tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN March 7, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PST
and that's it for us. thanks for watching. time to hand things over to don lemon. i'll see you tomorrow night. "cnn tonight" starts right now. president trump's advisers in spin mode over the wiretapping accusations and the president himself in sales mode on the replacement for obamacare. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. president trump said he's proud to back the gop plan for replacing obamacare. conservative republicans, blasting their own party's plans. is it doa, dead on arrival? will dismantling obamacare hurt president trump's voters? the president not backing down from the stunning wiretapping accusations against former president obama but also not offering the slightest bit of evidence. that's as republican intelligence chairman in the house and senate admit they've seen nothing to back the
president's claims. let's get right to cnn's political analysis, mark preston and mr. ryan lizza, senior white house correspondent jim acosta and legal analyst laura coats. jim, at the white house now, president trump still under fire for those accusations of wiretapping he made against the former president. but no word from him on that today. he didn't talk about it. instead, he was touting the house plan to repeal and replace obamacare. let's take a look. >> i'm proud to support the replacement plan released by the house of representatives and encouraged by members of both parties. i think really that we're going to have something that's going to be much more understood and much more popular than people can even imagine. this is the plan. and we're going to have a tremendous -- i think we will have a tremendous success. it's a complicated process but actually it's very simple.
it's called good health care. >> so, jim, complicated but simple. he says it's going to be more popular than people can even imagine, but it's not starting out that way, is it? >> reporter: no. i think the president's going to find out that repealing and replacing obamacare will be as difficult as passing and signing obamacare into law, that president obama dealt with when he was in office. this is a messy, complicated stuff and i think the house republican plan coming out today while it had the approval of the president, and he had a bunch of house republicans over here to talk about it today, and you heard the president there saying it's a better health care law in the end, you had a lot of conservative republicans up on capitol hill and almost the return, the revenge of the tea party you might say on capitol hill today, essentially saying this was dead on arrival. and to put it mildly, there were a few lawmakers up on capitol hill calling it obamacare lite. that is not a good start for this process. on the republican side of the equation and on the democratic
side you have the house minority leader like nancy pelosi saying that, you know, where's the score from the congressional budget office? don, this piece of legislation has not been scored by the congressional budget office. we don't know how much it adds to the national deficit. we don't know how many of millions of americans lose their health insurance as a result of obamacare being repealed and replaced and until those numbers are known, really, this is sort of an exercise in some political posturing today on all sides. when we get the numbers, then we'll see where things stand in this town. >> as they say, governing ain't easy. i know. it's not grammatically correct. but that's what they say, whoever they are. jim, the president didn't talk about russia today, but you asked about it in the white house press briefing. let's look at it. >> where's the evidence? where's the proof that president obama bugged president trump? >> well, i answered this question yesterday on camera on your air just so we're cleared. this is now twice.
i think i made it clear yesterday -- >> since yesterday, since yesterday -- >> nothing's changed, no. it's not a question of new proof or less proof or whatever. the answer is the same. and i think that -- which is that there's a concern about what happened in the 2016 election, the house and senate intelligence committees have the staff and capabilities and the processes in place to look at this in a way that's objective. >> will the president withdraw the accusation? does he have any -- >> why would he withdraw it until it's adjudicated? that's what we're asking, for them to look at this and see -- >> no regrets from him for raising this accusation? >> absolutely not. >> no regrets, jim. no proof. it seems like they're doing their best to try to wriggle out of this by spinning -- i have no idea what he said. >> reporter: no regrets, no proof, no kidding. that was what we heard at the white house today. don, this is a problem that is going to follow this president just like, you know, the voter fraud claim that he made at the beginning of this administration.
