hi, there. i'm brianna keilar in for wolf blitzer. up first, donald trump and hillary clinton on the campaign trail. also, under fire today. clinton is holding an event at a tech education facility in denver. she is facing renewed criticism over the terrorist attack in benghazi with release of a report for house republicans. we are getting a look at the stage for republican convention. these are live pictures from
cleveland where the party will be meeting in less than three weeks. the presumptive republican nominee trying to rally his base. donald trump is also under scrutiny for backtracking on his proposed muslim ban. cnn political reporter, sarah murray, is joining us live from pennsylvania. that is where donald trump will be speaking. give us a sense of what we are expecting? >> reporter: good afternoon. this is key to any donald trump strategy. he feels like he can tap into these white working class voters that helped him propel to winning the republican nomination and becoming the presumptive republican nominee. we are expecting him to talk about hillary clinton is the candidate of globalism. donald trump will cast himself as the candidate who will put america first, create jobs, who will help boost americans. we are expecting him to be hitting hillary clinton really hard in this speech today,
brianna. >> he is expected to go after hillary clinton on trade. what exactly specifically is he going after her on? >> that's right. i spoke to a senior trump aid earlier today who said that donald trump will be rattling off a number of trade deals where they feel like hillary clinton has failed american workers, whether it is nafta, tpp, whether you are talking about trade with china. in addition, trump is going to go a step further and lay out what he would do on trade in the first 100 days, how he would approach things differently. they are saying this will be his most detailed economic address so far. we have heard donald trump say he would get rid of the trade agreements. we haven't heard how or what he would replace them with. we might get more of a flavor now. >> tell us about this new hire. obviously, no love loss between ted cruz and donald trump. a former ted cruz, a top aide, is now working for donald trump.
p. >> reporter: that's right. jason miller is coming on as a senior adviser. he was high-ranking in the ted cruz campaign. a number of former cruz staffers still feel prickley about donald trump. even jason miller has taken some jabs at donald trump, you might expect when at rival campaigns. he is saying, donald trump is the carl lewis of flip-flopping. i have literally never seen anyone move with such speed. whenever you see an aide jump over to an opposing candidate, there is a little bit of awkwardness left over. this was a particularly tumultuous year. everybody is going to have to try to put that behind themselves as jason comes over to work for donald trump. >> we'll see how that goes. sarah marie, thank you so much. first, a ban on muslims
entering the u.s. and now immigrants from terror states. let's talk more about donald trump shifting positions on this topic. we have jeff zel any and knee amalik henderson and gloria borg borger. he is changing positions mere. >> this etch-a-sketch moment as one of mitt romney's former aides famously put it. look, i think donald trump, his temporary ban on muslims entering the country is very popular with the republican base. it is not so popular with leaders in congress and it is not so popular with independent voters. it may well be unconstitutional. so there needed to be some kind of shifting. question is, to what? b what we were hearing yesterday and others are hearing, it is
not completely formed yet, is that he would shift away from this ban on muslims to some kind of a ban from terrorist states. we are not quite sure how that would work. would it be a ban, would it be vetting? it's not well-conceived at this point. it is a shift. he realizes he has to move into a different mode. the question is, nair has to be a policy. we don't have that yet. >> it seems to me he has tried to be on both sides of things. he is giving red meat speeches. i was in mount sles sait. pleas carolina, when he gave this speech. people were saying, he is from new york city. the southerners weren't quite as comfortable with him yet. the challenge for trump is will he be able to stick with this
new policy. he feeds on applause than he does intellect. that will be interesting if he can keep on this. clearly a smart move politically to turn the corner. he doesn't have a voting record, why not? >> he sort of does have a record, him. >> only what he said. >> and pretty memorable. >> it was a pretty declarative statement p. >> i was reading, i, donald j. trump. >> i think can we really move away from it? if you are hillary clinton, you are going to really tie this around him until november. you saw elizabeth warren mention it yesterday. this is a big part of donald trump's brand, right? so for him to shimmy out of it at this point and rebrand himself, i think it will be difficult. >> we are used to candidates trying to minimize the changes in position. it is not a change. it is an adjustment.
