tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN March 14, 2017 5:00pm-6:01pm PDT
>> it's not a question of delaying but a question of getting it right. >> reporter: if you can't take the heat, get out of the microwave. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. jool maybe bannon's head instead of sean's on that guy. thanks for joining us. anderson is next. good evening. thanks for joining us. breaking news on the question of ties between the trump campaign and russia. it is a question we know both the house intelligent and senate intelligence committees are investigating along with at least three other committees and one sib committee. so is the fbi even though they've not publicly confirmed it. tonight we've learned chris cuomo is about to go on the record -- james comey is about to go on the record. manu raju, what are you learning? >> reporter: i'm told by sheldon whitehouse of long island he was told in a private meeting fbi director james comey would assure him and his fellow
senator lindsey graham whether or not there is an investigation ongoing into the donald trump campaign and those contacts that allegedly occurred with russian officials during the presidential election. since they have not confirmed the existence of an investigation, they have not even confirmed with senators, so in a private meeting between graham and whitehouse on march 2nd, james comey would not tell these two senators whether or not there was an investigation ongoing, even though they sit on a judiciary subcommittee investigating the issue of russia. comey according to sheldon whitehouse said he would confirm whether or not that investigation is occurring by this hearing that they're having tomorrow in this senate judiciary committee subcommittee exploring russia's meddling in the election. eastern yoeuropean elections as
well. they've asked for evidence of wiretapping that president obama ordered wiretaps and surveilled him during the election and dpram says if he does not get a response by tomorrow before the hearing, he told me that he's going to make it a tough hear tong justice department at that hearing tomorrow on russia. so a lot of news could happen tomorrow. especially if james comey goes public or says this investigation is ongoing. right now the fbi has not responded. >> at this stage, lawmakers have not gotten any evidence, something lindsey graham has asked for, that president trump was wiretapped on the order of president obama. >> reporter: absolutely right. there was a senate intelligence committee closed door breeching earlier today discussing the issue of russia -- actually members left that meeting and said they had not seen any evidence yet including senator joe manchin, who sits on that
committee and the top democrat mark warner told me going into the briefing there's no evidence whatsoever even though he met with james comey last week. one other senator demanding more information is senator john mccain, who said it's time for the administration to explain if there's any evidence there. what's your reaction to saying that need more time to respond to the wiretapping claims? >> i hope this they can ascertain as soon as possible the answer to that because americans need to know if indeed former president wiretapped the trump towers. that is a violation of the law and of the utmost seriousness. we need to know the answer. >> reporter: if there's no evidence, what's your reaction? >> let's wait and see. let's wait and see what the results are. the american people need an
answer and deserve an answer. >> reporter: the question is whether or not the fbi or the justice department will respond each in a private setting or a public setting and if they don't respond privately there been questions that james comey will get at a march 20th house hearing where they'll be discussing this issue of russia interference in the election but also the senate intelligence committee announcing today they plan to have their own public hearings later this month and senator mark warner also wants to hear from some trump associates about the contacts with russian officials including roger stone, the former trump adviser, who admitted to some contact with russians during the campaign season. >> manu raju, appreciate that. van jones has a town hall coming up thursday night. jason miller here. our chief political analyst analyst gloria borger is here. and ryan liz sa from the new yorker. paul begala joins us. the congressional budget office
maintain hs eel get a flight out sometime next week. is this significant tomorrow we may learn whether or not the fbi is investigating? >> i think it is. comey has gone from being extremely sort of stingy with any information to congress to being a lot more forthcoming. adam schiff this week has been saying the same thing, comey has been more forthcoming, not as worried about the fbi cooperation with the investigation. it's been reported for months now that this investigation exists. it was a serious -- of serious concern to the clinton campaign during the campaign that director comey talked publicly about her investigation into her e-mails but would never confirm or talk publicly about the reported investigation into trump and hi connections to russia. this is a big deal. once he goes public with this, it will force the white house to respond as well.