like the inaugural crowd size claim that he made on the first day of his administration. he keeps making these claims, these unsubstantiated, baseless claims that are not in line with the facts and when the president said that former president obama broke the law, somehow bugged trump tower and got away with it and now all of a sudden, the president has this information. nobody else has this information. the white house press secretary doesn't have it. the chief of staff doesn't. nobody has it inside the white house. nobody's willing to share it with us. you are in this position right now where the white house has to make the best of a really bad situation which is every few days, perhaps once a week, they have to come out and explain something that's inexplicable that the president says. and i mean, you heard what white house press secretary sean spicer there said. he said that they don't have any proof. they don't have any evidence of what the president was talking
about. but he also said that while we don't want to talk about it anymore. as long as the question is hanging out there, the question is going to get asked. there's an on camera briefing tomorrow and i would imagine the question is gonna be asked again. >> i don't want to talk about it. that works well in marriages, by the way. i don't want to talk about it anymore. thank you, jim. i appreciate it. jim has to get off the white house lawn. i want to bring in mark preston and ryan lizza and the rest of the panel. he doesn't want to talk about it anymore. it's simple. i was wondering, why have an investigation, spend the taxpayer dollars, have everybody focused on it. >> right. >> wasting time. when all he has to do is he can show the proof himself. >> yeah. >> very simple. >> i tried i don't want to talk about it anymore line the other night before travel. >> how was the couch? >> didn't go very well. no. didn't go very well. you know, the bottom line is that donald trump, president donald trump has put his staff into a very bad position to have to go out and explain the
unexplainable, he's put senate and house republican leaders in a very bad position. because they can't explain it. he's put the intelligence community in a very bad position because they can't explain it. at some point, you have to wonder is when is the american public or the 45% or 46% that are supporting him, don, when are they gonna come out and say, we want you to explain it? >> but why -- i mean, there's been -- but why? that's the thing. why does it not matter to them? >> there's a difference between saying 3 million people came to my inauguration and whatever number he had thrown out there. >> we'll talk about that, because the pictures are out. duh. >> right, right, right. it's one thing to say that which was ridiculous, right? another thing to go out and besmirch someone's character, and some would say a treasonist
charge in some ways against the former president. >> yeah. >> look, there's just follow up on that point, there's a fairly respected constitutional scholar writing and argued today that -- i'm not endorsing this and surprised that someone of his -- at his level and understands the constitution argued that this is a potentially impeachable offense to accuse a former president of this. so without commenting on whether he's right or not, it is at that level of seriousness in terms of accusations. >> that's why they don't want to talk about it. >> look. we were joking before like this is the third day and still talking about trump's tweet. but as journalists, i think it's really important to keep asking and pushing until we get evidence of the truth of that statement or the white house says, sorry, he was wrong, it's not true. what they want is just for it to go away. right? for it not to be talked about anymore. >> and pretend there's an investigation that's even warranted. it is not -- there's -- do you think there should be an investigation? laura, i'll bring you in in a second.
do you think we should allow the investigation or should the president just come out and say, i have no proof? they'll never do that, obviously. >> no, no. i'll just throw out there casually saying, fine. if the house and the senate intelligence committees want to investigate, fine. who are we to say they should or shouldn't do. we go back a week ago donald trump said the biggest thing to know is there's leaking within the government. >> or -- >> by the way he would be releasing information because somehow it was leaked to him and then he decided to tweet it out on saturday morning which is very bizarre. >> yeah. when i said why, why supporters do not care, many of them, i'm sure some of them do. why does he keep saying there's no investigation into crowd sizes. except for the park service released the photos today. no investigation into the 3 million people he promised to vote. really he's not provided any proof to how -- why president obama wasn't born in the united states. he's never shown any proof for that. >> right. >> never really answered for that. so, you know, we talked about impeachable.
