Skip to main content

tv   CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin  CNN  March 5, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PST

11:00 am
before the crash. his brother describes him as a best friend and a father figure ever since their dad died when they both were young. >> everything that brandon did was at the highest level, so loved by so many people. it's crazy. >> david mark baker was the fourth and final victim to be identified and the cause of this crash is still under investigation. that is it for me. erica hill is in for brooke baldwin and "newsroom" starts right now. hello, and thanks for joining me. i'm he cana hill in for today for brooke baldwin. we begin this hour for new signals of where house democrats may be focusing their investigations into president trump. chairman of the house intelligence committee adam schiff announcing he's hired a veteran prosecutor with experience in going after russian organized crime. daniel goldman worked as a attorney for the southern district of new york, jeffrey
11:01 am
toobin is here, so who is daniel goldman and why is he seen as the right person for hire in this role? >> he was a decade long prosecutor in the southern district of new york, the distinguished u.s. attorney's office here in manhattan and he had a specialty in organized crime but specifically he supervised and tried himself cases involving russian organized crime. so the way the congressional committees are dividing up the investigations is the schiffs intelligence committee is really dealing with russia. all of the preelection stuff either dealing with the issue of collusion and the trump tower/moscow, that's all under his pursue so you want someone that knows something about russia. >> that gives us a sense into his play book, obviously. it also is yet another signal that democrats are not waiting for mueller.
11:02 am
>> and yesterday we saw the house judiciary committee ask 81 people and entities for both documents and testimony and that's all related to issues since trump became president. intelligence is largely dealing with before trump became president. jerry nadler is talking about abuse of power and obstruction of justice, corruption regarding the trump presidency. now the lines between these committees are not entirely clear and you can anticipate the turf conflicts may arise but for the moment at least, that's exactly -- that's how it's being split up. >> could make for an interesting venn diagram. we have this new poll out that says 64% of registered voters say trump, president trump, committed crimes before becoming president. now if you divide that, that's 89% of democrats, 65% of independents, 33% of republicans. 64% of registered voters
11:03 am
overall, one would imagine, adam schiff, also paying attention to that polling. >> you know what's interesting about that poll is that 33% of republicans think he committed crimes, but 90% of republicans approve, so basically you've got 25% of republicans, saying, yeah, he's a crook but he's our crook, so it's all good which is a remarkable way to look at it, but, you know, so many polls of the trump presidency all come out the same way. basically, a third of the people think he's great, little more than half think he's terrible, no matter what question you ask, all the polls shake out the same way. they've been remarkably stable. >> which is fascinating. michael cohen and donald trump asked directly whether they believe cohen or trump more, 50% chose michael cohen, 35% chose donald trump as who they believe more. >> that's just the same
11:04 am
percentage. >> whether it was about charlottesville or helsinki or the kids in the border, any issue related to the president, 30% stand by him, 55 don't like him and then there's a don't know percentage in there, but it is remarkable. it used to be that presidents approval ratings went up and down a lot. the trump presidency -- essentially, we pay attention to these little changes, it's been unchanged for two years. >> interesting to see. we'll continue to follow it. always good to see you. thank you. >> nice to see you. one day after nearly everyone in the president's orbit became a potential witness for congressional investigators, the white house is pushing back calling the 81 letters of inquiry sent by house democrats, a quote, fishing expedition that is harassing and shameful. all those names were given two weeks to respond to the judiciary committee. if they try to assert executive privilege, house judiciary chairman jerry nadler says he
11:05 am
won't hesitate to issue subpoenas. kaitlan collins is at the white house and i know you have some new reporting about how the white house is preparing behind the scenes. >> reporter: yeah, they were expecting an onslaught of investigations since the democrats won the house, but they were not prepared for just how broad that scope is. the white house is saying publicly they're going to cooperate, but behind the scenes, erica, they are getting ready to push back on this. they believe the president has a right to confidentiality and especially related to those documents that have to deal with the president's time in the white house, they are going to try to limit the production of those types of documents, which could include potentially his conversations with people like former white house counsel don mcgahn who chairman nadler made several requests of yesterday. white house officials say essentially they feel the democrats have made a misstep here, that this is too broad, too expansive and that they feel
11:06 am
