that's according to the new york times which has obtained a list of the questions. and they cover a very wide range of topics from trump's ties to russia, to whether he obstructed justice. but there is more. they also touch on the president's businesses. and his relationships with michael flynn, james comey and jeff sessions. a lot to get to in the next hour or so. i want to bring in evan perez. also jack nguyen, former u.s. attorney mike moore and ash asha ringafa. good evening to all of you. evan, you first. what do we know? >> well, don, we know that these questions were put together, were brin by the president's legal team. they had a meeting last month. and during that meeting, they heard from the special counsel robert mueller's team, the four categories of what they had for the president. they put together the 50 or so. the fbi director as well as the national security adviser as well as the president's relationship, his treatment, his mistreatment who believes he did the wrong thing by recusing himself on the investigation. i tell you, the most important part, i think, the most interesting part of the questions deal with the question what we' come to call collusion. whether there was illegal coordination between the c campaign and the russians. despite what you hear from the president, he petedly, he said there was no collusion, no collusion, robert mueller is not done with that question. and very many -- 25% here have to do with that subject matter. and so i think what this tells us is that this is not nearly done. there's going to be a lot more for the president to consider before he sits down for this interview if he does do that. >> who actually wrote -- we don't know how these questions got leaked, from whom. but who wrote these questions? >> well, the president's legal teams put together the questions. the ones that you see "the new york times" published were actually written by the president's legal team based on what they heard from the special counsel team. so it may not exactly been the questions that were given to them, that were said to them, but this is the essence of what they wrote. and it's really intended for them to sort of prepare if they want the client to go and do this interview. and that, i've got to tell you, the questions -- especially the ones having to do with russia and contacts between the campaign, they're very broadly worded, and i think it's -- it's filled with land mines for the president. if he steps in there. because there's a lot of stuff here that clearly robert mueller knows already what the answers are. and the danger for the president is grave here, if he goes in for this interview. and it really, you know -- don, when we reported a story last month that talked about the four categories of questions, up with of the things that we noticed in talking to people was that there was agitation inside the president's legal team about this meeting. and it clearly told us that they saw the danger signs for the president. >>. >> let's dig into some of the questions, okay? specific questions that the smeshl counsel wants to ask president trump. what did you know about the phone calls that mr. flynn made with the ambassador kislyak in late december 2016. this is all about obstruction of justice, isn't it? >> it really is. >> this is for jack, i'm sorry. >> yeah. i think it's very much about obstruction of justice. it's also about the russian question and exactly what trump's people were doing with the ambassador. these are the two things that come together. i do quite agree with evan that the most interesting of these questions are those which focus on the russia trump campaign communications. these are far ranging. i don't think any of them are totally unexpected. bob mueller knows the answers to a good many of these questions. >> we tell people all the time, don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. i'm sure robert mueller would do that .. >> on the question of obstruction, it's whether the president was dangling the option of a pardon to induce someone to perhaps change their testimony, not cooperate, or in some other way impede the investigation. >> this is an interesting question. obviously the question has broad power to pardon people. but it's not to extend it as a carrot for someone to behave in a particular way in an investigation. and it's note worp thi that mueller is looking into that avenue. >> he speaks in these speeches at rallies, these questions, what did he know, what did you do. they have some indication, either through the cooperating witnesses or discovered through the course of the investigation of his intent. everybody said the same thing. if he goes in there, he's basically set up because i promise you, that his questioner will know the answers. >> the infamous trump tower meeting in 2016, what vomit did you have in the communication strategy, including the release of donald trump jr.'s e-mails. how significant do you think the trump team's response is? >> i think it's critical. i think that there's been a lot of surmise, the president helped shape that statement in a way that quite consciously obscured the truth,s what happened. to remind the viewer, this is the event at which afterwards, the trump team tried to say the meeting was about adoptions. if there's an obfuscation, it was the statement written about that meeting by the trump campaign. this is a key