you said there were other people who said that. senator al franken believes, as it concerns russia that attorney general jeff sessions committed perjury. there's a perjury word now. in the confirmation hearing and didn't disclose the meetings with the russian ambassador. here's what he told jake tapper. >> it's hard to come to any other conclusion that he -- that he just perjured himself. >> you think he perjured himself. what do you think the penalty should be? do you think he should resign? >> i think he should come before the committee and explain this. of course, no one asked him about the russian ambassador. he's the one who volunteered that information that he didn't speak to anybody and it turned out he had met twice with the russian ambassador. once a private meeting. and he had seven weeks to just notify us. this is about the russian government hijacking our
election. and this is about whether there was any collusion in that interference by the trump campaign. >> all right, laura. as we know, attorney general jeff sessions had to recuse himself. is he out of hot water or not? what about the potential deputy attorney general who was in the hot seat today for his confirmation hearing, rod rosenstein? >> jeff sessions is certainly not out of hot water and as if he's asking us to see the forest for the trees here and one heck of a mighty sequoia and may be -- this may be about whether or not his comments with the russian ambassador was ultimately wrongful. the big picture right now, the big issue is that he not only answered a question falsely in front of the senate committee hearing, he also did it in writing. everyone's focusing on what he said to senator al franken. patrick leahy gave him a question that was pointed and a same response and sessions can't hide behind contextual clues or lost in translation.
it is a serious thing to be -- to have testified falsely under oath. prosecutors salivate at cases far less consequential than this one. and in terms of the deputy attorney general, look, the next person in line to oversee the russian investigation that now that sessions recused himself is in a very precarious position. what they're asking him at a confirmation hearing that's signed to say, whether you're going to be objective and not come and try to enforce the laws with some type of political agenda, they're asking him now to guarantee how he will rule or try to enforce a particular case now, not having seen the evidence, not having seen the investigation. and this particular person is very, very interesting because he's not only got bipartisan support but eric holder called him in to come investigate the
iran cyber attacks controversy. he was with kenneth starr and white water. this is somebody when's a longest running u.s. attorney and essentially guaranteed through the tenure to be objective. but the biggest question we have right now, for jeff sessions, is why would you -- why have you answered falsely and won't come forward to explain further? i think the reason for that is his words have come back to haunt him and they'll continue to do so. >> do you want to say something, ron? >> to play devil's advocate on perjury, i've been around washington long enough to know that factually inaccurate testimony, partisans on both sides, when they see an opponent say something incorrect, often scream perjury. it is extremely difficult to prove. you have to prove and, laura, i know you know the law much better than i do. but you have to prove intent. hillary clinton testified in the benghazi committee and made statements not 100% accurate and a whole culture that wanted to haul her into jail for perjuring himself. most lawyers who looked at it,
no, that's not perjury. maybe not 100% accurate and not -- but she wasn't intentionally lying there. and to prove -- if franken is right, that this is a serious perjury case, you have to prove intent. it is a high bar. >> all right. >> it is. ryan, you are absolutely right. perjury is something you have to find the intent and in the lost in translation response is one way to get out of claiming you had done anything intentional and what he did in the letter in response to the questioning and not with leahy but the letter making franken upset today, that's what he was trying to do but you still have to understand that the attorney general, while he is certainly a great lawyer, is a figurehead for the department of justice. and the department of justice relies on the credibility of its organization, that they are objective, and can wield the hammer of justice, with the blindfold on. so if there is any presumption or perception that there is something, that there is some smoke or screen or smoke and mirrors being given, then you have to understand that the
department of justice has an obligation to try to hold on to his credibility with both hands. and this does not look good from the perspective of the figurehead, the person running the show, to be in this position. >> thank you, panel. i appreciate that. when we come back, a top republican after another saying they have seen no evidence for president trump's wiretapping accusations so can we trust what this president says? that's next. here's to the wildcats 'til we die...
t-mobile one save you hundreds a year. right now get two lines of data for $100 dollars. with taxes and fees included. that's right 2 unlimited lines for just $100 bucks. all in. and right now, pair up those two lines with two free samsung galaxy s7 when you switch. yup! free. so switch and save hundreds when you go all unlimited with t-mobile. we have breaking news. the lights are out at the statue of liberty. the statue plunged into darkness in the middle of new york harbor. you can just about see it there. you see the base right in the middle of your screen. you can see the flashing lights there. the bottom and then right in the middle should be the statue of liberty and usually lighted right now. no word yet on whether or not this is a power failure but we'll continue to update you on that.
