Transcripts For CNNW Anderson Cooper 360 20190112

Much at the moment to actually end it. Washington has been consumed by the question of whether President Trump would, for better or worse, really, truly pick up the mantle by declaring a National Emergency and just take the money to fund the border wall. Hes been flirting with the idea for days now. Today, though, he said not quite yet. Well, ill tell you what, its the easy way out. But congress should do this. This is too simple. Its too basic. And congress should do this. If they cant do it, if at some point they just cant do it, this is a 15minute meeting. If they cant do it, i will declare a National Emergency. So hes certainly not closing the door on it, but this is a bit of change. When we left it last night the white house was said to be laying the ground work, the legal ground work for an emergency declaration, including by using the word crisis over and over again at every public opportunity. As for the president he seemed ready to pull the trigger if not immediately, then certainly soon. I have the absolute right to declare a National Emergency. I havent done it yet. I may do it. If this doesnt work out, probably i will do it. I would almost say definitely. That almost definitely emergency seemed to morph into a maybe, possibly one at some future point in time which is a bit different in tone at least than how he was painting the border situation just this morning on twitter. He wrote, i just got back and it is a far worse situation than almost anyone would understand, an invasion. The president tweeted that following his thursday trip to mcallen, texas. I have been there numerous times the democrats dont know how bad and dangerous it is for our entire country. So keeping them honest, which is it . Is it far worse than almost anyone would understand, an invasion, as he says, or is it just one of those if i dont get what i want emergencies . Just a reminder, the dictionary definition of the word is an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that calls for immediate action, or an urgent need for assistance or relief. Which the president seems to be saying it is, even as hes now calling on others, not him to deal with it, in fairness theres nothing especially outlandish that lawmakers do what theyre supposed to do, what the Congress Gives them responsibility for, passing legislation to fund the government. However, the president now seems to be trying to have it both ways, telling democrats to do their jobs, but threatening to go around congress entirely if they dont deliver what he wants. Which, i suppose, makes it a crisis. A constitutional crisis. But perhaps not an emergency. And on top of all that is where the president may try to get the money after declaring a crisis that critics call a discretionary emergency. As we and others have been reporting the administration is actively exploring the possibility of funding the wall using money already allocated for recovery from real, undeniable, noncontroversial, youre damn well right they are, emergencies. Money for rebuilding puerto rico after hurricane maria, Disaster Recovery money in texas, florida, california, dollars to either rebuild or help prevent the very real disasters, the very Real National emergencies you see there on your screen. The president is eyeing money for that to pay for the wall which may or may not be an emergency, and may or may not be the answer to a crisis which in turn might or might not truly be a crisis. Some of this, as we said, is debatable. And, again, well have that debate. Whats beyond dispute, though, is there really is an emergency unfolding as we speak, as the mortgage comes due, the heating bill comes, the groceries run low. And what is soon to be the longest Government Shutdown drag on. More now from the white house, Cnns Jim Acosta is there for us tonight. Jim, whats going on there tonight . Reporter not a whole lot, john. They, over here at the white house, insist theyre doing everything they can possible to get this government open. But the president was saying earlier today that its really up to democrats to come back to the negotiating table. We saw the president earlier today, and you were just talking about those federal employees who are going to be going without any pay this weekend, you know, it took around 20 or 30 minutes of the president talking during a cabinet room earlier this afternoon, and i asked the president what was the message to federal employees and he said that he appreciated what theyre doing. And he essentially expressed his appreciation for hanging in there. But at the same time he repeated this rather dubious claim that a lot of federal employees support what hes doing, that hes shutting down the government in order to get funding for the wall on the border, at one point going after democrats on all of this. He said, listen, democrats can call the wall peaches if they want to. He said, just give me the money for this wall. So the president is somewhat walking back his comments about a National Emergency. But not ruling it out, correct . Hes not, john, thats right, i mean, he did say that there is the chance that he could declare a National Emergency, essentially hes back to where he was earlier this week, threatening to declare a National Emergency down on the border, basically describing that we have an emergency down on the border without pulling this trigger. The one wrinkle in all of this today, john, was he is essentially saying i know this is going to get challenged in the courts. He was predicting if it does get challenged in the courts he was saying its likely to get kicked back in the ninth Circuit Court of appeals, the bane of his existence going back to the travel ban and so on. But he said ultimately he hopes it will succeed in the supreme court. It was interesting to hear the president say today in the context of whether or not he should declare a National Emergency he does seem to understand that it would get tied up in the courts, and perhaps prevent him from building that wall, going down that route as well. And so he seems to be running out of options and i think thats why he was once again trying to paint the situation down on the border as a crisis. He once again said that were that the United States is under attack down at the border when all of the facts really do say otherwise, john. Are