like if they had gone after targeted lines of inquiry, they could have been more successful, but now that they've essentially gone after so many people. you can see there on the screen the president's son, his son-in-law, so many people that they believe they're going to be able to successfully argue that the democrats are on a fishing expedition here. the democrats are not after the truth said sarah huckabee sanders, they're just after the president. >> kaitlan collins with the latest. thank you. robert beanky is a former prosecutor and now host, good to see both of you today. we just hear the reporting from katelyn about what the plans are at the white house and we hear the term executive privilege thrown out there. jennifer, i'm curious, what is the standard in this case? we look at these 81 different people and entities, where could executive privilege honestly be applied? >> that's a great question, because unlike attorney/client privilege, executive privilege hasn't been litigated very much
11:07 am
at all so we don't really know the outer bounds of it. it's supposed to be something that protects advice between the president and his closest advisers. we want the president to rely on people in these areas where others have more expertise than he might. the problem is here, we don't really know what the outer bounds are because it hasn't been litigated yet and i suspect that if they don't like the looks of the mueller report or where things are going, that's where we'll see a broad blanket approach to executive privilege with, if nothing else, we'll at least delay things for a while while that is litigated in the courts. >> that has been -- delayed in the courts? >> actually, to jennifer's point, there's only been two cases, one in the george w. bush administration and the obama administration where for the first time they pushed back on congress's right to issue subpoenas and said, we claim executive privilege and those two cases, while they were in favor of congress's right to issue subpoenas, got sobolics up
11:08 am
and tied up in the court and that's even before it went to the appellate process, eventually congress and the president came to an accommodation but if donald trump who is known to push the areas of constitutional boundaries and separation of powers, decides to say, i'm going the full route, jennifer, this could go on for years before a court makes a final decision. >> wouldn't that be fun? speaking of the things that are still going on, there's new reporting in "the wall street journal" that michael cohen's attorneys did want to discuss a potential pardon. that in and of itself, not illegal, right, to have that conversation, perhaps not surprising, but is there anything -- is there anything that's fishy or wrong here or is this just an attorney doing their job for michael cohen? >> we know as prosecutors -- we use cooperating witnesses all the time that don't come from the best past or backgrounds, but we also say when you sleep with dogs, you can catch fleas. when you go in there and rely
11:09 am
upon him, he has to be pristine from this point forward with regard to all the data and information he gives. if he makes a bald face lie, and we don't know if that's true yet, substantially compromises the rest of his testimony especially in my mind, most importantly, when he said there was a phone call that went on that i listened to with roger stone speaking with the president about julian assange and the email dumps that were come f that can't be substantiated and we find out that cohen lied again, then i think pretty much substantially undermines the value of his testimony. >> when you're looking specifically at the pardon issue, in that reporting "the wall street journal" said that the attorney and i'm quoting here left the impression that in michael cohen couldn't rely on a pardon, he might cooperate. did that also undermine what we've heard from michael cohen? >> well, listen, there's no question that when you get yourself into criminal trouble
11:10 am
as michael cohen clearly was after the fbi executed search warrants against him, they look at all of their options. that's what people do. you think should i cooperate? should i fight it? if i fight it, how far should i go? you do all of those things and in this case there was an extra wild card thrown in, which is, i could get a pardon here because the president of the united states is my former client and i would be testifying against him, right, that's a situation that really no other cooperator -- >> it's rare. >> except cohen and all these other folks are facing. it's not at all surprising that he would take stock of all of these options. that's completely normal. i don't even think it's a big deal if his lawyers in those early days poked around a little bit to see whether pardon was in the option. did he lie about it? i don't think he committed perjury but even if he was misleading in the sense of saying, no, no, i didn't go for that then he has a real credibility issue. >> he said specifically, i never asked for a pardon, which, you
11:11 am
know, could be 100% truthful because if his attorney asked, he wasn't the one doing the asking. representatives lieuen buyer are calling for criminal investigation into jared kushner's security clearance and what's interesting is they note in their letter, we know that lying is not a crime, however, they point out if you did lie on your questionnaire, your application in that sense for security clearance, that's an issue. is this something that has legs do you think? >> i don't think it has legs as a criminal issue. congress has an oversight role here. it's entirely appropriate for them to look into this decision-making processes, what impact the president had on it, whether he interfered, all of that is fair game. i don't think we're going to see a criminal case here, even if they do find that kushner misled people on his forms. that's typically not a criminal issue either in the normal case, so i don't think it'll go that far. i think the inquiry is fair. >> what's your take on it? >> i kind of agree with that, but i also look at it from a
11:12 am
