Latest Breaking News On - Get it on - Page 1 : vimarsana.com
testify about michael flynn and russian ambassador kislayak. at today's briefing, sean spicer pushed back hard on the allegation and at one point the briefing kind of went off the rails when russia came up. listen. >> reporter: how does this administration try to revamp its image, 2 1/2 months in, you've got this yates story today, you've got other things going on, you've got russia, you've got wiretapping. >> no, we don't have that. >> regarding the allegations of capitol hill. >> i have said it from the day that i got here until whenever, that there is no connection. you've got russia. if the president puts russian salad dressing on his salad tonight, somehow that's a russian connection. but every single person -- >> no, sean -- >> i appreciate your agenda here, but the reality is, no, hold on, at some point, report the facts. >> let's talk about the facts tonight, the facts about this
white house and those close to it and ties to russia. we want to show you a flowchart just so that everybody can follow along because it's con fusing, there are facts about house security advisor michael flynn's russian ties during the campaign. he sat beside an anti-propaganda network which the kremlin paid flynn $100,000 to attend. and he discussed sanctions with russian's ambassador sergey kislayak and then lied about to the vice president and others and the fact that it cost him his job as national security advisor. that's a fact. then there's the facts about president trump's son-in-law jared kushner. kushner also met with the ambassador, his also met with russian ambassador surkov in 2015.
and paul manafort also partnered with a russian oligark to benefit the putin government. fact, former policy advisor of some sort, carter paige, worked in russia for about three years, and travelled to russia over the summer while he had been named a close advisor to the president. then, that same month, carter paige spoke to ambassador kislayak on the sidelines of the republican convention. as you might know, republican senator jeff sessions was the first senator to endorse donald trump, despite testifying he never had any contact with russians during the campaign. michael cohen is president trump's personal lawyer, two facts about him, last month he met with a russian immigrant with connections to the mob,
reportedly. and then there are the facts about long-time donald trump associate roger stone who communicated with someone known as guccifer 2.0 which was actually a front for the russian hackers. the ones we listed, they might be legal, they might be totally legal connections or nef far u you, the white house is saying -- >> reporter: the white house vehemently denied that today, they did not try and block her from testimony. but a review of the letters from her lawyers to the department of justice into the house intelligence committee, shows at the very least they tried to discourage her testimony. let's take a step back and remember who sally yates is, she
was acting attorney general for the first ten days or so during this administration. she was fire bid the president, but she was also deputy general in the obama administration and she was the one who fired some warning flares that there were some communications going on between michael flynn and the russian ambassador. that is why her testimony here is important. but sean spicer said this morning at the white house briefing said no, we're not trying to blocker. >> i hope she testifies. let's be honest, the hearing was actually never notified. if they choose to move forward, great, we have no problem with her testifying, plain and simple. >> reporter: and again, anderson that hearing was supposed to be today on capitol hill but the white house did not want another russian related hearing to dominate everything. and one of the reasons she was perhaps not testifying was because of executive privilege, the department of justice said that the president owns the executive privilege, not her.
her lawyers argued on friday that in fact most of this has been in the public domain, so she can testify. then suddenly on friday, that hearing today was cancelled. >> so chairman nunes, is the administration offering any new details about who signed him into the white house grounds last week to see the classified information that he claims he saw? >> reporter: in a word, no, they're not, and the white house said, look, i will follow up and let you know more information. he did not take questions on that today. and the white house in fact said, look, we're not going to say who swore him in, who escorted him in, but in talking to former government officials, we do know that even house intelligence chairman, even members of congress must be escorted in the same way as everyone else. so there is a log of him visiting, the white house could easily access it, but they have chosen not to release their visitor logs as they did during
most of the obama administration. >> the only person who knows for certain why the house intelligence committee cancelled today's public hearing and the closed hearing that didn't take place, he scheduled it himself. what news did nunes give you about sally yates and this hearings? >> reporter: the answer to that is to have a private meeting, after a lot of unanswered question, they wanted to have this private classified meeting today, that's why he cancelled that hearing today, but that private hearing was cancelled, all meetings in fact of the house intelligence committee were cancelled today and it's showing just how gridlocked this committee is. and nunes was asked by both me and other reporters, this question, did the white house
ask you to prevent sally yates from testifying? this is how he responded. >> look, you guys are just speculating, i'm sorry, whenever there's time, we'll do a press conference. >> reporter: did they ask you to cancel the hearing today? >> come on, guys. >> reporter: why did you cancel the hearing? >> nothing has been cancelled. >> reporter: so after that, chairman nunes' spokesman actually put out a statement suggesting that they either had no discussions with the white house, saying that no one at the white house spoke whatsoever with any two members of the committee or chairman nunes himself, but his answer earlier today dodging that question, really raising questions about if there are any discussions whatsoever between the chairman and the white house on the hearing itself that did not happen today. >> i'm confused. he says nothing was cancelled. there was supposed to be a public hearing, i mean i remember last week, i had it penciled in on my schedule.