there any plans at this point for the president or any members of congress for that matter to work on this over the weekend . Well, we dont expect a whether or not he will lot of activity on that front. You know, the senate adjourned, they went home, congress, a lot of these members of congress have gone back to their districts. We do think over the weekend there listen phone calls that go on, mick mulvaney, the acting chief of staff will probably be in touch with people. You saw Lindsey Graham advocating that the president go ahead and declare a National Emergency and Start Construction on the wall of the border. Even after Lindsey Graham put out that tweet the president did not go down that road. It is kind of interesting and a curious moment for this white house where the president doesnt seem to have a viable option that theyre looking to at this point to get that wall that he wants down on the border, john. Meanwhile, 800,000 workers got zero on their paycheck today. Jim acosta, thanks for being with us. Congressman garamendi, speaking with bloomberg news, called Disaster Relief to wall building, reprehensible. He spoke with us earlier this evening. Congressman, the president shifting his tone today, saying right now hes not ready to declare a National Emergency. Does that ease your concerns at all . No, not at all. This is a guy that has five different opinions from morning till the next day. He shifts back and forth. Hes not at all consistent. But he has been saying for the last week that hes going to declare a National Emergency and build the wall. No, were not going to let that happen. Hes not going to go and do that and there will be a heavy price if he even tries to do it. I understand if the president does decide to do it, and you say you think he will, you have legislation prepared to stop him. How does this legislation work . Does this go to his power to declare a National Emergency, or is it more targeted than that . My legislation would be much more targeted, it goes directly at the authority that may exist today for the president to declare a National Emergency, and then go after the money that congress has already authorized and appropriated for civil works across the United States. These are levies. These are airports. These are operations, dredging operations, things of that sort. Wed simply repeal that section of the a law. He couldnt get the money. He could declare the emergency, but he couldnt get the money for it. Exactly. I would expect others to pass legislation or attempt to that would curtail the ability of the president to declare a National Emergency which in and of itself is a major problem for our constitutional civil rights. And will be challenged in the courts. Absolutely. Now, when the president talks about taking money away from Disaster Relief funding, and that is under consideration right now, can you explain what impact that would have on your district . It would be terribly, terribly serious, the Disaster Recovery money that was allocated last spring in the appropriation process is absolutely necessary to shore up the levies in the sacramento region. And for one of our communities that has 35 foot levies all around it within moments of a break in the levies that entire community of 14,000 people would be inundated in water that is very, very cold. There would be numerous, numerous deaths. So its a very serious problem of life, death and obviously property. And this isnt hypothetical, exactly. You were able to get some of the documents which list the specific projects being reviewed by the administration as it considers where to go after this funding . Absolutely. Its publicly available. On the army corps of websites theres all of the projects that the 2018 emergency appropriations for Disaster Recovery would be used for. Theyre laid out there. Most of these projects are going to go to bid and contract over the next few months. All of those are subject to the president ial whims. But we do know that specifically targeted were the projects in california, 2. 5 billion as well as puerto rico, another 2. 5 billion. Congressman, whats your message to the 800,000 people who did not get paid today, government workers who had zero on their paychecks given there were no negotiations as we speak to end the shutdown . Were trying. Weve been trying since the new congress was established, since the democrats came into power last thursday. That night we passed legislation that would reopen the government, send it over to the senate. The senate is sitting there, i suppose, waiting for it to hatch. The ball is in the senates court. The president says hell veto it. So theres where the problem lies right there. Were willing to continue to discuss this matter about how to wisely, appropriately, using the taxpayer money to secure the southern border. Congressman garamendi, thanks so much for being with us. My pleasure, thank you. Two views now on whether whats happening is a crisis as the president says and whether the wall is the right answer. These are two highly informed assessments from individuals with more direct experience on the subject than most of us will ever have. Yet, they disagree. Jorge ramos, and mark morgan who ran Border Patrol for the last six months of the Obama Administration and does support building a wall. Jorge, i wonder what goes through your mind when you hear its possible that the president might use Disaster Relief funds to pay for this wall. It would be completely absurd. Can you imagine the victims of puerto rico, the victims of hurricanes in texas or in florida, or the victims of fires and flooding in california, paying for a wall . A wall that is useless, that we dont need it right now when we dont have a real crisis, when its a manufactured crisis, it would be completely ludicrous. And its something that we should not do simply because someone, a politician, some point in his career he decided to promise a wall that we really dont need at this moment. Mark, i know you do support building a wall, which we will talk about extensively. But first, do you support using Disaster Relief funds to do so . Well, this is what i know. And for 30 years of federal Governmental Service i can tell you what we absolutely have on the southern border is a National Security and humanitarian crisis. Last year 400,000, a little less than 400,000 illegal aliens were