of course that iconic statue there, lights always on. turning now to the white house, doubling down on trump's accusation that former president barack obama wiretapped trump tower and the white house press secretary saying the president has no regrets about making the unsubstantiated claim. i want bring in david axelrod, a former senior adviser of president obama and historian john meechum. good evening to you. david, i'm going to start with you. tonight, multiple top republicans said that they have seen no evidence that the former barack obama wiretapped trump. listen to this. >> we don't have anything today that would send us in that direction but that's not to say we might not find something. >> i don't know what the basis of his statement is. so i really can't comment on this. >> have you seen any evidence of that? >> mr. leader -- >> no, i haven't. >> i have not. i have not seen that evidence.
as you know, i think a lot of that was maybe a little bit -- the multiple tweets were perhaps a little bit strung together. >> so but the white house is not backing down from their claim that they want an investigation. an investigation based on what, though? >> yeah. well, look. i think both things can be true. i think they can have no regrets and there can be no evidence, and we've seen that before. your panel mentioned earlier the comments he made over twitter about the 3 million to 5 million people who voted illegally and at that time the same pattern took place. the white house said, you know, well, you know, there's no evidence that it didn't happen. so, someone ought to examine it. and this has been an ongoing thing with this president. he has no filter and gets on twitter and most of us have a
thought box and thoughts we express publicly. he has no filter. and he just goes right to -- and if he's read a conspiracy theory, apparently that was the provocation here. he takes it right to twitter if it suits his mood and then it leaves everybody else scrambling. i would think as a former white house staffer that it would be the most miserable job on the planet right now to try and be a spokesperson for the president because you have to justify the unjustifiable. very tough for the people on the hill, republicans who want his signature on their legislation and, therefore, they want to play along. the republicans are still supportive of him. they are constituents. they want to play along and it strained credulity to have to answer these questions all the time, and i suspect that this is a pattern that's not going to change. let me just finish by saying, don, we are one week out from when the president gave what i thought was a very effective speech to the congress and one
of the takeaway lines was the time for trivial fights are over. boy, does that seem like a distant memory, doesn't it? >> i had practically forgotten about it considering what happened. john, i don't know if you are laughing. that laugh was out loud. you gave there. >> yeah. >> but i just want to -- to the point that david just made, can we put up, these are the inauguration pictures? we went back and forth about this. everyone knew. everyone knew exactly what was happening here. the national park service released the photos and showed the crowds in the last three inaugurations. in response to the freedom of information act from various media outlets. the white house knew these photos would not back up their claims. >> right. >> so the question is, you know, there's no proof about wiretapping. there's no proof to the crowd size. why lie? >> i have a new theory. which i laugh because david was right saying that -- imagine
having to defend this. it's just an amazing thing. seems to me that trump actually, president trump is not actually speaking to us anymore. he's speaking i think to the 44% or so people who approve of his performance. by the way, richard nixon had slightly better numbers on the day in april of '73 when bob and john resigned. and so, for people who are charting this historically, that's kind of where the numbers are. i think that he's now and perhaps always has been simply speaking to his base. >> was that 44% -- pardon the interruption -- they believe -- are you saying they believe that? >> i think enough of them do or he wouldn't be doing it. i think he puts it out there and people who don't follow this
as obsessively of this as the rest of us and others are probably healthier in other parts of their life, therefore, it becomes part of a kind of catastrophic news environment where people believe that, well, wait, didn't obamacare wiretap him? you know? we never saw that birth certificate. it is the continual post truth stories that at a certain point have a corrosive effect on the public trust and for those of us who -- i was -- we were talking last tuesday. we're -- those of us who think he's trying to lend -- now trying to lead the whole country, it is like lucy and the football. every time we go, he pulls it away. >> yeah. hey, david, i have something. speaking of we were talking about the wiretapping thing, this is from "wall street journal" saying that the former president is livid. president obama livid over the trump allegations. he said but he was livid and a quote, livid over the accusation that he bugged the republican campaign offices believing that