it didn't happen. how is that not canceling? >> reporter: yeah, and i pushed him on that question, anderson. and he suggested that perhaps that there was no official notice of that hearing that actually went out, even though they announced that publicly that there would be a hearing today, so curious explanation from the chairman nonetheless. >> because i'm sure sally yates, jake clapper and all those people were told that they were to have a laehearing, correct? >> reporter: there was some ongoing discussions between staff and sally yates and her investigation into michael flynn and of course her suggestion privately that perhaps he could be blackmailed, potentially because of his connections with the russians and perhaps that's one reason why people do not want this issue with russia to be aired publicly.
but nunes said that was the reason, that it was more important to have these private meetings with comey and rogers, but that meeting also not going forward, so there's questions as to how this committee is move forward about these ties between trump campaign and russian officials. they're saying that they still want to hear from sally yaittes but chairman nunes says he doesn't know when that's going to happen. >> was this meeting cancelled? >> of course it was cancelled. it was scheduled, the witnesses were there to testify, a room was reserved, we were all set to go, we had our questions and it didn't happen. and the idea that it didn't happen because the comey-rogers meeting was to have happened.
there are more than two hours in the week, comey and rogers are on capitol hill a lot. >> so there could have been time for a private meeting and a public meeting as well. >> it's no coincidence that that private hearing was scheduled for exactly the same time that the private hearing was supposed to happen. all of his behavior since last monday's open hearing is bizarre, and that's not a partisan statement, right? i mean no less that senators mccain and lindsay graham say what is this guy doing? he's out on a lark. >> i believe lindsay graham referenced inspector crews sew. director comey confirms, and forget about what the congress is doing, director comey confirms that there is an investigation into links and coordination between the trump campaign and possible links and
coordination between the trump campaign and russia. pretty ugly five-hour open hearing for the white house and i have to look at the fact that the open hearing did not happen today and say that was not an accident. >> so do you think nunes was trying to basically, if there had been in your opinion a certain momentum after the last hearing last week, was he basically just trying to shut that down? >> i -- you can draw your own conclusion, an open hearing that was scheduled for today, you can say cancelled, you can say it did not happen. the american public did not hear what wou from those who would be able to contribute to this investigation. >> sally yates' attorney sent a letter, telling the committee, telling nunes that she would testify about conversations relating to mike flynn and russia, and that executive
privilege would not apply if they didn't hear back from them by monday. that very same day, if my timing is correct, okay, that hearing is cancelled. >> you can surmise that the deputy attorney general was a particularly painful potential witness. she was apparently at the center of the whole michael flynn thing, and all the characters that we talk about, stone, manafort, carter paige, jared kushn kushner, michael flynn is the one person who actually lost his job, there was action taken against him for something that he did. so her testimony would have been particularly difficult for this white house. >> the "new york times" broke the story yesterday and we have been reporting on it, that jared kushner during the campaign, met with this german ambassador, who has ties with a russian bank, and the white house is saying
that was a perfunctory meeting, and the white house is saying, no, no, no. >> the head of this russian bank is a russian intelligence officer, trained by russian intelligence. and it gets to the whole larger issue, there's nothing illegal or bad here, but what is add here and the reason we're having this conversation is that there are at least half a dozen people who had a bizarrely intense set of ties with russia. i have run five campaigns and i don't think any of the people involved in my campaigns had any contact with russia and those people, certainly the attorney general, certainly michael flynn, it looks like maybe even jared kushner were not entirely up front about the nature of those contacts. >> and you put that up, a quick little flowchart, there's a lot more there. you know for the white house to come out very aggressively and say this is all media
association, if the president put russian dressing on his salad, which is a clever line, but you can't say there aren't meaningful connections, the security advisor lost his job. >> they would try to paint this as a partisan thing. a midnight run to the white house that puzzles both democrats and republicans alike, that's not a republican or a democratic thing to do. come back to the fact that there is an active fbi investigation under way. that is not a partisan thing. >> so has the work of your committee basically just ground to a halt. >> and the way you said that, the investigation certainly has grounded to a halt. but here's the odd thing, all meetings have been cancelled. we were supposed to have a meeting this morning, that has been cancelled and thursday morning we were to have a meeting and that has been cancelled. and there will be not a meeting of the committee and we're charged with oversight of some
profoundly scary things, we're not going to do anything until this closed door meeting with comey and rogers occurs. >> any clue wen that's going to happen? >> it's not on the calendar. we'll get the panel's take on all of this, plus how deep to paul manafort's russian ties really go? they're certainly not going away. why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.
