you may never see anything like this again. that is marcus mariota playing kwaubt quarterback and sever. the kansas city chiefs never recovered they squandered their 18 point lead and lost 22-21. top of the hour on this sunday, 7:00 here in new york, 4:00 in the afternoon out west. i'm ana cabrera. new words today by a top white house official talking about the tell all book that paint it is first year of the trump administration completely dysfunctional. stephen miller, was on earlier today and calls the book, fire and fury garbage. and about the trips atributribu

to steve bannon, grotesque. and everything painting the president in a poorly written light not fiction and the president is a political genius. i'm about to play you part of that, but in a time since then, steve bannon issued an apology of source. he said he regrets not coming out sooner to shoot down comments tied to him in the book, comments he called misdirected. steve miller with jake tapper responding to the book "fire and fury". >> it's tragic and unfortunate that steve would make these grotesque comments so out of touch with reality and obviously so vindictive and the white house staff is deeply disappointed in his comments, which were grotesque.

with respect to the trump tower meeting that he's talking about, he wasn't there when any of this went down, so he's not really a remotely credible source on any of it. it reads like an angry vindictive person spouting off to a highly discredited author. it's a work of poorly written fiction. i will also say that the author is a garbage author of a garbage book. >> you were at the campaign during the trump tower meeting in the summer of 2016. you were there and steve bannon was not. did any of those people from that meeting meet with president trump as bannon say it is chance that don junior didn't walk them up to his father on the 26th floor is zero. can you settle that for us? >> i have no knowledge of anything to do with that meeting. what i can tell you is that the allegations an insinuations in this book, which are a pure work

of fiction are nothing but a pile of trash through and through. >> boris sanchez is at the white house right now. steven miller not surprisingly dismissing the book at garbage. this was a book the president's legal team blocked publication altogether. are you hearing people at the white house using terms as strong as steven millers? >> reporter: not quite as harsh. but earlier in the week the white house called the book a piece of fiction, asked serious questions about the author's cred blts. and yesterday you had the president going further calling the author a fraud, saying what he had done is a disgrace and refuting several key components within the book about how the information from sources was gathered for publication. beyond that you have steven miller calling it garbage, the

author garbage. we've nod heard that kind of commentary before, but we should note some of the president's and steve miller's attacks were geared toward former white house chief strategist steve bannon, who as you heard miller say, made comments that were grotesque according to him, the senior policy advisor. shrtly after that statement was made, steve bannon put out this statement, seemingly an apology for taking so long to respond to some of the excerpts that were leaked from the book. he took offense to one portion where he was quoted as saying that meeting at trump tower between trump campaign officials and russian nationals was unpatriotic and treasonous, he called that inaccurate reporting and said that donald trump junior was a patriot and those comments were geared more toward paul manafort. we've reached out to the white

house for comment on steve bannon's statement but yet to hear back. >> let me read that. he says my support is also unwaivering for the president and his agenda. i am the only person to date to preach a global effort of trump and trumpism. the president continues to bash bannon on twitter. will this statement mend things or is it too little too late? >> reporter: we have yet to see. we have some experts who speculate because they share so much history or common ground there may be a way to mend fences. we should point out that a few days ago, cnn reported that sources within the white house called the president's friends and allies to say they were either with steve bannon or with him. you heard the president using the mon kerr sloppy steve this weekend. and finally, rebekah mercer made

comments this week putting distance between herself and the head of "breitbart" news. saying she hasn't spoken to him for months. so part of this is steve bannon seeing his influence slipping and trying to save his career where his surrogates are lacking and the president has been so vicious toward him. i want to bring in our panelist, julian settler, gabby, and former u.s. attorney for the middle district of georgia, michael moore. we saw steven miller playing defense for the president, we saw the statement by bannon, does that help or hurt the white house get back on message? >> it helps them get back on message. if you stand in the way of the white house, they will try to tear down your credibility. that's what they've done with