mr. trump was questioning both the integrity of the office of the president and mr. obama himself, people familiar with his thinking said. what is your response to that? >> well, i don't have a response to it. just knowing him as i do, i'm sure he was livid. and less livid about himself. i don't think anybody believes barack -- it may be that john's right, that there's a core of president trump supporters who may believe it, but i think the broader public doesn't believe it. if anybody knows anything about how this works, it is impossible to believe this scenario. but there is -- the point john makes is the most important one and this is my concern about this president. you know, elections come and go and policies change and you may not like the way the policies change but that's the nature of democracy. but this constant drumbeat of attack against institutions whether it's the former president, the courts, the
media, sort of the fundamental pillars of our democracy, that has a potentially long term corrosive effect that may in his view serve short-term politics but in the long-term is very unhealthy for our country. >> i don't think people -- i think people may want to believe it but any rationally thinking person cannot come to the conclusion this is true considering president trump's wiretapping accusation is not the only unsubstantiated claim that he's pushing. look at today. he said 122 vicious prisoners released by the obama administration from gitmo returned to the battlefield. just another terrible decision but if you look at the numbers and the facts, 113 of the prisoners were released during president george w. bush's administration. >> yeah. >> so -- can we believe what the president says? >> no. >> why does he still have a phone for twitter? but go on. >> well, no. we can't.
and my point is that this is part of a concerted propaganda effort that's anathema to the kind of database truth in our politics that has characterized us since philadelphia in the late 1780s. i really believe this. and i mean, you all may say that people don't believe this, but i think there's this snow machine that he just -- he turns on and it complicates, it fills the air. i've been watching the captions on your network all day and saying about wiretapping and obama and trump tower. and i think it creates an ambient atmosphere of distrust. and i believe that insofar as there's a method to this madness, that's what the president of the united states is doing because, guess what, how the hell did he get there
but by creating an ambient sense of distrust of the birth and citizenship of the 44th president of the united states? it has worked before. i think we are being naive if we think that somehow or another our reason based, our analysis will make it go away. >> imagine that. rewarded for conspiracy theories and lying by becoming the president of the united states. >> yes. david, david was a main person on the planet who helped elect barack obama and i'd ask him. i mean, do you think that the birth certificate propaganda hurt the president and helped trump? >> well, there's no doubt it was an impediment and stoked up the base and certainly helped in the midterm elections. i mean, president obama won two very solid victories in his election and his re-election. and he retired with a very high approval rating which i think is bothering the incumbent. >> yeah. >> when he looks at his own numbers. but clearly, it took up a lot of
time. it created a lot of grit. you know? it threw a lot of sand in the works. i think that was the point. look. donald trump is a marketer. he's a brander. he is a reader of audiences. he thinks this sells to his base. and it may sell to his base. the question is, how do you govern this way? and ultimately, where does it all lead? i'm not sure he has a concept of this. >> yeah. we'll talk about obamacare and the voters affected and many of the voters and people who voted for this president would be affected if obamacare went away. we'll discuss that. we'll be right back. at blue apron, we're building a better food system.
where instead of paying for middlemen, we work directly with family farms to deliver higher quality ingredients for less than you pay at the store. get $30 off at blueapron.com/cook youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. you've got mail! what did you think i'd look like? i'm wire-y. net. uh, i love stuff. give me more stuff. (singing) we're no strangers to love i love that! hey, i know a bunch of people who'd like that.
