fundamentally you have the same policy outcome for this country and said these are, quote, minor technical differences. >> eliminating lawful permanent residents from the ban is a huge change in the substance as well as the procedural due process arguments constitutionally. in the end, if the hawaii representatives, the state of hawaii's arguments were to prevail to the supreme court, it would turn the entire statutory basis of our entire immigration law on its head and hamstring congress and the account from restricting emergency basis for a whole range of reasons never considered by a federal court before. this goes to the very essence of sovereignty, what a nation is. both congress and the president's authority are at their highest ebb in the drafting of this resolution to keep us safe. >> we're tight on time. sorry we don't have more time for you. andre, final word to you.
statute 1182 gives the president sweeping authority on immigration which id does. the problem with the first one, you can't discriminate where someone is coming from or the religious minority part. that's out now. you've got six instead of seven, yes, they're muslim majority countries. how much harder is this court fight for you guys this time around, green cardholders aren't included. >> to be clear on dan's point, he's wrong about the statutory authority. the president can designate certain individuals as having a terrorist threat. he's designating all individuals from six muslim countries as effectively terrorist threats. that's something he can't do and has never been done. >> we're out of time. thank you both very much. following a lot of news as you can see this morning. let's get right to it. if he's making that up, it's a real problem. if it's true, it's an even
bigger problem. >> all he has to do is pick up the phone. they should know whether the form form form form former president of the united states -- >> who would you like better, the one who says russia is evil or the one who says let's talk. >> the relationship with the russians cries out for investigation. >> when you're a governing party, everyone doesn't get what they want. >> i firmly believe nobody will be worse off financially. >> we're looking at about 15 million americans losing their insurance. >> if they vote for this bill, they're going to put the house majority at risk next year. >> this is "new day," with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> welcome to your new day. alisyn is off. poppy harlow with us as always. >> good morning. good to be here. >> lawmakers demanding evidence of president trump's claim that he was wiretapped by his predecessor. republican senator john mccain calling on the president to
prove it. remember, the president is a phone call away from getting this answer and he has more power to declassify information than anyone. mccain says if you can't prove it, retract it. >> the house intelligence committee is giving the justice department until today to provide any evidence of this wiretapping claim. an adviser to the president is more than just doubling down suggesting there was perhaps much more than just wiretapping of the campaign. this as we are 53 days in to the trump presidency. let's begin with joe johns live at the white house. >> reporter: good morning, poppy. plenty of doubt and skepticism this morning, the department of justice is going to be able to come up with anything responsive to the house of representatives request. that is in part because past and current government officials who should know, who should have access to information have already denied the president's assertions. still, it's an important moment because of how it could affect
the president's ability to be credible going forward. >> the president has one of two choices, either retract or provide the information that the american people deserve. >> reporter: pressure mounting for president trump to provide proof of his unsubstantiated claim that former president obama wiretapped phones at trump tower during last year's election. >> i have no reason to believe that the charge is true, but i also believe that the president of the united states could clear this up in a minute. >> >> reporter: one of the president's top advisers referring to alleged monitoring that she says may have involved more than wiretapping. >> there's an article this week talking about how you can surveil someone through their phones, through their television sets, any number of different ways, microwaves that turn into cameras, et cetera. what the president has asked is for the investigation into
surveillance to be included -- >> all this as the house intelligence committee is calling for the justice department to present evidence today to substance ate the president's wiretapping claim. >> i don't expect we'll see any evidence. either the president quite deliberately for some reason made up this charge or perhaps more disturbing, thement really believes this. >> reporter: the committee has been looking into possible ties between the trump campaign and russia. as long time confidant roger stone admits to a private twitter exchange between him and guccifer 2.0, who breached the democratic national committee's computer last december and who some believe is a front for russian military intelligence. a tool used to meddle in last year's election. stone telling "the washington times" his conversation with the hacker were innocuous and
perfunctory, noting they happened after the dnc was hacked. it comes as the white house says it was unaffair that now fired national security adviser michael flynn was lobbying to help the turkish government during the u.s. presidential campaign. and while all of that is going on, the president has got a busy day on the calendar today. he's expected to hold the very first cabinet meeting of his administration, all but two of his cabinet nominees have been confirmed. >> joe johns, appreciate it. white house counselor kellyanne conway suggesting without evidence that surveillance of the trump campaign may have involved even more than wiretapping. we spoke to the columnist who interviewed her moments ago. here is what he said. >> i think she was throwing things up into the realm of the possible. here's the problem. this isn't just anybody speaking here. this isn't like you and me at the bar suggesting something may be going on here. this is the special counsel to
the president, suggesting something may be going on. for that reason i think it's significant. i think this is a serious strategy on the part of the trump administration. what i think is also at work here, chris, is something deeper here. there is an enormous destain twn trump administration that they don't feel accepted by the democrats, that there's still a lot of pushback over the fact that hillary clinton lost this election. so what the trump administration is throwing up here is these variety of allegations where they're somehow trying to tarnish the democrats in any way possible. the issue, however, is do they have any evidence for that. i think that's still a major question. >> interesting theory from mike kelly of the bergen record. the cause that the administration is going back after them. is that what this is about? tit for tat?