>> gloria, still questions about what kind of investigation it is if in fact there is one. >> if it's limited to the question of russian hacking or if it goes beyond to some kind of collusion with people in the trump orbit and the russians. but also my question is tomorrow does comey answer the question of do you think that donald trump has no evidence whatsoever to say that barack obama was wiretapping him. we got word when this story first surfaced that the fbi wanted the department of justice to clear it up. nothing was forthcoming from the department of justice. we heard comey was skrupset abo it. maybe that will be cleared up tomorrow. >> how significant would this be? if there is an investigation, it would undercut the white house line all these stories are based on anonymous sources and it will be on the record in this case. >> i look forward to finally
clearing this up. i think we'll find what we all know, that there was no collusion between the trump campaign and foreign governments or foreign entities. this is absolutely ludicrous. it makes no sense. the fact -- look, the election is over. donald trump won. he's now president of the united states. it's very clear that there is this effort of folks whether it's the career bureaucrats or insiders or people who are upset that applecarts are getting tipped over, they're still trying to delegitimize this presidency. dangerous for the country. tomorrow hopefully they'll make clear this is nonsense. >> van, is it an attempt to delegitimize? >> it's such a weird thing because i think if the shoe were on the other foot obviously people would want to know, did barack obama conspire with the chinese? you guys med made up kenyans and muslims and all kinds of stuff. if the tfbi says they are not
investigating this that would be huge because there's no such evidence and concern. but if they confirm i think you have a very hard time saying that comey, who you guys loved months ago, now somehow up to no good. >> there is a danger for democrats, paul, they have kind of gone too far out on a limb and there isn't anything there, smoke but no fire. >> the smoke is we know the russians illegally hacked into the democratic party to try to tip the election to trump. we know that. what we don't know is did trump or his associates help putin help trump. we don't thouknow that yet. that's worthy of investigation. don't get against james comey. who else has had major powerful positions from george w. bush, barack obama, and now donald trump? he's never been willing to confirm any investigation about trump because the justice department guidelines for decades said the fbi can't confirm or deny an investigation unless they have to to undermine
hillary's election. that was a big exception comey created. i'm deeply distrustful of mr. comey. he needs to know, he's walking into that hearing tomorrow, before that, he was attorney general of the state. he knows the justice department well. knows the questions to ask. by the way, lindsey graham is a pretty good attorney as well. >> he's said on the record he'll be tough if they don't come and respond to the questions he's already asked about any alleged allegations of wiretapping by obama. >> in a way it's return to normalcy. we've had so much happening in the media and leaks and what not, and now you have some adults who are serious on how to be prosecutors coming into a room and maybe actually having some closure. and it would be awesome if that closure were to clear the president. i think it's entirely possible
there's a scenario where donald trump didn't know anything, his campaign didn't know anything, but one of his associates might have been communicating with somebody and that is going to be have muddy and -- >> eve an confirmation of an investigation, that doesn't -- that might mean nothing more than a confirmation of investigation. there's no actual end result to it. >> absolutely. he could say, yes, there's an ongoing investigation, i can't talk more about it. it would confirm what's publicly reported. if on the other hand he says in there's no investigation and never has been, a lot of us in the media -- >> how could there not be? how could you not investigate? >> it has been reported there is an investigation. if he all of a sudden says no, that's not true, we all got this wrong somehow. [ talking over each other ] >> will he be able to say what the scope of the investigation is? is it narrowly into hacking? that could then lead to the question of did somebody in donald trump's orbit, were they'ves dropped upon because
they were talking to rugs upon whom we were listening, right, or is he going to say there's an investigation and no more? >> what other point matters for democrats, they want independent counsel looking into this. and some republicans. they've sort of been hobbled because they don't know what they want that independent koups toll investigate and they don't know if there is an investigation. if comey confirms there's an investigation and at least gives some parameters about what it's about, that will allow a lot of democrats to say, okay, that now needs to be put in the hands of an independent counsel. >> jason, if comey tomorrow says there's no evidence of the obama white house wiretapping president trump or the campaign, that there was no fisa request, no "there" there. >> i think you have to look at it another way also. what if say they there was something. that's a real concern. too many folks in the media,
