tonight as president trump vacations in florida, he's firing warning shots at his political and global adversaries in new tweets. and in a revealing new interview, there's a lot to digest this hour, including the president's new demands for a deal on immigration. he's telling democrats there will be no agreement to protect the so-called dreamers from deportation unless congress funds the promised wall at the u.s./mexican border. and we are following all the studying claims and contradictions in the president's interview with "the new york times." the president arguing that the russia investigation makes the u.s. look bad, even as he says he believes that the u.s. council will treat him fairly. the president also declaring he has an absolute right to do what he wants with the justice department, raising new questions about his intentions and whether he might cross any legal lines. and cnn has learned there's growing concern that north korea may be on the brink of provocative new military action sometime after the first of the year. u.s. officials say the newest intelligence suggests kim jong-un's regime is moving to launching another ballistic missile. this hour, i'll talk about those stories and more with the top democrat on the house foreign affairs committee, congressman elliott engle. and our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. first, i want to go to cnn white house correspondent sarah murray with the president in florida. so sarah, the president was discouraged from holding a year-end news conference, but he's found other ways certainly to vent in these closing days of 2017. >> reporter: that's right, breanna. this president has been largely out of sight this week, but in an unplanned encounter with a reporter, he clearly had plenty to get off his chest, including a number of complaints about the russia investigation. president trump in full vacation mode hosting military members at the palm beach club. >> i said to come use my course. that's okay, you guys have a good time. >> reporter: pausing long enough to rail against the russia investigation in an interview with "the new york times." while he didn't call for an end to the special counsel's probe into potential collusion between trump's presidential campaign and russian officials, the president insisted its damaging. i think it's a very bad thing for the country, he told "the times," because it makes the country look bad. it makes the country look very bad and it puts the country in a very bad position. so the sooner it's worked out, the better it is for the country. in the impromptu interview at his golf club, trump insisted 16 times that no collusion has been uncovered in the various russia investigations. reiterating the frustration he's aired publicly. >> the russia story is a total fabrication. there has been absolutely no collusion. are there any russians here tonight? any russians? >> reporter: trump also lamenting that attorney general jeff sessions recused himself from the russia probe, insisting such a move wouldn't have happened under former attorney general eric holder. i don't want to get into loyalty, but i will tell you that i will say this, holder because he knows that he can't really order them to do anything that he wants them to do. >> and to that point, he said that the former attorney general totally protected president obama. that was his characterization of how that worked. and he said, he, trump, had great respect for that. >> yeah, there's a lot that was packed into that short little bite there from the new york times interview. and look, i think what he's telegraphing, again, is that he's very unhappy with jeff sessions. we have heard it before. and i think he knows that what jeff sessions, or he believes, rather, jeff sessions did by recusing himself in the russia investigation, which, by the way, he had no choice to do given his role in the campaign, he feel that is that has cast a cloud under his administration. it's true, but it's part of his way of expressing that frustration. i think he thinks that what sessions has done is unforgivable. you keep hearing that. >> and paul manafort is caught up in the web of the special counsel investigation. it's so interesting to hear trump talk about it because he really distances himself. like he only worked for me for, quote, a few months. and yet this was a key player at a key time in the trump campaign. >> oh, absolutely. but you hear that repeatedly from people at the white house. and i think it is part of the strategy, it is the political and legal strategy, which is to distance the president from any of these people. he barely knows paul manafort. i have heard people at the white house say that he barely knew mike flynn who was his national security adviser. i mean, we have pictures -- >> their offices are like feet away from each other. >> everybody has been fired except for mike pence. everybody is gone. so, i mean, the amazing thing is that there is this repeated effort by the white house to distance themselves, to distance the president, rather, from mike flynn and anybody else who has gotten caught up in this investigation. >> evan perez, thank you so much. now let's get reaction to all of this from