apprehended, and thats just the ones we apprehended. I think the statistics could show we could easily double that and look at the numbers that we apprehended illegal aliens, take into consideration as well the facts are, and this is true, Human Trafficking routes are alive and well, drug smuggling routes through the southern border are alive and well. There are really bad people that are illegally entering this country every single day. Thats real. That crisis has to be addressed. And im going to give jorge a chance to respond to that. Theres no crisis. Its a manufactured crisis. When were talking about crisis, were talking about Something Like the war in iraq, or 9 11. There are about 700 miles of wall, physical barriers already between mexico and the United States. And those were created, those were built after 9 11. Thats a real crisis, not what donald trump and his followers are trying to promote right now. And then, mr. Morgan, where is the crisis . At this moment we have some of the safest communities in the country are along the border. At this moment, the number of undocumented immigrants has remained stable. As a matter of fact, it fell back to 7 million. And we really dont need a wall at this moment. Mark, hang on one second. I dont see the possibility of a crisis at this moment. Stick around, were going to pick this up after the break. An air Traffic Controller got 3 bucks and change in his paycheck today. More than his wife got. How are they making ends meet and what does he think of the president s claim that folks are happy to go to the fiscal mattresses. To pay for his wall. His gop colleagues arent buying his racist remarks, hear what steve king said and decide for yourself as 360 continues chblt. We know whats around the corner is always worth the trip. We know the only thing better than the last adventure is the next one. We know the great outdoors. We love the great outdoors. Bass pro shops and cabelas where incredible selection, great people, and an experience like no other, all come together. I can do more to lower my a1c. Because my body can still make its own insulin. And i take trulicity once a week to activate my body to release it, like its supposed to. Trulicity is not insulin. It comes in a onceweekly, truly easytouse pen. And it works 24 7. Trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. Dont use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. Dont take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, youre allergic to trulicity, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. Stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. Serious side effects may include pancreatitis. Taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your low blood sugar risk. Common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. These can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. To help lower my a1c i choose trulicity to activate my within. Ask your doctor about onceweekly trulicity. At booking. Com, we cant guarantee youll good at that water jet thingy. But we can guarantee the best price on this hotel. Or any accommodation, from homes to yurts. Booking. Com booking. Yeah ive always been amazed and still going for my best, even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. So if theres a better treatment than warfarin. I want that too. Eliquis. Eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. Plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. Eliquis is fdaapproved and has both. Whats next . Reeling in a nice one. Dont stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. Eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. Dont take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. While taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. Seek immediate medical care for sudden sign of bleeding, like unusual bruising. Eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. Tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. Eliquis, the number one cardiologistprescribed blood thinner. Ask your doctor if eliquis is whats next for you. Has been excellent. They really appreciate the military family and it really shows. With all that usaa offers why go with anybody else . We know their rates are good, we know that theyre always going to take care of us. It was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. It was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say oh we cant beat usaa were the webber family. Were the tenneys were the hayles, and were usaa members for life. Get your usaa Auto Insurance quote today. Were talking about the president s wall, the invasion he spoke of again today, the crisis that either is or isnt, and in a larger sense, whether a wall or the kind the president envisions would even work. Were back now with mark morgan and jorge ramos. Mark, a chance to respond, and if you will, answer the question about the idea of funding the wall through Disaster Relief funds from either puerto rico, north carolina, florida or texas. Well, with all due respect to jorge, hes absolutely, 100 incorrect. When you look at years along the southwest border that are doing well, that are prosperous and safe, that is due to a multilayered strategy of infrastructure, technology and personnel. That is due to the hard working men and women of the United States Border Patrol who are protecting the borders every single day. We saw a television, past couple cay days, walking along a wall talking about how tranquil it is. If you look at sandie go, on either side, those towns are prosperous now and theyre prosperous because theres a wall there. Thats a fact. The crisis comes from we talk about in this country having an opioid epidemic. The drugs are coming from south of the border. Let me finish. Youre wrong, that is real, Human Trafficking, there are kids, women, girls that are being trafficked into this country, that are being forced into sexual exploitation. That is real. You cannot say thats real. That is not manufactured. If you do, you are lying and misleading the American People. Its a manufactured crisis. Go ahead, jorge. Its a manufactured crisis. Let me address the issues you mentioned. First of all, the drugs. You are what you are saying is not true because the vast majority of the drugs in this country happen at legal ports of entry, not along the border. So that has absolutely nothing