especially the democratic party, have been so quick to jump on this and attack the president. the president has been right a lot of his predictions, whether it be sensitive materials on computers, the rise of -- >> he could come out and say this is what i know, he could call the fbi and say release the information, i know it. >> there's a process. >> a second ago you said there was no investigation. now you're saying he might confirm trump was right about the surveillance which would mean there's an investigation. >> there are a lot of things we don't know and will find out. >> the president knows. he can declassify anything he wants. he could call up james comey or anybody else and say, you know what, declassify this. why not? let the american public know that i was -- somebody was listening in on my phone conversations. >> i think ultimately -- >> or microwave. >> i think part of the thing that i think trump's defenders need to take some responsibility for is that if this happened, this is a huge crime committed
by obama against not just trump but against our democratic process. you don't handle it with a tweet. you don't throw it out there in this way and create all this hoopla because, guess what, if trump is right, you've got a whole country to hold together. this is a massive constitutional crisis. >> he devoted three tweets to it. >> my point is even if you guys are right i think what you're seeing is if this is a precursor to how donald trump handles major issues and constitutional crises, you have real problems. doesn't it bother you? you wouldn't advise him to handle something this serious in this way, would you? >> he has a clearly different approach. the secretary of state has a different approach. >> president of the united states, most important position in the world, to van's point, a tweet, you know, in advance of an arnold schwarzenegger tweet,
the best way to accuse the former president of the united states, one of the greatest crimes. >> the media have attacked the president over and over for his presentation style. if it works for him he'll keep going back to it. >> the russian hacking. he's an extraordinary salesman. i don't take that away from him. he's le legitimately my president. he was also illegitimately helped by the russian hack. he's trying to divert attention from that by attacking the former president obama for doing something monstrous which i don't believe at all. to believe his theory, you have to believe that barack obama subverted the constitution, committed an outrageous crime, to spy on donald trump and it took that spy material and hid it, allowed trump to become president and went off water skiing with richard branson. very smart. >> next, is the white house trying to have it both ways on the gop replacement for
they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team. modejane, you'rerves getting a ticket. pay. 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. find fast relief behind the counter allergies with nasal congestion? with claritin-d. [ upbeat music ] strut past that aisle for the allergy relief that starts working in as little as 30 minutes and contains the best oral decongestant. live claritin clear, with claritin-d. an unlimited data plan is only as good as the network it's on. and verizon has been ranked number one for the 7th time in a row by rootmetrics.
(man) hey, uh, what's rootmetrics? it's the nation's largest independent study and it ranked verizon #1 in call, text, data, speed and reliability. (woman) do they get a trophy? not that i know of. but you get unlimited done right. (man 2) why don't they get a trophy? (man 3) they should get something. (woman 2) how about a plaque? i have to drop this. my arm's getting really tired. unlimited on verizon. 4 lines, just $45 per line. where's the car? it'll be here in three...uh, four minutes. are you kidding me? no, looks like he took a wrong turn. don't worry, this guy's got like a four-star rating, we're good. his name is randy. that's like one of the most trustworthy names! ordering a getaway car with an app? are you randy? that's me! awesome! surprising. what's not surprising? how much money erin saved by switching to geico. everybody comfortable with the air temp? i could go a little cooler. ok. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. i wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. and i couldn't wait to get my pie chart.
the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. just to know this is what i'm made of, this is where my ancestors came from. and i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. it's opened up a whole new world for me. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. tonight, the white house
trying to have it both ways, replacing the obamacare replacement bill, liking some but dismissing another part. the other part is estimate that 24 million fewer would be insured under the legislation. the reaction has been intense all day with moderate house republicans shy eight way from the bill, a number of senate republicans calling it dead on arrival, democrats salvaging it. the president facing pressure to how he squares the cbo projections with his promise of hi hi health insurance for everyone. jim acosta. >> reporter: it's rare moment president trump passes up on a chance to speak his mind but he did when asked about the congressional budget office analysis of the proposal to replace obamacare. >> this is the american health care act, the president is proud of it. >> reporter: the white house pushing back on the cbo score of the health care plan that found 14 million americans would be uninsured by next year, 24 million by the year 2026.