democratic congressman elliott engle, the ranking member of the foreign affairs committee. sir, thank you so much for being with us today. >> thank you. >> so this interview has trump saying 16 times that there was no collusion. and he also says that democrats agree that there is no collusion. i am assuming that is some news to you, that characterization of how democrats feel? >> well, we know that, first of all, russia interfered with our last election. what we don't know is what kind of collusion there was in the trump administration. and i and others believe that there probably has been a great deal of collusion. that's why the president is always sort of toning it down or putting it down. and it's very, very serious, because russia is not a friendly nation. it's an adversarial nation. and i don't care who russia was helping, whether it was hillary clinton or donald trump. i don't want the russians interfering in our democracy. and the president seems to always dismiss it and say there's nothing to it. but we know there is something to it. it's not a matter of is there anything to it. we know it is. we just want to find out if there was collusion with the trump campaign. >> he refers to dianne feinstein, democratic senator, and he seems to say that she's saying that there's no collusion. if you look at her comments, it's more closely that she is saying that it seems like things are pointing in the direction of obstruction of justice. so when you see him, basically using that as something to exonerate himself, what does that tell you about how he views the possibility of obstruction of justice as a direction of this investigation? >> the obstruction of justice, of course, is something very serious. and, you know, what bothers me is that the president often talks about the justice department, that he basically controls it, i mean, he's president of the united states, he's not a king or an emperor or dictator, and he just doesn't seem to understand that he is subjected to the same laws that we are also subjected to. so he just has this annoyance when anybody wants to find out the truth. all we're looking for is the truth. mr. mueller is impeccable. has an impeccable reputation. he's a republican. he's certainly not out to do in the republican president. he's out to find the truth. and i have confidence in him. and i believe that we will get to the truth. but it's looking awfully suspicious about russia and looking awfully suspicious about the president's inability to point a finger at russia for interfering in our democracy. >> he said in this interview in response to a question about whether he would ask the department of justice to reopen the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mails, which is something some of your republican colleagues have called for, he says he has the right to do whatever he wants with the justice department. what did you -- what did you think about that? >> well, he doesn't. and, of course, he's not a king nor an emperor. that's a very carry attitude and a very scary statement. i wish they would just leave hillary clinton alone. she lost the election. and they keep trying to drag her back as if some kind of whooping gal. but that's ridiculous. we're looking to see what the president is doing or has done or what his administration is doing or has done and what his campaign is doing or has done. and they can use hillary clinton to try to distract everybody, but the bottom line is, mueller is there as special counsel. and i want him to just work his work, let him find out where the bodies are buried if they are, or if they are not. i think he's fair, even the president thought he was fair. but right now we hear in washington, roamings about attempts to try to degrade him or make mueller seem as if he's biased. that's not true. and i look forward to seeing what mueller comes up with. i want the truth. i'm not looking to go after anybody. i think the truth, we need to know the truth. >> as the ranking member of the foreign affairs committee, i do want to see what you thought about what he said about north korea and china. because he said that essentially it is really up to china to really deal with north korea. what is your opinion on that? >> well, you know, the president has said so many different things. it's almost like it's flying by the seat of your pants. yes, north korea is very serious, probably the most serious situation we have now. the president has called kim jong-un, who was a terrible person, all kinds of names, rocket man, things like that, which aren't really helpful. this is a very important and zip plomatic standoff. >> is china the key here? >> i think china is one of the keys. and russia may be one of the keys, too. china is supplying north korea with oil. russia has taken in guest workers from north korea, which brings the regime a lot of revenue. and, china and russia are not my cup of tea, but if we need to work with them to try to get north korea to back down, and that might not even be possible, but we need to trichlt and we don't -- >> i want to ask you, you said china's supplying oil to north korea, because that is something the president says. we haven't been able to confirm that with u.s. sources. that