Return to Transcripts main page


Arizona Police: Suspect Linked to 4 Murders Found Dead in Hotel Room; Clinton Says He Doesn't Owe Monica Lewinsky an Apology; White House Daily Briefing. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired June 4, 2018 - 14:30   ET


[14:30:00] NICK WATT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They were actually evacuating people from the surrounding rooms in the hotel when they heard that gunfire from within the suspect's room. They believe he killed himself. No officer discharged their weapon at all in this incident.

Now, you mention Steven Pitt earlier. He is a nationally renowned forensic psychiatrist. He would probably have been working on this case if he had not been killed. The connection, they have made a connection between him, the two paralegals and the other mental health professional. Police have they have solid evidence linking all those murders and linking them to this suspect.

So we're still waiting to see if perhaps there may be a fifth victim here in Scottsdale -- Brooke?

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Nick, thank you. Nick Watt in Arizona.

I have Ashleigh Banfield with me, the HLN host of "CRIME AND JUSTICE WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD."

When I was reading about this, I was reading about Steven Pitt. Reminding myself of the connections he's had with a number of high- profile cases. He sort of went through those already. Tell me more about the victims and what's going on.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HLN HOST, CRIME & JUSTICE: It's still pretty mysterious. What Nick was just showing us makes it even more mysterious --

BALDWIN: Is there another?

BANFIELD: -- if there's possible a fifth victim here. We're getting ahead of the horse here.

But what's really fascinating is how they made the links. A psychiatrist, two paralegals and a psychologist all in different areas, possibly within 24 hours, it does not necessarily give you a tail that's obvious to connect. But forensically, what they will be doing at lightening pace is looking at every computer file in those offices, every hard-copy file to see if his name comes up. It's possible he may have had business with each of these offices, so there would be records in those offices of this particular patient if that's the case. Shell casings, they were all shot. If the shell casings all match, there's your automatic evidence at the scene that links the crimes. Then there's --


BALDWIN: Based upon evidence that's already linked them, correct?

BANFIELD: Based upon evidence at the scene, and they're not --


BANFIELD: -- expounding on that. Then there's also the possibility of a cell phone. Maybe there's triangulation of a cell phone that will put this one person at all of these scenes as well. There will be computer information. Just the forensics -- these places are troves of information. And then what we'll have at the death scene of the suspect is going to hopefully provide a trove of information, too. And that's not even going into the pattern. Did he kill them all the same way? Is there a pattern, a method by which someone may have been shot execution style? Maybe there was a similarity in all four as well.

BALDWIN: You covered the JonBenet Ramsey case. What was that, 1996? What was Steven Pitt's role there?

BANFIELD: His role was sort of an unusual one for a psychiatrist. It sounds more like a role for an M.E. His prominence was that he articulated that the undigested pineapple that was discovered in JonBenet's autopsy suggested that she had eaten close to her time of death. Patsy suggested she didn't have any fruit, yet Patsy's fingerprints were on a bowl that had the pineapple in it. So that was just one piece of the mysterious puzzle.

ABC News is also reporting he has a connection to another high-profile case, the Jodi Arias case. That he had --

BALDWIN: Jodi Arias?

BANFIELD: Right. And that's a Phoenix case. So he had provided some expertise in that case.

He's actually connected to a number of high-profile cases, lending his consultation services. Is it possible that this suspect was fixated on this celebrity psychiatrist? Possibly. But that doesn't explain the paralegals or the psychologist.

BALDWIN: We still don't know who he is. But like you're saying, that they have lengthy evidence, whatever it is they found to all four of these victims so far. We'll see if there is possibly a fifth. Too early to know.

Ashleigh Banfield, thank you so much. We'll watch you tonight, as always.

Still ahead here on CNN, former President Bill Clinton saying he does not owe Monica Lewinsky an "I'm sorry," and that he did the right thing during the scandal, during his time. That came up in an interview with NBC. We'll play part of that. Also, we're waiting for that White House briefing to begin. What will

Sarah Sanders say about the president's tweets that he could pardon himself, and this letter that says the president did, indeed, dictate that initial misstatement in the wake of that now infamous Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. We'll take you live as soon as it happens.

[14:34:12] We'll be right back.