as one top gop source put it, the headlines are terrible. >> cbo coverage estimates are consistently wrong. >> reporter: the white house did concede scores of american, perhaps millions, will be without health insurance if they're no longer mandated to buy it under obamacare. >> would you concede there will be some coverage losses? perhaps in the millions? that will there would be millions of people who will not have health insurance as a result of what you're doing? >> well, again, sure, except you have to look at the current situation. >> reporter: press secretary sean spicer tried to explain how the republican plan satisfies the president's promise to cover every american. >> the president is okay with millions of people -- >> no, he's not. right now they're not getting that. by giving them more chois at a lower cost, more americans can buy health care for their family or themselves or in a lot of cases for their business without paying the penalty. is system now is not working. >> reporter: even though the white house is rejecting the cbo's predictions on coverage it
seems they like other parts like a reduced deficit and reduction in premiums. >> the cbo is saying just with what we're doing, first prong alone, 10% decline in the original market. that's a significant reduction. we're talking about bringing costs down and increasing choices. >> reporter: cherry-picking of data is low-hanging fruit for democrats. >> all this hocus-pocus language that they talk about, well, you're not going to be able -- worried about costs but then they don't seem like they're that much worried about coverage. and so what i'm saying to them is that the american people need coverage. >> jim joins us now. i understand the white house is working on changes to the bill. what are you hearing? >> reporter: they are working on changes with republican leaders on the bill. if you need to add to your washington jargon, a so-called managers amendment.
i talked to a republican source involved in the process who said these managers amendments are typical with any bill of this size and that at this pointitis not envisioned that they're going to have major changes made to this piece of legislation but if you're listening to the handwringing on capitol hill among republicans they are talking about coverage right now, not covering americans but covering their rear ends in case all this blows up in their faces. no question, if they want to get this out of the house, a lot of republicans are saying privately they're going to need changes to the bill. >> jim acosta, thanks. now more on political side effects, some in the republican party. phil matting hi has the latest from capitol hill. jim acosta was saying the white house working with republican leaders trying to make changes. what are your sources telling you about the effort? >> the process hasn't been helpful. when i talked to senior gop leadership officials say they the white house was on board with the bill as is. the white house was on board
with the strategy included not making major changes going forward. every time the president tells conservatives this is up for negotiation, every time the press secretary stands in front of reporters and says there could be major changes, that undercuts this effort entirely. there's a lot of concern inside gop leadership circles right now that what the white house is doing is not helping the process at all. in fact, it's making their job difficult. i think jim hit on the crucial point here. as it currently stands, house republican leaders even as much of their conference remains unsettle are not planning major changes to the bill. every time the white house says the opposite, that creates more problems as they try and wrangle votes. >> what would republican leaders like to see from the white house to get it passed? >> sell. they don't want individuals coming to capitol hill and meeting with leaders. they want the president himself starting to bring the hammer down. he's traveling tomorrow, going to have a rally in nashville on health care. those types of events are helpful. but the reality remains when i talk to gop sources that the president is going to have to come down hard, particularly on
conservatives. conservatives where he's very popular in his district. at some point he'll have to lay out an ultimatum. it can't be glad handing or pizza parties and bowling. he has to tell members it's time to get in line. short of that, they'll be short of votes. >> what are your sources telling you about what it might look like in the right place? >> what i'm hearing a lot of is the focus obviously has been a lot on conservatives and for good reason. they've been the most boisterous about their concerns. the real concern up here especially amongst house leaders is the moderates. if you look at the coverage number, if you look at some of the issues the conservatives are picking on right now, if those issues start to move, if some of those changes that white house officials say they're open to actually come to be, those moderates start to leave enmass. the reason is simple -- politics. these are the individuals that serve to lose their races in these swing districts if these