president trump today publicly supporting the republican plan to repeal and replace obamacare. with me now david axelrod and john meachem. it sounds like obamacare or the aca lite, i mean, they rolled out a plan to dismantle the president's signature health care law. some republicans are calling it lite. as i said. what is your reaction to that as a man that was by president obama's side as he crafted this law? >> well, look. i think that what you're seeing here is the collision of politics and the reality of governing. it's been a good strategy of republicans for last three cycles to run against obamacare, to run against the affordable care act. to say we'll repeal and replace it with something better and then they were the dogs that caught the car and now they have to produce and what they're
finding is the president has said, we're going to eliminate all those things you don't like about this affordable care act and keep all the good things. well, it is very hard to do both. and they're caught in this game of twister and so they're right wing or i should say republican conservative base is unhappy because it doesn't completely abolish government support for people who need health care. moderate republicans are very upset because it will ultimately decimate medicaid and a lot of republican governors understand that and are very concerned about that. it's going to mean 10 million or 15 million people will lose their health coverage. and the interesting thing about it, don, is the people most likely to be hurt by this are low, middle income workers who have benefited from this program. older people who are going to
have to pay more under the -- if this is the plan to pass and rural communities that are very subject to losing their hospitals because of what is going to happen now and because they're going to be overrun by unpaid-for expenses for people who lose their insurance. so, all of this hits the very base that elected donald trump president. so it's a big, hot mess. whether they could get it through the congress is a very, very big question right now. >> it is interesting because many people that supported the president as i said before the break and voted for the president will be the ones affected if it is repealed and not replaced by anything or even if it is and not perfect they're the ones to suffer. john, you wrote the foreword to the new book of "we do our part toward a fair and more equal america." peters is a well known liberal,
he's citicized the democratic party for catering to the elite class. does he think democrats can turn things around now? >> charlie is eternally an optimist, a west virginian who ran for the state legislature. ran jfk's campaign in the biggest county in west virginia. and one of the things that struck him as he was working on this book which is about really kind of recreating the ethos of the new deal, the spirit of generosity, the new deal, to help us defeat the predegradation, win world war ii, become the dominant power in the world, that was people overcame their prejudice against the first catholic president. that was an incredibly difficult sell to make in 1960. and so, he has seen the country change in great ways as he's 90 years old. it's been a remarkable thing but a lot of those folks voting for jack kennedy voted for donald trump. and charlie was a west virginia democrat and it's been an incredibly difficult journey as david knows for those kind of
white voters but what charlie wants us to do and what i think all of us want regardless of partisanship is what was it about the country in the 1930s and '40s that enabled us to take on monumental problems, sacrifice a little bit for the common good and build a world that won a war, that created civil rights? this is the anniversary of the march in selma. you know? it took too long to get the kind of social progress we needed but we got it and how do we get that back? >> maybe we weren't so spoiled. i wasn't around but maybe the country wasn't so spoiled back then. who knows? >> sometimes -- >> a lot of it is about the economy. you're right. a lot of it is about a lot of us are very affluent and a lot of us as charlie likes to say, we pull up the ladder and forget about where we came from. >> david? i'm out of time, but quick last word. >> yeah. no. i think that the democratic
party failed in the last election to speak to the entire country and have an economic message but i'll say this. donald trump has made lavish promises to these people that voted for him. in the short run, i think they're supportive. long run they say has my life really been improved or not? has he kept those promises? i think that's a big hurdle for him to clear. >> david, john, thank you so much. i appreciate our time tonight. thanks. coming back, repealing and replacing obamacare one of president trump's top campaign promises, but will his own voters be the one to really pay the price? it's league night!? 'saved money on motorcycle insurance with geico! goin' up the country. bowl without me. frank.' i'm going to get nachos. snack bar's closed. gah! ah, ah ah. ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪
we need to be ready for my name's scott strenfel and r i'm a meteorologist at pg&e. we make sure that our crews as well as our customers are prepared to how weather may impact their energy. so every single day we're monitoring the weather, and when storm events arise our forecast get crews out ahead of the storm to minimize any outages. during storm season we want our customers to be ready and stay safe. learn how you can be prepared at pge.com/beprepared. together, we're building a better california.
we're back now. the press secretary sean spicer saying today the president has no regrets about the wiretapping accusations against the former president barack obama. here to discuss selena zito and j.d. vance. good evening, everyone. j.d. you're first out. >> how are you doing? >> great, thank you. let's talk about president trump's wiretapping claims.