the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain... but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
at red lobster's lobsterfestime. any of these 9 lobster dishes could be yours. so don't resist delicious new lobster mix and match or lobsterfest surf and turf because you won't have this chance for long. doctors recommend taking claritin every day distracting you? of your allergy season for continuous relief. claritin provides powerful, non-drowsy, 24-hour relief. for fewer interruptions from the amazing things you do every day. live claritin clear. every day. ♪ ♪ wanna get away? now you can with southwest fares as low as 59 dollars one-way. yes to low fares with nothing to hide. that's transfarency.
before the break, we walked you through some of the ties that seven donald trump advisors have had with russia, we don't know if any of these connections, if any of them would be nefarious, but they do exist. jonathan turley, ryan liza, matthew rosenberg, gloria borger, kirsten powers, and bill press. i know, gloria, you have been talking to sources today what, have you learned? >> i think that if sally yates had testified, she would have been an embarrassment to the white house. and i think that starts sort of peeling the onion away from why devin nunes didn't want her to appear, she may end up
appearing, it may back fire, but i have heard from multiple sources that she did not go see the white house counsel just to give him a heads up about flynn's communications as said by reince priebus and sean spicer, but in fact she went over there to say that she had significant concerns about an issue of compromise. and that in fact he may have been compromised. and i think then we have to ask the question, about after she went to the white house, why did it take so long for them to finally decide they were going to fire general flynn only after "the washington post" had revealed in a story about his communications only after it became public. >> matthew, it is extraordinary to see in real time a house skbel intelligence committee investigation just break down. you heard from congressman heins, even their regular
meetings have stopped. >> it's amazing. and we have heard the same thing, in that sally was going to get up there, our sources basically seem accurate. sally was going to get up there and talk about conversations they had in the white house about flynn being compromised, potentially, about flynn being a real security risk. and then the fact that it took another two weeks before he was let go and that it looks a lot like he was let go because it looked bad, not because he was a security risk. and by all accounts, nunes did not want a repeat of last monday, to have fbi director comey to say, yes, there is an investigation going on involving the white house. >> and for those who want to believe that this is a bipartisan commission who really want to get to the bottom of what's going on. >> that week of events, monday to monday shows that nunes
allowed himself essentially to become a tool of the white house on several levels. i reported in a piece on newyorker.com, the morning of the official white house hearing, a administration official told me what was going on in nunes's testimony and that the hearing would be about incidental collection. so that goes right to the heart of that hearing. then congressman nunes wchbt to the white house grounds and got this information and then met with the president. so the white house using nunes as a tool. >> just repeat that again. you have a source telling you that the white house, somebody at the white house -- >> the morning of the monday testimony, i talked to a senior official at the white house who said watch nunes's testimony, he's going to lay the predicate here and directed me to an article in the hill about incidental collection. so very clearly saying we know
what nunes is going to say, and out of this hearing what we want is a conversation about incidental collection. nunes goes and gets these secret documents and we have that arguably charade taking the focus away from comey testimony that the fbi is investigating donald trump associates and putting it on the side of incidental collection. and it's not just yates that was going to be trouble to the white house, there were two other witnesses who were going to be hostile to the white house, that is clapper and rogers. you basically have the white house and nunes blowing up this investigation. >> you also had sean spicer from last week saying wait until the end of the week and see what comes out and the president himself saying -- >> exactly. trump's comments have been really overlooked, but we do have the president saying to fox news, something's coming out.