more pragmatic standpoint. that would have to go through the department of justice in order to be prosecuted if they were going to do that which donald trump has complete authority over the justice department. i think it's something we really need to look at as a country. i filled out lots of applications and i was concerned about making sure that i was exactly correct in everything i said because i file those applications under penalty of perjury. in this particular situation, it just wasn't a one off, it's over and over and over again -- >> it's not like i forgot that one thing. there's more to it. >> sometimes you got to make a statement, sometimes you got to say these forms have meaning, these oaths have meaning and if they're continually repeatedly violated, i need to make a point of it even if it successfully doesn't come to an ultimate guilty decision. >> is jared kushner the right one to make that point? that's a tougher one. >> he could be because this is something that's gone on and on and on and he's had a lot of involvement in foreign affair and a lot of this has do with
11:13 am
the disclosure of -- >> or the lack of disclosure. >> and one of the big things our founding fathers were concerned about was the idea that our government officials could be corrupted by the influence of outside foreign influences. to me it goes to the core of the concern of the founding fathers and why there's a separation of powers in order to make sure that does not occur. there's a lot of serious issues here. >> the other thing is, there are a lot of these other people that we're talking about as having potential criminal liability, don junior and others and the president's family, kushner wasn't involved in many of those things. he's not implicated as far as we know in the campaign finance violations as far as we know. to the extent they want to make a statement against kushner, this may be the easier way to do it. >> thank you, both. up next, roger stone may be going to jail. testing the limits of that gag order and, yes, the judge is taking a closer look. plus an old prejudice in new
11:14 am
tweets. why one columnist says elan omar's comments are a page out of the president's play book? another men's championship teams visits the white house, where are the women? they're winning titles but not scoring invites. we'll talk to wnba coach, sheryl reed. ...which is kind of, a lot. and if that pain... could mean something worse? joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain... and helps stop irreversible joint damage. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including... infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system, and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been some place where fungal infections are common... or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever,
11:15 am
bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel... my mom's back to being... my mom. visit and use the joint damage simulator to see how joint damage could progress. ask about embrel. fda approved for over 19 years.
11:16 am
you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't.
11:17 am
and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. you can barely feel. ♪ ♪ t-mobile will do the math for you. right now, when you join t-mobile, you get two lines of unlimited with two of the latest phones included for just one hundred bucks a month. different generations get the same quality of customer service that we have been getting. being a usaa member, because of my service in the military, you pass that on to my kids.
11:18 am
something that makes me happy. being able to pass down usaa to my girls means a lot to both of us. he's passing part of his heritage of being in the military. we're the edsons. my name is roger zapata. we're the tinch family, and we are usaa members for life. to begin your legacy, get an insurance quote today. the man who describes himself as the dirty trickster may be on borrowed time. he was posting a picture with the words, who framed roger stone? a post that may violate his gag order. he's under a strict gag order from the judge.
11:19 am
the judge imposed the order after stone posted another picture which showed the judge's face and gun carrot hairs. this is the judge also looking into the stone's book which he failed to tell her back. the book attacks mueller. kevin sharp say former federal judge and joins us now. based on what you've seen here, did roger stone violate the gag order with this latest instagram post over the weekend? >> the first time he came out with the cross hairs setting aside the foolishness of even doing something like that, there was a question on whether or not it violated the order. she fixed that. this order, this last order was pretty clear, don't do it and he did. i don't see how you get around that. i can't see an explanation that makes sense. >> it's also -- in terms of the explanation that makes sense, it leads you to wonder why, why would -- just pull from your experience here if you can, a
11:20 am
defendant who was told not to do it very clearly as you point out and yet would continue to push and really play with fire like this, have you ever run into someone like this and did you ever get any of those answers? >> you know, not exactly in his situation, but you do run into defendants like this and that was my first question of, you know, why? the judge put down a clear order, why do you come out so quickly after that and do something like this and i have seen it before with defendants in front of me. there is a motive, right? it could be some mental illness but i don't think so. so what is he trying to do but test the judge? is she serious? am i testing her if i'm roger stone, am i saying go ahead, you know, hold me in contempt or revoke my pretrial release and is there a motive for that? does he think that this helps him raise money? does this make a point?