is coming from south korea. is that the case, as you understand it? you have factual understanding that china is supplying oil to north korea? or just stands to reason? >> well, it stands to reason. and the president said it, and i assume that part is true. but the question is, we need to use -- >> i just want to be clear, congressman, because he seemed to indicate, it seemed like he might have been saying that he got it from fox news. and i'm just -- have you been briefed and told that indeed this is the case? >> no, we have not been classified on that. >> okay. you do believe that china is giving oil to north korea. that seems to stand to reason as you say, but the u.s. department of treasury released these images, which i want to show you. this is what we have been talking about. the treasury department said that this is a north korean ship. they didn't say what the other ship was. so you're still awaiting more information on this, right? >> i'm awaiting more information. but i want to tell you, i've been to north korea and pyongyang twice. and i'll never forget when we met with the high-level officials there. it was just after saddam hussein had been deposed and said to us, saddam hussein didn't have nuclear weapons and look where he is today. implying, of course, that the north koreans would never give up on obtaining nuclear weapons. and frankly, it's been a failure in multiple administrations that we let it get to this point where it is difficult. there's no way that north korea can beat the united states in any kind of a war. but the fact is, a million people or more could die if there was ever, god forbid, a nuclear war on the korean peninsula. so i think instead of calling names, i think instead of pointing fingers, we really aught to get down to quiet diplomacy because i think north korea is on a very bad road. and we are, of course, waiting in a few days or weeks that they may have another missile test. >> that's right. and i want to get to break and talk to you about that afterwards, because north korea has warned that the next test could be an atmospheric test. a very scary thing. we'll discuss that with congressman eliot engle, the ranking democrat of the house foreign affairs committee, right after this. i used to have more hair. i used to have more color. and... i used to have cancer. i beat it. i did. not alone. i used to have no idea what the american cancer society did. research? yeah. but also free rides to chemo and free lodging near hospitals. i used to maybe give a little. then i got so much back. i used to have cancer. call 1-800-494-4357 today. your contributions to the american cancer society fund valuable research. but that's just the beginning. a cancer diagnosis can kick off years of challenge. and that's where your donation truly shines. you help us fund free rides to treatment. a live 24/7 help line, free lodging near treatment centers. and even efforts to expand access to insurance. so, please - donate today at cancer.org and help attack cancer from every angle. ♪ (christmas marching band music) (drumsticks click) ♪ ♪ give a little bit ♪ ♪ give a little bit... -hello. ♪ give a little bit... ♪ ... of your love to me oh, haha. ♪ there's so much that we need to share ♪ ♪ so send a smile and show that you care ♪ ♪ i'll give a little bit of my love to you ♪ we are back now with the top democrat on the house foreign affairs committee, eliot engle. as we get more information on the missile threat from north korea, congressman, we want to talk to you about that. if you can just standby for the next report, because right now i want to bring in cnn's pentagon correspondent, barbara starr. barbara, what are you learning? >> well, good evening, breanna. u.s. officials are telling me tonight they are seeing signs that north korea might be preparing for yet another ballistic missile test. they had wondered over the last few days, could it be a missile test, could it be a satellite launch? it's beginning to look like the preparations and the moving around of the equipment means a potential missile test still remains to be seen if the regime carries through and goes ahead and conducts a test. they don't see it as eminent but it could happen after the new year. that makes the timing sensitive as we are heading to south korea hosting the winter olympics. rex tillerson is traveling to canada to meet with the allies after the first of the year to discuss north korea. a lot of sensitive timing, a lot of effort to keep the situation on the peninsula quiet and calm during this period. earlier today, defense secretary james mattis visited with pentagon reporters in an end-of-the-year visit. and he was asked about north korea. he said he's not at all impressed by their test program, but he also said that he's very much on the page of diplomacy by economic efforts. it's not just words, he said, there are economic efforts. a very clear sign that the defense secretary very much like the state department is looking for the allies to do more in the realm of both economic sanctions and diplomacy. brianna? >> thank you for that report, barbara starr. i want to get back to congressman eliot engle. you heard barbara's report there. and the north koreans