to do with walls. Thats a false narrative, jorge. Im sorry, the number of arrests thats wrong. The number of arrests weve had in the last few years are among the lowest in the last 20 years. And if you are right, how come, out of the nine members of congress who represent districts along the u. S. mexico border how come not a single one of them support the idea of a wall . Where is the crisis . Again, im really open to listen to you. I just did jorge. Jorge, i just did, i just gave you facts. Human trafficking, that is real, this is not a crisis thats informered. Drugs, why dont we talk about the staff legal ports of entry. What about the staff that we dont know whats coming in through the southern borders between the points of entry. Its not just a crisis in between the points of entry, its a crisis on the southern border. We have a lot of drugs coming in in between the points of entry. Thats real, thats not manufactured and thats leading to the Opioid Crisis that we have in this United States. Thats real. What do you tell the young women and children that are being trafficked jorge, let me finish. What do you tell the young women being trafficked into this United States by the drug cartels being sexual ly exploited. The stats we get from the government itself is that the majority of drugs being smuggled in are through the points of entry. Those are the government statistics we are citing. To let people know where the statistics come from. My question to you, President Trump is not the first president to ask for funding. Both president bush and president clinton asked for border fence funding. President obama funded the maintenance of some 700 miles of wall that exist. Why is this request from trump different. Thats a fascinating question. Youre absolutely right, three u. S. President s, george bush sr. , and george w. Bush, all approved walls and fences, democrats and republicans alike have approved walls and fences. How come we dont want trump to build his own wall . The reason is very safrm, first, because its useless, second because theres not a National Emergency like 9 11, and third, this is really important, donald trump has created a symbol for many people, the wall is a symbol of racism. Many members of congress simply cannot thats absolutely false. Go back to the districts to ask for money for a symbol of racism, hate and discrimination. And politically, for democrats its simple to say that donald trump is not going to deliver on his signature issue. And then promise something completely different for 2020. Those are the reasons why i think right now many members of congress are not going to approve a wall. Mark, has the president made your argument harder to deliver . I dont think so. Because theres a couple important factors. First of all, jorge, its absolutely a false narrative. Anybody who says, anybody who talks to the American People and said that walls are ineffective, theyre lying to the American People. Look at the facts and statistics. Look at negalus, san diego, el paso. Jorge, let me finish. Thats absolutely a false narrative. You know, the sheriff for yuma county in arizona came out a newspaper article this week that said in 2005, when they used the multilayer strategy of infrastructure, technology and personnel to the right levels in his area, he saw illegal immigration drop 90 , overall crime in his area dropped dramatically. One story of a hundred across this country. To your point, youre spot on, in 2006, the secure fence was approved, a bipartisan bill that led to 720 miles of fence. And, jorge, i challenge you, go back and listen to the sound bites of a Bipartisan Senate and congress, including president s from the democratic side of the house, that said exactly the same thing thats being said why we need this wall, exactly word for word was said back then. That the president is saying right now. Thats a lie. Let me give you a statistic. On almost half of all undocumented immigrants, come by plane or with a visa. We dont need walls for that. Thank you both gentlemen for being with us. Nice discussion. Thank you. Thank you. A lot more to get to on a bu busy friday night. Where is Mitch Mcconnell in all of this . Find out ahead. Only genuine idaho potatoes have the perfect taste and texture to get your meal started right. Moving . Thats harder now because of Psoriatic Arthritis. But youre still moved by moments like this. Dont let Psoriatic Arthritis take them away. Taltz reduces joint pain and stiffness and helps stop the progression of joint damage. For people with moderate to severe psoriasis, 90 saw significant improvement. Taltz even gives you a chance at completely clear skin. Dont use if youre allergic to taltz. Before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. Taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. Tell your doctor if you have an infection, symptoms, or received a vaccine or plan to. Inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz, including worsening of symptoms. Serious allergic reactions can occur. For all the things that move you. Ask your doctor about taltz. We have breaking news at this moment on just how concerned, even freaked out, Law Enforcement was when President Trump fired fbi director james comey. The New York Times has a story that just posted minutes ago, and let me read you the opening paragraph. It says in the days after President Trump fired james b. Comey as fbi director, officials became so concerned by the president s behavior that they began investigating on whether he was working on behalf of russia against american interests, according to former Law Enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation. Adam goldman shares the by line. He joins us now by phone. Adam, this is an issue of there being a trillicriminal investig. And tonight, i think for the first time, correct me if im wrong, your reporting is that there was a counterintelligence investigation into whether the president of the United States was a threat to the United States. Caller yes, essentially thats correct. When the fbi started investigating President Trump in the days after comey was fired there were two elements, essentially to the investigation, one was a criminal element that dealt with the possibility of obstruction, and the other was the counterintelligence element to this. And, you know, i think while broadly people