the russia investigation and the media. it seems they have to get that out of their system before they can move on to policy. i don't think this will go away right away. but i think this is exactly how they take on anything that stands in their way. >> gabby, while plasing the author of fire and fury the other day, the president also pointed the finger at bannon. let's listen. >> i did a quick interview with him a long time ago having to do with an article, but i don't know this man. i guess sloppily steve brought him into the white house quite a bit. that's why sloppy steve is now looking for a job. >> will bannon's clarification of sorts be enough to get back in trump's good graces? >> no, i don't think this is in in way going to immediately solve that feud between him and the president. i think this is going to take a lot of apologizing for and work to naent relationship on

bannon's behalf. this is a president who values loyalty on top of anything else. for a senior aide bringing someone into the white house who intended to write a book like this has a damaged the president's reputation, but also caus caused headaches for the west wing. it's something the president is 23409 going to forget and steve bannon is going to to r have to figure out and apologize for. >> the president tried to stop the book coming out, that didn't happen. does the president have any legal ground if it can be proven that some of what's in the book isn't true? >> i'll say i've not read the book. i've read excerpts from it. there's a case called nooi"new times" versus sullivan that calls for a liable standard to

move forward. what's interesting to me here is steve bannon coming out talking about the details in the book, hasn't refuted what's said. he said i wasn't talking about little don, but i was talking about paul manafort. the problem that the white house is in this instance, he's still talking about the russian meeting. and if, in fact, the russian meeting, whether with little don or manafort or whoever he wanted to put it on, if that meeting is unpatriotic and treasonous, it makes the president's effort to cover up that meeting more intriguing and suspicion. we know with the letter and the explanation that he helped craft -- it's suspicious whether we're talking about bob mueller looking at it or a congressional committee looking at it. they put him on the national security counsel and then to come out and say i don't know, he's sloppy steve or whatever else, he was their pick to be on

the council. he helped run the campaign. as far as wolff goes, it's concerting to me that you let a man inside the white house with that kind of access to the oval office and the people and staff that you now say i really didn't know who he was. that in and of itself to me causing to place some judgment questions. >> what do you make of that defense? >> that he says he doesn't know who he is? >> yeah. just the way they've approached this, attacking the credibility of the author, attacking steve bannon and basically distancing themselves from his influence and placing the blame on him for the access to this administration. >> i think basically that the president's your cheerleader until you disagree with him. soobs you disagree with him or point something out about him that he doesn't like, he thinks you're the greatest guy in the world because he picked you. in this instance they sent out a surrogate today, steve miller, to talk about the president's capacity and his intellect.

when you have to send a surrogate out like that to stand up for the commander in chief's capacity and and we intellect have an argument with a well respected journalist and news show host, it's not a good day for the white house. i think this is their modus operandi, they do it all the time, they do it to bob mueller, the witnesses, jim comey, as soon as you come out in a direction they don't like, whether it's wolff, bannon, whatever -- i'm not here to defend the book -- but these are things we've all heard about before. the difference that i've seen in the excerpts i've read is that now those comments have been adrib butted to various people. we heard for a long time something is amiss in this white house. >> right. >> go ahead. i'm sorry. >> the bottom line is a lot of people are getting asked more questions about their take on

the president's mental fitness. we heard nikki haley have to answer questions on that, the cia director, mike pompeo have to answer questions on that, and even the british prime minister theresa may. and i asked today, watch this. >> i'm not a professional in that asirea. i think the people understood what they were voted for. the behavior in the office we've seen isn't that different from the campaign. i'm going to leaf it to the mental health professionals to determine his fitness. i believe some of the comments have called into question his fitness for sure. >> how do you suppose this bodes for how republicans work with the president moving forward? >> i don't think it's going to change anything. there's this perception that

this book comes out, questions are asked and parts of the electorate are going to move, i can't believe this is what's going on in the oval office, but we 'seen it in the twitter feeds, and it's not new. it just has better stories and behind the scenes aspects. so i'm not convinced you'll see the needle move within the republicans, and the republican congress especially after receiving this large tax cut, which plays well with a lot of that part of the party is not going to jump ship. it's going to take more to rock the republican boat. >> this doesn't change people's view, in some ways, from back when the election happened. an exit pole from the election showed that only 35% of people believed that trump had the temperment to be president.