conway responding this morning. >> specifically do you know whether the trump tower was wiretapped. you answered by citing this report about the cia techniques revealed by wikileaks. why would you make a suggestion like that without any evidence? >> i wasn't making a suggestion about trump tower. >> that's what you were asked about. >> you answered him about surveilling generally. >> you have no evidence that that was used against trump tower? >> i have no evidence. that's what investigations are for. i would note director comey has asked the department of justice to make a comment. he hasn't made a comment. i noticed yesterday in your show with congressman schiff, he plans to ask director comey about this. >> kellyanne conway later tweeting saying on wiretap claims, i said many times we're pleased there are investigations. my comments were about surveillance articles and news and techniques generally, not about campaign. headline just wrong.
kellyanne conway wants to clear this up. she's moments away from being on the show. right now let's bring in republican congressman steve king of iowa. always a pleasure to have you on the show. you have your own comments to explain. you tweeted support of mr. vilders running for prime minister. you wrote he understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. we cannot restore our civilization with somebody else's baby's. this is being condemned by many regions of american politics and citizenry. what did you mean? >> of course i meant exactly what i said as is always the case. to expand on that a little further, i've been to europe and spoken on this issue and i've said the same thing as far as ten years ago to the german people and any population of people that is a declining
population that isn't willing to have enough babies to reproduce themselves. i said to them you can't rebuild your civilization with somebody else's babies. you've got to keep your birth rate up and you need to teach your children your values. in doing so, you can grow your population and strengthen your culture, strengthen your way of life. that's not happening in any of the western european countries. france comes the closest to having a birth rate that's a replacement rate. it's a clear message we need to get our birth rates up or we'll be entirely transformed within a half century or more. wilders knows that. that's part of his campaign. >> if you want to apply that kind of thinking to america, it seems like a complete contradiction of what we're all about. this is the melting pot. we're known by those countries as the bastian of diversity. it's a strength for us. it sounds like you're trying to white cleanse our population and saying somebody else's babies.
i think that means me, congressman. i'm only second generation in this country. who is somebody else's babies? >> chris, we're a country here, if you take a picture of what america looks like, you can do it in a football stadium or a basketball court and you see all different kinds of americans there. we're pretty proud of that, the different looking americans that are still americans. there's an american culture, american civilization. it's raised within these children in these american homes. the reasons why we require that the president of the united states be raised with an american experience. we've also aborted nearly 60 million babies in this country since 1973. there's been this effort we're going to have to replace that void with somebody else's babies. that's the push to bring in much illegal immigration into america, living in enclaves, refusing to assimilate into the american culture and civilization. some embrace it, yes. many are two and three generations living in enclaves
that are pushing back in resistance against assimilation. it's far worse in europe than it is today here in the yates, but i want us to be looking at that, promoting the birth rate in america, restoring the rule of law, putting an end to illegal immigration and recognizing we need to be a country that's pulled together on similar values. that makes us stronger. >> that's the exact point. it seemed like you were doing the opposite, like you were trying to say someone else's babies means you're either white or you're not right. as you know, that's not what america is all about. can we get agreement on that? >> well, actually, if you go down the road a few generations or maybe centuries with the enter marriage, i'd like to see an america that so homogenous. i think there's far too much focus on race, especially in the last eight years. i want to see that put behind us. i gave a speech on this on saturday and half the liberals got up and left the room when i
talked about unity -- they're looking for hatred is the point, chris. >> hold on a second. congressman, if you suggest that somebody else's babies shouldn't be welcome in a country, you seem inherently divisive. that's why i keep asking you what was your intention with this. you keep to be doubling down on it. you say america has different faces, that's fine. you keep making this point that this country needs to be about white people raising their birth rate and not bringing in other people. that's exactly what america is not. >> chris, i never have made that point. i've never said that. i've been characterized as saying that. i've had the blogs out there say i said that. i tell them go, back, watch the tape, listen to the language. our language is precise. i did defend western civilization, starting this summer at the republican national convention. when i said western civilization, that launched
people opposed to western civilization. that's a big problem. if we have an element of americans here that reject western civilization, then what have we? this is an effort on the left i think to break down the american civilization and the american culture and turn it into something entirely different. i'm a champion for western civilization and, yes, our english language is a big part of it. whatever the english language has gone globally, freedom went with it. science technology has always lifted up the standard of living on average of everybody on the planet. i want more of that, not less. there are civilizations that produce very little, if any. this western civilization is a superior civilization and we want to share it with everybody. >> you're entitled to your opinion about all these things obviously. i want to go back at this one more time because it's that important. a muslim american, an italian american, jewish american, you realize they're all equal, all the same thing.