have warned that the next test could be an atmospheric nuclear test. are you concerned that this may be what we see for this next test? and if not this next test, that it will come soon? >> well, of course i'm concerned. and i think that's the biggest thing we have to face in the foreign policy. you have a regime that doesn't really care what the world thinks. the u.n. just sanctioned them again. so this is not going to be easy. we have to involve our allies and involve countries that can, perhaps, influence north korea. but we have no guarantee. this to me is a most dangerous situation that we face today in the entire world. >> if north korea tests a nuclear missile, how should the u.s. respond? >> well, i think we have to respond again by slapping sanctions. it hasn't work in the past. you know, we had the cold war with the soviet union and the united states. and there was never a nuclear war because there was a deterrence. they understood if they made certain moves there would be a price to pay. at some point, north korea is going to have to understand that as well. and so i think that perhaps that will ultimately make it, make it less likely that there would be a war. but they have to understand that we're not just going to sit there and allow them to get stronger and stronger at a point where they can bully everybody in the world. >> do you worry kim jong-un's risk tolerance is higher than that of the ussr during the cold war? >> yes, i do worry that. i do worry that. that's why it's so important that we have to not only take matters into our own hands, but involve other countries, involve our allies. and as i said before, involve china and russia as well. i don't think that china necessarily wants to see north korea strengthened in terms of the nuclear ars nachlt and i don't think that russia wants it either. we need to just do it. but instead, we seem to be falling back and forth and insulting him on the one hand, kim jong-un, and talking strong about him and the other hand insulting china on the one hand and talking strongly about them. helping them in another hand. there needs to be more consistency. and we need to do it with the rest of the world. this is not a game. this is -- i am very serious, there's a lot of real stories. >> you have been watching because you represent a portion of the bronx, not the area where this deadly fire occurred last night, but this was the deadliest fire since 1990 that killed at least 12 people in an apartment building there in the bronx. the new york fire department says the fire was started by a 3-year-old child playing with burners in a first-floor apartment. do we know anything more about how the fire was able to spread so quickly aside from the fact that the door was not closed to the apartment. what about measures to prevent the flames from spreading so quickly? >> well, we don't really know what happened right now. there are lots of these buildings all over the bronx. i'm from the bronx and still live there. i represent a portion of it. they are still investigating and want to make sure that the landlord provided everything that was supposed to be provided. and we just don't know. it's just a shame, because apparently when the woman slammed her door, she ran off her children. the fire and the smoke went all the way up to the fifth floor and they made it -- some people went out on their fire escapes. it just breaks my heart. i was not far from there three days ago. it is just a terrible, terrible thing. >> eliot engle, thank you so much for talking to us about all these things today. and a happy new year to you. >> thank you, brianna, same to you. just ahead, we'll talk about the declaration and the absolute right to do what he wants with the justice department. do he understand the scope and limits of his power? and president trump's cold temperatures across the country to cast doubt on climate change. is made of. y but right now, our bond is fraying. how do we get back to "us"? the y fills the gaps. and bridges our divides. donate to your local y today. because where there's a y, there's an us. jack and jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. all because of a burst water pipe in their house that ruined the hardwood floors in their kitchen. luckily the geico insurance agency had helped them with homeowners insurance and the inside of their house was repaired and floors replaced. jack and jill no longer have to fetch water. they now fetch sugar-free vanilla lattes with almond milk. call geico and see how affordable homeowners insurance can be. i mwell, what are youe to take care odoing tomorrow -10am? staff meeting. noon? eating. 3:45? uh, compliance training. 6:30? sam's baseball practice. 