BALDWIN: Former President Bill Clinton making the rounds on TV promoting his new book and weighing in on President Trump, the Russia investigation and Monica Lewinsky and his impeachment. President Clinton also talking about why he believes Trump hasn't been impeached.


BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think, if the roles were reversed, based on my experience, if there were a Democratic president and these facts were present, most people I know in Washington believe impeachment hearings would have occurred already.

CRAIG MELVIN, NBC NEWS ANCHOR & CORRESPONDENT: If there were a Democrat in power right now?



BALDWIN: Then, in a different interview, questions arose about the president's own past and Monica Lewinsky and "Me Too." Watch.


MELVIN: But you didn't apologize to her.

CLINTON: I have not talked to her.


MELVIN: Do you feel you owe her an apology?

CLINTON: No. I -- I do not -- I never talk to her. But I did say publicly on more than one occasion that I was sorry. That's very different. The apology was public.


BALDWIN: Let's discuss. With me, CNN's special correspondent, Jamie Gangel, in Washington, and Erin Gloria Ryan, who is contributing editor to "The Daily Beast."


Jamie, to you first.

i know you've -- I'm sure you've interviewed him several times in your past. But here's President Clinton, he goes on the "Today" show, with James Patterson. I think they're there to present their new thriller, and the whole thing goes sideways. And it looks as though the questions about his past surprised him.

[14:40:17] JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: To me, it's inconceivable that he did not expect to be asked about this. It is true he agreed to do this book and these interviews before last fall and the "Me Too" movement. But in this climate, it's just -- it's hard to imagine. He understands the political climate. And let's remember, the Clintons' very close friend is Harvey Weinstein. So you would have to be living under a rock not to see any of this.

But, Brooke, what really surprised me is Bill Clinton can hit his marks. He can walk into a room and know exactly what to do. The fact that after all this time, he bristled so, and was so defensive, and wasn't prepared to deal with it, really surprised me.

BALDWIN: He seemed a little tone deaf on this entire --

GANGEL: Yes. Absolutely.

BALDWIN: -- "Me Too" movement.

GANGEL: Absolutely.

BALDWIN: Here's another clip.


CLINTON: I like the "Me Too" movement. It's way overdo. I think -- it doesn't mean I agree with everything. I still have some questions about some of the decisions which have been made.


BALDWIN: I like it, but I don't agree with all of it.



ERIN GLORIA RYAN, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR, THE DAILY BEAST: Oh, my. What I thought was really interesting about this moment in the Bill Clinton interview was that it followed the playbook of so many other men who are trying to sidestep the problems in their own pasts. He obfuscated. He tried to point out that he was actually a victim. In the interview, he pointed out that he was $16 million in debt when he left the White House. Like we were supposed to be like, oh, poor


RYAN: -- poor billion Clinton. And then he pointed out that


RYAN: He pointed out that when he was the A.G. in Arkansas, he had appointed a record number, a disproportionate number of women to work in the A.G.'s office, and that he had hired women, and he had a sexual harassment policy in the 1980s. You know, I don't really care if some of your best wife is a woman or some of your best daughters are women or if you hired women. What you've done publicly does not give you private -


BALDWIN: Erin, thank you.

Let's go to the White House

[14:42:34] SARAH SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: -- all Americans at home and abroad. Since taking office, the president has strengthened American leadership, security, prosperity and accountability.

And as we saw from Friday's Jobs Report, our economy is stronger, Americans are optimistic and business is booming.

When the president predicted 3 percent economic growth, a number of economists didn't take him seriously, including President Obama's director of the National Economic Council and Moody's chief economist. The economy has now grown by 2.8 percent during the first four full quarters of this administration, and we believe we are well on our way to reaching the level of growth the president has predicted. The American people do not believe this strong economy is fantasy or unrealistic.

Just as he promised, President Trump believes in the American people and is putting them first in every decision. On North Korea, we are actively preparing for the June 12th summit between the president and the North Korean leader.

SANDERS: The advance team in Singapore is finalizing logistical preparations and will remain in place until the summit begins. In the DMZ, the U.S. Ambassador's delegation continues diplomatic negotiations with the North Korean delegation. Discussions have been very positive, and significant progress has been made.

Lastly, and most importantly -- and speaking of great accomplishments -- today is my husband's birthday, so happy birthday, Bryan, and for putting up with me for all this time.