had assumed that, you know, mueller was looking at whether the president himself had in some way conspired or colluded with the russians, nobody had ever laid out exactly what happened. Thats what we sought to do with this story. What exactly is, define a counterintelligence investigation, just so our viewers understand. The essence of a counterintelligence investigation is something thats a threat to National Security. And typically these investigations are done quietly, clandestinely. And many, many times they dont lead to criminal charges. And the methods that the fbi uses to try to understand what an adversary might do is highly classified and you dont see them, typically brought out in article 3 or civilian court. Why is the idea of a counterintelligence investigation into the president of the United States, why would that information be so controversial, and why did they work so hard to keep it quiet . Well, i think they worked really hard to keep it quiet because they wanted to understand, hey, look, the way these things are supposed to work is were not supposed to find out about it. Okay, the fbi investigated, counterintelligence investigation, maybe they suspect an individual might be working for russia, they investigate, do it quietly, then it goes away, like they did with carter page years ago in new york. And so the idea is that, you know, the fbi can do the investigation, nobody hears about it and maybe the person isnt working for a hostile country. And they close the case and move on. You know, in this case, everything became public. Yes. So it was much more it was much more difficult for the fbi to try to do what they needed to do here. But, you know, there were a couple things that pushed the fbi over the edge, and i think its been lost on people is that the possible obstruction relating to firing comey needed the obstruction has to have an object and the object was the investigation into russian interference in 2016, that is a National Security investigation. And it so as yes. And there were two episodes. Remember how chaotic the period was following the firing of james comey. Two specific episodes that alarmed some of these Security Officials and fbi agents in the wake of that. Explain what they were. Well, obviously the firing of comey and the referencing of the russia investigation laying out why comey should be fired. The second aspect to that was i believe it was the next day, the lester holt interview on nbc news, he says he did it because of russia. And, you know, the fbi is watching this, and they say, well, hes telling us why he did it. He did this on behalf of russia. And, you know, within days of that theyve opened up this you know, theyve opened up this theyve opened up this multitiered investigation that has a criminal aspect and a counterintelligence aspect to it. And then when the president had the Oval Office Meeting with the russian ambassador, i believe it was, where he bragged about firing james comey and called him a nut job, that was in their minds a vindication for the investigation. Caller yeah, a vindication, bolstered their reasons. You know, the fbi, they opened this investigation, needed to articulate the reasons, the information for doing it. And, you know, and then this comes out about that meeting where hes calling comey a nut job, this took great pressure out of me, the end of comey. That, itself, was the people working on the investigation saw that as reaffirmation of the reasons to open on the president. Number one, a counterintelligence investigation indicates that they were investigating whether the president was a threat, a security and intelligence threat to the United States, thats extraordinary. But just finally, there are those within the community, you write about this. Caller i want to clarify something. Go ahead. Caller this is what jim baker testified, and it goes to a hearing and we had testimony, to be clear, its whether the president s actions were a threat. Okay. Right . Its not that i dont think anybody is convinced that the president did this on behalf of russia, you know, fired comey. But, you know, but, you know, they had the but the act of firing, the simple act of firing comey, jim baker told congress that was considered a threat to National Security. Is it clear whether the counterintelligence investigation was ever wrapped up . Caller i dont know if thats the case to date. We say that in the story. Im sure its something mueller, you know, if he writes a report, its likely thats something he could explain. Adam goldman, if you will, please stick around with us. I want to also bring in chief Political Correspondent dana bash and Kirsten Powers is with us as well, and fbi supervisor Josh Campbell who served as a special assistant to director comey. Dana, first to you on this. And this gets to the article references this point. There are many within the intelligence community, and certainly within the president s orbit who say that this and other things represent serious overreach by the fbi. Potentially. And, you know, i obviously would love to hear joshs response to that since he was not only working for the fbi, but working for james comey. What is an unknown here lets take a step back. This is very explosive. Yes. And its obvious why the fbi did not want anybody to know about this, at all. The notion, as you were getting to with adam, of investigating a president of the United States to see if an american president is working for the russians is just it just its almost too much to wrap your mind around. Having said that, we dont know what happened. We dont know how quickly it wrapped up, if its wrapped up. And obviously its connected to the much larger Robert Mueller investigation. This is before yes. It seems as though the fbi started this before Robert Mueller was appointed by Rod Rosenstein. And mueller took it over and merged to an extent the counterintelligence and the criminal investigations. Josh campbell, you were there at the time, first of all, explain to us or verify what you can about this reporting. Caller yes. So john, i have to be obviously very careful with information that i talk about, that i knew when i was in the fbi. As you mentioned, you know, working for director comey, after he was fired i continued on in my role as a special assistant to the director. So, again i mention that just to say that any fbi