or we're just fill ng somfillin some details. this is a glaring example where they are trying to do that. the campaign denying this is any change in his position. here is what national spokeswoman, katrina pierson, for the trump campaign, told me yesterday. >> mr. trump is going to be refining his policy, putting out more specific details, which everybody has been asking for. there has been no change. he still does not want to allow individuals who come into this country who cannot be vetted. >> who cannot be vetted. this is what she and i went back and forth on. there is a vetting process, starting with the u.n., trickles down ultimately when it comes to refugees coming to the u.s. to federal agencies, the department of homeland security, criminal background checks from the fbi, et cetera, what do you make of this on the vetting? are we expecting donald trump to be a big part of this?
that he will propose a change in the vetting process. >> she certainly wasn't familiar at that time with whatever vetting process that donald trump and his advisers might want to come up with. she kept saying it was up to congress. it was up to the fbi. it was up to everyone else to come up with it. >> they do seem to want to stick on this point about vetting to sort of distract from what is seemingly movement all over the place. >> which is missing the word muslim. >> there are a couple of bills pending that can would make it more difficult for certain people to get into the united states. i would have to say that they are probably looking at the lense lation. one of the bills is sponsored by senator sessions. they are looking at this legislation, i am sure, to talk about something that would be constitutional. they are not going to lose any of their supporters by changing their position slightly, because trump supporters are trump supporters. they don't care about the
details. >> i think a shift is a shift. i think it will make some republicans that are uneasy about him more at ease with him. the problem is, this policy making on the fly here, we saw it in your great interview with katrina. this campaign is not stuck to these boring talking points like their rivals do in terms of these ten-point plans. they are doing this on the fly. at this point, ideas start to matter more and more and more. i think he will have to give specifics. the people on tv speaking for him will have to be familiar with them. >> that seems pretty basic, jeff, nia, gloria, thank you. we'll be waiting for those specific. coming up, a new report from house republicans that details what happened the night four americans were killed in libya but no new information that connects hillary clinton to any wrongdoing. we'll be talking to two lawmakers at odds over that report. how safe is the water
flowing into your home? a new investigation on the epa and led getting into public drinking water. it's the little things in life that make me smile. spending the day with my niece. i don't use super poligrip for hold, because my dentures fit well. before those little pieces would get in between my dentures and my gum and it was uncomfortable. even well fitting dentures let in food particles. just a few dabs of super poligrip free is clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat. so it's not about keeping my dentures in, it's about keeping the food particles out. try super poligrip free. yourbut the omega-3s in fish oil differ from megared krill oil. unlike fish oil, megared is easily absorbed by your body. megared. the difference is easy to absorb.
premium like clockwork. month after month. year after year. then one night, you hydroplane into a ditch. yeah... surprise... your insurance company tells you to pay up again. why pay for insurance if you have to pay even more for using it? if you have liberty mutual deductible fund™, you could pay no deductible at all. sign up to immediately lower your deductible by $100. and keep lowering it $100 annually, until it's gone. then continue to earn that $100 every year. there's no limit to how much you can earn and this savings applies to every vehicle on your policy.
call to learn more. switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance. 80% of recurrent ischemic, strokes could be prevented. and i'm doing all i can to help prevent another one. a bayer aspirin regimen is one of those steps in helping prevent another stroke. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.