this has happened before where he presents these conspiracy theories or a conspiracy theory with little or no facts to back it up. said barack obama faked his birth certificate because he was born in africa, that's false. we know that. he said thousands of muslims were on tv celebrating 9/11, false. ted cruz's father had something to do with lee harvey oswald false. let's not forget the inaugural crowd size. three to five million illegal voters. and the list goes on and on. there are some americans who simply cannot trust president trump because he is a serial liar. do you think this time that it should be different given how severe this charge is? >> well, i don't know if it's different or not. it's certainly a pretty severe charge but i think you get to a point with president trump where to take a phrase that selena coined, you start to take him not literally anymore, and that's something devon nunez
said today during a press kofs, which is a striking admission from a roup leader of congress, to say that these half truths or lies get to such a point and they're uttered so frequently that you stop actually taking the president literally. that's a pretty striking thing for a guy like devon to say. >> striking thing if people believe it. selena, i know you coined this. but it makes no sense. when you're the president of the united states that people can't actually believe the words that come out of your mouth. i know to many trump voters that doesn't matter. that's not the entirety of the country and not the majority of the country. people want to believe what their president says and many people cannot. no one can. because it's actually not true and backed up by the evidence. >> well, i mean -- >> or facts. >> the hallmark of the presidency is to sort of stand there and be for truth and justice. right? so it's a very difficult thing to sort of sort out in your head today i spent the day going down the ohio river from west
virginia to steubenville, mingo junction, just talking to people who voted for him. and they were -- almost to a tee everyone that i talked to, they were also all democrats and i asked them several things. but one of the things we talked about is, you know, his loose use of words. and this one woman who described herself as a staunch liberal, she said, look, he is not a politician, that's how he talks, he talks like a salesman, there's this expectation of hyperbole. and it's part of what we wanted. we wanted someone that was going to not only just blow up the system but just not talk like a perfectly measured politician and that's what they got. >> with all due respect to that woman, that is divorced from reality. this man's the leader of -- >> we have been -- >> what are you saying?
she doesn't live in reality? >> no. but what i'm saying is what have we done over the past 30 years in american politics that we have pushed people to feel that way? >> selena, we haven't pushed anyone to feel that way. that may be true that -- >> not us, but -- >> i mean the country. no one should be pushed to ever believe something that's not true. if someone is telling you the truth, it's backed up by facts and by research. >> right. >> you are a person who is not divorced from reality and you have all your wits about you, then you need to believe the truth. basically we are making excuses for people who are divorced from reality. i know that's hard to hear, but it's the truth. charles? >> it's not how i feel, but i'm just telling you -- >> maybe you should tell them. maybe you should present the facts to them when they say those things. i have people all the time that tell me, and i said, listen, that's simply not true what you're saying. >> right. >> and they keep believing it because he is the president and it comes out of his mouth and he's lying to them. charles, go ahead. >> first of all, don't say
anything about this we thing. we didn't do this. donald trump is lying. donald trump did this on his own and people who have, you know -- partisanship is pushing people to want to believe because they are being attacked by people who they do not like and they do not align with politically and they see the attack as being partisan and therefore they want to believe what he is saying is true because the alternative is to know you have made an enormous mistake and that you are having -- there's an assault on truth and honesty itself and that is not the position that anyone really, really, really wants to be in. and that is where we are now. and i think it is incumbent upon us in particular, people who appear on national television to always guard the truth because that is -- you know that is what we do. we traffic actual information that is provable. if the president is going to lie and be a pathological liar on top of that, that is a problem because many other people pointed this out, he's lying and
not even in a crisis. there comes a time in a country where you need -- the president has to come on television and explain something that has happened in a country. you know the market has crashed. there's an attack of some sort. we are engaged in some sort of warfare. there is a natural disaster. in those moments, accrued credibility matters. and if you have destroyed that over time, you have destroyed american credibility. >> yeah. >> that's enormous. >> and another reality check to come for the president a lot of folks who voted for him will be affected if obamacare went away in its current form even if they try to replace it. we'll discuss that next. as after a dvt blood clot,ital