chapter in the whole episode. >> that was a statement given to the media. the questiwe've heard, what's t deal? lying to the media is not a crime. it tells us the robert mueller is focused on that question, whether or not there was a crime commit there had. i think it's interesting they were asking that. >> michael, the questions obt n obtained by "the new york times" focus broad dion michael flynn, on james comey, on the attorney general jeff sessions about coordination between the trump campaign and russia. any surprises? or are there no surprises here? >> i don't know that there's really any surprise. we're talking about things, whether that be folks who knead statements about what the president did, actions that he took. there's no great surprise. what's interesting is there's some discussion in the questions about -- it looks as though there's a question about trump feeling like he's not been protected by jeff sessions. he seems to -- that's been a recurring theme that we've heard. tt bottom line is that no attorney general could protect this president from himself. he gets off on a tangent, he just can't do it. i think that's sort of where he's at. but i saw that's an interesting twist. the department and his attorney general, i thought that was interesting. >> did you discuss whether mr. sessions would protect you in reference past attorneys general. that's the one you're talking about. >> that's right. >> so were you surprised, based on these questions that mueller doesn't appear, what we have here, to be focused on trump's finances? >> he does have a question related to a real estate deal in moscow that he may have been involved with with michael cohen. i think it starts to allude to that. but i think this is kind of a broad arc of what he is looking to get at. and remember, if he has an in-person interview, there will be plenty of follow-up questions. the fbi presents these as open-ended questions. you know, kind of the columbo approach. i don't know, tell me what you know. and just let the person talk. and the president is especially in danger here. he likes to control the narrative. we saw that on fox and friends the other day. while that may fly on "fox & friends" it's not a great strategy when you're talking to a federal prosecutor. i would suspect there would be several that might start touches on other real estate or financial aspects of trump's life. >> i appreciate you. everyone else stick around. what it tells us about where the russian investigation is he heading. at t-mobile, we don't just see uniforms. we see the people behind them. so we're committed to helping veterans through job training when their service ends... and to hiring 10,000 veterans and military spouses to be part of our workforce in the next 5 years. because no matter where you serve... or when you served... t-mobile stands ready to serve you. so we provide half-off on all family lines for military. i knew at that exact moment ... i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors. it's not just picking a surgeon, it's picking the care team and feeling secure in where you are. visit cancercenter.com/breast ( ♪ ) ( ♪ ) >> a list of 50 questions robert mueller wants to find on his ties to russia, on his businesses, his family and his closest advisers. back with me, let's go through some of these we didn't talk about. there's one that involves roger stone. what did you know about roger stone or wikileaks. >> this tells me, there's an entire line of inquiry that we haven't seen really the tip of the iceberg yet which is into hacking the e-mails, release of the e-mails and how that -- any connection or coordination there might have been with members of the campaign and that activity. and i think that that is what this question is getting at. and we know that roger zoen has made mention, pe had contact with julian assange. we know that don jr. was in contact with wikileaks. we know that trump asked for the release of those e-mails on television. it would be interesting to see what trump answered to that question when he sits for this interview. >> what do you know about a 2017 meeting in seyechelles involving erik prince. that's something that the cooperating witness told mueller's team about. >> i think that's right. i think, you know, the idea -- you remember this meeting apparently -- there's a russian operative or businessman that is there. these two individuals, one is the brother of trump's secretary of education, strangely meeting with somebody who's connected with apparently russian business and russian government. there's a question on how that happened and who set that up and what the purpose was behind the meeting. you know, i will say this, this seems to be written from an outline that mueller's team gave broadly. and i don't know that i would necessarily take every bit of -- every specific question and think that that's where mueller is boring down. what's interesting to me is that trump's team apparently took this general outline and came up with these questions that they thought might be of particular interest to mueller in the investigation. and so for instance, somebody could have said well, tell us about -- we want to know about the meeting in seychelles. or tell us about kislyak. >> do you think this is a study guide for the president? >> if we can count on him to study it. he''s a smart man. he wouldn't be where he's at. i