the republican led house committee on benghazi led their final report this morning. in it was praise for ambassador stevens, state department computer expert, sean smith and former navy seals, tyrone woods and glen doherty. there was also criticism of the state department, the cia and the defense department for lack of response by the military. there was no bombshell, specially when it came to then secretary of state hillary clinton. here is how committee chairman, tray doughty, summed it up this morning. >> collectively and individually, all seven of us believed that there were more questions to ask, more answers to acquire. more witnesses, more documents to access. this report validates that belief. there is new information on what happened in benghazi and that information should fundamentally change the way you view what happened in benghazi. there are recommendations made
to make sure it does not happen again. >> cnn chief political correspondent, dana bash, is on capitol hill covering this. dana, was there new information here. he said it should change how people look at what happened. >> there is new texture and anecdotes to feed into the narrative we have known for many years now and through several investigations preceding this. there is no question, though, that they got a little bit more clarity when it comes to chris stevens, the ambassador who lost his life, his motivations and why he would be in a dangerous place like he was, one examle that they got was he needed to prepare for hillary clinton's visit there. she was secretary of state then. that was going to be a month later. he wanted to go. they wanted to make it a permanent consulate. the bigger question that
everybody has been looking at no matter how much trey gowdy wants to tamp down on the question of politics is politics. republicans have many of them have been very transparent about the fact that they believe that the democratic nominee or presumptive for president has culpability here. that's not some place that trey gowdy wanted to go. listen to my questions to him on that. >> shockingly that, was not what the house asked me to do. look at the resolution. the resolution doesn't mention secretary clinton. speaker boehner nor speaker ryan have ever asked me to do anything about presidential politics. speaker boehner asked me to find out what happened to four of our fellow citizens. i believe that is what i have done. >> so that's what he said his responsibility is. the issue, though, was plain in
sight for us standing there or sitting there in the press conference, which is on the stanl. he had two of his fellow republicans who had decided that because trey gowdy wrote this 800-page narrative without any conclusions, they wanted to give conclusions and highly political conclusions as would you imagine, brianna, specifically laying the blame on the administration and hillary clinton who was secretary of state at the time. at the end of the day, two years, 7 million taxpayer dollars and certainly a lengthy narrative and some information for if the future, recommendations, so that americans are not put in harm's way doing their jobs like they were in benghazi. no smoking gun, if you will, frankly, that a lot of republicans, no matter how much they say this wasn't political were looking for. >> dana bash, thank you so much for breaking that down for us.
let's talk more about the release of the benghazi report by the republican-led house committee and some of the reaction we are seeing from both sides. the state department said, quote, the essential facts surrounding t surrounding the 2012 attacks in benghazi have been known for some time but they are working to implement previous reports.
from the clinton campaign, this chief goal is to politisize this and hurt hillary clinton's campaign. >> joining me is adam shift. the republicans were united. they say you politicized the report more than they have. what's your response to that? >> well, i think dana hit it right on the head. two years worth of work, $7 million and all the republicans were able to add was texture and anecdotes to what we knew already, no new conclusions, no new evidence of secretary cl clinton engage ing in wrongdoin. republicans are trying to make virtue of the fact this it wasn't focused on secretary clinton. it wasn't for lack of trying. they tried for two years and
failed. they ran this committee to exclude us. they excluded us from witness interviews without telling us. they didn't share information when it contradicted the narrative they wanted to create. they issued subpoenas without consulting or having a vote on them. they made it very plain this was going to be partisan from the very beginning. much as mr. mccarthy, one of the leadership said, the goal was to try to attack the secretary. the fact that they failed shouldn't be held up as some kind of applause line for the republicans. >> democrats released their report yesterday. in this report, there is a lot of criticism for the defense department not responding in the immediate aftermath of the attack. there is also a little finger-pointing at the late ambassador, chris stevens. what did you think of that? >> i think it is terrible to point fingers at an ambassador that gave his life for his country. he understood the risks.