>> we should pull that tape because when we get it, but i think the wording on it was particularly odd because i think if memory serves me correct, he was talking about what the white house was going to be putting -- anyway, i don't want to mischaracterize it, but the wording was stunning in retrospect. >> having been a committee chairman and i shut down committee hearings right at the last minute, it's your prerogative as chairman, you don't have to explain it to your majority, or your minority members or your witnesses, you can do it for whatever reason you want. i think this whole thing has become political, i think for republican members to rush out to the press on every little hearing piece when you're talking about felons leaking -- >> i'm so glad that he has shut down some of this talk, this week, i think it's helpful, i really do.
>> what talk? >> helpful to who? >> i believe that his own committee members are doing a disservice to this so-called investigation, which i don't even, i'm questioning that it is beyond. >> yates testifying is by no means a common appearance in d.c. the people objecting in the justice department were career people, not political people. and i'm sure, i often litigate against some of these people, they're having can nipations, the fact that you can go to -- raises ethical questions. i think that she's right, there's a waiver issue here, that might allow her to get around, and probably could get around presidential privilege, i can tell you her description, her letter is laden with
presidential privilege problems. >> i think there's a lot of folks that don't know what amount of those terms mean, so we'll put a pin in that, we'll take a quick break, and we'll also talk about chairman nunes's recu -- senator jeff sessions recusal from the case. oh yeah sure... ok, like what? but i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement? we're absolutely doing that. but there's no law you can't make the most of today. what do you want to do? i'd really like to run with the bulls. wow. yea. hope you're fast. i am. get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade. the newly advanced gle can see in your blind spot. ok let's call his agent. i'm coming over right now. [ dinosaur roar ] onboard cameras and radar detect danger all around you. driver assist systems pull you back
into your lane if drifting. bye chief. bye bobby. and will even help you brake, if necessary. it makes driving less of a production. lease the gle350 for $579 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. you need one of these. you wouldn't put up with an umbrella that covers you part way, so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half off. gave us the power to turn this enemy into an ally? microsoft and its partners are using smart traps to capture mosquitoes and sequence their dna to fight disease. there are over 100 million pieces of dna in every sample. with the microsoft cloud, we can analyze the data faster than ever before. if we can detect new viruses before they spread, we may someday prevent outbreaks
before they begin. i wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. and i couldn't wait to get my pie chart. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. just to know this is what i'm made of, this is where my ancestors came from. and i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. it's opened up a whole new world for me. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. a body without proper footd needssupport can mean pain. the dr. scholl's kiosk maps your feet and recommends our custom fit orthotic to stabilize your foundation and relieve foot, knee or lower back pain from being on your feet. dr. scholl's.