he obviously still won. how long will people be talking about this book because with the white house, the news sickle moves fast. >> it moves with speed. and already miller tried to fiction the focus back towards the fake news media as opposed to to this book by michael wolff, they have a narrative they can create. their advisors are being pressed to answer questions on the president's mental health, and they don't care about talking about the policy the white house is focussed on or the manufacturing jobs as you heard steven miller say in that interview, and that's what they're going to run ahead with going forward. i think this poses questions about the president's habits, in terms of waking up early and working late rather than staying in his residence and watching

cable news nonstop. there are a lot of questions that exist around that that republicans might be focussed on in the weeks ahead. i think it's tough that you're going to see any republican on capitol, any senior advisor questioning the president's mental health publically or privately to reporters. still ahead this hour. talk about adding insult to injuries, passengers stuck in a blizzard backlog find their luggage wet after a pipe breaks. tonight's golden globes red carpet in black tonight. live to the beverly hilton coming up. you're live in the cnn "newsroom." don't go wade. a. w. a. u. . y.

i'm mark and i quit smoking with chantix. i tried, um, cold turkey. i tried the patches. i was tired and i was fed up. i wanted to try something different. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. compared to the nicotine patch, chantix helped significantly more people quit smoking. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions

which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i'm finally free of smoking. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. when i met my team at ctca, they put together a comprehensive plan, that gave me an opportunity to accomplish my goals, and my dreams. learn more at cancercenter.com it's a like, a dagger?a worm! a tiny sword? bread...breadstick? a matchstick! a lamppost!

coin slot! no? uhhh... 10 seconds. a stick! a walking stick! eiffel tower, mount kilimanjaro! (ding) time! sorry, it's a tandem bicycle. what? what?! as long as sloths are slow, you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. even more cancellations and delays at new york's jfk airport

after a frozen pipe flooded terminal 4. this was the scene not long ago as water poured into the terminal, soaking bags stored there. the faa said a portion of the arrival hall has been shut down because of the water main break. port authorities gave an update, polo, what is the situation now? >> reporter: passengers at jfk just cannot seem to catch a break this weekend. yesterday the backlog of flights there that led to stranded passengers today, a flooded out terminal. you mentioned, we heard from authorities trying to get to the bo tom of this, and scrambling trying to clean up the mess so they can accept international flights here. they hope by 10 or 11:00 tonight those will be back on schedule. you're about to hear from the executor director of the port

authority, the main focus is not only to get this airport back up and running, at least operations at terminal 4 but also get to the bottom of why this pipe burst causing so much damage. >> we will thoroughly investigate why this pipe burst. we will thoroughly investigate why it was not adequately protected. and we will examine carefully the contingency plans that were in place in order to recover for this event. we will determine the accountability and responsibility for the failure that did occur this afternoon. >> reporter: now, important to point out that domestic flights do continue to both land and takeoff here at terminal 4 and the rest of the airport, however with some delays. much of it having to do with what officials here describe as a cascading series of events here. this all started on thursday

with the massive winter storm that delayed and cancelled flights. they've even been dealing with frozen equipment because the temperatures are so low. at least for now they have hope they can accept some of those international flights again, they hope it can happen in the next three or four hours. >> what's the outlook for getting things fungction back t normal? >> reporter: they said by 10:00 or 10:30 they can get the flights arriving here. some of the flooding took place not far from where customs officials process people coming here from other parts of the world. so if you don't have an area to process these people traveling in from other countries they have to reroute them. there's nine or ten flights scheduled to flying in tonight, they're looking at the possibility of having to reroute those until customs officers can start processing those people

again. >> when you look at the baggage claim and how much water there is, it makes you think this is something that's going to take a bit to fix and cleanup. security was set to be extra tight in atlanta for the biggest college football game but put president trump in the stands and you have security on steroids. tomorrow night a huge game, huge southern rivalry, 100,000 fans expected, security will be presidential. i want to bring in hailey har tongu hartung. what is it going to be like to get inside the game? >> reporter: before fans wait to get inside with nothing more than their clear plastic bag of items on them, they have to fight traffic in downtown atlanta to get there. that, officials have told us, is the biggest concern for