major changes are made, if this -- the concerns about the coverage numbers are not assuaged at any point. that more than anything else why you see republican leaders telling the white house, look, you need to stay unified with us, you can't freelance because those are the members that in the end they believe will be the hardest to bring around. >> phil mattingly, thanks. back with the panel. you have to white house pushing back on the cbo report but only kind of part of it, embracing other aspects. >> they like the deficit reduction part of it because it reduces the deficit $337 billion over ten years. but much of that comes from the cutbacks in medicaid to the states. that's what the moderates are upset about. and i just have to ask a question after listening to phil. if you're a republican house moderate, why would you go out on a limb and vote for this bill if you know it's going to get changed in the senate? then you'll be on the record voting for something that is unpopular in your district and
mitch mcconnell in the senate has already said we're -- this won't be the final bill. unless they can get together on what they're going to do, the house members who have to go first on this are saying why am i going to walk the complaint for you in the senate? >> today was a big day under the radar. conservatives starting to real hi move against this bill. we've seen breitbart for a couple days. eric bowling on fox news saying this is not good. chris ruddy, the news max guy, says we need a more populous plan. conservatives are walking away from this. >> tom cotton saying there is no -- >> bona fide conservative, u.s. senator from arkansas, doesn't like this at all. i think donald trump has to make a decision. it either needs to be cut and run, abandon this, sell out paul ryan, or stay and fight. but he has to decide because --
>> when you say fight you mean back the current -- >> you have to go to those conservative members of congress and say you ran on this for the last six years, you side you wanted to repeal obamacare. you promised you were going to repeal obamacare. this is your chance. if you don't do it, i'm going to campaign in your district and imgoing to tell all of your constituents that you lied to them. >> jason? what should the president do? >> i'm continually bewildered how the republican party didn't have a bill. as somebody who's helped to elect a lot of these conservatives and republicans, i think what have you guys been doing? a couple things. one, i was glad to hear an openness to potentially making changes that there might be a managers amendment, a little inside baseball, clean this up. several things we need for success for this bill. one, a much better job of making it clear to the american people or reminding them this bill -- obamacare is heading off a
cliff. look at the raitts going up -- >> the white house has been hammering that message. >> still i think people don't realize the urgency that we need to act here. i think the second part we need to do is make sure it's clear how people are going to benefit and how they'll be helped by passing this particular piece of legislation. the third and final piece is this is the time, now we've seen what the hill has been able to come up with ryan care or whatever the bill is. the president needs to engage and say he's the negotiator in chief. if we're going to save this -- >> i think dan prefers the term trump care. >> couple things. this is the most important part of the overall drama because up until now trump has been able to say i am the deal maker. i know how to make deals. nobody makes better deals than me. so far he's made every mistake he can possibly make in trying to put this thing together. he's negotiating against himself, he moves in one
direction, signals another, he's undermining his own position and his partners'. if you watch this closely, it may turn out that he hasn't read his own book. he doesn't actually know how to negotiate. >> quick break. more with the panel on this. have republicans promised too much on health care and which voters stand to lose the most or gain? your path to retirement may not always be clear. but at t. rowe price, we can help guide your retirement savings. so wherever your retirement journey takes you, we can help you reach your goals. call us or your advisor t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day 50+ a complete multi-vitamin with 100% daily value of more than 15 key nutrients. one a day 50+. 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 love your phone...talk. ...but hate your bill. do something about it! straight talk wireless let's you keep your phone, number ...and 4g lte network... ...for half the cost, with the bring your own phone activation kit. straight talk wireless. only at walmart. 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. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. to take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer.