we don't need babies from one of those groups more than we need them from another of those groups. do you agree with me? why do you pause on a question like that, congressman? it doesn't depend on any definition. you're either an american or not. muslim american, irish, scotch, german american which is what your roots are. either those are all equal things or they are not. what is your answer? >> they contribute differently to our culture and civilization. there are moderate muslims that are equal to in all these -- >> i said a muslim american, people who have lived here who are assimilated. >> there are a lot of people teaching hatred in their families who are white, irish, italian. a lot of people preach hate. there's hate in a lot of different groups. i get you have muslim extremism that there's a concern in this
country about it. i asked you something else. these people are either ought equal or they are not. a muslim american, italian american, german american like you and your blood, your roots. they are either all equal or they are not in your mind. what is the answer? >> i'd say they're all created in the image of god and they're equal in his eyes. if they're citizens of the united states they're equal in the eyes of the law. individuals will contribute differently, not equally to this civilization and society. certain groups of people will do more from a productive side than other groups of people will. that's just a statistical fact. >> it's not as a function of race. it's a function of opportunity and education. you're not more likely as a muslim american to contribute to american society. it's about your education and your opportunity, not what your blood is. >> chris? >> yes. >> it's the culture, not the blood. if you can go anywhere in the
world and adopt these babies and put them in homes already assimilated in american, they will grow up as american with any other baby with as much patriotism and love of country as any other baby. it's not about race. it's never been about race. the struggles across this planet, we describe them as race, they're not race. it's a clash of culture, not the race. sometimes that race is used as an identifier. >> steve king, it's important. i wanted to clarify it. 2450u for coming on the show to do so. america is known for one thing, diversity as strength. appreciate you being here. let's bring in counselor to the president kellyanne conway. thank you. let's pick up on this real quick and we'll move on. you were talking to your kid which is good. still got to be a mom. irish american, italian american, you have both blood in your answer. why pause before answering -- >> i wasn't listening to your
interview with congressman king. this president is the president of all americans. he said that in the wee hours of november 11th. i think you wanted me here for a different reason. >> absolutely. it wanted to bring you in on the conversation of america. we had mike kelly on and everybody is talking about the interview right now. the suggestion seemed to be from you that wiretapping include all these different genres of technological advancements, they should be looked at as well. the problem is the president is a phone call away -- >> hold on. none of that is true. i was answering a question about surveillance techniques generally. i was reflecting what people saw in the news last week, several articles about how we can surveil each other generally. the answer i gave involving the president and the wiretapping in trump tower is very similar. that screaming headline doesn't even reach the quote and the content accurately.