8:30? tai chi. yeah, so sounds relaxing. alright, 9:53? i usually make their lunches then, and i have a little vegan so wow, you are busy. wouldn't it be great if you had investments that worked as hard as you do? yeah. introducing essential portfolios. the automated investing solution that lets you focus on your life. or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com. tonight the president's surprise interview with "the new york times" is offering a new window into his thinking as he heads into his second year in the office as well as midterm elections. his news on the russia election and his power over the justice department are getting some of the toughest scrutiny. i want to bring in our analysts and specialists to talk about this. susan hen cy, starting with you, donald trump was asked in this interview if he was going to order the doj to reopen the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mails. and this is what he said, quote, i have the absolute right to do what i want with the justice department, but for purposes of hopefully thinking i'm going to be treated fairly, and he's talking about the russia investigation, i've stayed uninvolve in this particular matter, talking about the e-mail investigation. legally speaking, does he have the right to do what he wants to do with the doj? >> so, he is the head of the executive branch. so the president does have very, very broad authority to set priorities, fire people, sort of the way he might carry that out. that said, this is yet another example of a pretty dramatic overstatement by the president. he can't discharge those authorities in a way that has a corrupt purpose or violates the law. it's sort of a legal issue, there's a strong e normative tradition in the justice department. some decisions are made at the political level. some decisions are needing political accountability, but a lot of important decisions are made by career officials who really carefully are separated from the political considerations from the white house in order to avoid sort of perceptions of politicization, which is exactly what the president seems to be attempting to create now. >> you are the lead political editor of npr. thank you for being with us. so, clearly legally speaking, there are some hurdles for the president when he makes this claim, but politically speaking, what are the hurdles? because, in addition to their being legal lines, there are also political realities about what a president can and can not do. >> absolutely. when it comes to what susan is talking about, when it comes to presidents in the past, when it comes to trying to maintain an optical difference between the white house and the department of justice, any time you watch a hearing for any attorney general, that person is going to be asked, can you make a decision that is separate from the president of the united states, can you be independent of the president if you need to be? and they have to say yes. if they can't say yes to that, then there's no way that they will be confirmed. and the president is supposed to know that. that's why the president normally will stay away from trying to, you know, influence the justice department into specific investigations. now, of course he has the right to fire someone like rod rosenstein, in charge extensively of the investigation at this point, because he's the acting attorney general below the -- below jeff sessions as the attorney general, because he recused himself from the investigation sessions. so he would have to fire rosenstein to be able to then oust mueller, because the president can't directly affect that. but that would be his end road. and that would be sort of the similarity to the saturday night massacre from the nixon administration. >> or he could fire someone like, hey, jim comey, which he did. then you see this whole can of worms that it opens for him. harri harriet, it seems like, this is not the first time we have heard him say something like this, does he really have an appreciation for where the boundaries are? >> i don't think he does. i think he's trying -- what i see him doing is more trying to set limits. he's trying to brow-beat mueller, i would have to say. i'm going to say there's no collusion, so if you indict me, i'm going to make sure the reign of force of the republican party is coming against you. if reality is if trump would try to fire mueller, the presidency would change. with the help of democrats, he would be impeached immediately after this. it would be a mistake. the comey thing was a huge story. rosenstein or mueller would be that times two. so he can't do this politically, i don't think. >> the ramifications of doing something like that. because you have heard democrats say, david swordlik, they are concerned he may fire him. doing so would be a mushroom cloud. >> i agree with you. i hear the president putting down a marker. right now they don't want to go full-steam ahead with the mueller investigation because they understand that their political problems ratchets up tremendously after he fired director comey. but he was reserving the right to, so then later on down the road, the circle titans, they can say, look, we have been saying all along, we have the power to do this. and that is what he was trying to talk about. >> the fact of the matter is he's almost putting a threat out there. he's saying be fair. as long as you are fair to me, everything will be fine and i'll leave it alone. remember, he did this during the 2016 campaign, too, with the republican national committee. he said, as long as you're fair, then i'm not going to run independent. and he held that over their heads. and i think if you read between the lines, he's doing something similar