tomorrow. state and federal and local officials around the game, something good to keep in mind, the secret service working since day 1, so they were able to fold in their plans seamlessly. think about atlanta on any p given day at rush hour, now you're dealing with the presidential motorcade into town, they are telling fans to be downtown by 4:00 p.m., and that's well in advance of when gates to the stadium open at 5:30, the game kicks after 8:00 p.m., the president isn't expected to be here closer to game time. so all of those logistics in mind, you have to think about the security precautions in place. the atlanta political director welcomed us into their joint

operation center and helped us understand the 10,000 video cameras that help with surveillance as well as the movements of their bomb sniffing dogs and the many assets in place behind the scenes, like robots to investigate any suspicious packages and take care of anything they may find. so there are a lot of moving pieces here as so many entities come together to protect the people of this city and the more than 100,000 fans who are expected to be in atlanta tomorrow. >> thanks for the info. we appreciate it. coming up, senator lindsay graham making a case for the investigation into michael wolff. we'll discuss next live in the cnn "newsroom." what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom?

what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter. morgan stanley looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.

we're back with a new twist in the russia investigation. two leading senators are calling on the justice department to

investigate the trump dossier author. former british spy christopher steele. here's what senator lindsey graham had to say. watch. >> during the time that mr. steele was being an informant for the fbi we now know he was shopping the dossier to journalist outlets all over the world, which is inconsistent in my view with being a reliable informant. there's a bunch of stuff about the department of justice, how they conducted themselves that need to be looked at just as much as trump needs to be looked at. i'm going to insist that special counsel look at these things. >> my panel is back along with mark mazzetti. john mccain gave the dossier to the fbi. and christopher steele was a private citizen at the time, he was not an informant for the fbi. but according to fusion gps when

he was investing he found what he thought was a crime so wanted to flag that to the crime. now we have senator lindsey graham saying he wants the author investigated what is the republican's end game here? >> they want to make the dossier -- put that at the center of this political debate over collusion, the entire russia investigation. they want to taint the dossier as a political document, a piece of opposition research that was designed to smear president trump that was, you know, paid for by hillary clinton. but to walk that become back for a second. before mccain gave it to the fbi, the fbi got possession of at least parts of it earlier that summer, during the campaign. and there was this discussion about whether chris steele should be paid for his work. so this is still at the center of the debate. what exactly did the fbi get? when did they really look

seriously at the dossier, and what they did with it, even before the election. >> fusion gps which got steele involved in this investigation, wrote an op-ed saying, in part, we hired mr. steele and gave him no specific marching ords beyond this basic question. why did mr. trump repeatedly seek to do deals in a notoriously corrupt police state that most serious investors shun? >> so michael moore, fusion gps expressing frustration that their testimony before congress hasn't been made public. by calling for an investigation into steele could they prevent fusion testimony from being released? >> i think the people from fusion gps can now say it as

they want to say and whether or not the testimony comes out they have to debate. this is pure destraks by lindsey graham and others. you mentioned we have a ball game in atlanta coming up. this is like the referees on the field trying to debate what the players had for lunch as opposed to what's happening on the ball field. they're trying to distract us from what went on. remember the dossier, we talk about this and republicans seem to like to forget it, the dossier came into existence well before we were talking about hillary clinton's people or the democrats paying for it. this thing came to light with some republican money early on in the primary. i don't know if that was when lindsey graham was involved in the primary or not. but this is a pure effort at distraction, what matters is what is in the dossier. not how it got there. they got all the right in the world, as a congress, to have oversight hearings and talk about what goes on with the fbi and that type of thing.