And with that, I will take your questions. Jonathan?

QUESTION: Sarah, just a short time ago, the president said that "I have an absolute right to pardon myself." Why does he think that, and does he also agree with Rudy Giuliani, his lawyer, that a pardon for himself would be unthinkable, and would lead to immediate impeachment?

SANDERS: Thankfully, the president hasn't done anything wrong, and wouldn't have any need for a pardon. QUESTION: But does he absolutely rule out doing that? I mean, does he rule out ever issuing a pardon for himself?

SANDERS: Once again, thankfully, the president hasn't done anything wrong, and therefore wouldn't need one.


QUESTION: The -- the -- how does the president respond to this criticism from Republicans about his tariffs against the E.U., Canada and Mexico? How do you reassure these senators and various people who are complaining about this?

SANDERS: Imposing the 232 tariffs protect the steel and aluminum industries because they're very critical to our national security. And for months, the United States has had discussions with Canada, Mexico and the E.U. to find an alternative. Without an alternative solution, tariffs are the only measures appropriate to safeguard the country. We have strong relations with Mexico, Canada and the E.U., and will continue, and the -- those will continue even though the tariffs are there.

John (ph)?

QUESTION: Sarah, what was the contents of the -- Kim Jong-un's letter to the president that he received last week, and what -- what did the president take away from that? Is he more encouraged, based on receiving that letter?

SANDERS: I'm not going to get into the specifics of the letter, but as the president said, they were interesting, and we feel like things are continuing to move forward, and good progress has been made, and we're continuing to prepare for the president's summit. I can tell you the president has been receiving daily briefings on North Korea from his national security team, and I can also tell you the schedule for -- tentatively, for that first meeting will be on June 12 at 9:00 A.M. Singapore time, and take place June 11, 9:00 P.M. East Coast time.

QUESTION: There's a (inaudible) report that Vladimir Putin has reached out to Kim Jong-un, and wants to meet with him. Is that a meeting that the president thinks would be constructive to this process? Does the president support Vladimir Putin meeting with Kim Jong-un, as well?

SANDERS: Our focus is on the president's meeting with Kim Jong-un, and the president will make his views known directly to him when we're in Singapore, and our focus will continue to be on denuclearization.


QUESTION: Sarah, why -- the president tweeted that the special counsel law was totally unconstitutional. If that's the case, why is he allowing his own Justice Department to abide by it?

SANDERS: Look, scholars have raised a number of questions about the legality of the special counsel process. The president's made his views about the special counsel very clear, and the president knows that the special counsel isn't needed, because once again, he hasn't done anything wrong. There was no obstruction, no collusion and no wrongdoing. However, we continue to cooperate.

QUESTION: He's never said the law itself was unconstitutional. How can he allow his own Justice Department to participate in something that's unconstitutional?

SANDERS: Once again, I -- I addressed this. The scholars have raised a number of questions on it, and the president's made his views clear.

Francesca (ph)?

QUESTION: Thank you, Sarah. I did want to follow up on that, and try and figure out what exactly the basis was for the president's claim that it is unconstitutional, but I wanted to ask you about something else, as well.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has been accused of enlisting taxpayer- funded staffer to not only shop for apartments around Washington D.C., but also to shop for a used mattress from the president's hotel just around the corner, and I wanted to know if any of that gives the president pause at this point, or causes his confidence in Scott Pruitt to waiver.

SANDERS: Certainly looking into the matter. I couldn't comment on the specifics of the furniture used in his apartment.

John (ph)?



SANDERS: And, certainly -- certainly would not attempt to.

John (ph), go ahead.

QUESTION: Can we just dwell on that for a second, let it sink in?

SANDERS: I'd prefer not to, but go ahead.


QUESTION: You said that significant progress is being made in the diplomatic talks in (ph) the DMZ between U.S. and North Korean officials.

The -- the big question, here, is denuclearization. The president would like that -- it to happen all at once. You've said that before. But that it could also be a phased-in process.

I know that the meeting has yet to take place, but certainly you'd (ph) be trying to iron out some details here. Does it look like it will be all at once, or is the phase-in more likely?

SANDERS: Look, I'm not going to go ahead and predict a meeting that hasn't even taken place yet. And I can't get into the ongoing diplomatic talks. But I can tell you that they've been positive and we're looking forward to the meeting in Singapore.