he loved libya. he wanted a more firm presence in benghazi. no one understood the dangers more than he did. in terms of the criticism of the defense department, those issues were raised years ago in terms of the fact that our response teams were not co-located with the planes they would fly on. those are things that have now been addressed, assets have been repositioned closer to the region where they may be needed. none of that is new. the fact that they are leveling new criticisms doesn't justify this two-year, $7 million expense. people are going to be gravely disappoint disappointed in this report. those of us that participate in the prior investigations could see this coming for years now. the only thing i can hope that comes out of this is not the pentagon response that happened already more than a year ago but rather that congress never revisits this kind of a taxpayer funded investigatory committee
established for political and partis partisan purposes. >> no one wants to speak ill of the dead but isn't it appropriate to look at the role of anyone involved in this, including ambassador stevens? >> absolutely. it is perfectly fair to consider why did the ambassador think it was important to have a presence in benghazi. look, this man gave his life for his country. he did it for all the right reasons. he wanted to have a presence there. he thought it was important for the united states for our national security policy and foreign policy. i have nothing but praise for his motivations, for whaanting do what he did. i don't think the failures, and there were failures in terms of the state department security, should be laid at the feet of the ambassador. he was a great foreign service officers. >> one of the reasons we all, the public collectively, found out about hillary clinton's use of a private e-mail address and a private e-mail server solely
while she was secretary of state, was because of the information that this committee sought. do you see in sort of an incorrect way the utility in that? >> well, look, the secretary has said that she should not have used the private e-mail account. she has acknowledged that was a mistake. that wasn't the point of the investigation. point was supposedly to try to come up with something new about benghazi. so by the majority's own definition, that was not something that they were trying to achieve. of course, from the point of view of their leadership, this was exactly what they are trying to achieve. trying to find something they could use against the secretary. frankly, i think the american people, to paraphrase bernie sanders, they are tired of hearing about the e-mails. they are more concerned with who is going to protect the country and restore our economy. those are the issues that voters will be caring about in november. >> congressman adam schiff, i do
want to tell you this. hillary clinton is at a technology and education event in colorado. she was just asked about this house republican report on the benghazi attack that killed four americans. here is what she said four times ago. >> the question, if you couldn't hear it, was about the committee report on benghazi that was released today. and i have said from the very beginning, nothing is more important than the safety and security of our diplomates and development officials who go into dangerous places around the world pursuing american values, interests, and our security. and i said this when i testified for 11 hours that no one has thought more about or lost more sleep over the lives that we lost, the four americans, which was devastating. we owe it to those brave
americans to make sure we learn the right lessons from this tragedy. that's why i immediately put together an independent committee to go everywhere, look everywhere, come up with what recommendations would help us prevent such tragedies in the future. that, of course, should be the goal. i understand that after more than two years and $7 million spent by the benghazi committee out of taxpayer funds, it had to today reported they found nothing, nothing to contradict the conclusions of the independent accountability board or the conclusions of the prior multiple earlier investigations carried out on a bipartisan basis in the congress. while this took on pairrtisan tinge, i want us to stay focused
on the important work of diplomacy and development. that's specially true in dangerous places. we can not withdraw or retreat from the world. america needs a presence for a lot of reasons. the best way to honor the commitment and sacrifice of those we lost is to redouble our efforts to provide the resources and support that our diplomates and our development experts deserve. so i'll leave it to others to characterize this report but i think it is pretty clear it is time to move on. thank you all very much. >> that's hillary clinton in denver talking about this house republican report on the benghazi attack. here with me is ohio congressman, jim jordan, a republican member of the select committee and you wrote a supplement to this report that is in addition to what the chairman put together and you
were critical certainly of the administration. i want to ask you about that. first, you just heard secretary clinton's response. what did you make of that? >> talking about lessons learned, the key lessons we learned looking at facts. when there is a moment like this, a crisis situation where americans gave their life for their country, one of the key things is for our leaders in the government to be straight with the american people and not try to mislead them. we learned in our investigation, for example, that no military assets launched and headed towards benghazi until after the attack was over. what did launch before the attack was over was the political spin started bisect clinton when at 10:08. tyrone woods is on the roof of the annex fighting for his life and his fellow citizens. an hour before the mortar attacks hit and take him and glen dohert's life. she issued a statement to justify that as inflammatory information on the internet. she instantly goes to the video.