>> you may not have meant it. the skconversation you were havg with kelly was about -- >> it was generally. >> he didn't s&p ask you about it generally. you were asked specifically. >> i'm not inspector gadget. i don't believe people are using the microwave to spy on the trump campaign. however, i'm not in the job of having evidence. that's what investigations are for. i have said many, many times throughout the week that the president is pleased that the house and senate intelligence committees have agreed with him that this should be part of the investigation that already exists about russia and the campaign, an investigation that apparently has gone nowhere so far. every single day on this network and others people are screaming about russia and the campaign and to what avail. where is the evidence -- >> the investigations haven't started yet. >> you're fine with that investigation taking its time. but when it comes to the house and senate intelligence committee listening to president trump and including this as part of the overall investigation,
somehow that has to be on a rocket docket. it has to have evidentiary proof on day one, has to have a conclusion before it even starts. >> because they're fundamentally different suggestions. >> hold on. >> wiretapping is something he could answer with a phone call. >> again, the idea that i was talking about broader surveillance in the trump campaign, no, i wasn't. i've said many times, i said yesterday in an interview, at least your network is interested in playing all the clips so that's good. i said yesterday i was the campaign manager, speaking to people in macomb county, michigan, not moscow. we have dni, former director jim clapper saying no one under my purview would have anything to do with that. he couldn't discount local and state. >> he said there were no fisa warrants. the suggestion was there was a fisa warrant taken out on the president. the president essentially blaming a former president of a felony, calling him a bad or sick person and offering no
proof. that is a very different suggestion than what is the extent of contacts and communications between the trump administration and russia. >> i would also say in the same article today, the screaming headline that just is false, is not what i was saying, it also says my husband is in line with the solicitor general job. that job went to somebody else. >> all right. that's wrong. >> where is the screaming headline, retraction? >> i never said it. that would be really bad if i did it. >> you're quoting from an article. now you're selectively quoting. >> i'm saying i never said that. >> i was talking about surveillance generally. people will fit that the way they want to fit it. >> i've watched it, i've read it and i talked to kelly. he believes you were throwing it out there generally. he was asking you about the investigation specifically. >> then he should correct his headline. i know i'm great click bait. >> the question is why were you doing this?
this goes to personal integrity, what kind of message you're putting out. this seems to be a distraction. you've had injected into this, look at what russia's contacts are with the campaign, the wiretapping that is without basis and the person who made the accusation can answer it with a phone call and for some reason hasn't. it doesn't seem right, kellyanne. >> i'm allowed to talk about things in the news without you questioning anybody's personal integrity. there were articles in the paper about how we surveil people generally. >> you answered to a specific question and it seemed to be an effective way of putting more doubt on a situation. that's what it came across as. >> maybe to you and maybe to other people who don't necessarily want donald trump to be the president. but to other people, they see it as what it was, talking about news articles and talking about surveillance generally. it was not talking about the trump campaign. that's what investigations are for. the committee has agreed with president trump and they will have the investigation and we will comment further after it's
done. also, i talk about any number of things, everything in the news. he's repealing and replacing obamacare. there are people who have health insurance card who kay can't use it, can't afford deductibles and premiums. let's talk about real things, not fantasy things, let's talk about the jobs he's created. >> we talk about all these things. >> sometimes. >> you said by people who don't want people to be president. that is not just fair. my questioning of you, questioning of his baseless claim about wiretapping is not about not wanting the president to be president. >> maybe not you. >> that's unfair and it's hurtful because you are feeding people's animosity. why even put out out there. >> feeding people's animosity. look over my shoulder i have 24/7 secret service protection because of feeding people's animosity. don't claim that privilege. >> do you think i'm asking questions to you because i don't want president trump to be president. >> no.
>> then why put the suggestion out there. >> i'm saying there are many people who don't, who have screaming headlines who are constantly on our backs, they won't give him full and fair coverage. i would like full coverage. i would like people to cover everything he's doing. you can ask the tough questions. people can attack it. he's had 33 or 34 executive actions. everybody wants to cover one or two or them. you know what the jobs report, 235,000. >> the jobs report that he used to say was phony. >> can't even pause to say, wow, in his first full month in office, 235,000 jobs including in manufacturing, construction -- >> almost as many jobs last february. four out of the last five februarys -- >> why flick your wrist at that if you're one of the guys in construction, it's a meaningful number. >> i'm saying the numbers were good, beat expectation, not the number he put out the day before that wasn't the official number. the point is, this is a man who is now president of the united states who has bad-mouthed the job numbers as phony every time
they come out, misstating what the non-participation rate is, fundamentally misstating. now he says they're not phony anymore. you don't think that's worthy of criticism. >> i think it's worthy to note there are 235,000 net jobs in his first full month in august. i think it's very notable that 20 million people have said no to obamacare, 6.5 million agreed to pay the penalty because they can't afford the premiums and the deductibles chris. you have other people claiming a hardship exception. you can't have these people who are not being treated fairly under our current health care system left in the cold. >> 20 million more covered than you had before. none of you will answer whether or not people will lose coverage. >> i have answered that many times. >> are people going to use coverage? >> the president says everybody will have coverage, have a smooth transition. he looked at his democratic colleagues and asked them to come aboard, too. what are their ideas?
you have democratic members on cnn all day long, i haven't heard one good idea. >> they say when the cbo scores your plan you'll see as many as 10 million people lose coverage because you're cutting medicaid -- >> no. people will get tax credits and will be able to have more competition. >> less money than they're getting now with the subsidies. >> you're reading -- >> i read like nothing else. i've got to correct the misstatement. >> you're saying, quote, cutting medicaid. i'm not going to let that stand. the fact is if you're on medicaid now and that's how you get your health insurance, that's how you'll get it in the future. if you're one of 175 million americans like you and me who get your health insurance through your employer, you will continue to do that. it's the farmers and plumbers and small business owners in between who can't access health coverage because it's unaffordable and inaccessible.