Stephen (ph)?

QUESTION: No matter what you're calling it, is maximum pressure still the policy of the United States toward North Korea?

SANDERS: Our policy hasn't changed. And as the president stated, we have sanctions on. They're very powerful, and we would not take those sanctions off unless North Korea denuclearized.


QUESTION: Sarah, let me ask you, if I can, does the president believe that he is above the law?

SANDERS: Certainly not. The president hasn't done anything wrong. And...

QUESTION: The question isn't if he's done anything wrong. I guess the question is, does the president believe the framers envisioned a system where the president can pardon himself, or the president could be above the law?

SANDERS: Certainly, the Constitution very clearly lays out the law. And, once again, the president hasn't done anything wrong. And we feel very comfortable on that front.

QUESTION: I know. But you, just a moment ago, said it's not -- it's not that clear. So I guess, simply put, does the president believe he is above the law?

SANDERS: Certainly no one is above the law.

(Inaudible), go ahead.


SANDERS: Sorry, no. I'm going to keep going. Right here.


QUESTION: I just want to ask you -- this is an important one because it's about...

SANDERS: Sorry, Peter, we're going to keep moving. Go ahead.

QUESTION: I'll just keep asking, if I can. The president...

SANDERS: Peter. You can't actually.

Go ahead.


QUESTION: Well, I'm still going to, Sarah. It's -- I think this is important. I haven't had a chance...

SANDERS: I'm going to continue to move on.

QUESTION: ... to ask this question...

QUESTION: Thank you. Sarah...

QUESTION: Sarah, thanks. Sorry.


SANDERS: Right here.

QUESTION: All right. Thanks. Go ahead.

QUESTION: (inaudible) the question?

QUESTION: Sarah, what's the -- what's the status -- status of the tariffs on China? Does the administration still plan to move ahead with the June 15th deadline, as they stated?

SANDERS: President Trump is taking steps to continue to reform the dysfunctional trade system that currently harms American workers and businesses. And the president is taking steps to protect U.S. technology and intellectual property from China's discriminatory and burdensome trade practices.

We're going to continue in those negotiations, as you know. I put out a statement, earlier this morning, that those conversations continue.


SANDERS: Brian (ph)?


SANDERS: We're going to keep moving. Go ahead, Brian (ph).

QUESTION: Thank you. Two quick questions. Once, I've asked this before. Is there any chance we could ever see the president come out here and take some questions from us in this briefing room?

And, secondly, has anyone in this administration ever asked the president -- last week, you had -- on your agenda, you had an agenda where you had more jobs coming -- I mean lower unemployment coming out. And you also had the Second Chance Act, I think it was.

And instead of those, we were -- we had to respond to presidential tweets. Has anybody ever in this -- in this administration asked him to back away from Twitter, just for a day?

SANDERS: On the first question, certainly you guys would be the first to know if the president comes out here. But, thankfully, he does address the press in a number of ways and in a number of venues. And we'll see if it happens here, and we'll certainly let you know.


SANDERS: In terms of Twitter, the president uses Twitter to communicate directly to the American people. Frankly, you have the ability to choose what you want to write about. And you guys choose to write about things that the American people...

QUESTION: We don't have the ability to ask him a question in regards to that.

SANDERS: ... don't care about, day in and day out. And that's a decision that you make. And, frankly, I think it's the wrong one.


SANDERS: Jordan (ph), go ahead.


QUESTION: ... had opportunity to ask him a question about that, though, Sarah. Could we at least get an opportunity to ask him a question about what he tweets?

SANDERS: Jordan (ph), go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks, Sarah. I want to ask you about the lawyer's letter to the special counsel. You said last August that the president did not dictate the statement about the Trump Tower meeting during the campaign.

QUESTION: But the lawyers wrote to the special counsel that the president did dictate that statement. What's the reason for that discrepancy?

SANDERS: Like you said, this is from a letter from the outside counsel, and I'd direct you to them to answer that question.

Debra (ph)?


QUESTION: ... information?

SANDERS: Once again, you're referencing a letter that came directly from outside counsel, and I would refer you to them to answer that question.

Debra (ph)?

QUESTION: After Kim Kardashian's visit (inaudible), is President Trump considering a commutation for Alice Johnson, who already has served 21 years of a life without parole sentence?