a major story we're following tonight, house intelligence committee leader devin nunes is -- adding their voices to the chorus of lawmakers on the democratic side questioning whether chairman nunes is fit for his job. >> if he's not willing to tell the democrats and the republicans on the committee who he met with and what he was told, then i think he's lost hiss ability to lead. >> i think there's a lot of explaining to do, i have been around for quite a while, and i have never heard of any such of thing, there's things that needs to be explained by the chairman. >> we're talking about an interview that president trump had given march 15, we want to
play it for our viewers because he talks about something coming down the pike. >> i think you're going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. >> so just explain the curious nature of that. >> you seem to have the president saying something's going to come out that -- about his claim on the famous tweet about trump tower being bugged by president obama. and then you have the white house, at least to me and i assume other journalists the morning saying this is going to a place of incidental collection and then you have most of the committee members talking about incidental collection and then nunes going to the mouse shouse that i've got information that the intelligence committee does not have. and this frankly peripheral
issue of incidental collection. >> i go to the white house briefings, so when chairman nunes came out and told the press that he found this incidental surveillance, he said i'm going to go down and brief the white house, so we have a briefing, that sean spicer says we have no clue what he's talking about because we have no idea where he got these documents, we have no idea what he's going to say. i think that turns out to be a big lie, because we find out now, he was at the white house the day before, that's where he got the documents, at least that's where he looked at them. i think those documents may have been what president trump was telegraphing to tucker carlson, they thought they had the goods, nunes goes up and makes a big deal of it and it turns out to be nothing. >> you said that it's good that that had been stopped? >> the issue of incidental collection is a very serious
issue. >> worse than russia's possible hacking? >> there's no evidence whatsoever that there was collusion. >> i'm talking about russia's involvement in the u.s. election. >> there's absolutely no evidence of that. >> there's no evidence that russia was involving themselves in the u.s. election. >> that they were colluding with the trump campaign. >> but they clearly were involved in the u.s. election, no? >> what we do know as a matter of fact, that there was this incidental collection. >> we know more than that, we know russia was involved, we know that russia hacked, there was some emails involved. someone said that could even be described as an act of war. >> that's a different point, to go back to that for a moment, is that the substance coming out of the house intel committee has really overshadowed everything, or the lack of substance coming out. so what we have is this running
back and forth between the capitol and up to the white house, with this back and forth and everyone's why is he going here at this time, why is he going at that time? the fact of the matter is he can no longer get his message out. there's a basic pr tennant called preaching to your own choir, where you have to say, here's why you have to do it. you don't see members of the house defending the chairman. i don't know how the chairman is really going to push ahead with this. >> you think he should recuse himself? >> he should come out and very much lay out the case, here's the people he met with, here's the evidence or he needs to have speaker ryan put in someone else to do this. because this is stepping on the president's message of this drip, drip, drip of these leaks coming out. >> you got to huddle with your team team, your team on both parties. >> he's not huddling with any
team, he's stone walling with his own team. >> i think, frankly they have a cooling off period. remember, the investigation is going on -- >> they're not children in a time out are they? >> committee hearings should not be confused with investigating. investigating is going on on some level a at the fbi. >> we just had the conversation from the committee saying that the -- >> it's the oversight of it. >> what investigation are you talking about? because devin nunes seems to want to be investigating the unmasking and the incidental collection, and other people are saying, we're not saying that's not important, because of course that has to be looked at. but what they want to investigate is russia and the russian hacking of the election, and the potential ties people from the trump campaign to russia. that is what they are investigating. >> kirsten was it seem to you that the house intelligence
committee is doing it -- it seems like they're not doing anything now. >> i think the integrity of this entire investigation is being called into question. i don't think people feel like they can trust what's going on and you say it's his prerogative to cancel the hearing, that's fine, but why did he cancel the hearing? we know from "the washington post" that they reported that he was going to show up and sally yates as well going to show up at the white house and contra dictionary what the white house has said. if he's doing it to protect the white house from an investigation that's actually not okay. >> what he said on fox was that the president was getting a lot of heat from the immediate where. >> when you say connect the dots, at least connect the steppingstones, i heard after the comey testimony last week, that comey did not say in public what he was saying in private. the members were very frustrated about that, comey is a very clever guy, and he answered
questions, okay, he's a savvy testimony guy. that's number one. >> what did he say in private that he didn't say in public? >> obviously i don't know, but that's what they were saying. >> who wassaying that? >> he was saying things to members in private -- >> what you're saying is i heard from a guy who said this, i don't know what he was talking about, but i heard this. >> how come everybody in press land can say i heart frd from a source. >> this is -- i heard it from committee members themselves, not staffers. >> i know what you're talking about, nunes and schiff did get a private meeting from comey about the precise nature of the investigation. after the schiff testimony, nunes was clearly not happy that
the trump white house were under investigation. and what schiff and nunes knew privately, versus what comey was willing to say privately, was how close to the white house the investigation was. and this was the reason that nunes said that there's a cloud over the white house now that he thinks is unfair. >> somewhat, yes. getting back to kirsten's questions, is what they want to do is have comb any come in, and he will not do that, until he got a request signed by the minori minority chairman, mr. schiff and that request did not come. >> we have a lot more to cover, we'll be right back. they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will.