what we ought to be looking at, we need to keep our eye on the ball and talk about what facts are in the dossier and are they provable, was there collusion with trump and does it lead back to russia money. that's one of the reasons they're more insistent than finding out about the author of the dossieren and looking at trump's tax returns. >> you don't see a legal case or legal grounds for the doj to open an investigation into christopher steele? >> the dodj if they find he did something wrong, was an informantd, taking money from somebody be he shouldn't, if there's some evidence of a crime. but again in this case you're talking about republican senators sending an inquiry over to try to get them to do an investigation about who paid him and where the money came from

and such as that, while at the same time they're not as insistent as finding out does president trump and his businesses have russian tie. it makes me look at lindsey graham's comments -- i like him, but i think they lack merits. >> we have the world watching, reacting to president trump's statement that he's smart. >> the impact on our nation's global reputation from all of this, how does do you see this playing out? >> it hurts. there's no way to look at the past year and the last few days and not see the ways this can and does undercut our image around the globe. many years ago, at the end of the bush administration we were

at a low point, president obama helped rebuild the image of the nation overseas and we've been declieng. and stories like this about the president, but more importantly, the behavior of the president himself with his tweets on foreign sboepolicy and his over demeanor have an effect. other leaders watch this -- >> he's comparing himself to reacting in a way that ronald reagan reacted to questions of mental instability and fake news and books as he put it. >> that's not the case. ronald reagan wasn't blamed generally for being unstable, he was being blamed for being too hawkish. there were questions about his memory, especially during the second election. but it wasn't like this. this was not about someone who some argued was fundamentally unstable and incapable of holding the job. that's a different kind of

conversation than we had with ronald reagan. and ronald reagan, even his opponents realized brought a certain level of experience and command to the white house that we haven't seen thus far. so i don't think the comparison is exactly fair. >> i want to ask you about another investigation we've learned of recently. the fbi reopening an investigation into the clinton foundation. hoar's what congressman ada schiff had to say about this. >> if they are investigating hillary clinton it doesn't take a genius to see why. it's not because there's new evidence that's come to light. it's because they're being badge erred by the white house to do it. >> what are you hearing? are your sources giving you any reason for reopening the investigation, gabby? >> there are a number of questions that came out during the campaign about the activities of the foundation that were never resolved or answered. and that's one of the reasons why this has been a larger

question about this foundation and whether or not it should be investigated by federal authorities for some of the activities and access that secretary of state clinton may have been giving to people who were donating to her foundation. think the white house has to play it carefully because this is an undergoing probe. they shouldn't be looking as though they're trying to pressure jeff sessions or the doj into reopening it or keep it going in any sense. they need to keep their mouth shut, focus on the policy debates and questions on capitol and not play this up. i think that's a dangerous situation for the president because he has a tendency to rehash the 2016 campaign, go after his opponent and this is something he went after her for on the campaign trail and one he's likely to touch on in the coming weeks but that does taint the investigation if there is one under way if the president is actively and routinely

commenting on it. >> mark, how much of a distraction is this book now for the trump white house? >> it's a distraction, i suppose, but they are feeding it as well. you see the president tweeting about it, his advisers talking about it. they aren't ignoring it. in fact, they're embracing the debate. they're pushing back. they would rather not be talking about president trump's mental stability but at the same time, the president is tweeting back that he is a stable genius. so it's hard to see this going away, especially when, you know, the president himself continues to keep this in -- as part of the discussion. >> do you think this book and some of the revelations feed the russia investigation in any way, open new doors, new people for the special counsel to call before it? >> certainly the comment by

steve bannon, which got the most attention on the first day, are particularly interesting, his views about the june 2016 trump tower meeting and his belief that it was treasonous. now whether or not mueller's team has spoken to bannon is unclear. but if they haven'ted, they would want to given he made his views public. so at the least, bannon's comments in the book, make him a very interesting potential witness for the mueller team because they would want to know what he knew at the time, even though he wasn't in the campaign, but also what he knew in the white house discussing the meeting, especially when it was revealed last summer by the time. >> and talking about money laundering, too in the book. >> i thank you all. straight ahead, a stunning statement from the cia director

today, why he believe it is russians are currently trying to impact elections. live in the cnn "newsroom."