we know that was misleading. an hour later, she sends to her daughter, a private e-mail where she says, terrorists killed two of our people. >> how is that different? we already knew that. >> not even close to the degree that the private communications were all terrorist attack. the public communications were all video. >> we have known for months when she sent that e-mail to her daughter, chelsea, and also when that statement was put out. >> we didn't know to the detail this continued with the administration publicly saying one thing, privately telling the truth. privately attributing it to the terrorist attack which the state department knew was the case and publicly blaming it on a video. it continued for days and days and days. we have been told no military assets could get there. that's different than none of them tried. we didn't start to send them there until after the attack was over. the fact that the spin started before the attack was over but no asset wrs in motion to go
there and help our people who were fighting for their lives is a big takeaway. politics drove this all. that's what we write about. their campaign says republicans are politicizing this. the people who politicized it was the clinton state department, the obama administration at 10:08 the night of the attacks. they instantly went to the video on air. >> i do want to let our viewers know we are awaiting a white house press briefing that we are expecting the press secretary there will be questioned about this. some of the findings in this report include providing a mechanism for threat assessment in these situations, that that's important and greater interagency communication and training. grear attention to future potential threats on the anniversary of 9/11 and greater mechanisms to provide survivor benefits. you add to that in -- stand by for a moment, congressman. we are going to go to the white house where josh earnest is
beginning. >> are they going to disclose what they received from house republicans? a $7 million effort funded by tax payers to do what the would-be speaker of the house says was their goal, which is to tear down secretary clinton's poll numbers. that was their goal. it remains to see if that's what they accomplished. >> they claim the military was slow to respond to these assaults, eight hours after they had gun, no military assets had been directed towards them? >> this has been thoroughly debunked by previous republican-led investigations in the congress. so i'm not going to get into the back and forth, because, frankly, republicans have already done that. republicans in the house intelligence committee have concluded that those xharchargee
fot tr not true. questions have been raised by the benghazi lead investigator. there is plenty of churn just to review what republicans have concluded. those congressional committees that have been committed to trying to understand the facts of a tragedy that led to the death of four americans have concluded what happened was tranldy. they have also concluded the variety of conspiracy theories that have been flowering on the republican side of the aisle are politically motivated fantasies. it is unfortunate that the death of four americans would be subject to that kind of political fantasizing. that's the state of the republican party these days. >> another issue. it is time to take another look at agency policies regarding
displacement of the flag at federal cemeteries. would president obama agree with that and would he direct that the veterans administration and the national park service to remove any flags? >> i am not aware of how this question has been raised administratively. we can take a look at that. i do know that house republicans in a partisan attempt to extend displays of the confederate flag did include that in the zika bill that they passed in the dark of night last week. i think that underscores the partisan nature of the legislation that they put forward. i'm not aware of any executive action that's being contemplated on this question. >> ayesha? >> thank you. i wanted to talk about some more fallout from the brexit vote. scotland is looking at ways to
possibly stay with eu. that is the white house press briefing, josh earnest addressing this house briefing. we are speaking with congressman jordan. you did put out an addendum. >> we had an 800-report that talks about what happened, the facts. we thought it was also important and mr. gowdy said this, the chairman said it, he encouraged people to read it and draw their own conclusions. mr. pompeii yo and i drew our own conclusions. b what motivated us to stay there when so many other countries left? it was so dangerous one diplomate security described it as a suicide mission. he said, quote, everybody here is going to die. that's how bad the situation was. we were committed to stay.