the white house is working with leaders to try to make changes to the bill before it comes up in the house. president trump made many promises on the campaign trail and since taking office. >> we'll terminate and replace obamacare. it will be replaced with something terrific and a lot less ebs pensive and much better coverage. i'm not going to leave the lower 20% that can't afford insurance. everybody's got to be covered. this is an unrepublican thing for me to say. i want to take care of everybody. you have a group of people that aren't able to take care of themselves. we have to take care of people that can't take care of
themselves and i will do that through a different system. i don't care if it costs me votes or not. everybody will be taken care of much better than they are now. >> everybody will be taken care of. have they overpromised? >> what would happen is he let paul ryan write the bill and the people who voted for trump are the losers in the paul ryan bill. if you are poor, white, rural, older american, you're getting less assistance from the government to buy health insurance on the individual market in this bill -- >> because there's not the subsidies. >> not as generous as in obamacare. or if you're just over the poverty line and in one of the states they expanded made cade, you could lose that. you listen to those clips. trump on sort of the welfare state has a very different view than sort of the neolibertarians in the republican party and what's so interesting is he has a faction in the white house who are nationalist pop you lis and have a different view of the
paul ryan party. this health care bill does not represent that view. this is the ryan wing of the party, not the trump wing. >> it's not just that they don't like each other but they have complete hi different world views. paul ryan believes like a ronald reagan, jack kemp philosophy, and, you know, you could argue that the bannon/trump wing is liberal. >> they have not brought through what an alternative plan would be. >> it would be populist and what this bill is not is populist. trump got elected by the white working class, an older white working class. they get hammered by this bill. bloomberg looked at which counties get more and which get less. by 3-1 counties that voted for hillary get more. why? because there's a $600 billion tax cut that only applies to the richest americans.
>> which rays the question the it starts to go south, why would donald trump go down with it? this is off brand for him. >> one of the things donald trump has been to brilliant about during the campaign is understanding his message, understanding who his voters are and speaking to them when other people weren't. hillary clinton certainly wasn't the same way donald trump was to the point paul was making and ryan that this is paul ryan's plan and he's not speaking to chose voters. >> go back to what i said, we need to focus on the choice and competition aspect of this to create more health care opportunities for people. the president, when he was running in the campaign, talked about being able to buy insurance across state lines, talked about small businesses being able to pool together, talked about expanded hsas. i know the folks on capitol hill are saying because of the reconciliation process, current mechanism, they can't do it. if i were in the white house, advising the president, i would say load it up on the same day,
you ran on this, off mandate, put it to the democrats, especially democrats up in 2018, make them take this society voetd because this is something the president won on and let's go and watch the democrats sweat a little. >> democrats are standing by watching. >> what i noticed during the campaign was that trump would do these things where he would stick up for poor people, he would stickum for the needs of people, even stuck up for planned parenthood, people forget that, and while he was doing that, we were aten toich the heart land, this particular mix working. i don't think the people in washington, d.c., who are in the republican party, hooray, we now have all these majorities, understand how they got those majorities. they didn't get them based on a paul ryan world view, whatever his positive points are. that wasn't what won. what you now have is a guy who has a philosophy when he remembers it that actually is
for though folks. it won't work. >> the question is, if the president is for universal health care and ryan's bill is for universal access in some way, shape, or form to health care, the president wants to guarantee health care to everybody, it won't be popular but that's what i'm going to do. what does he do? he doesn't love paul ryan. paul ryan doesn't love donald trump. we know that. now he's stuck. it's an arranged marriage and they're stuck with each oh. does trump wul away from ryan and say we're starting all over again or does he go down with the ship or betray the people who voted for him? >> i think this is where the president steps in and saves this bill and approves it, makes it something that go ahead and get through. >> do you think he can do that? >> i think so. he's the negotiator in chief. of course he can go and get this thing through. again going back to the point that leaving obamacare in place
as it is isn't an acceptable option. see the premiums going up, people's access to -- you have to do something about it. [ talking over each other ] >> opposition is easy. proposition is hard. what you guys are failing to do as a governing party is put forth something you can agree on. >> we're your fans. [ talking over each other ] >> help us to make it work and your party let people wither on the vine, refused to expand medicaid, did horrible things to people in your own state. now you get a chance to governing and governing is hard. >> i'll take to jorge ramos about what steve king accused him of. >> jorge ramos' stock and trade is identify between race. trading tools, give you access to in-depth analysis,
controversial remarks saying we can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies. he doubled down. attacked jorge ramos and mapged to make another inflammatory remark. >> jorge ramos' stock and trade is to identify and trying to drive wedges between race, race and ethnicity to be more correct. when you start escalating the differences then you end up with people at each other's throats and he's adding up hispanics and blacks who he predicts will be in greater number than whites in america. i will predict the hispanics and blacks will be fighting each other before that happens. >> what he meant by that he can explain. but jorge are ramos, the target of his comments. >> jamie:s me. first of all, your reaction to congressman king's comments about you. what's your response saying you're trying to drive a wedge between race and ethnicity?