employee takes an oath that they wont divulge certain things. I will say, though, speaking hypothetically about the mechanics and the impact of such an investigation, i think first of all its important for the viewer to understand the mechanics. So for the fbi to open an investigation of any kind, the threshold is actually quite low. You need information or an allegation that theres been some type of violation of federal law, which is a very low threshold. You cant go on fishing expeditions. You have to have something, you know, concrete to point to. But again, investigations are just that, gathering information to get to the bottom of what happened. So if you look at the impact here, and again lets take ourselves back in time to that place where you had the fbi director who or excuse me, the president of the United States who was removing the fbi director, the person who was investigating him, which he knew about, because comey was on the record in public testimony indicating that he was investigating the trump campaign, this was obviously something that the president knew about and people inside the fbi knew there was this russia investigation, the Deputy Attorney general himself knew that russia was on the president s mind when he got rid of comey. So as you start to piece together these you know, these elements of the puzzle, it is beyond the possibility that people inside the fbi would say is there a problem here as it relates to National Security . And thats their job in order to get to the bottom of that. And, you know, to snuff out any type of threat. The one thing that i think we have to also understand is that the fbi when it comes to the president of the United States, or any type of elected official, theres actually a special category for those types of cases. Theyre called sensitive investigative matters. And what that means, and again, you know, thats terminology, but what that means is that if you have a certain threshold of case that involves a politician or a lawyer or a member of the clergy, a protected class, those require the highest levels of approval from the department of justice. So this isnt something that the fbi would open on its own, and then send over some type of notice. This would require coordination with the department of justice, which is stunning when you think about it because the one person who remains, to this day, who was there at that time was Rod Rosenstein, it was the Deputy Attorney general, and obviously hes taken a lot of slings and arrows from the president , hes stood up to these threats from the white house and a lot of the criticism. But if you go back in that time the only person who was still there, or who is still here now that would have been there at that time, who would have known about that was the Deputy Attorney general. So as you look at the larger picture, i agree with dana and i agree with you, john, this is a big deal when you think about the president of the United States being under fbi investigation. I dont know if theres any time in our lifetime or, indeed, in the history of the country where federal Law Enforcement looked down to the white house, 1600 pennsylvania avenue, and thought at least that possibly the actions of the president might threaten u. S. National security. The actions of the president might threaten u. S. National security. That is what we have learned in this New York Times reporting. And kirsten, a sitting u. S. President , this that type of investigation, ive got to say this is a strange place to be, even after all these months of this investigation, its a startling sentence to read out loud. Yeah, its absolutely its shocking. As josh just said its hard its hard to imagine that this has happened before. And, you know, i think for everybody who watched this play out publicly, obviously there was a lot of criticism and a lot of concern about what was going on, but as josh has pointed out the fbi is expert on this issue. So its very different for us to sit and watch it and say this doesnt this doesnt look right and this is very concerning. For the fbi to look at it and say that we think this president might be a National Security threat, he might be working on behalf of a foreign government, either wittingly or unwittingly is really its explosive to say the least. And im sure that the that trump defenders are going to say that this is just proof that the fbi was out to get him. But i think go back to josh, he laid out very clearly that this is not something that they can do, easily. Because its the president of the United States. And i will note in adams piece he does talk about the idea that people have made accusations of overreach. The defense in the story is that the fbi, these agents, these people, sources hes spoken to say you dont know what we knew at that time. The information we had isnt public. You dont know that. Dana, the president s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani is trying to play this down, as he does. He also confesses he actually has no insight into the investigation. Right. I mean, he wouldnt know. It is his job, as somebody who represents the president to do just that, to play it down. And to suggest, as he did in the story, that, well, it doesnt seem that anything came out of it. So who cares . Well, again, thats his job. But he also doesnt really know what went on. You know, the question is, yes, there are accusations and there will be larger and louder accusations of fbi overreach at the time. But i think what josh said is really, really noteworthy, that when it comes to a run of the mill fbi investigation you can do whatever you want. Not whatever you want. You need to have the threshold is low. But for somebody who is important, you need something more than that. And i would guess that the president of the United States would be its about as tough as it could be and should be to open this kind of investigation into which tells you that they really did have reasonable doubt or cause to at least look into it. Just to be clear, josh, what youre telling us is that the Justice Department at the highest levels would have had to approve, Jeff Sessions of course, was recused at that point, had recused himself so that would have meant that Rod Rosenstein would have had to approve of this type of investigation . Caller thats exactly right. When we had congress people, members of