what drove us to stay? why did we stay when everybody else seemed to be leaving? why did we mislead the american people? the only explanation is political concerns overtook everything else. remember, you have to remember the context. libya was supposed to be the crown jewel of the obama administration's foreign policy. you oust a dictator and do it without putting boots on the ground this. was a wonderful day when gadhafi left. the situation had gotten so bad that we have a diplomatic security agent saying, everybody is going to die and yet they stadium because they were so invested from a political standpoint. from 9/11/2012 happens, remember the narrative, we are 56 days before an election, bin laden is dead and all qaeda is on the run. this is their legacy. they can't tell the truth it was a terrorist attack. they concoct this story before
the attack is over. they start saying it is a video-inspired protest that led to this attack. they ran with that story publicly. in that same place josh earnest was standing, jay carney stood right there, two days after and said, there is no evidence to suggest it was a pre-planned attack that same day. state department personnel in tripoli said we know it was a well-planned attack. you couldn't be more polar opposite. they accused us of playing politics. the politics started with them, 56 days before an election. all we do is show that the facts convey convey that and in a very strong way. >> thanks for being with us. buyers remorse perhaps in britain. the uk hesitating to pull the trigger and leave the european union. can the eu push them out? we'll discuss. you both have a
would cut you some slack, right? >>no. your insurance rates go through the roof. your perfect record doesn't get you anything. >>anything. perfect! for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claim centers are available to assist you 24/7. for a free quote, call liberty mutual at switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509 call today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
for the first time since the brexit vote, british prime minister, david cameron, is facing leaders from european union countries doing damage control. meanwhile, here in the u.s., president obama is urging everyone to remain calm about the future of the united states closest ally. >> i think that the best way to think about this is a pause button has been pressed on the project of full european integration. i would not overstate it. there has been a little bit of hysteria post the brexit vote as if somehow nato is gone and the
trans atlantic alliance is dissolving and every country is rushing off to its own corner. that's not what's happening. >> u.s. markets seem to be heeding that device bouncing back for the time being. cnn international's richard quest is in russells. how are these discussions between prime minister david cameron and eu leaders going. do you think anything is going to be accomplished? >> oh, not tonight. i mean, i can say that with absolute certainty. for a simal reason that a large number of the europeans are saying, there can be no informal negotiations until the british prime minister fires the starting gun known as article 50. until he formally says to this lot, by the way, we are leaving. it has to be formally done. he can't have an anybody knows it is going to happen. there can be no formal or
informal negotiations. tonight, we are going to have a dinner. they are going to have a dinner. i am going to stand here and wait and watch. they are going to basically hear from david cameron himself about what happened, why he is re-signing, how long he expects it to be before he will start the formal process. i have to tell you, there are a lot of people who are very annoyed, some who are frustrated. there are some who are just down right uncertain as to what happens next. now, one man who is here, is pretty much none of those things. it is nigel farage. he is head of the united kingdom independence party ukip. he was one of the most prominent leave campaigners. he was basically bluntly rude to the european parliament telling them none of them had a decent job. i asked him did he see the similarities between himself and his position on brexit and donald trump in the united
states? >> our viewers in the united states who are watching now and wondering what on earth is going to happen to britain, how can britain thrive, i didn't say survive, i say thrive outside the european union when the banks are being decimated in the share price and the threats have been very severe. and the pound has fallin $13, $14. >> the ftse is up 3%. 12% since february. sterling is marginally lower than it was in february. we have to stop this nonsince about the markets. the pound has been in the bear market since july, 2014. fact. imagine if nafta was a political union and a court in mexico could overrule, imagine if you had free movement of people with mexico. how would you feel? you wouldn't like it. what we are doing in the uk. we are reasserting our democratic rights in terms of
business and trade, we'll go on trading. >> you are starting to sound in some way with the similar policies to donald trump. now, he admires the brexit result. he said it was fantastic. it was brilliant. do you admire donald trump in this u.s. presidential election? >> donald trump dares to talk about things other people want to brush under the carpet. what mr. trump is doing in america is very different than what i am trying to do in the united kingdom. my problem in politics is far dpr greater than donald trump. we have literally lost our sovereignty, lost our borders. >> he would say the same thing about u.s. borders. >> the problem you have in the u.s. is illegal immigration. our problem is legal immigration to half a billion people. >> so you wouldn't be looking to him for too much support? on the one hand, he also says if he becomes president of the united states, barack obama is going to the back of the trade