here. >> he certainly does have his rhetorical markers he puts out there. stick around, we have so much more to talk about, including something the president said this morning. just ahead, the president is making new demands of democrats. will that encourage bipartisanship in the new year? our biggest bloom. our biggest entrees ever. outback steakhouse. aussie rules. and now, get a free $10 bonus card with every $50 in gift cards. you or joints. something for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. and we're back now with our analyst as president trump sets new terms for a potential deal with democrats on immigration. so david, we have heard the president optimistic about working with democrats in a number of areas, infrastructure, health care, and also on dreamers, undocumented immigrants who come to the u.s. as children, no other home besides america, and find themselves in danger, potentially of being doe ported and not allowed to work here, sometimes not go to school here. today he tweets the democrats and said basically no daca without a wall. what do you really think the prospects are for bipartisan cooperation in 2018? >> with that tweet today before or during the holidays, in a way, he may have done the democrats a favor by letting them know, they need to be singing from the same sheet of music next week when they have the scheduled leadership meeting at the white house to talk about this. there's pressure on both sides of this, right? for democrats, this is something the base wants, to protect the dreamers. for republicans, though, they don't want to further shrink their base or shrink their party by having something drastic happen to the dreamers, including the president has hinted at that, and he knows he can only afford to lose one vote in the senate on any deal that's done. so both have to figure out a way to navigate this. >> is this, perry, going to be a big immigration fight in january? >> i think it will. it's a bluster from trump. he knows that the wall he talked about during the campaign is not going to be built. you noticed that they have downplayed it. but this is a situation where he's demanding some kind of heavy border security measures that democrats will be likely opposed to. and he will insist upon those. i do think we're headed to a fight that will be pretty intense here. >> do you think that the markers laid out came as a surprise to any democrats? >> no. i think this is sort of the usual way that trump sort of talks about this stuff. and i think that the democrats are probably thrilled about this kind of thing. because as you head into 2018 and democrats traditionally during midterms need to fire up non-white and younger voters, this is an issue that resonates with them. and the longer this kind of immigration fight and talk of immigration moves through 2018, democrats are happy to have that fight. >> when you look at the map for 2018, you have ten democrats up for re-election in the senate who are from states that trump won. so they are getting squeezed there. and it was with their aid that trump and republicans were able to continue funding the government. a lot of democrats in the house voted against the funding bill. there could have been a government shutdown if some of those democrats had said, no, no, no, we want a deal with the dreamers. they didn't do that. maybe perhaps not surprising, but did they give up leverage? >> look, it's a potential -- there's a potential for blacklash whenever democrats appear to be politicizing something serious and something they want to implement. so they can't look like they're turning down a deal. but as president trump is coming and saying, forget it without a wall, i'm not approving this, then at a certain point, even the liberal base realizes that the president's not really being -- negotiating in good faith. >> i want you all to weigh in on this next question. one other part of the interview that stood out was where donald trump said, we are going to win another four years for a lot of reasons. he's talking about the presidency, obviously. most importantly because our country is starting to do well again and being respected again. but another reason that i'm going to win another four years is because newspapers, television, all forms of media will tank if i'm not there because without me, their ratings are going down the tubes. susan hennessy, what are your thoughts on that? >> it is an incredibly revealing comment. you hear prior presidents, barack obama, george bush, talk about being profoundly transform in their first year of office, sort of by the gravity of the endeavor they are engaged in. trump, a year in, appears to still be talking about this like it's a reality television show. like it's all about entertainment. >> it is kind of, a little bit, like a reality television show. >> i also think it's a furtherance of the media. saying that the media is not here to just report the facts as they stand. they have some sort of personal bias. they are in it for the ratings. they are part of this game as well. >> i would think that he's right on the fact that his presidency has created more interest from the public. with president obama, there are more stories getting