i sure had a lot to think about. what about the people i care about? ...including this little girl. and what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i asked my doctor. and he recommended eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. yes, eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. both made me turn around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily ...and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned
repealing obamacare will come at a cost for a lot of americans. welcome back. selena, let's talk about red states because you go out and talk to folks a lot. red state governors and senators have been warning that the white house -- that they need to protect the needs of voters in their states who have gained health care under obamacare. while they may hate the man who passed it, but they do like the
benefits that they get from it. i know you spent the day on the road, as you said, speaking to trump supporters. what are they telling you? >> well, you know, it's sort of a mixed reaction. they do admit that, you know a lot of them have their benefits that they have from before obamacare were put in place and have increased and it's more cost effective. having said that, they associate the impacts in their communities. it has a smaller businesses can't afford to pay their employees, so they cut the hours back, so that makes, you know, businesses either close or, you know, they don't employ enough people in the community. so it is sort of a debate among people. part of the problem with obamacare is -- for people who didn't like it was that they felt that there was too much government involvement. but now how do you get sort of the tooth paste back in the tube, right?
once you have this, it's very difficult thing to sort of undo. as far as obamacare goes in the way that it's going to proceed going forward, you know, the sausage making in getting obamacare made -- i suspect it's going to be the same way in getting it undone. this is not going to be a pretty process. >> so president many of the president staunchest supporters heavily rely on obamacare in its current form, and i know that you think that this new form is risky and might hurt them. just to give you -- these are just raw numbers. 11 1/2 million americans are insured under obamacare. 6.3 are from republican congressional districts. the majority of the people who are on obamacare are from red districts and many of them were supporters. so, you say that this new replacement plan is risky for them. you don't like this plan. >> no, i don't love the plan at
all, in fact. we have to keep in mind, right, that there's both a short-term political answer to this question and i think a long-term political and more substantive plan who is helped and who is hurt by this repeal and replace plan. congressmen may benefit from the repeal. these folks have running on repealing and replacing obamacare for eight years. they may get a short-term jolt when they actually do it, the problem is that a lot of benefits that exist in obamacare just generally speaking people having health insurance, that's popular. and if you actually move forward with this particular repeal and replace package, it clearly is going to leave a few americans unensured and probably going to continue to raise premiums for a lot of the folks who have coverage right now. so, i think that over the long-term when people see the
consequences of this particular replacement provision, it's not going to end well for the republicans who vote for it. >> the president tweeted today, charles, our wonderful new health care bill is now out for review and negotiation. it doesn't show that he knows that this can backfire with his base? >> not only with his base. i think with the american people. you know, there's going to be a real reckoning because there are people who have been born -- children have been born with real severe illnesses, parents would have hit a life-time limit a long time ago with those severe illnesses. those kids are alive today because they have coverage. there are people with other very severe illnesses who have medication coverage and are under care and alive because of this health care law. the idea that you could move millions of people out of those roles of being enrolled under health care or severely limit the structure of the coverage they have and not expect people to actually die and not have neighbors to understand that this has happened and this
person is no longer with us. this will have a real concrete effect. people will show up at those town halls. people will show up to vote. this is not a good situation for them. >> thank you so much. we'll be right back. afoot and light-hearted i take to the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose.
president trump says he wants congress to investigate his stunning charge at former president barack obama wiretapped him, but he may not like what they find. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. adam shift says he if the president wants an investigation, fine. let's have one. and promises it won't take long to get to the truth. meanwhile, president trump warns house republicans of mid-term blood bath if they can't pass health care, but the real cost of replacing obamacare could be much more serious. we'll talk to two people who stood up at town halls to say that they owe their lives to affordable care act. let's get right now to senior political analyst, mark preston and julia, the author of "security mom" and jill daugherty now at the evans school at the university of washington. so, mark preston, to you first,