>> if you cut the funding for medicaid, they'll have to replace the money themselves. they'll say they don't have it in most cases and take people off the roll. the cbo will come out with a score as early as today that says exactly that. >> it doesn't bother you that 20 million people said no to obamacare and would rather pay the penalty. >> take it one at a time. the medicaid is separate from the people who don't like the mandate. >> this is about health care reform. you can use a card that's not fake. you can get you and your children care if you need it. that's what the president wants to do. >> you can use the card if you have money to pay for your care. >> deductibles and premiums? people can't afford that. >> you campaigned so hard on repealing and replacing that now you're doing it even if it doesn't make the most sense. tom cotton coming out, all these republicans coming out saying they don't like the plan. >> tom cotton said it needs
major carpentry and it could pass. the president and vice president have met with 35 whips in the house this past week. the vice president went to a lunch for senate republicans and stalked to them about health care. the president had senator cruz in for dinner, working the phones, listening, negotiating, deal making. he said, if you have improvements to the bill, we'd like to hear them. he is receiving all these input. he's also challenged, slashed, invited the democrats to come along. we know firsthand as republicans what it's like to have a bill that's jammed through on a partisan vote. >> debated this for almost a year when it was obamacare. now you want to get it done in like two weeks. >> no. we want to make sure that people who have care continue to have care. but also these -- being able to buy your insurance across state lines the way you do with auto insurance and life insurance makes sense to people. >> it's also highly misleading.
you price insurance, car insurance, on where you drive, not where the company is. that is a red herring. >> it's not a red herring. health care is much more important than driving. we want people to have more choice and competition. as i sat with you right here, in 1,021 counties only have one insurer. >> because in states like arizona they did not put the law into effect the way they could have. they wound up hamstringing themselves, okay? that popped premiums. there are other reasons that premiums popped that need to be addressed. >> the biggest reason of all is the disaster of obamacare and you know it. >> that's just a slogan. you have 20 mill i don't know more covered now, a rate of increase of cost for health care that is less than before obamacare. >> you told millions of americans that don't have health care that they're a slogan. >> no, i didn't. >> he wants to help them. >> i did not just tell anybody
they are just a slogan. that's what gets you in trouble. i am not someone who doesn't want president trump to be president so i'm asking tough questions. i'm not someone. >> you think it's a good idea o that one-third of our nation's counties only have one choice in health care? >> no, but you have to look at why. >> aetna called it a death spiral. humana left the exchange and said it's not a winning proposition. they literally can't afford it. that doesn't work. when people admit that something is not working and they want to fix it the way this non-politician businessman in the white house is willing to do -- >> you ask those same people what's going to happen when you reduce the subsidies to medicaid and the amount of money that goes in. doctors won't take it now. that's going to be even more true for the most vulnerable, the trump voters, the people in west virginia you like to talk about all the time. >> that's not true. >> what are you talking about?
they need the medicaid expansion, need the exchanges. they don't have money to put in an hsa. >> people on medicaid will continue to get their health care through medicaid. >> but will they get the same coverage of care? when the amount of money goes down, so will what the insurance company for you. >> the fact is the quality has decreased for many americans, the access has been reduced, the premiums have skyrocketed. it's not a stable or affordable system as it is for many americans. it works for some and they should continue as they are. >> the question is are you going to make it better for them or worse for others? that's the question. >> make it better for everyone. >> we'll see when the cbo scores it. >> you and your wife want to go and get the plan that works for you and your family. >> i get it through my employer, only 4% of the population affected by a lot of these changes. i'm not a point of comparison, thank god for it. i don't think you should play around with the realities either. if there's not as much money in the system, it will hurt people
who don't have money. >> you're presuming there's not as much money in the system. there will be cost savings and with more choice and competition prices come down and quality goes up. >> we'll with the cbo. this hasn't been scored. >> correct. >> for all the due political criticism for the way the aca got put through. people deny that, you're right, they're playing politics. they had it scored all along the way. some of it was right, some of it was not. >> there was were huge miscalculations. >> everyone says the same thing, i don't know, i don't know, i don't know what it's going o to cost. i don't know how many people are going to be off. that's the way you want to get it through congress. >> what i want you to focus on is how many people don't have coverage and access now, how many people are willing to pay the penalty and taxes. the three phases of repeal and replace mean in phase one, those penalties and mandates are gone. that's a good thing. >> how do you keep up the healthy pool? that's what's going to control costs.