just don't know that he's able to not control the narrative and the conversation. i feel like he likes to get into the room and convince everybody he's the smartest. earn in the room. that will kill him if he gets in front of federal investigators. >> what witness or subject, jack, gets the questions beforehand? >> well, look, i think this is all part of the negotiations as to how this interview in front of him was going to unfold. i think the motivation on the part of the special counsel's office was to give them some head's up about the general areas they might have in mind. to make it easier for them to say yes. i heard a love ott talk about whether or not this means the president will testify, will not testify. i mean, we have to remember, too, this is not entirely up to the president. if the president at the end of the day refuses to make himself available to answer some of these questions, then we might sb into the issuance of a subpoena. and a period of litigation in the courts, attempting to force the president's testimony. so i think what we're seeing here is perhaps one of the concluding chapters as i say, these negotiations as to what the ground rules for this interview with the special counsel will be. >> jack, while i have you there, let me ask you this, what discussions did you have with reince priebus in july 2017 about on staining the sessions resignation. with whom did you discus it? talk to me about that. again, this is one piece and just one piece. of the face that might lend itself to a charge of obstruction. you can not issue a pardon corruptly. you will hear people all the time say that the president's pardon power is unlimited. she's absolutely right. it does have its limits. by the same token, this obstruction charge, the questions lending themselves to that demonstrate that, you know, there are limits here to the kind of pressure he can put on the investigators. we can't have the witnesses immunized or pardoned and the prosecutors are taken off the field by firing. i think a lot of this is bound to sort of draw a ring around that. >> what did you mean when you told russian diplomats that firing mr. comey had taken the pressure off. so many people were stunned when truch fired comey and told the russian ambassadors and others, i face great pressure for russia when that's taken off. do you think the president's own words will come back to haunt him? >> it definitely will. i think that's when he told the russians that comey is a nut job and that's why he fired him. i think a good portion of the obstruction of justice case he has built hymn, talking about the president, via his tweets, via his interview, via public comments that he's made. and they are coming back to haunt him. what mueller is looking at is a pattern of activity is that's going to point to firing comey, that's the bad act here, whether he did it with corrupt intent. and everything else is circumstantial, kind of pointing, whether or not he did it for the wrong reasons. and a lot of the reasons are things that he has himself stated out in public. >> much more on 50 questions. robert mueller wants to ask president trump and where he thinks the investigation might be going. >> 50 questions robert mueller wants to ask president trump, the best window yet into the russian investigation. let's welcome in steve cortez, a former campaign trump adviser. also margaret hoover and keith boykin. good evening to all of you. let ice talk at the timeline here that ewe're learning. alling the stunning information from "the new york times." this talks about the negotiation between the trump lawyers and robert mueller. it's as if mueller sought for months who expressed a desire. they were going back and forth with the lawyers. so mueller told mr. dowd in early march, he needed to question the president directly to determine whether or not he had criminal intent to fire comey. but mr. boyd feld if i recall. investigate sors agreed days later so share during a meeting with mr. dowd the questions they wanted to ask mr. trump. so that's how these questions came about that we have now. when mr. mueller's team relayed the question, their tone and detailed nature submitted mr. could's view that the president should not sit for an interview. mr. trump remained firm in his assistance that he meet with mr. mueller. a week and a half after receiving the questions, mr. dowd resigned, including that his client was ignoring his advice. margaret hoover? >> this is striking because it's all here in one place. a lot of this has been sort of cobbled together over some time. we know the president has said he had no problem sitting down with special counsel mueller. we all know, the american public can see the president has a very hard time sticking to any one version of the truth. and that, you know, if i were his lawyer, i certainly wouldn't -- and i'm not a lawyer. i wouldn't advise him to sit with the special counsel because he can't help but contradict himself constantly .. and contradicting yourself in front of a special counsel is called perching yourself. one can understand why he's been through so many lawyers. and here we see all in one chronological timeline how it's coming past. >> people were trying to figure out exactly why -- although there were rumbles, why dowd resigned. this gives us a clear indication that because he didn't think the president was listening to his -- his client wasn't listening to his advice. >> i don't know if we can say it's clear, but if that was the advice, i would agree with mr. crowd that under no circumstances should he be interviewed or interrogated, i should say, by his own justice department. let's be very clear. mueller's investigation is part of donald trump's own dia sexual harassment. his own justice department, his own underling does not have the right to -- >> what do you mean about his own underling. hold on. what do you mean by his own underlings. we have co-equal branches of government here. why do you keep calling him his underlin underlings. he's supposed to be independent from the justice department. >> there are co-equal branches. the congress has every right to investigate the president. and i suspect the democrats take the house, they will do so vociferously starting in 2019. and they have every constitutional and legal right to do so. trump's own justice department does not have the right to in any sense compel him to be interrogated by his own underling, mueller. mueller works for the president. that is just the reality of the legal situation. >> do you look at these questions, do you look at these question as interrogations. they were written by supposedly trump's own team. >> i do. the american people people knew these allegations. i say scurrilous allegations, knew these going into the election. certainly known them since they decided that they either weren't true or weren't relevant to electing him president. >> i'm talking about the questions here. >> the president doesn't answer to mueller. he answers to the people. >> but keith, can you rerespond to this. mueller is not under the president. >> right. well, a lot of things he said that need to be cleared up. first of all, mueller is special counsel. congress created this special counsel law. yes, he's an employee, so to speak, or an independent representative of the justice department. the justice department is under the executive's authority, but congress created the law for the special counsel to investigate issues like this. he has the statutory authority to do what he's doing. no president is above the law. that's a principle we learned from richard nixon and watergate. even when bill clinton had to sit and testify in a legal case against him. donald trump is no different. he's not above the la uh. he has the responsibility to do so. thirdly, i agree with what margaret said and what steve said as well about the legal aspects of it. from a legal point of view, i would never advise a client to testify in a case like this. but from a political point of view, it's incumbent upon the president to testify, to show that he has nothing to hide. and that's why you have to separate the legal issue from the political case. >> margaret, you wanted to say something? no? >> this is all -- it's incredibly baffling. and unprecedented. we real think -- we haven't seen this. this is -- frankly, what's concerning most to me is why this list was leaked now. right? i think that's just as much a part of the story. >> that was my first one i've read. i've read before i read the story, who leaked this? why would it be leaked? >> all signs point to the white house, and all signs point to -- what we know about the white house is there is a strategy of leaking items in order to get the president's attention and to garner his focus. >> speaking to him through the television, you think? go ahead, steve. >> margaret, what i think is actually baffling is the fact that we now know, and it's not just conjecture, that the obama department of justice, whether we're talking about comey or mccabe or on the national security side, people like clapper and brennan, were corrupted at the very highest level. >> why are we talking about this, steve? come on. let's focus on today's news. don't go back in history. >> and because -- no. what's baffling is how are they not being investigated? and why -- >> one story at a time, steve. >> trump's justice department to investigate those people. because there was -- there's real crimes and twlrp, i believe. there have have been 100 counts. five people pleaded guilty, including trump's campaign chairman and trump's -- >> for crimes committed long before the trump campaign. >> don't bring in subterfusion. >> i had me, keith, for a second. you have a point. there was clearly political corruption at the highest level of the fbi. and that undermines everybody's confidence in our independent judicial system. and by the way, in the department. that is not good, okay? but we can see two things at the same time. and that is an independent and separate issue, that while connected to the impetus for the special counsel has nothing to do with what the special counsel has discovered. we can separate that whoet going down the bunny holes on partisanship on either side which has to do with the truth. >> the nation"national enquirer targeting trump's personal attorney, michael cohen. discover card. hey, i'm curious about your social security alerts. oh! we'll alert you if we find your social security number on any one of thousands of risky sites, so you'll be in the know. ewww! being in the know is very good. don't shake! ahhh! sign up online for free. discover social security alerts. this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ to keep our community safe. before you do any project big or