read on certain websites, i think that is true, but there's a pew report showing he's had much more negative media coverage than obama and george bush or bill clinton did in his first year of office. the media -- his ratings are terrible. so the media is helping him do much better in terms of winning the election, because he's the most unpopular first-year president we've had in a long time. >> he's a guy on camera who also wants to be a producer. he's like, hey, i want control. >> hey, what's the matter with that? >> i want control over the lighting and the cameras. >> i know some people like that. >> i think it is typical trump bluster and think he's overstating his value. the first african-american president was big news. the first reality show president is big news. let's say if there's a woman president next time, that will be big news. we in the mainstream media will be just fine. >> but this has been a wild time. >> it's been wild, but yeah, there's always news, president trump, always news. >> there's always other news, although there's a lot of news to cover with this president. thank you so much. david, susan, domenico, perry, thank you so much. we appreciate it. dangerous windchill values across the nation. standby for the latest weekend forecast. and as americans bundle up, the president is doubling down on his skepticism on climate change. is he confused on the difference between weather and global warming? cob)r every hour that you're idling in your car, you're sending about half a gallon of gasoline up in the air. that amounts to about 10 pounds of carbon dioxide every week. (malo hutson) growth is good, but when it starts impacting our quality of air and quality of life, that's a problem. so forward-thinking cities like sacramento are investing in streets that are smarter and greener. the solution was right under our feet. asphalt. or to be more precise, intelligent asphalt. by embedding sensors into the pavement, as well as installing cameras on traffic lights, we will be able to analyze the flow of traffic. then that data runs across our network, and we use it to optimize the timing of lights, so that travel times are shorter. who knew asphalt could help save the environment? ♪ on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. they appear out of nowhere. my secret visitors. appearing next to me in plain sight. hallucinations and delusions. these are the unknown parts of living with parkinson's disease. what stories they tell. but for my ears only. what plots they unfold. but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's will experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. and these can worsen over time, making things even more challenging. but there are advances that have led to treatment options that can help. if someone you love has parkinson's and is experiencing hallucinations or delusions, talk to your parkinson's specialist. because there's more to parkinson's. my visitors should be the ones i want to see. learn more at moretoparkinsons.com tonight, we are monitoring life threatening weather conditions across much of the country. temperatures are plumeting. the record lows as new year's eve approaches with millions at risk from dangerous windchills. our meteorologist is in the weather center with a brand-new forecast. tell us what you're seeing there. >> yes, a lot has changed since this morning. this morning when we were talking about windchill advisories and warnings, we were talking about less than 10 million, but that number has jumped huge. now, we are over 30 million people under some type of windchill alert. watch, warning or advisory. this takes into account not just the temperature, but also the wind that will be out there. so this is going to be the feels like temperature. what it feels like on your wod di body if you're standing outside. for example, tomorrow morning as you are waking up in boston, it is fwoipg to feel like minus 13. it gets worse though as the next wave moves in. because monday morning it's going to feel like minus 22. chicago, minus 16. sunday morning. minus 23 on monday. the reason you're noticing two separate waves is because we have the current one now. we get a break for some folk, then the next wave comes through especially sunday into monday. the thing to understand, it's not just going to affect the midwest and northeast. they may have colder number, but the cold air is going to dip as far south as texas and georgia. dallas may not even hit 30 for a high temperature on monday. atlanta, georgia may barely make it above freezing for their high on monday. the thing that makes this such a big issue is what the impacts are to your body. you naturally have a layer of heat that's on the exterior of your body. it surrounds you, but when you start to fakih r tor wind in, that layer gets blown away. it makes it very difficult for you to he witell how quickly yoe body heat and hypothermia can can set in. this is why it's so important for people to understand and unfortunately, adding insult to injury, a lot of these areas are going to get snow on top of that. these are the winter weather advisories and winter storm warnings that are in effect for areas of the midwest and northeast. now