congress under investigation, or any type of elected official, that would be something that the bureau by policy, by Justice Department policy would coordinate with the Justice Department. You can bet that if it involved the president of the United States, the highest official in the executive branch of government, that that would be something that the fbi would coordinate. And looking ahead, john, i think its very important that we understand that, again, its important to take yourself back to that place in time where you have the fbi concerned, according to the reporting, about what the actions of the president might actually you know, what challenges or threats that that might represent to the nation. They didnt know at the time that there would be a bob Mueller Investigation, that there would be a special counsel investigation. According to the reporting, as they opened this case, they probably looked at themselves and thought this is the vehicle that will be used to determine whether the president removed the fbi director for purposes of obstruction, and if there are any outlying National Security threats. And the reason why thats important to talk about now is because all of that got folded into the Robert Mueller investigation. So its very opaque, we dont know a lot about what hes doing, but we can bet that that would be one part of that. As josh is talking, as were kind of digesting this information, it makes you realize why Rod Rosenstein got the special counsel in the first place. If josh the way josh describes the protocol is accurate, and im sure it is, that it has to go to the highest levels of the Justice Department, that was Rod Rosenstein because Jeff Sessions had already recused himself. I believe at that time, or he was in the process of. Its more evidence and more of an explanation of why rosenstein said, okay, this is something that we have to separate from. Because of the allegations of, you know, maybe retribution from fbi agents because their boss was fired. Yes. Or whatever reason, youve got to separate it. If theres a counterintelligence investigation into the president of the United States you can understand why theres a special counsel. Exactly. You can understand why someone like Robert Mueller is needed. Rod rosenstein, of course, we have learned is stepping down which made many people believe, kirsten, ill give you the last word on this, that the Mueller Investigation is coming to a close. I have to say as january progresses, as we learn more and more things, it seems to me we are headed into a pretty, pretty eventful period. Weve heard that many times about this just being around the corner, getting wrapped up. And so i think theres obviously more to come. And i just think that we this we cant stress enough, what a big story this is, frankly. And to think about the fact that we generally would make an assumption about a president of the United States that we know which side theyre on, that we dont have the fbi wondering whether or not they are working for a foreign power, like i said either knowingly or unknowingly, as the reporting says, is just an absolutely shocking thing, i think, and says a lot about President Trump. Josh, very last question, were running out of time here before we go, you said actually the bar is fairly low to start asking these types of questions. Would it just be the action of the president , the firing of james comey, the mentioning of russia in a lester holt interview that would cause an investigation, or would there have to be other intelligence pickups, other causes for concern that russia might have some level of influence on the president . So it becomes very important for an fbi agent, one of the phrases, the mantras they use is you have to have specific and articulable facts. You cant just have a hunch that an agent had has, or some type of hearsay, possibly someone told you in order to open up a Serious Investigation like this would be. You have to be able to articulate what it actually is. Gain, in this case, if the agents looked across the horizon and saw all the different threats they were looking at, saw the actions of the president and started piecing it together, that could have enough to say were going to look into this. Its important to say, even though i just mentioned, this would require the highest levels of approval from the department of justice, it is also important to understand that fbi investigations often wash out and there is no there, there, this is the reason why the fbi does this work in secret is because a lot of the times, you know, if you get information about a possible crime, that doesnt actually pan out, you dont want to negatively impact someones reputation. But, again, we dont know if thats the case here because we can bet that that would have been folded into what mueller is doing. We have to wait and see what that report is and whether that actually talks about the bombshell reporting were seeing tonight. Josh campbell, dana bash, Kirsten Powers, thank you all so much for helping us digest this, 30 seconds before we came back from a commercial there, big story breaking tonight. Next, Iowa Republican congressman steve king, no stranger to hot water, coming up, why his latest episode threatens him with possible cvs pharmacy. Ed gets copays as low as zero dollars on Medicare Part d prescriptions. Ed gets labels clear as day. And, lily. Lily gets anything she wants. Ed knows he could just have us deliver his prescriptions. But whats the fun in that . Switch to cvs pharmacy. As the government remains shut down over the immigration debate, one of the loudest antiimmigration voices in Congress Finds himself in some very hot water over some recent comments. Iowa republican congressman steve king wondered aloud to the New York Times earlier this week why, in his words, and im quoting, white nationalists, white supremacists, western civilization, how did that language become offensive . Unquote. Tim ryan says he is considering offering a formal resolution censuring king for his remarks. For his part, king took to the house floor today and responded. I regret the heartburn that has poured forth upon this congress and this country and especially my state and in my congressional district. But the people who know me know i wouldnt have been have to make this statement because they know me. They know my history. Theres