small, pg&e will come out and mark your gas and electric lines so you don't hit them when you dig. call 811 before you dig, and make sure that you and your neighbors are safe. >> steve, i want to get your take on this story. a "national enquirer" cover story. a source close to president trump tells cnn, this could be a strong sign the president is upset with cohen and turning against him. there's no way that "enquirer" david pecker would allow that to be published without the president's blessing. do you think the president is turning on cohen? >> i don't. i think it's a bit irresponsible to read into a tabloid covering what we think is an innuendo from the president. there's a lot of stretches of logic there. quite frankly. are these stories true? i have no idea. don't read often those stories on the side of the aisle in the supermarket. >> so you don't think he's turning. david pecker is a friend of president trump's. you know the whole catch and kill with the "national enquirer" about stories that were negative about president trump. you see nothing there, steve? >> look, i don't think so. it appears to me that mr. cohen might have some legal problems of his own. it does not appear to me in any sense that the president has any real problems or any real jeopardy of his own. so the idea -- i hear this a lot that michael cohen is going to flip or induced to flip. flip on what? if there's no crime committed by the president, no collusion, what is he going to flip on? >> what strikes me and what seems resonant is, you know, somebody who's followed this and has a sense of how this goes down in michael cohen's businesses, it could seem to me that the president watches "national enquirer" and the editor has a -- there's a strong relationship there, we all know that. it seems to me that the president is very clearly trying to put distance between himself and michael cohen. we also have a very strong sense that michael cohen is in quite a bit of legal trouble after the 16 phones, the many, many documents and art facts that were taken from michael cohen's apartment. usa, the southern district of new york doesn't go in and confiscate that much material if you don't have good cause. and there's not a good reason to. so michael cohen is in trouble, the president is rightfully and understandably trying to distance himself from it. even though i'm sure there's loyalty there, there's a long-standing relationship. there's a lot of information. but for both of their protection, it makes sense the president would do that. >> so keith, jim acosta asked michael cohen about that, when asked if a message was being september, cohen told cnn, twha do you thi -- what do you think? >> he's the king of understatement. of course there's a message being spent. anyone who pays $150,000 to pay off a playboy playmate obviously has an interest in protecting that president of the united states. the "national enquirer" serves some sort of function of unofficial state publication. nobody takes the "national enquirer" seriously. it's not a very reputable publication. it's known as a rag. but at the same time, it does speak for the president of the united states. and if the "national enquirer" is saying they -- >> since when, keith? >> let me finish and then you can interrupt. it does speak for the president of the united states in the sense that it is definitely portraying his message out there. obviously whenever you have a publication out there that tries to kill a story that's harmful to the president, that's a publication that's speaking for the president of the united states. >> it's a publication that's been involved in legal -- yeah, with women who said they did catch and kill story for the president of the united states. so that's why it's in the news media right now. thank you all, appreciate it. when we come back, the gaslighting of america. the author who says president trump is gaslighting us. and she says we love it when he lies. termites, feasting on homes 24/7. we're on the move. roger. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home. i'm all-business when i, travel... even when i travel... for leisure. so i go national, where i can choose any available upgrade in the aisle - without starting any conversations- -or paying any upcharges. what can i say? control suits me. go national. go like a pro. no one thought much of itm at all.l people said it just made a mess until exxonmobil scientists put it to the test. they thought someday it could become fuel and power our cars wouldn't that be cool? and that's why exxonmobil scientists think it's not small at all. energy lives here. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. searching for answers may feel overwhelming. so start your search with our teams of specialists at cancer treatment centers of america. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com/experts i'm all-business when i, travel... even when i travel... for leisure. so i go national, where i can choose any available upgrade in the aisle - without starting any conversations- -or paying any upcharges. what can i say? control suits me. go national. go like a pro. ( ♪ ) (grunting) today is your day. crush it. angie's boom chicka pop whole grain popcorn. boom! >> is president trump gaslighting america? my next guest says he is. and she literally wrote the book on that topic. joining me now, cnn political commentator, the author of the new book called "gaslighting america." we love it when trump lies to us. thank you for coming on. and this is my next read. >> great. >> it's gotten great reviews. i can't wait to read it. we've spoken a lot on this show since the president took office about gaslight, even during the campaign about gaslighting. first explain to our audience exactly what gaslighting is and some examples. >> gaslighting is a form of manipulation that is so extreme you begin to question your own reality. and when you raise objections to objectionable things, people say you're hysterical or you're crazy. and this is typically something that happens in abusive relationships, but i think we can apply this dynamic to what is happening with our relationship with the president. but unfortunately, like many toxic relationships, you can escape from, we can't easily escape this. we sort of have to live in this environment and cope with it. so what i do in this book is explain the methods that he uses because he does take very deliberate steps in hopes of taking away that power. >> let's put that up. you identify the steps involved in gaslighting. but do you think if the trump -- do you think it's deliberate? or it's just sort of second nature to him. stake a claim. advance and deny. crea krcreate suspense, discredit opponents, declare victory regardless of facts. >> i don't think he knows he's doing this. i think these are strategies he honed. at his heart, his gatt lighting method is a media . >> the target she honing in on makes it difficult for him the respond. i saw it play out through the gop primary. the textbook is how he took on barack obama with birtherism. he dipped his toes in that water. then he would sort of go on television and say you know, people are saying this. they say if you have interest in it you're a madman. maybe there's something to it. once you see him do this you won't be able to unsee him do it. i hope the more people that see it that it takes that away. >> we see it so close here. we saw the interview where he was asked what evidence do you have that president obama wiretapped -- >> yeah. >> people are saying. >> there are reports on the internet. another favorite one. investigators are on it. there's a report coming soon. so as a media person you to say okay. i will keep covering that story. there is a friendly person that will drum up something. so it is really foolproof. >> yes! the media loves it because it gives them something to cover. republicans love it because it shows he will never back down. even the democrats like it because they keep falling for this fantasy that this will finally be it. it never is. >> that's good because i say the same thing. i remember during a campaign a lot of my friends did not take him serious. i said all right, guys. and even now i think people under estimate his influence on sort of tainting the media, right and how he weaponizes it. you know, it became a cage. he would parade the press out and say look at them. they are fake news. audience would boo against them, cnn or this or that. there was nothing reporters could do because they are supposed to cover the story. they were getting ducksucked in. >> fake news is his way of saying this is what i don't like. >> you say it bears resemblance. >> it's funny how the national inquirer keeps popping up. there was this where the national inquirer said ted cruz was having some kind of affair. this was something donald trump sort of hidden at when he was attacking cruz. he had a tweet saying we are going to spill the beans. there was this thing that cruz had something to hide. what was so crafty about this until it went full blown madness is that no women were named, but the print edition had images of five women with their faces sort of blurred out. it sent a real live witch hunt. one of those women was me. i was doing my job and somebody confronted me on the air. it made it a story i had to fight my way out of. >> thank you. the book is called gaslighting america. there's a movie called gaslighting. it's one of the all time classics. >> read the book first then watch the movie. >> thanks. we'll be right back. to bring together a group of remarkable people. to help save the universe... from paying too much on their car insurance. hey, there's cake in the breakroom... what are you doing? um...nothing? marvel studios' avengers: infinity war, in theaters april 27th. now...where were we? (vo)have to happen?idn't i didn't see it. (vo) what if we could go back? what if our car... could stop itself? in iihs front-end crash prevention testing, nobody beats the subaru impreza. not toyota. not honda. not ford. the subaru impreza. more than a car, it's a subaru. homicide is a number one cause of death for black men ages 15 to 34. for this week's cnn hero an emergency doctor it is a reality that pushed him to take action in and out of the hospital. meet dr. rob gore. >> i don't like pronouncing people dead. it's probably the worst thing that i have ever had do. i want to preserve life. when i see patients coming in with violent injuries, when somebody looks like you from your neighborhood you realize i don't want this to happen anymore. what do we do about it? >> for more go to cnnheros.com. i'll see you back here tomorrow. good evening. we begin with breaking news from the white house. john kelly denying the report that he used the word idiot to describe