some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team.
back with the panel. we moved off of sally yates' testimony. you were talking about concern that some in the legal community and department of justice that sally yates -- >> you should understand, that is very uncommon. the trump administration, the bush administration, going back to the clinton administration, they hold these privileges jealously. >> for people that don't follow this closely, that's conversations that are taking place in the white house, the president has to be able to feel that conversations he's been having with people. >> ever since george washington and the jay treaty, the president has said we need some confidentiality. and nixon supreme court, really recognized that in a substantive way, and say, yes, there's this executive privilege not in the constitution, there's a lot of am bbiguit
ambiguity. and the precise thing that yates was doing is investigating. when you have a prosecutor, which she was, talks about an ongoing investigation, it raises a question about fairness. for civil attorneys like myself, we tend to fall in the fetal position when you see prosecutors go out in the middle of an investigation, because there's no indictment here. >> she's just talking about things that are already in the public record? >> that's what's going to be tough. if you read her letter, if she can thread that needle, then she's a very, very good lawyer, this has got to be a very careful performance. when you read the letter and what she's not going to talk about, it's going to be very mono syllabic. >> i have talked to multiple sources about this, her claim is that privilege ought to be waved because there have been multiple
public comments of current senior white house officials describing these communications in january of 2017. and i believe that she wrote to the justice department, she asked for permission, the new justice department, asked for permission, the justice department sort of said the buck stops at the white house. so her attorney sent a letter to the chief counsel at the white house, and then said, the letter from her attorney said, if i do not receive a response by monday march 7 at 10:00 a.m., which is when she was supposed to testify. i will conclude that i can testify -- >> and the hearing will go on the same day? >> the point is, she still has ethical obligations, it's not just a privilege, she's a former prosecutor who has access to that's going to embarrass an
unindicted person. >> what happens to be a fact is that sally yates is a president obama appointee, what it's schiff, or schumer or pelosi, sally yates was appointed by president obama. >> she did have an extensive career in the department of justice. >> she is being recruited by the democrat party in georgia to run for governor. so it's not like she's just a casual person that obama selected simply because of her intel electric. >> she's not switzerland. >> she's obviously a partisan. she's going to run as a democrat for governor of georgia. i don't see how she can walk this line and do justice to it. >> i'm not sure why you would want this. her departure led to serious ethical questions on whether she acted correctly. and there are those who wonder
whether she was acting for her own aspirations, that she told an entire justice department to stand down and not assist the president. she can resign, the way it worked out in the nixon administration, but many people have questioned that. >> i'm just a talk show host, but all this talk, sally yates, what is she going to say? misses the point, the military have a phrase, fubar, that's what this investigation is all about. it will never be put back together again the house intelligence committee, with devin nunes. they're doing everything they can to try to make this russian connection go away. guess what? it's not going to go away. >> about an hour ago, donald trump telling a group of reporters something about health care that was not expected, and that's an understatement. we'll tell you what he said when
he come back.
>> how confident are you the bill will pass? if it doesn't pass, is there a plan b? >> there's no plan b. there's plan a and plan a. we're going to get this done. i'm not -- we don't -- we're not looking at a plan b. we have plan a. it's going to pass. >> you said there's no -- there's plan a. >> right. >> at this point, is there an acknowledgement that perhaps there does need to be a plan b? >> no. plan a. the president's plan is to pass the bill tonight, get it on to the senate and sign a bill once it go throughs conferen confere >> is there any plan if the bill doesn't pass tonight? >> it's going to pass. that's it. >> now the president saying, i know we're going to make a deal. that's an easy one. with us, steven moore who is with the heritage foundation, a former senior economic adviser. what do you make the president
saying this? it seems to stand at odds with what he said that nobody knew how difficult health care was. >> i don't think donald trump has any credibility left on this issue of health care. he said he only had plan a. there was no plan b. then all of a sudden a couple of days later, he has plan b. he has plan c and d and f and g and every time he takes a stand, it looks like there's really no stand there. a lot of republicans called his bluff over this health care. he, it turns out, was -- there was no a -- he had no ability to stand his ground. i don't know what he is talking about, unless he is talking about maybe a back channel with the democrats. maybe donald trump -- the chance that donald trump is actually going to be making a deal with democrats and have enough votes with a few republicans to come up with some changes that are strengthening the affordable care act, i will eat my hat, but it will be great if he did that.