nothing about my family or my history or my neighborhood that would suggest that these allegations could be supported by any activity whatsoever. I reject that ideology. I defend american civilization, which is an essential component of western civilization. All right. Joining me now is representative Eleanor Holmes norton of the district of columbia. Representative, thanks so much for being with us. I will ask you about steve king in one moment. On the breaking news we heard moments ago, the New York Times reporting that the fbi back when the president fired james comey opened a counterintelligence investigation out of concern that his actions were a Security Threat to the United States. Your reaction . Have we forgotten that for a very long time now, trump has seemed to be at one with the russians. Hes been accused of being too close to the russians in the first place. And thats democrats who, of course, have been criticizing him and remember when he stood beside when he took that press conference and indicated that he didnt see that putin had done anything. So, i mean, if you put all of this together, and that is not what got the fbi interested in this, you will see why im not surprised. All right. Again, were still digesting that report tonight. Back to steve king, the congressman from iowa. Your reaction to his initial statement. This is someone youve known in the house for a long time. Our surprised when he said, i dont know white supremacist is an offensive word . I was not surprised, because hes had a very long line of this kind of rhetoric and of close association, not only in this country, but in europe, with white nationalists. Hes going so far this time that while a censure resolution is almost surely going to be put on the floor of the house, you see members of his own appeared, what i think is amounts to trying to get him out. He won his election by only 2,500 points. Thats because this is not new, because it follows a very long line of white supremacy, white nationalism, perhaps not as overt as this. But always there and always undisguised. So now what youre seeing is, hes got a primary challenger already. He may get another one. You see the top three leaders of the house, scalding criticism of him. So i think what youre seeing is republicans runsing, theyre not going to hold on to this seat. The only only by three points did youre right. Did king retain the seat. So i think theyre trying to force him out before democrats take this seat. Would you support a censure vote . And do you think republicans are doing enough . Governor tim scott made a really, really powerful Statement Today in the oped in the post condemning these words. Not only would i support a censure vote, democrats control the house, i think a censure vote would easily pass the house of representatives. Eleanor holmes norton, thank you so much for being with us, and really appreciate your time tonight on a variety of subjects. Lets check in with chris cuomo to see what hes working on for cuomo prime time in the next hour. What weve learned from the New York Times really falls into what were getting very deep into on the show tonight. Weve had three aspects of the Mueller Probe come to light in the last few days, and they all worked together. Weve learned that the probe is looking at public statements of the president as probative in their criminal case of obstruction of justice. That will be surprising to many people, that the president s public statements may count in that case. That goes along with what the New York Times just told us now. And the big point here is that we always knew about the criminal case, the obstruction of justice involving the president , potentially, but not the counterintelligence element. And not that early on they were looking at him. And that creates an urgency and a focus that we didnt know about in the probe in terms of what its ultimate story is. That takes us to the third point. They dont want us to see that story, jb. The lawyers of the president want to look at it first and play with it . No way, not on our watch, weve got to fight that. Chris cuomo, thanks so much. Well see you in a few minutes. Coming up, 13yearold jamie floss escapes after being held captive for three months. First, a quick look at a cnn original series premiering this sunday, american style. John kennedy had a style of a kind of wealthy upper class new england person. So was more casual than the sort of typical ruling class person. Kennedy carried himself with simple style. It was never overthought, it was very much with ease. Style matters with jack kennedy. And his style is grace under pressure. He defines cool. President kennedys youth, his sartorial excellence, his great physique were all differentiators, i will say, from prior president s. He looked fantastic. Uhoh guess what day it is . . Guess what day it is huh. Anybody . Julie hey. Guess what day it is . . Ah come on, i know you can hear me. Mike mike mike. Mike what day is it mike . Ha ha leslie, guess what today is . Its hump day. Whoot whoot ronny, how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico . Id say happier than a camel on wednesday. Hump day yay get happy. Get geico. Fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. Jamie is the hero in this case. Thats what a sheriff from wisconsin said today, a day after 13yearold jamie klaus escaped the house where she was allegedly held captive for nearly three months by a man also expected of killing her parents back in october. Kloss is now with her aunt, according to the sheriff. The suspect is in custody facing two counts of homicide and one count of kidnapping. Its unknown how he became aware of the 13yearold girl, but Authorities Say nothing shows he knew or had contact with the family before. The news continues, so i now hand it over to chris cuomo. Cuomo prime time starts now. Thank you, welcome to cuomo prime time. We have breaking news tonight. Law enforcement officials were so concerned about the president s behavior in the days after he fired james comey that the fbi opened a criminal counterintelligence investigation to determine whether the president was secretly working with russia against america. That comes from the New York Times. You have to put it together with new information about how the mueller investigators are using the president s public statements against him