11:21 am
does it increase awareness of what it was that got him punished to begin with? there's a motive behind it. what it is? and it makes it difficult for the judge, because you can't let this go. you've got to keep control of your courtroom, but you also don't want to fall into the trap that a defendant might be trying to set for you, but at the -- >> what kind of trap would this be for the judge? >> one that makes her look bad. one that let's him say to the world someone's trying to infringe on my first amendment right or my right to protect myself or my right to defend myself, rather. and so does this make her look like she's trying to tilt the scale, right, put her thumb on the scale? that may have had some -- some likelihood that that was possible earlier but you really left her no choice.
11:22 am
>> stay with us for a minute, if you would. we're getting new reporting in and i want to go to our sarah murray who has more on that in terms of the gag order. what are you learning? >> reporter: the judge is telling that roger stone that her gag order -- at least when it comes to this rerelease of the book where he wrote this new introduction, it's very critical of the investigation, excuse me, that that shouldn't have been out there but she wants a lot more information from roger stone about communications he had with his publisher and also about ways he has tried to abide by this gag order. she also runs through the fact that he had a number of opportunities to bring this book up before, he didn't do it, he failed to do it in a hearing and she points out that the only reason she's under this district gag order is because he violated the first conditions that she set out. she originally said, you know, you are free to be out there to talk about the news, you're free to be out there to talk about the case and he decided to post a very incendiary picture with
11:23 am
cross hairs over her shoulder and that's how he lost that right. she is saying, i want more information. >> sarah, thanks for that. kevin sharp, quickly, as you weigh in on that -- let's go to the president now who's speaking at the signing for an executive order. >> they want to do that instead of getting legislation passed. 81 people or organizations got letters. it's a disgrace. it's a disgrace to our country. i'm not surprised it's happening. basically they've started the campaign so the campaign begins, but the campaign's -- their campaign's been going on for the last two and a half years. it's a shame. and the people understand that when they look at it, they just say presidential harassment, but that's okay. no administration has accomplished probably you could say this with absolute certainty in the first two years anywhere near what we've accomplished, whether it's the tax cuts, whether it's regulation cuts,
11:24 am
whether it's the veterans administration what we've done with the veterans administration with choice and so many other things that nobody thought would be possible to get passed. no administration has done in its first two years what the trump administration has done, so what the democrats want to do, they cannot stand the loss, they could not stand losing in 2016. i see it all the time. i see people getting on. i saw a certain person get up yesterday, the anger, the anger and they just haven't gotten used to the fact that we won a lot of states that haven't been won by republicans in a long time, but essentially what they're saying is the campaign begins -- instead of doing infrastructure, instead of doing health care, instead of doing so many things that they should be doing, they want to play games. president obama, from what they tell me, was under a similar kind of a thing, didn't give one letter. they didn't do anything. they didn't give one letter.
11:25 am
many requests were made. they didn't give a letter. it's too bad because i'd rather see them do legislation, we negotiate out legislation -- things we agree on like infrastructure, but they want to focus on nonsense, so i just want to end by thanking all of the people that are in this room today, very special people, the job you've done for the v.a. is incredible and just keep up the good work and second, you've been fantastic. thank you very much. >> sir -- >> thank you all. >> president trump speaking there. he was talking -- mentioned the veterans in the room because this was a signing for an executive order on the national road map to empower veterans and end veteran's suicide. he did not take any questions at the end but he did weigh in on those letters sent to 81 people and entities from the house judiciary committee yesterday. according to the president, he said it's a shame.
11:26 am
it's presidential harassment. he said over and over again, he believes this is democrats in his words, starting the campaign, that they can't stand losing, they want to play games in his estimation, but again saying, he thinks it's too bad. he'd rather work on legislation. we will continue to follow this as we move forward. as the president spoke, we were getting word from the oversight committee, they're not happy with the white house's response to their demands, so stand by for more on that. too long. ♪ ♪ now i'm wondering if your loves still strong. ♪ ♪ ooo baby, here i am, signed, sealed, delivered, i'm yours ♪ applebee's 3 course meal now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.
11:27 am
and your mother told me all her life that i should fix it. now it reminds me of her. i'm just glad i never fixed it. listen, you don't need to go anywhere dad. meet christine, she's going to help you around the house. the best home to be in is your own. from personal care and memory care, to help around the house, home instead offers personalized in-home services for your loved ones. home instead senior care. to us, it's personal. home instead senior care. we really pride ourselvesglass, on making it easy to get your windshield fixed. with safelite, you can see exactly when we'll be there. saving you time for what you love most. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪ billions of problems. dry mouth? parched mouth? cotton mouth? there's a therabreath for you. therabreath oral rinse and lozenges. help relieve dry mouth using natural enzymes to soothe and moisturize. so you can... breathe easy, there's therabreath at walmart.