the head of the cia is convinced that russia is working to undermine american elections right now and he is worried about it. >> are they currently doing that? >> yes, sir. have been for decades. so yes, i continue to be concerned. not only about the russians, but about others' efforts as well. we have many foes who want to undermine western democracy. there's a washington based focus on russian interference, i want to broaden the conversation. we have an important function to keep the american elections safe and secure and democratic. we are working to do that. so we are going to work against the russians or any others who threaten that very outcome. >> mike pompeo saying that

russia has meddled in tlaelaed . it's not an opinion shared throughout the trump administration. elise, when you spoke to the secretary of state this week, he wasn't as convinced as pompeo that russia is going to try to influence the midterms later this year? >> reporter: i thought the cia director's comments were interesting and similar to the ones he said in aspen at a conference in july. he kind of almost didn't dismiss it but kind of said this is what russians always do without specifically presenting any evidence and just making it like they're one of other actors trying to do it. i asked secretary of state tillerson specifically if he was concerned about meddling in the 2018 election. take a listen to what he told me. >> do you think they're going to try to meddle in 2018? >> i don't know. i hope they don't.

>> do you have evidence they are? >> we have none yet. we do know that russia has involved themselves in other elections in europe and elsewhere. it is a message we conveyed to the russians. i conveyed, i don't know i don't understand why you do this. i don't understand what you get from this. >> and then the conversation went on. i said to the secretary, what russia tries to do, don't they, in the united states and around europe, is to sow discontent throughout the democratic system. so there is this concern that russia is trying to do this around the world. whether there's specific evidence in the u.s. that they're actively trying to do it right now, i don't think there is as far as secretary tillerson is concerned and i don't think that the cia director presented any evidence in his interview of specific things that they have to show for it. clearly it's a concern.

>> a lot of people thought last year when tillerson was named secretary of state that with his vast experience in russia and relationships with people there, that things would be better between moscow and washington, why hasn't that happened? >> reporter: there was a lot of warm rhetoric by the president and secretary tillerson had this good relationship working at exxon mobile, but it's actions that have caused the u.s. to continue to take a tough line particularly on ukraine, the u.s. has added -- the state department added a number of russian individuals and businesses and companies that are doing businesses with russia to its list of sanctions on ukraine. and president trump approved the sale of arms to the ukrainian military. i think at the same time secretary tillerson said they

want a better relationship with russia on areas they can work together, such as syria or north korea, but there is a lot of concern about continued action. but secretary tillerson said the main issue they need to solve is ukraine while they continue to work on the other areas. and, of course, election meddling in not just the united states, but in europe and the democratic process there is a concern. >> thank you, elise. let's head to california now, the 75th annual golden globes kicking off in a few minutes. live pictures from los angeles. this year it's about more than the glitz and glam. it's the first award show since the sexual allegations have rocked the industry. we'll take you live to the red carpet next. out that socks aree number one most requested clothing item at homeless shelters. so for every pair we sell, we donate a pair to someone in need. but first we had to fix this. socks shouldn't fall down.

fixed. lack of arch support? fixed. socks shouldn't have an annoying seam. fixed. the result? socks so comfortable we've been able to sell and donate over two point five million pairs. get an additional 20% off your first order at bombas.com. to find smarter solutions. to offer more precise and less invasive treatment options than before. like advanced genomic testing and immunotherapy. see how we're fighting to outsmart cancer at cancercenter.com/outsmart

he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using. tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings! tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices.

many stars are using tonight's golden globes to send a message, they are wearing all black. to make a statement about sexual harassment and the scandals that have rocked hollywood. let's check back with stephanie from the red carpet in beverly hills, stephanie, only minutes away from the big awards ceremony it looks like a lot of women are sticking by this idea of showing unity and wearing black. >> reporter: you know what, it's not just the women. i have to tell you, ana, it's the men too. so many men wearing all black. really ready to speak about the fact that the supporting the me

too movement. and one of the founders of the me too movement was here on the red carpet with michelle williams, take a listen to what they had to say about what this time in hollywood really stands for. >> it's humbling, but it's also empowering, right, i just think this is such a bold statement for women who work in hollywood to make with women across the world. a person like me, i stand and represent survivors. i know so many women on this carpet are survivors. it really makes me feel wonderful. >> reporter: and you could see it, these stars that were here with their activists, very much feeling like this was an important moment for them as well to be here. susan shah ran don and rosa, you're seeing these stars show up with their activists and they really want people to hear what they have to say and take advantage of this huge tie, this turning tide here in hollywood, ana. >> some stars they have said they are using their plus one to