cue wouldn't happen. you would be at the front of the cue. so in many ways you must hope he becomes president. >> for the united kingdom, i think trump would be better for us than barack obama has been. no doubt. >> how about hillary clinton? you are not going to take sides at this early stage? >> there is nothing on earth that could persuade me ever to vote for hillary clinton. >> you sure you don't want to think about that? >> absolutely not. she represents the political elite. it is almost as if she feels she has a divine right to have that job. >> okay. so that was nigel farage. we talked just about the dinner. let me tell you what i believe they are eating tonight at this so-called last supper for david cameron and the brexit divide. they are having quail -- sorry, somebody was just telephoning me. they are having quail and green bean salad with crispy dried
18 million americans may be at risk for getting drinking water tainted with lead. sa s >> reporter: more than 18 million americans are getting their drinking water from systems that have violated federal lead rules. not only does the epa know about it, they've done almost nothing to enforce their own
regulations, according to multiple industry experts. >> i think that the public needs to be told the truth about contamination in their water supply. >> reporter: more than 5,000 water systems are in violation, including failure to properly test water, failure to report contamination, and failure to treat water properly, according to a new analysis by the natural resources defense council, or nrdc. in 9 out of 10 cases, the epa took no enforcement action when water systems violated the lead and copper rule. the federal regulation meant to keep america's tap water safe from lead. >> imagine a cop sitting watching people run stop signs and speed at 90 miles an hour through small communities and doing absolutely nothing about it. that's, unfortunately, what we have now. >> reporter: eric olson is among the experts saying water utilities are routinely gaming the system, using incent testing
methods to avoid detecting high levels of lead. what that means is there are even more water systems with lead issues that aren't officially in violation. >> they don't care if they're violating the law. they don't feel like they're going to face any penalties. >> reporter: philadelphia is one city accused of gaming the system. in 2014 city officials sent residents questionable instructions for testing telling them to preflush their water and remove aerators which often track particles of lead. experts say both techniques would make lead levels appear lower than they actually are. in fact, the epa instructed as far back as 2007 that they should not remove or clean aerators. >> i was concerned, i wanted to test my home's water. >> reporter: jonathan's 18-month-old water has been drinking philadelphia's water from the tap since she was born. he's organizing a group of homeowners to get independent answers because he doesn't trust the way the city conducted its
testing. >> it concerns me that they're not using the best practices available. it concerns me that they're not following the latest epa regulations. >> reporter: so why doesn't the epa enforce its own rules? multiple sources and industry experts tell cnn it comes down to two key reasons. water isn't a main priority for the epa because its resources are stretched thin. and the epa has a cozy relationship with the water systems it's supposed to regulate. >> they're friends, they hang out for each other, they ask for each other's advice and you get close after a while. >> so should zins be worried? >> reporter: citizens should be very concerned. >> reporter: when. >> most of my colleagues have all chosen to install water
filter underneath our kitchen sink. >> you are saying that people who work at the epa are buying water filters because they aren't confident in the quality of their tap water. >> yes. >> sara, how is the epa responding to this and do they have any problems to address this problem? >> reporter: so last night the epa responded to the report saying the epa works closely with states and the states are the first line of defense when it comes to drinking water systems and they also said it is important to note that many of the systems the nrdc cites in that analysis are already working to resolve violations. i have it tell you something. the most shocking thing to me when i first read this report was that flint, michigan, which opened up all of our eyes to this invisible issue, one of the most notorious, egregious cases of lead and water contamination we've seen in a decade. that system is not in violation by the epa technically 37 and so
th that really paints a picture, shows you how big an issue like this is, that places that have this problem aren't necessarily being forced to correct it. >> how is that in compliance? >> well, flint -- for various technical reasons, the epa has decided not it find flint, michigan to be in violation. now if you -- you look at the situation there, common sense would tell you that they have an issue. and people there hope that the epa would do something. and on that thread, people across the country when they -- they turn on their water, they're hoping, they're putting their trust in the government that the federal government is going to make sure their water is safe. what this report and what industry exports have told us, it all boils down to they are not doing that. in most cases if the state is not enforcing, if the state oversight fails, there is no
backstop. the federal government isn't keeping them in check. >> that is it for me. i'm back at 5:00 eastern on "the situation room." newsroom with pamela brown starts right now. hello, i'm pamela brown in for brooke baouldwan. trump says this will be the most detailed address yet on the economy. as he puts forth his ideas on job and trade, many say he will pull back his temporary ban on muslims visiting the united states. we'll have much more on that in just a moment. but first a cnn political reporter sara murray