11:28 am
means they won't hike your rates over one mistake. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
11:29 am
reach her health goals! i'm in! but first... shelfie! the great-tasting nutrition of ensure. with up to 30 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals! ensure. for strength and energy.
11:30 am
ensure. this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. president trump lashing out
11:31 am
at ilhan omar. she's taking heat again for insinuating pro-israel groups are pushing allegiances to a foreign country which is wildly procreated as an anti-semitic trope. the president is condemning the democratic congresswoman on twitter. i want to bring in dana milbanks. you have a column out titled, ilhan omar is using president trump's playbook. what do you mean by that? >> for american muslim above all have been the victims of this questioning of their loyalty to the country. you've seen it when the president talked of having as a candidate the muslim ban. you see people on the far right saying, well, they believe in sharia law and therefore can't serve in government. you see these anti-sharia laws popping up in most states and it's all about suggesting that
11:32 am
there's divided loyalty there. i think the irony now is we have congresswoman omar doing the same thing in a sense to jewish american by saying that, you know, if you are pro-israel, you are -- you have allegiance to a foreign country. now there's certainly nothing wrong with criticizing israel, get behind blocking foreign aid to israel, those sorts of things aren't perceived as anti-semitic, it's the questioning of a motive just as she did earlier when she said support for israel's all about the benjamin's. it suggests there's something nefarious going on and that people who are supportive of israel, that is, largely american jews have divided loyalties and are not loyal to america. >> it's interesting, though, the way you point it out, how both she and the president are using similar tactics, right? as we look at this on both sides
11:33 am
of the aisle, there is a lot of finger pointing, there's a lot about what aboutism. you have the president calling out congresswoman omar but ignoring senator king. there's this tweet from alexandria ocasio-cortez, if house leadership is creating a standard and committing to calling a resolution for every incident whether it's the congressional black caucus, then that's a clear way to address the issue wen can all understand. it's valid to ask why not if they're not. is it going to be a resolution for every single comment that's made and if so, will that be the standard? if not, can congress actually come up with some sort of a uniform standard? what's your thinking on that? >> first of all, the most important thing would be for the
11:34 am
congresswoman to see what people want her to see. it is true that there are different standards for the two parties. the same -- this weekend as this was going on, you had the president of the united states saying, certain foreign borne members of congress, talking about omar, hate america. so that's virtually identical. the things the president has done, even some anti-semitic things talking about globalists, showing images of prominent american jews as he does this, as he's gone after muslims and others, this has largely been embraced or at least accepted by the republican party. i do think the democrats are holding her to a higher standard than republicans have been holding themselves. i think that's probably also true on me too and other things. the question is, should democrats do the same thing republicans have been doing, sort of circle the wagons and basically look the other way because there are a member of
11:35 am
the tribe. i think that it's probably worthwhile to hold yourself to a higher standard. >> dana milbank, thank you. >> thanks, erica. we are just getting word that house democrats say the white house has rejected their demands for documents related to security clearances in the administration. stand by, we'll have more on that. more news on these investigations. the top democrat on the intelligence committee hiring a former prosecutor who fought russian organized crime. no more excuses with cologuard.
11:36 am
we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do. but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard... i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom.
11:37 am
if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. i get to select my room from the floor plan... free wi-fi... ...and the price match guarantee. so with hilton there is no catch. yeah the only catch is i'm never leaving. no i'm serious, i live here now. book at and get the hilton price match guarantee. about the colonial penn program. here to tell you book at if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price.
11:38 am
a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you, too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the number one most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed, and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. and with this plan, you can pick your payment date, so you can time your premium due date to work with your budget. so call now for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, and it's yours just for calling. so call now.
