem that the president gets the message. >> secretary of state mike pompeo is skipping a planned trip to germany, but no one knows where he is headed next. a live report on that abrupt change of plans coming up. drivers just wont put their phones down.
brought to you by geico. yesss, i'm doing it all. the water. the exercise. the fiber. month after month, and i still have belly pain and recurring constipation. so i asked my doctor what else i could do, and i said yesss to linzess. linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess is not a laxative, it works differently. it helps relieve belly pain and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. i'm still doing it all. the water. the exercise. the fiber. and i said yesss to linzess
for help with belly pain and recurring constipation. ask your doctor. with moderate to severe ulceratiyour plans... crohn's, can change in minutes. your head wants to do one thing... but your gut says not today. if your current treatment isn't working... ask your doctor about entyvio®. entyvio® acts specifically in the gi tract, to prevent an excess of white blood cells from entering and causing damaging inflammation. entyvio® has helped many patients achieve
long-term 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®. ask your doctor about the only gi-focused biologic just for ulcerative colitis and crohn's. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.
the state department is staying tight lipped about secretary of state mike pompeo's travel plans after he abruptly canceled a trip to germany just this morning. pompeo was scheduled to meet with german chancellor angela merkel this afternoon, but the state department canceled the meeting citing pressing issues. what are those pressing issues? michelle kaczynski joins me now. michelle, as you know, the press pool traveling with pompeo say they have want been told where they're going next. do we know why the cancellation and where they're going? >> no, the state department isn't giving any detail now.
just as you said, they're calling it a pressing issue. the pool was told we need to leave. we're going to this undisclosed location. and by the way, once you get there, you may not be able to report on it or tell anybody about what's going on there until you leave this location. so the question is, how urgent is this matter that the secretary of state needs to go to this location? what will he be doing here, or is this a show of support? you know, there's a lot of lack of clarity there, obviously, but the state department generally acts this way over travel when the secretary would be going to an area of open hostility, a war zone, so let that guide your thinking on where exactly he could be touching down within the next several hours, jim. >> all right. big u.s. carrier group going to the persian gulf now. u.s. officials are saying this is in response to a specific and credible threat. what is that threat?
>> yeah, so this was a threat that iran or its proxies were targeting u.s. assets in the middle east or u.s. allies. so the u.s. had this carrier group in the adreattic sea. on sunday, the move came to suddenly move it to near the strait of hormuz in the gulf. so the u.s., there's been speculation while this was planned for some time, but the administration is insisting this is based on urgent information that iran was planning an attack. so they wanted to move this group there as a show of force. and also, according to national security adviser john bolton, to send a message if iran does try to attack u.s. assets or allies, it would be met with relentless force. so there's a lot of speculation that this pompeo unexpected trip is going to be in conjunction with this. something to do with iran. and that's something we're waiting to see, jim.
>> michelle kaczynski, thank you. >> houston police in a frantic search for a missing girl after her stepfather says she was abducted by three men. we'll have the latest next. hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ i had a few good tricks to help hide my bladder leak pad.
like the old "tunic tug". but always discreet is less bulky. and it really protects. 'cause it turns liquid to gel. so i have nothing to hide. always discreet. is your floor's best friend. only roomba uses 2 multi-surface rubber brushes to grab and remove pet hair. and the roomba filter captures 99% of dog and cat allergens. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba.
but how do i know if i'm i'm getting a good deal? i tell truecar my zip and which car i want and truecar shows the range of prices people in my area actually paid for the same car so i know if i'm getting a great price. this is how car buying was always meant to be. this is truecar. ( ♪ ) only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol®.
kentucky derby says he is not ready to give up. gary west, the owner of maximum security, says he will sue to overturn the decision made by the kentucky horse racing commission after they denied his appeal. cnn correspondent martin savidge is live in louisville, kentucky. i mean, this is such a historic turnaround here. is there any more recourse to try to get this victory back? >> well, if you listen to gary west, the owner, he believes his battle has only just begun. it does look exactly like we're sort of headed around the far turn and going straight into a courtroom when it comes to possibly changing the outcome of the 2019 kentucky derby. this appeal that was done to the kentucky horse racing commission
was pretty much dead on arrival. and that's because the law or the rules are very plain. they read, when it comes to the stewards disqualifying the horse, findings of fact and determinations shall be final and not subject to appeal. so the idea they tried to appeal in the first place was really, it seems, almost out ofdo desperation. in the appeals process, the argument was made by maximum security that this was a capricious decision made by the referees and they didn't have a lot of fact on which to base it. the referees said we had a lot of video and talked to the jockeys riding in the race. gary west was on tv last night. he's blaming another horse in the race. >> you will find that the one horse actually caused the infraction, not our horse. and if the one horse, i believe it will eventually show that if the one horse would have finished ahead of our horse, we would have had every right in the world to claim an objection.