>> you have health savings account. people who don't have employer or medicaid sponsor health insurance can have a health savings account. >> what do they put in it? >> the money they receive. >> the tax credits? that's not cash in hand. what if you don't have the rest of the money. >> they say i don't want a plan that has maternity benefits because i'm past child bearing years. >> on its face i don't understand how it got in there, the cbo, their score will be important for many people. do you trust the cbo. >> the cbo is a very important component of this. we're awaiting their scoring, respect the process. we know in the past -- >> do you trust them as a fair arbiter? >> the president is working very well with all his agencies including the cbo. we're waiting for the score. >> i'll talk health care all day because it matters so much to people. >> it does matter very much. >> the wiretapping thing is a
fundamentally different charge. he could answer it himself. he could declassify what he finds out himself immediately. nobody has more power than the president yet he hasn't made a call to jim comey. why? >> i'm not going to discuss who he calls and who he doesn't call. >> sean spicer did, said he didn't reach out to them. >> listen to me. i'm not going to do it. >> sean spicer did. we know he didn't reach out. why not? >> director comey can also make a statement. he directed the doj -- >> why would he make a statement about something that isn't snapping. >> i saw congressman schiff say on a different network that he will ask director comey the question when he appears before him. >> it's taking time and resources to investigate something he can answer. >> the president is comfortable waiting. >> of course he is because it's distracting from looking at the russia connections. >> okay. >> that's my point, kellyanne. why would i ask you a question about why my kid went to bed last night? i could make a phone call and tell you what time.
>> that's a glib analogy. >> he can pick up the phone and get this answer. >> you realize what the crux of all this is, right? i hope you as an american are very concerned, as we all are, about the leaks coming from the intelligence and security community somewhere. we have leaks of the president's readout of a conversation he's having with a head of state. that can't be. we know general flynn was wiretapped. we know -- >> general flynn was not wiretapp wiretapped. >> i'm sorry, that people leaked the conversation. whether he was wiretapped -- >> he was not wiretapped. what i'm saying is we know that conversation he had was leaked somehow. so somebody is giving information that they should not be. >> leaks are a problem. that's not what the president asked for. he said i was wiretapped by president obama, accusing a former president of a felony, and he called him bad or sick. he has no proof to support calling president obama, a man who he says he likes, bad or
sick. what about that? >> what about the rest of the obama administration. >> what about calling him bad or sick? was that right for the president to say? >> chris, i'll let the president speak for himself. he's perfectly capable of that. he's the president of the united states. do you think he's covered -- >> does that make it right? >> i want to ask you a question. the level of disrespect for the president of the united states and the way he is described by people, people whose approval rating is half of his frankly, is beyond the pale. >> his polls have gone the wrong way since he said the wiretapping, lowest level since the wiretapping stuff. >> i wrote an article 15 or 18 years ago, when people think you're making a difference in their lives. he will be judged by his accomplishments. he's being judged by people saying he's making good on his promises to get things done. people like the job numbers, people like the unemployment numbers, people like the
consumer confidence. they like the fact that people feel good about the direction of the economy. they heard him in his joint address two weeks ago. that doesn't wash away because people aren't covering it. that was his natural connection. >> you know why it washes away? on the heels of that is the attack of jeff sessions. >> he looked me in the eye for 64 minutes, at his press conference a couple weeks earlier for 77 minutes, he gave the rally in melbourne. he'll be in nashville this week, donald trump, a brilliant communicator and natural connector, cuts through the noise or cuts through the silence, he is at his best. i want to see him do more of that. >> i think he should take your advice as always, and i think he should do it by picking up the phone, calling and getting the answer to the wiretapping allegations, have a press briefing saying here is what i learned. >> i think he should be respected as the president of
the united states. >> i think those go hand in hand. if he does that, he'll get a lot of respect. kellyanne, thank you for coming to discuss it. appreciate it. you heard the discussion, what does it mean to the work that's supposed to be done for work in washington? we'll get "the bottom line" with michael smerconish next. various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. z supports two others in the community.