11:39 am
breaking news. the democrats investigations into president trump expanding and we're learning now the white house has apparently rejected some demands from lawmakers. manu raju is live on the hill with the latest details on that for us. >> reporter: that's right. this is elijah cummins, the chairman, for the last two years as the ranking democrat. he has been asking for information about the security clearance process at the white house raising concerns about
11:40 am
what has happened for a number of white house officials including jared kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior adviser. when he became chairman of this committee in january, he demanded those answers by february 6th. he has not gotten any answers. in the aftermath of a "new york times" report last week saying the president overruled concerns by intelligence officials and allowed jared kushner a security clearance to go forward, well, cummins renewed his demand and saying he want answers by monday. we have just gotten a response from the white house, the white house counsel sent a letter to cummins rejecting the democratic demands and not answering the rank of questions they have. they basically arguing that the committee is not pursuing this under legal grounds. they're not legally obligated to receive this information. they're also saying it's a violation of rules of the house to ask for such an expansive
11:41 am
document request. one section here says, we will not concede the executive's constitutional prerogatives or allow the committee to jeopardize the individual privacy rights of current and former executive branch employees and it also refers to this as radically intrusive demand. this puts the ball back in cummins' court. cummins put out a statement criticizing this move by the white house to essentially reject his line of questioning, not providing these documents. he says in this statement, there's a key difference between a president who exercises his authority under the constitution and a president who overrules career experts and his top advisers to benefit his family members and then conceals his actions from the american people. so this fight intensifying.
11:42 am
expect elijah cummins to move forward potentially with subpoenas and we'll see how the white house ultimately responds as this fight gets ratcheted up on capitol hill. >> manu raju, thank you. i want to bring back in jennifer rogers. as you look at all of this, maybe the next step is subpoenas. that would be a big step. >> it is and i don't think we're quite there yet as the two sides say in their back and forth here, what usually happens is you reach what they call accommodations on these things. you negotiate. we'll give you this. okay, thank you. now we want that and you go back and forth and eventually reach agreements and maybe neither side is completely happy, but honestly, if they issue a subpoena, it'll go to the courts and then as we were discussing earlier, you're tied up for a long time. >> i'm sensing a trend here. i mean that very seriously. this is what we seem to be moving towards in almost every circumstance, we'll just move into the courts where it's going to be tied up for months, years,
11:43 am
who knows. >> that's right. ultimately the democrats just have to decide and they can do this on each topic that comes before them, what are they willing to accept to be able to move along with things? if you do get bogged down in the courts, it's only less than two years until the next election, they don't have endless amounts of time to get through some of these things. we'll see some back and forth. they'll get some of what they want, not all of what they want and they'll have to make that decision whether to issue the subpoena. >> we can't forget too that representatives are launching a criminal investigation into jared kushner's security clearance, so buckle up. thank you. up next, why don't we see women's championship teams being welcomed at the white house? we'll ask sheryl reed who has paid a visit in the past. with all that usaa offers
11:44 am
11:45 am
11:46 am
why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. we're the tenney's and we're usaa members for life. call usaa to start saving on insurance today.
11:47 am
11:48 am
it's become an american tradition, women a major championship, go visit the president at the white house. it all began in the '80s. presidents obama, bush and clinton have all invited teams. president trump also hosting a few celebrations, although there's one glaring difference for this administration. no wnba sports teams. jeremy diamond is at the white house. cnn white house reporter with more. i know cnn has reached out to the white house for a little clarification here. what are they saying? >> reporter: we have reached out to the white house to ask them why the president has not hosted a single women's championship team at the white house and so far they have not responded to our requests for comment. no comment, no explanation for why the president hasn't hosts these teams for a solo visit at
11:49 am
the white house. that is what is in question here. the president has hosted some women's team in november of 2017, several women's college championship teams attended a broader gathering of college championship teams, men's and women's teams but not a single one of those championship teams has attended a white house event in solo fashion to be honored by the president which has been such a common occurrence. since 1983, every women college championship basketball team has been invited to attend an event honoring them at the white house, except in this administration, the president has not done so-so far and same goes for the wnba. you have seen championship teams attend events at the white house honoring them but the president so far has not invited the last two wnba championship teams to attend any event at the white house. now why is this hitting such a nerve, erica? one of the reasons, of course, is because of the president's
11:50 am
history of comments about women. during the campaign and before then, we know the president has made several derogatory comments about women. there's the "access hollywood" remarks, of course, that everybody remembers and so obviously all of that is really bringing to the surface the question of why the president despite hosting these men's basketball teams and nfl teams, nhl teams, all of these men's championship teams have attended the white house, have been honored and the president seems to enjoy the celebration, but so far as we're pointing out here, no women championship teams have attended the white house for solo visit to be honored by the president. >> jeremy diamond with the latest on that for us. thank you. so this, of course, raises the question, is gender playing a role here? let's ask our next question sheryl reed, the coach of the fourtime wnba championships, the minnesota lynx. so first of all, when your team won, did you receive an invitation from the white house?