>> do you know what the president means? if it was such an easy thing to make a deal, i mean, we wouldn't be here. there would be a deal last friday. >> by the way, you are not going to have to eat your hat, because the negotiations that are going on right now -- i've been in touch with house members today, is that they are getting very close. this is standard negotiating tactics. when you have plan a on the table, you don't tell the people you are negotiating with, there's a plan b. there's a plan b. they are getting close, i think, to getting this thing sewn up. i don't know if it will be in three weeks or three months. as i said the other night, they are going to get this done. they are going to get it through the house and senate. here is the argument that's been i think very persuasive for the republicans who have been on the fence. a lot said, we can't vote for this because any negative ramifications of this bill are going to affect us when we run for re-election. one point i told them is, obamacare is falling apart. the premiums are going to go up
and up. obama isn't going to get blamed. it's republicans. you better fix this now or you will have a tough re-election in november of -- >> i agree they better fix it. it is not obama's problem anymore. it's the republicans' problem. unless they -- how are they going to fix it? they want it repealed. the taxes that keep it going. they want to get rid of the individual mandate that requires healthy people to have insurance. if you get rid of those, you don't have any funds left to actually provide the subsidies needed to enable these to function. >> you are wrong. i was just looking at the bill that passed the house two years ago. the congressional budget office said that that bill saves $500 billion over ten years by repealing obamacare. here is the plan. you use some of the $500 billion to cover people now.
as i said the other night, you basically say, it's repealed on january 1, 2019. for the next two years, you provide coverage for people so nobody lose theirs coverage and then you come up with a plan that is market driven. this is -- >> you are saying it's not repeal and replace. it's repeal down the -- for down the road and then that pressure forces people to come up with a plan? >> that sounds not only unfeasible politically but also stupid. >> why? >> because they're going to be up for re-election next year. you are saying -- >> they are -- >> you hold people harmless under the bill. if you have coverage, we will fund your coverage. then you come up with the solutions like we talked about last night. you could do interstate competition, medical malpractice reform. >> what i don't understand is
why wasn't this plan a? >> that's a good question. i wish it happened. >> we have to -- we have to leave it there. we will continue to watch this. thanks very much. he says he has nothing to do with the alleged russian hacking with coordination between the trump campaign and russia. we will look at who is he, how deep do his ties to russia go. i mean wish i had time to take care of my portfolio, but.. well, what are you doing tomorrow -10am? staff meeting. noon? eating. 3:45? uh, compliance training. 6:30? sam's baseball practice. 8:30? tai chi. yeah, so sounds relaxing. alright, 9:53? i usually make their lunches then, and i have a little vegan so wow, you are busy. wouldn't it be great if you had investments that worked as hard as you do? yeah. introducing essential portfolios. the automated investing solution that lets you focus on your life. we danced in a german dance group. i wore lederhosen.man.
when i first got on ancestry i was really surprised that i wasn't finding all of these germans in my tree. i decided to have my dna tested through ancestry dna. the big surprise was we're not german at all. 52% of my dna comes from scotland and ireland. so, i traded in my lederhosen for a kilt. ancestry has many paths to discovering your story. get started for free at ancestry.com.
earlier we laid out some of the connections between some of president trump's key adviser and russia in the past. just the facts. the fbi and two congressional committees are investigating ties between trump associates and russia, russia's meddling in the election. paul manafort offered to meet with the house intelligence committee. he has been facing allegations about work he has done in ukraine and russia. no doubt we will hear more about him as the weeks go on. drew griffin tonight has more details. >> we have to talk to mr. manafort. >> it's a name heard more and more on capitol hill. >> you talking about paul manafort? >> i'm talking about mr. manafort. >> this paul manafort. donald trump's former campaign chief. who is denying he has had anything to do with the russian government, with vladimir putin and with alleged russian hacking of a u.s. election and with any coordination between donald trump's campaign and russia.
Michael-flynnRussianAmbassadorBriefingSean-spicerAllegationKindKislayakOneJeanie-mosThingsAdministration