modejane, you'rerves getting a ticket. pay. all while reducing america's emissions. online and on your phone nope. it's been masterpassed. for the little victories, am i right? masterpass, the secure way to pay from your bank don't just buy it, masterpass it. 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. . if you missed the last half hour, you missed the interview of the day, perhaps the interview of the week. good monday morning to you.
chris's interview with kellyanne conway making headlines, she says the headline in "the bergen" is not her words. let's get right to michael summer con nirn. what an interview. >> nice work. >> i was rereading the article with her quotes in it, she said, no, they got it wrong. this is a selective parsing of my words, i was talking about surveillance in general, not talking about the wiretapping claim by our president. how do you see it? >> poppy i was taking notes while chris was doing the interview. what jumped off the page to me or what jumps off now is kellyanne saying let's talk reality, not fantasy. let's talk facts. you can't make an assertion as president trump has done as chris pointed out and say he's a bad guy, he's a sick guy, he tapped me, he wiretapped me and then have absolutely nothing to
show for it, no justification, no evidence, and then to say, well, we'll await the outcome of the investigative process. there would be no vittive process but for him making that wild and up until now unsubstantiated assertion. i think you've got to show something before you put a statement like that in play. i didn't hear anything. to your point about the bergen record and the conflating that is taking place oochs, i also sense there's a desire on the part of the administration to wrap into this the revelations from wikileaks last week about how samsung televisions -- >> that's what she was alluding to. all these articles last week. completely disconnected. >> to me it's like a giant ball of yarn that gets thrown to the american populous so the kitty can play with it and we get distracted from what really matters. you have to back up these sort of assertions, i didn't hear it. >> one of the other dynamics going on. this was effective for the
president. i don't know why the committees took this up. there's some speculation that the democrats wanted to take it up so they can expose there was nothing there or if there was something there, they have a probable cause basis essential w ly to say, yeah, they were looking at you and here is why. even still, politics aside, it's a distraction from what they were supposed to be looking at which is russia and the connections. they have allowed parity now by saying the wiretapping, which is being conflated with leaks, totally different things, is equal in value to the russia talk. you shrug that off? >> no. i don't shrug it off. there's more to it. he's been relatively silent on twitter for the last week or so. go through the tick tock of what led to that saturday morning outburst. so firmly cemented in my mind because i was about to go on air on cnn and we had to rewrite the show. he's just at it again with the twitter rant. you put it in context, he was
upset about jeff sessions i think having said he would recuse himself from the russian investigation. he goes to marla lago, wakes up, pulls out the phone and the rest is history. every time the water gets hot, he throws a smart bomb out there and we go running for it. this one is different than anything else. this is a bold face assertion about a predecessor that there seems to be no justification. >> especially a felony. >> someone called my radio show and said is there a legal claim here? at this point there's a defamation action. >> another thing making red lines, chris pressing steve king of iowa who stood behind his tweet that says civilization cannot be restored with, quote, somebody else's baby. chris had to ask the same question over and over again. here is a bit.
>> you realize they're all equal, we don't need babies from one of those groups more than other groups. do you agree with that? >> well, i would say -- >> why do you pause on a question like that, congressman? >> they contribute differently to our culture and civilization. >> first of all, there was no delay in that interview. that was a meaningful, purposeful pause. >> i don't get it. i thought he was going to couch it and say i was talking about europeans and they need to worry about the french people, not everybody being overrun by muslims. that's what i thought he would say. here in america it's different because we are the melting pot. we are diversity of strength. that's how we're heralded by other countries. they're all equal, right, and he pauses. >> had to think about that. he had to think about that. it's something else he said. when you watch it a second time
i think this will be alarming to you as well. he said the goal for the country is to be homogenous. i was seated in the green room with an african-american gentleman who works for the program who couldn't believe that was a statement he just made. i'm sure in steve king's mind the hom hom moej any we should have -- >> here is what troubles me the most about it. if i'm in a cave and i'm al qaeda or isis, i love this kind of conversation. i love this being pitched as a clash of civilizations, and it reminds me when on w.'s watch there was a banner unfolded speaking about the need to win the crusade. that's what they want to portray this as. i think we play into their hands when we do it. >> i hope people don't hear what he says and say there's a big division in this country. no, there is not. we travel this country all the time, and people always talk about how you cut me open, cut you open, we're both going to bleed red. people have respect for