SANDERS: The President's considering a number of different pardons and commutations, and when we have an announcement on that we'll certainly let you guys know.

John (ph)?

QUESTION: Thanks a lot, Sarah. Since Robert Mueller was named the special counsel over a year ago, the president's team, his legal team, the Justice Department has never challenged the constitutionality of the special counsel.

Yet the president today is doing just that. Why hasn't either the Justice Department or the president's legal team challenged the constitutionality? They have the right to do so in federal court, and yet they haven't done so.

SANDERS: Again, scholars have raised a number of questions about the legality ...

QUESTION: (Inaudible) specifically those two entities have not done it. The president's own lawyers have not done it, Sarah, and they can do so. Why...

SANDERS: You would have to ask them. I'm not here to speak on behalf of the outside counsel.

QUESTION: What about the Justice Department? Can you speak on behalf of the Justice Department?

SANDERS: I'd refer you to the Justice Department. They have a pretty large comms team. They'd be happy to answer those questions.


QUESTION: Sarah, I'm wondering if the White House stands by the comments that were made by the U.S. ambassador to Germany, who said that he was backing anti-establishment conservatives to take power in Europe. Seems like a very unusual thing for a U.S. diplomat to say towards friendly countries.

SANDERS: I don't have any updates on that front at this point.


QUESTION: Sarah, let me ask you -- turn your attention back to trade for the farmers out there who care less about the politics who have to run on business every day.

There was a farmer in Iowa who told one of our crews out there this morning, he said I -- it's hard to know which way to jump right now, as in they don't know what decisions they should make for their businesses, because of what is playing out here in Washington, here in China, the NAFTA negotiations as well.

What would you tell those folks out there who are trying to run these businesses, who are trying to make a decision on which way to jump right now?

SANDERS: Certainly the president is trying to do everything he can to protect American farmers, American businesses and he is negotiating with a number of countries, but also the president wants to make sure that we're ending unfair trade practices.

The president has said that he wants to help protect farmers, and we're looking at a number of different ways to do that, and we're going to continue that throughout this process.

Peter? Peter?

Sorry, Blake, I'm going to keep going. Peter?

QUESTION: Thanks, Sarah. I just want to (inaudible). You know, in August you said, he certainly didn't dictate the statement. I wonder if you could tell us the basis of your comment when you made that in August (ph), and do you think that still stands? Is that still an operative statement or do you -- do you retract that?

SANDERS: Once again, this is a reference back to a letter from the outside counsel...

QUESTION: In August (ph) ...

SANDERS: I understand, but it's also pertaining a letter from the president's outside counsel, and therefore I can't answer, and I would direct you to them.

QUESTION: What was your basis of saying it in August then?

SANDERS: Once again, I'm not going to get into a back and forth, and I would encourage you to reach out to the outside counsel.


QUESTION: Sarah, Rudy Giuliani, the president's outside lawyer said to the Huffington Post, in no case can he be subpoenaed or indicted. "I don't know how you can indict while he's in office no matter what it is. If he shot James Comey, he'd be impeached the next day. Impeach him, and then you can do whatever you want to -- to him."

Is that appropriate language coming from the president's outside lawyer. in talking about the president shooting Jim Comey in that -- that fashion?

SANDERS: I -- you would have to ask Rudy Giuliani about his specific comments, but thankfully the president hasn't done anything wrong, and so we feel very confident on that.

Josh? Go ahead, Josh.

QUESTION: If I could ask a follow up question?

SANDERS: Sorry, I'm going to keep going. Josh?

QUESTION: If I could ask a follow up question? Who are you ...

SANDERS: Not today, Jim.

QUESTION: Well others have had follow up questions, so... SANDERS: They haven't, actually.

Go ahead, Josh.

QUESTION: They have had follow-up questions. If I could ask who these legal scholars are that you are citing (inaudible).

SANDERS: I'm going to direct the question to Josh. Go ahead.

QUESTION: If you saying one thing from the podium, but it wasn't dictated by the president, and as long as you're saying something entirely different, contradicting, how are we supposed to know where to believe? How can we believe what you're saying from the podium if his lawyers are saying it's entirely inaccurate?

SANDERS: Once again, I can't comment on a letter from the president's outside counsel, and I'd direct you to them to answer it.