>> so a lawsuit seems to be next. will it be state or federal court? that's the real question. federal court, it's rare that an outcome is overturned, but i didn't use the word never, so there could be some hope for maximum security. back to you. >> it just seemed like particular circumstances. martin savidge, thanks very much. president trump has pardoned a former army lieutenant who killed an iraqi detainee in 2009. military prosecutors say that michael behenna killed a suspected al qaeda terrorist to avenge the deaths of two soldiers who died in a roadside bombing. he claimed he was acted in self-defense. a military court sentenced him to 25 years in prison but that's been reduced on appeal and he's been out on parole since 2014. in a statement, the american civil liberties union called it a presidential endorsement of a murder that violated the
military's own code of justice. a frantic search is under way in houston for a 4-year-old girl reported missing last week. maleah davis's staepfather says three men abducted the girl, her brother, and him on friday night. the men knocked him unconscious. when he woke up 24 hours later, he says the men had released him and his 1-year-old son, but maleah was nowhere to be found. this as we're learning new details about the girl's home life before her disappearance. nick valencia joins me now. you're with a search party right now looking for this poor little girl. what are you learning? >> jim, there are a lot of gaps in the stepfather's story. he tells police on friday night he was on his waze to the archt with 4-year-old maleah and her 1-year-old brother to pick up the children's mother. he hears a sound in the car, he thinks he has a flat tire. he gets out to check that. that's when he tells police he was approached by two hispanic
men. next he he knows, he is knocked unconscio unconscious. it takes him about five hours to get medical treatment. it's then that he finally reports maleah missing. the mother was expecting to be picked up by the fiance, the stepfather and the two children. she doesn't file her police report until saturday morning. a lot of gaps in the stepfath stepfather's story. so far he's not a suspect, but police have been unable to corroborate or verify his story. >> the other information here is child protective services had been called to the home in the past. what do we know? >> yeah, family source tells me that it was late last year that maleah fell and hit her head on the edge of a table. the injury required two brain surgeries. it was discovered she had potential signs of physical abuse, prior trauma that led to the cps investigation. those children, maleah and her two siblings, were taken away only to be returned in february. a judge ordered them back to the
house, but child protective services was still visiting the family on a monthly basis. i have been texting with the mother over the course of the last two days. she said she's overwhelmed, extremely anxious and she said she's terrified for maleah dav s davis. ecuusearch has joined the search. they're known for their alternative methods of looking for people. this is the intersection where the stepfather remembers being. they're focused the search on this wooded area. >> listen, we hope there's a possibility of good news for this little girl. nick, thanks very much. time is running out. can house democrats reach a deal to see the unredacted mueller report or will they hold a vote to hold the attorney general in contempt? stay with cnn.
when they join t-mobile? iphone xr on us? yeah, iphone xr on us! what's not to love about that? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. my time is thin, but so is my lawn. now there's scotts thick'r lawn 3-in-1 solution. with a soil improver! seed! and fertilizer to feed! now yard time is our time. this is a scotts yard.
i think i found my dream car. it turns out they want me to start next month. she can stay with you to finish her senior year? of course she can! [ laughter ] [ groaning ] hey! want to drive? really? [ engine revs ] do you think we can do this, rob? things will be tight, but we can make this work. that's great. ♪ [ laughing ] okay... here we go. now... [ gasps ] wait... grandpa, what about your dream car? this is my dream now. [ laughs ] ♪ principle. we can help you plan for that.
when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org monitor their blood glucose every day. which means they have to stop. and stick their fingers. repeatedly. today, life-changing technology from abbott makes it possible to track glucose levels. without drawing a drop of blood, again and again. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest.
hello, everyone. i'm kate bolduan. thanks so much for joining me. spying or surveillance? that is again the question today as the director of the fbi breaks with the attorney general. it was just last month that bill barr used that very word, spying, when he told congress that he was concerned that the government had illegally spied on the trump campaign in 2016. and moments ago, the fbi director, chris wray, he distanced himself from that in testimony before the senate. watch this. >> well, that's not the term i would use. >> thank you. so i would say that's a no to that question. >> well, i mean, look, there are lots of people who have different colloquial phrases. i believe that the fbi is engaged in investigative