diversity in this country. i hope this doesn't take the conversation in a way it doesn't deserve to go. >> michael smerconish, good to see you. >> great show on saturday. my saturday morning viewing. >> oh, yes, required. coming up, what do we really know about russian president vladimir putin? a brand new cnn documentary sheds the spotlight on "the most powerful man in the world." fareed zakaria joins us next. z2a1gz zx9z y2a1gy yx9y
russian president vladimir putin. he is called the most powerful man in the world in this documentary. here is a preview of it on his grudge against then secretary of state hillary clinton prior to the 2016 election. here is the spot. >> as putin saw people turning against him, hillary clinton weighed in. >> the russian people, like people everywhere deserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted. >> when putin hears something like that, i imagine he hears bush talking about saddam hussein. he hears that as they're coming for me. they're trying to drive me from power. >> you'll see it here only on cnn. let's discuss it. it is premiering tonight with fareed zakaria host of fareed zakaria gps. you've called this the most
powerful man in the world. why that name? >> we thought about it a lot. obviously the united states, obviously china is more powerful than russia. rush is a major world power. thousands of nuclear weapons, u.n. security council borders three continents. the power of the president is dependent on the power of his country and how much he can exercise that power in a completely uncon strained way. vladimir putin can exercise power more effectively, more ruthlessly and more freely than any leader in the world. in china you have a communist power, politburo standing committee. in the united states you have checks and balances. putin has nothing which allows him to enter feern in the internal affairs of countries all over the world. if you put that package together, he rises to the top. >> we have one viewer who ask not going to like the title of this documentary. he may like what you just had in the clip there which was the
motivation potentially for any interference by russia during the election. could have been motivated, not by pro trump, but by anti hillary clinton. there's a real and profound dislike there. true? >> absolutely. that is in the heart of putin's views on this election. they may have subsequently developed connections and contacts. that's another story that we pursue. but there's no question that in 2011, 2012 when the arab spring was happening and putin faced demonstrations, hillary clinton as secretary of state came out in favor of democracy and russia, free elections in russia. putin heard that as they're coming for me, this is regime change. in a sense what he's saying to hillary clinton is you tried to mess with my election, i'm going to mess with yours. >> so you met the russian president vladimir putin several times. your most recent meeting with him was last summer. what struck you the most fareed,
as you were writing this and you decide what's in, what's out? what was top of mind for you after that meeting? >> two things. he's very efficient and very, very intelintelligent. we had a small amount of time in the green room. he used it effectively. the italian prime minister immediately started lobbying to have the sanctions removed. no chitchat. the second is, i asked him about why he called trump -- why he flattered trump. he got very upset. he said you're a famous journalist, you have this big show in america. he obviously had been briefed, i doubt he watches the show. he said why do you say things like that? all i said is he's a flamboyant character. surely you don't disagree with that. then he poised and he said, he keeps talking about wanting to
have good relations with me, with russia. would i be crazy not to welcome that. so he also plays the game that trump plays which is to say, always saying is can't we all get along. >> many in the u.s. translated as brilliant, not exactly what he meant. >> basically a little bit of both. >> fareed zakaria, it is tonight on cnn, the most powerful man in the world, russian president vladimir putin. 9:00 p.m. east earn. "newsroom" with john berman, because the stronger part of the team is sitting next to me is going the pick up after this break. >> love you, john. bp developed new, industry-leading software to monitor drilling operations in real-time, so our engineers can solve problems with the most precise data at their fingertips. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.
at the marine mammal center, the environment is everything. we want to do our very best for each and every animal, and we want to operate a sustainable facility. and pg&e has been a partner helping us to achieve that. we've helped the marine mammal center go solar, install electric vehicle charging stations, and become more energy efficient. pg&e has allowed us to be the most sustainable organization we can be. any time you help a customer, it's a really good feeling. it's especially so when it's a customer that's doing such good and important work for the environment. together, we're building a better california.
and fantasies. the house intelligence committee set a deadline to provide the facts behind president trump's evidence-free claim of being wiretapped by president obama to prove it's not a fantasy. senator john mccain said absent these facts the president should retract the claim and admit it's a fantasy. while on the subject of fantasies, counselor of the president kellyanne conway dropped a giant implication bomb, a rhetorical link between the president's claims and new cia surveillance methods revealed by wikileaks, again, evidence-free. a few minutes ago kellyanne conway suggested it was not what she said or meant, even though it is what she said. let's bring in cnn national correspondent joe johns at the white house this morning. >> good morning. the house intel commit see wants to know if there is any there there. there's a lot of doubt and skepticism across washington as