John (ph)?

QUESTION: But Sarah, if the words are -- literally, you said he did not dictate. The lawyers said he did. What is it? (inaudible)

SANDERS: I'm not going to respond to a letter from the president's outside counsel. We've purposely walled off, and I would refer you to them for comment.

John (ph)?

QUESTION: Thank you, Sarah. Question about pardons. Eleven days ago, the president issued the posthumous pardon for boxing great Jack Johnson. The leading proponents of this for more than a decade have been Congressman Pete King in the House and Senator John McCain in the Senate, both big boxing fans. Senator McCain tweeted his support for the pardon. Will the president use this opportunity to call Senator McCain, and try and patch things up with him at this moment of his life?

SANDERS: I'm not aware of a scheduled call, so I wouldn't want to get ahead of that.

All right, Phillip (ph)?

QUESTION: Sarah, thank you. I just wanted to check something with you. What, in the tariffs that were imposed against Canada, reinforce the U.S. national security?

SANDERS: I'm sorry. What was the last part of the question?

QUESTION: What -- you know, the tariffs that were imposed against Canada, aluminum and steel, what in that reinforced the U.S. national security? In what form the U.S. feels more secure, now that Canada has been targeted by tariffs?

SANDERS: The president feels strongly that the steel and aluminum industries are critical to our national security, and our ability to protect ourselves, and that would be that reference point in the 232.

Halley (ph)?

QUESTION: Sarah, thanks. The special counsel didn't seem so unconstitutional when the president was calling on one to investigate his political opponent during the campaign. So is it only unconstitutional if the president doesn't like it?

SANDERS: Once again, the president's made his views on this point clear. I don't have anything else to add.

Jennifer (ph)?

QUESTION: (inaudible) question for you, Sarah. Thank you. The president on Friday said that he's open to bilateral deals with Mexico and Canada. Is he still leaning towards bilateral deals, as he heads up to Canada at the end of this week, or is he still thinking -- or is he thinking that he'd like to save NAFTA, and just renegotiate?

SANDERS: As the president said, he's open to it, but we're in ongoing negotiations.

Right here.

QUESTION: Thanks, Sarah. Last week, Missouri Governor Greitens stepped down. Did President Trump or anyone at the White House ever reach out to encourage him to step down?

SANDERS: I'm not aware of any conversations directly with the president, or with anyone here at the White House.

QUESTION: And so why not, considering he's the leader of the party?

SANDERS: Certainly, we were aware of the issue, and felt that this was a decision to be made by the people of Missouri, and a local issue.


QUESTION: Sarah, you said the president hasn't done anything wrong, and what (inaudible) pardon. But he said in his tweet that he has the absolute right to pardon himself. Does he assume that special counsel will find him guilty of something?

SANDERS: No, because he hasn't done anything wrong.

QUESTION: But he said in his tweet that he'd pardon himself. So it would seems to be an assumption that the -- that Mueller will find him wrong for something, and if so, what would it be?

SANDERS: It seems like it would be a completely wrong assumption. The president hasn't done anything wrong. I'm not sure how else I can answer that question.

QUESTION: Had two people from the Justice Department been pardoned (ph)? For example, the Office of (inaudible) Counsel has said that the president can't actually pardon himself. Does the president in fact (inaudible) view of (inaudible) that may have informed his tweet today? And also, there are some concerned about whether the president is still fielding those traditional pardon recommendations from the Justice Department. Some people are concerned that instead of relying on the Justice Department, he's relying on sort of rich and famous people to recommend pardons.

SANDERS: The president looks at each case individually to see if something wrong has been done, or whether mercy should be given. That's what he's done, and that's what he'll continue to do in the future. He has the authority to make that decision and has.

QUESTION: Well, has he asked for a new OLC opinion?

SANDERS: I'm sorry?

QUESTION: Has he asked for a new OLC opinion on pardon power?

SANDERS: I'm not aware of -- of -- or an ask or a recommendation, but certainly would reiterate the fact that the president hasn't done anything wrong.

Ali (ph)?

QUESTION: Thank you. What does the president think is his top foreign policy achievement in the first 500 days?

[15:00:06] SANDERS: I think that there have been a number of major foreign policy achievements. Certainly, I think the strengthening of relationships with a number --