>> the fact is that this country is changing. this demographic revolution, i call it the latino way. it is not what i think but what is happening. the census bureau projected in 2044 nonhispanic whites will become a minority. not something that i want or decided. that's the way it is. >> congressman says you're celebrating that white people are demographically becoming a majority minority in this country. >> i'm celebrating is the diversity of this country, which i find incredibly beautiful. the essence of the united states is its diversity. the essence is it's a multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial country created by immigrants. that declaration of independence which we know all men and women are created equal, that's what i'm celebrating, the diversity. what i'm concerned about is what he's saying and that he might with the support of the white house or some in the white house, he might want to make america white again. that's not the united states
that i know, not the united states that i celebrate and love. >> when it comes to the congressman's original tweet that the u.s. can't restore it civilization with somebody else's babies he's standing by that but amended it saying if you can go anywhere in the world and adopt these little babies and put them into households that were already assimilated to america, they will grow up as american as any other baby. essentially, his whole notion is such a rejection of the belief that immigrants to this country actually add to the culture, that it's not just about, you know, kind of adopting -- that culture is a changing thing and that's a positive thing that we learn new things from new people who arrive. >> what can you expect from a member of congress that once compared immigrants to dogs or who once proposed to electrify the walls between mexico and the united states? that's what he's saying.
whose babies is he talking about? the united states is already changing. before doing this interview i was checking the latest numbers. right now, anderson, all the babies being born in the united states right now more than half are minorities. >> do you feel he is using sort of code language? his original tweet was in support of talking very much against muslim immigration, wants to shut down mosques in the netherlands. >> those are code word. using culture or civilization, he means he wants america to be white again, he wants to take us back to 1965 when white nonhispanics were about 85% of the population. that won't happen anymore. everything changed after the immigration act of 1965. >> a tweet of his last night, he tweeted make western civilization great again, again that idea of western
civilization versus the rest of the world basically. >> remember, this was never a white country from the beginning. there were native americans before the pilgrims came here. africans came in the 17th century. spanish was being spoken here before english in 1513. so this has always been a diverse country. and i think that's exactly what we have to celebrate and to protect. >> also the notion of who is american now when you look back when irish immigrants were coming here in large numbers. there were -- there was a huge movement against irish immigrants. now they are, you know, part of -- they are just a american as everybody else who's an american citizen here. it's very much how you view what an american is -- i mean that changes over the decades. >> exactly. and, you know, lately, some
people don't like the fact that i've been saying that this is our country. it is yours and mine and ours. when i mean our country, i mean it's ha tino, white, african-americans, natives, asian. >> there is a push at least on left to try to attach congressman king's comments to the president. is that fair? sean spicer today said i think the president believes this not a point of view he shares. he believes he is president for all americans, i'll leave it at that. >> i want to hear him tomorrow. he's giving an interview to fox news tomorrow. i would like to hear president trump saying no i do not agree congressman king. that would be fantastic. that's a question for the interviewer. on the other hand, we have to remember trump during the campaign made many racist remarks. he criticized mexican-americans for being rapists and criminals and drug traffickers and that's
false. many are making the comparison between congressman king and president trump it's for a reason. something trump said on june 16th, 2015. modern life dese president trump's taxes, we'll be right back with that. so you don't miss his first birthday. tickets, i need to see your tickets sir. i masterpassed it. feeling like father of the year: priceless masterpass, the secure way to pay from your bank don't just buy it. masterpass it. including the full-sized introducingsprintercedes-benz family of vans. and the mid-sized metris. ...if these are your wingtips...