11:51 am
>> well, when we won our latest championship in 2017, the answer is no. we have grown accustomed to winning championships in 2011, '13 and '15 and following each of those championships the president phoned us. we would set up a phone call. our players would gather around and accept the president's call. it was president obama in each of those cases. he shared with us how he felt about our championship run and he invited us to come visit him at our next best chance and we did so in all three of those cases. and unfortunately, the fourth one in 2017, there was no such phone call or an invite to visit the white house. >> any congratulations whatsoever from the president on that championship? >> unfortunately, no. as i said, it was -- we were accustomed to that and we were anxious for that call which didn't come and since the inception of our league in 1997,
11:52 am
each championship has gotten an invite but it just hasn't haepd for us or seattle storm. >> why do you think there was no invitation for you in 2017? >> well, you know, unfortunately i think it's hard not to believe that it has something to do with gender in that it seems that all the other invites have been male sports and obviously it's become, you know, a political lightning bolt that, you know, unfortunately athletes are being faced with this idea of, would we go to visit and the president in turns has this mind set that he just doesn't want to look bad by folks not going to visit him and that's unfair for our group. we would have been very thoughtful in our response to being able to go visit the white house and we would have enjoyed that for sure. >> you say you would have been thoughtful in your response, you would have enjoyed it. if the president extended an invitation then or today, would
11:53 am
you accept it? >> i think it's important in any case, even when president obama made the invite, we gather our team and we talk about how it fit in our season. there's many factors of whether you would go make that visit because it happens during our season. in this case, certainly there would be more conversation that would have had to happen because there are some players that would have felt like they would not have wanted to align themselves with this president but i would have asked all of them to consider that this isn't just about this sitting president, this is about -- this is what championships do. they visit the white house. it would have been important for us to -- put that political part aside, and make a bigger statement for girls and women around the country. >> i would have to imagine even just based on what you said here that this did come up, because you're used to getting the phone call, there's no phone call, you're used to getting the invitation, there's no invitation. i imagine there was a discussion with your players even before you got to that point that if we get the invitation, what are we
11:54 am
going to do? what were those discussions? >> if we had gotten the invitation, we would have huddled. when we won the championship, media wants to know we were going to go to the white house and our response was, were we going to be invited? there's no sense in answering a question until you have the invite. many thought we would use it against the president. we would be invited then tell him no. that's not how this group would have handled that. it's much bigger than this president. i just felt like, you know, this group would have been very thoughtful as we had gotten together. it would have been their first time visiting the white house as a champion. i would have made sure that all the participants had a say in this and if somebody didn't want to go, they didn't have to go. as a group, we would have gone. >> cheryl reeve, congratulations. if you do hear more from the white house, just on the heels of this, let us know.
11:55 am
we would love to follow up with you. thanks again. >> we will, thank you. breaking news. the white house as we continue to follow this rejecting one of the first requests from democrats to provide documents in their investigations. why subpoenas are next in this escalating standoff? one of the names being targeted by democrats, rhona graff, the woman known as the gatekeeper as trump tower, what could she bring investigators? ♪
11:56 am
♪ t-mobile will do the math for you. right now, when you join t-mobile, you get two lines of unlimited with two of the latest phones included for just one hundred bucks a month. means they won't hike your rates over one mistake. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
11:57 am
11:58 am
11:59 am
thanks for joining me. i'm erica hill in today for brooke baldwin. we begin with new signs of
12:00 pm
defiant and pushback this hour from the trump administration, those in response to growing congressional investigations into the president. first, democrats getting their first outright rejection from the white house. they're asking for more information about security clearances, like that of jared kushner. also cnn has new reporting that the white house is working behind the scenes to mitigate the trove of documents requested from some in president trump's inner circle. letters you may recall sent out to 81 people and entities within the president's orbit. mr. trump for his part publicly condemning the inquiry just moments ago. take a listen. >> i guess we got 81 letters. there was no collusion. it was a hoax. there was no anything and they want to do that instead of getting legislation passed. 81 people or organizations got letters. it's a disgrace. it's a disgrace to our country. i'm not surprised that it's happening. basically, they've started the