bring an activist to the awards. are you seeing evidence of that? >> reporter: oh definitely. i mean, you can see it from susan as well. people taking advantage of this to show this moment in time how things are changing. and they just announced the red carpet is closed. everyone is making their way into their seats, but if you think about the fact that this movement started a few months ago, and now you've seen almost every star -- i didn't see one major star not wearing predominantly black tonight here on the red carpet. that's a huge statement. and several of the women i talked to, like actress ann dough, they think this is a time change. this is different than any other thing that has happened here in hollywood. and that these days of this old patriarch are behind us in one sense, but there's still a lot of work that needs to be done. you're seeing that evident here at the golden globes. this is just a start of really the awards season here in hollywood. >> it'll be interesting to hear the speeches too coming tonight from the golden globes. stephanie, you look lovely, just gorgeous, my friend, good to see

you and thank you for that report. still ahead, here in the news room, grotesque, vindictive, not credible. new words used by a white house official talking about the tell-all book that paints the first year of the trump administration as completely dysfunctional. what steven miller told our jake tapper here in the news room next, stay with us. when it comes to heartburn

trust the brand doctors trust for themselves. nexium 24hr is the number one choice of doctors and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. and all day all night protection. when it comes to frequent heartburn, trust nexium 24hr.

is one of the president's unique talents if you want to call it that, finding nicknames for his opponents usually just two word monikers, but they can cut deep. that's a subject of this state of the cartoonian. almost like magic, late on thursday, president trump came up with a new nasty nickname for his former chief strategist steve bannon. >> sloppy steve. >> the nickname comes in the midst of a rather consequential fight about a book that paints a picture of the president as disconnected and not up to the job. there is one job that the president is clearly up to, coining devastating nicknames. >> rocket man. crooked hillary clinton low snrge jeb bush. little marco. >> cruel and juvenile and occasionally racist. >> i call her pocahontas, that's an insult to polk haun tacahont.

>> silly steve, nah, hobo steve, might anger the hobo community. >> sloppy steve. >> bannon is capable of coming up with biting nicknames as well. according to politico, he privately refers to president trump's son-in-law jared kushner as fredo. the craven's son in the godfather. though we should point out that politico originally misreported this saying that bannon called kushner frodo, the character from lord of the rings. so will bannon now return fire and come up with a nickname for his former boss? one wonders where this epic battle might end up, perhaps like an old west stand off. with smart phones instead of guns. adding insult to injury, a pipe break sends water streaming into a baggage holding area shutting down parts of an

already backlogged airport. bone chilling cold. think it's frigid? try fighting a fire when it's two below. and time's up, celebrities send a message. hello erin, i'm anna cabrera in new york, you are live in the cnn newsroom, lots to talk about as we head into a new week. much of the talk this week, it has been about a book. people close to the president this weekend are safe to say not big fans of the new book that describes the oval office as out of control, the president as mentally unstable and an inevery sucker that will talks about the mechanism that could invoked to remove him from office. i'm talking about "fire and fury" by michael wolff. president trump tried to stop this book from being released. it failed. not one of the advisors was on cnn shredding the book and describing the man who wrote it as garbage. >> the book is best understood as a work of very poorly written

fiction. and i also will say that the author is a garbage author of a book. and the tragic thing, and there are many things about it that are unfortunate, the betrayal of the president in the book is so contrary to reality, to the experience of those who work with him to my own experience having spent the last two years with him, you know, on the campaign, i had the chance to travel all across the country with the president on trump force one, the president, me, dan scavino, going from rally to rally to rally to rally, and i saw man who was a political genius. the allegations and insinuations in this book which are a pure work of fiction are nothing but a pile of trash through and through. >> cnn's boras sanchez is at the white house, boras. >> reporter: hey there anna, it has now been five full