...if this is your gourmet latte... then these are your vans. vans for professionals. strictly professionals. best commercial van residual value according to alg and starting at just $25,995. mercedes-benz. vans. born to run. it can seem like triggers pop up everywhere. luckily there's powerful, 24-hour, non-drowsy claritin. it provides relief of symptoms that can be triggered by over 200 different allergens. live claritin clear. their leadership is instinctive. they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team.
i use what's already inside me to reach my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen. and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member
has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option, click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.
this is cnn breaking news. >> brakieaking news right now, white house putting out the subject of trump's taxes. >> that's right. the white house is trying to get ahead of a story that is floating ot there, it's about to be reported that president trump back in 2005 pa$2005 paid $38 m in taxes on $150 million in income. there's a report out there that his 2005 tax return was obtained and that's where that information is coming from. and so the white house is trying to get ahead of this story, because obviously, the president has refused time and again to release any of his tax returns, but of course it looks like the
2005 return is getting out there. we have obtained a pretty scathing statement from the white house. they are none too pleased about this. let me read this and put it up on the screen. it says you know you are desperate for ratings when you are willing to violate the law for a story about two pages of tax returns. mr. trump was one of the most successful business men in the world. he paid $38 million on an income of more than $150 million as well as paying tens of millions in other taxes such as sales and excise. and this illegally-published return proves just that. it is totally illegal to steal and publish tax returns.
the president will focus on tax return that will benefit all americans. so anderson, it does appear that even though the white house did not want this information out there, they didn't obviously want this tax return made public, they're not disputing what's in that 2005 tax return. as a matter of fact, they're trying to get ahead of the story by essentially giving the rest of us some of the pertinent information there. this just goes to show you, and i think this escalates the desire of many out there to obtain these tax returns. it makes it the holy grail of all holy grails, when it comes to covering president trump when it's this closely-held secret, when he doesn't want to release his tax returns to this extent. i think it's just going to make people to want to see those tax returns even more. >> we should point out during the campaign, then candidate's trump's reasoning was he's under audit. his own attorneys put out a letter explaining that tax
returns if memory serves me, up to 2004 or something were no longer under audit. i might be wrong about the year, but theoretically, those returns could have been released because they weren't under audit, but still, donald trump refused to release any tax return. >> and that's right. there was that story that came out in the "new york times," there was a metro desk reporter obtained one of the tax returns for then candidate trump and it showed something in the magnitude of $1 billion in losses in his casino businesses. and that essentially allowed the rest of the world to extrapolate out that he was able for many, many years, perhaps 18 or so years to not pay any income taxes. hillary clinton tried to make that an issue during the campaign and donald trump still won the presidency. that is why you hear him say time and again, if americans care that much about my tax returns, they would not have
made me president of the united states, and he does have something of a point, although you do have a lot of democrats in washington, even some republicans who would like to see the law changed to require candidates in the future to release that information to the public. it has been tradition to release this on their own, donald trump buck tha bucked that tradition, blaming it on the excuse that he's on a routine audit. i think donald trump deep down inside feels like the public doesn't care enough about this, so he's just not going to do it. but it does raise the possibility apartment spectre that every once in a while, one of these is going to leak out and cause a mess for this white house. >> back now with the panel, also joining us, philip bump. what do you make of this? we're understanding their is is supposed to be one return from 2005 and the 1040 form.
>> what's really important is we don't really have that many tax returns. if you go back to 1975, there's been a handful of times we've learned how much donald trump has paid in taxes. but how much he paid in taxes is probably the least interesting part of what could be contained in that tax return. we'd like to know how much he gave to clarity, how muharity. where he earned his income. that's the big question. what donald trump just got ahead of the $38 million, that's interesting. we didn't know that before. but it really is the tip of the iceberg. >> and the charitable contributions. because during the campaign he said he'd given tens of millions to contributions, echoed by his vice president. there are a lot of questions about overseas business dealings and whether tax returns would give us indication of dealings in other countries and where.
>> yeah, that's exactly right. it appears what we will be seeing is the first couple pages of his tax return. but, you know, their is stiis i interesting year, the year after the apresent dprentice debuted. this is something that the wall street journal reported in march of 2016 and we already know that he took a big easement because of one of his properties in new jersey. what we're hoping to get is more detail on the big picture. >> white house trying to preempt the release of this by giving out information they hadn't previously given out. joining us is the panel. potentially a big deal? >> yeah, we have to see exactly what msnbc has and exactly what it shows, but as philip just outlined, there are a lot of questi