notice widespread you're looking at numbers about 2 to 4 inches. however, the areas that will have the highest numbers are along the great lakes. that means yes, even the town of erie, pennsylvania, could get an additional foot of snow on top of the nearly 6 feet that they've already seen in the last week. this is going to be as we make our way all the way up to the kn new year. >> wow, thank you so much for bringing us that. now the president is taking some notice of the frigid weather across the country even as he enjoys sunny florida, which sounds lovely and in the process, he is raising some new questions about his views on and understanding of climate change. our government regulation correspondes is here with this. so the president managed to make a tweet about the weather controversial. >> yeah, weather is very political. especially coming from the president. his tweet certainly plays to the base, but it also highlights how out of step president trump's policies are with science. it also magnifies his misunderstanding of a science behind climate change. and tonight, scientists are calling the president's weather tweet irresponsible. the president using the cold snap in the u.s. to cast doubt on climate change. tweeting in the east, it could be the coldest new year's eve on record. perhaps we could use a little bit of that gold old global warming our country, but not other countries, was going to pay trillions of doll hars to protect against. bundle up. it's the same argument senator jim inhoff made on the senate floor. >> we keep hearing that 2014 has been the warmest year on record. i ask the chair, you know what this is? it's a snowball. and just from outside here. so it's very, very cold out. >> inhoff and the president mistakenly suggesting cold weather means climate change is in the president's words, a hoax. >> it's like saying that if everybody around me is wealthy then poverty's not a problem. it misses the bigger picture. local weather is not an indicator of changes in climb. we all experience local weather. >> nasa says 2017 was one of the warmest years on record. and 97% of climate scientists agree. climate change is real and poses a threat. this map from the university of maine shows while we're in a deep freeze, the rest of the planet is above average. scientists say devastating hurricanes from florida to texas to puerto rico and deadly wildfires out west were exacerbated by rising temperatures. >> the president who dismissed the seriousness of global warming, something causing hardship to americans today and will continue to do so in the future is completely irresponsible. >> the effort to undermine science has been ongoing since he took office. wiping ref renlss to climate change from its website, removing scientists from the agency's advisory boards. >> my administration is putting an end to the war on coal. >> and rolling back many environmental regulations, including the obama era clean power plant. an initiative to curb greenhouse gas emissions at coal fired power plants and rejecting an international agreement to fight climate change. >> the united states will withdraw from the paris climate accord. >> the trillions of dollars in trump's thursday tweet was an apparent reference to the potential cost of the paris climate accord to the u.s. economy. and estimate that's been disputed. the united states now the only country in the world not a part of the initiative. the president sees pulling out of the paris climate accord as a way to save the country money, but the government accountability office released a report in october that said that the u.s. government has spent more than $350 billion over the past decade in response to extreme weather events and they predict we will end up spending even more if more isn't done to curb carbon emissions. >> great report. thank you so much for that. and stay with cnn on new year's eve. especially if you are in duluth, chicago, fargo or somewhere near there. it's going to be cold. you should stay in with anderson cooper and andy cohn ringing in 2018. that will begin at 8:00 p.m. eastern. thank you so much for watching. to our viewers, a very happy new year. erin burnett "outfront" starts now. "outfront" next, president trump says he believes the mueller investigation will be fair to him. because in his words, there is no collusion. is he sending a message directly to the special counsel? plus, wall street had a record-shattering 2017. does president trump deserve the credit? and dangerously cold temperatures to ring in the new year. how bad will it get in we are live in times square. let's go "outfront."

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Australia , Georgia , Paris , France General , France , Texas , Atlanta , China , Florida , Boston , Massachusetts , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , Russia , Puerto Rico , North Korea , Pennsylvania , Dallas , South Korea , Chicago , Illinois , Americans , America , Soviet , Russian , North Koreans , Russians , Aussie , Susan Hennessy , Malo Hutson , Saddam Hussein , Randy Cohn , Elliott Engle , Barack Obama , Barbara Starr , Kim Jong , Eliot Engle , Rex Tillerson , George Bush , Erin Burnett , Jim Comey , Evan Perez ,