tv At This Hour With Kate Bolduan CNN March 16, 2017 8:00am-9:01am PDT
just wait. when your reforms kick in, premiums go down. and this is before we get to phase ii or phase iii. the cbo estimate, which shows our reforms when they kick in bring premiums down, but more importantly, cbo ignores, because they can't score what tom price is going to do to further bring market competition and freedom, bring prices down. we're very confident that this bill, which already shows lower premiums, combined with things that price will do, and also state-based high risk pools. let me go back to one thing. and it's hard to quantify. we had a really good risk pool in wisconsin. utah had a really good risk pool. when you have a risk pool that covers the catastrophic costs of people with catastrophic illnesses, the rest of the insurers, the rest of the insurance pool don't have to pay for those costs. by directly helping support the people who have preexisting conditions with their catastrophic costs, all other insurance products don't have to
price that into their insurance and you dramatically stabilize and lower the price of insurance. cbo can't quantify that right now because they haven't looked at the new risk pool wisconsin will be setting up as a result of this law. so we're very confident we're moving the ball in the right direction. we're restoring market freedom. we think this approach is just much smarter and better on how to deal with getting costs down, improving access, including people with preexisting conditions. you are the one i was pointing to earlier, sorry. >> reporter: -- members of congress should get their insurance, where do you think members should get their insurance? >> we wouldn't have obamacare. i haven't given any thought to that. >> reporter: thank you, mr. speaker. realizing you are the speaker of the house and not the leader of the senate, senate republicans have really dismissed this bill. it seems all but dead on arrival
over in the senate. how successful will you be as speaker if your bill passes and makes it through the house and then they sort of start from scratch over there? realizing this is a legislative process, you've got a lot on your plate. how successful -- >> i'm not the majority leader of the senate. my job is to move bills through the house. let me describe to you in one word what all this is about and what is happening. legislating. this is legislating. this is going to the regular order process. here in the house, we constantly get feedback, we constantly get suggestions from members. and we're working at bridging those gaps to make improvements in the bill so that we have a bill that can pass. and we feel like we're making great strides and great progress on getting a bill that can pass, because it incorporates the kinds of feedback from members of all walks of life in our conference. i have not heard from those senators. the senators who have been
critical of the house bill, none of them have called me. so i'm not sure what exactly their concerns are. all i would say is, senators are not helpless with respect to the housin house. the house passes a bill, it goes to the senate. they're free to amend the bill when it goes over there. that's part of the legislative process. they'll have every opportunity to make a change to this legislation, because that's how legislation is written. the house passes a bill, the house amends a bill, sends it to the senate, the senate amends the bill, then it goes to conference. that's the legislative process. >> reporter: on the president's budget, some of your republican colleagues have voiced serious concerns about cuts to the state department. are you concerned about the consequences of slashing the state department budget? >> honestly, i haven't looked at
the budget functions. that's function 150. i haven't looked at what they're proposing in function 150. this is the beginning of the budget process. this is what i immersed myself in for two decades here. when the president submits a budget, that is the beginning of the budget process. then it goes to the budget committees, goes to the appropriation committees. we'll have a full hearing about how priorities will be met. but do i think we can cut spending and get waste out of government? absolutely. where and how and what numbers? that's go we'll be figuring out assi as time goes on. this is the beginning of that process. thank you. [ inaudible question ] >> hello, everyone, i'm kate bolduan, thanks for joining us. that of course was house speaker paul ryan, talking about many things in his weekly press conference. health care, of course, the health plan the republicans are working to put together. also talking about the budget. but also making news on the president's wiretap claims, echoing the house intelligence committee chair's statement
yesterday, ryan saying just now that the committee got to the bottom of the president's claim and no such wiretap exists. what ryan said is, "we've cleared that up," an important bit. but back to the big news and the big focus for the big issue facing congress right now, what to do about health care. with me, steve moore, cnn economic analyst, distinguished visiting -- you just say it, steve, it's too hard to get out of my mouth. ranna, who has the name that i never screw up. and m.j. lee, m.j., thank you for having the easiest name on the entire panel. >> no problem. >> so we watched paul ryan there sticking -- a couple of things stuck out to us, but right off the top, paul ryan, despite what you hear from conservatives and moderates and the dissent and the factions within the republican party, what you hear from paul ryan just now is we are very pleased with where we are, we are right on track.
what headline stuck out to you? >> what really stood out to me in the press conference is his emphasis on president trump's role in being the negotiator. yes, he said he's happy with where things are, yes, he said again, congress is working hand in glove with the white house. but he emphasized over and over again not just once that president trump is playing the role of bringing people together and actually bridging the gap -- >> he's leaning into it a little more than we heard before. >> yeah, we have to keep in mind that for the last couple of weeks ryan has been very focused on saying we don't want to make any substantial changes to the house republican bill and by the way, we have the votes, and by the way, everyone is on the same page, but interestingly, now he's saying that trump is playing a big role in bringing these different factions in the republican party together. and i think that's noteworthy, especially coming after president trump's own speech yesterday where he said, quote, we welcome the health care debate and its negotiation.
>> that shouldn't surprise us too much, his bestselling book was "the art of the deal." >> i totally agree. this i think is kind of an important -- i don't know if you call it a nuance, but an important kind of shift from paul ryan, because one of my questions to you, steve, who at this point owns this bill? as of yesterday it sounded like the white house is saying it's a negotiation, and paul ryan is saying, wait, we're all tied to this, then republican factions say this isn't us at all. >> it doesn't matter who owns the bill right now. at the end of the process, donald trump will be the one who signs it into law. i agree, he has to play a much more active role. republicans are all over the map. i'm part of some people at heritage who went over with other groups to meet with donald trump earlier this week. he's trying to bring in everybody, what do you want, what is it going to take to get your vote. i agree, i don't think getting this through the house is going to be a big problem. the senate is really difficult. >> when i heard this bill first put forward, i thought, oh, my
gosh, republicans are following democrats and what they did under obama, which is lose a lot of political capital by taking on health care first, the flawed approach to doing it. i think that's why cohesion for the republicans is crucial. what we saw in the last administration is if you screw things up on health care, if you lose people on health care, it makes it tougher to get the rest of your agenda through. >> what you heard from paul ryan is we're working to bridge the gap, this is the bill and we're working to make it work. the details are clearly the most important part, however over do you lean to conservatives, do you make any concession to moderates, it seems you're not going to get both. but tinkering around the edges, is that going to work? >> yes, i think it will. this is going to happen. i've been saying this for the last couple of weeks on cnn. this is going to happen, because it has to happen. republicans can't afford to fail on this one. so they will at some point get the 50 votes in the senate and they will get to 218.
but it's a slug-it-out process. and you've got a lot of members on the right who are biting at paul ryan's heels, saying it doesn't have enough reforms to move us fast enough to free enterprise system. then you have some of the moderates very nervous about that report that came out about people losing their insurance, that's something, kate, they'll have to deal with. they'll have to assure the american people, we have got reforms, lower cost, more choices, there's going to be more competition, but people won't lose their insurance. i don't think they'll get this through if the american people think 15 million people will lose insurance. >> if they go home to town halls and have protests. >> i don't think tinker at the edges is going to work. i think we have a fundamental problem in the u.s. health care system. if you look at international comparisons, we are vastly more expensive than france with poor poorer outcomes. if you have, as the cbo has
said, 24 million americans possibly losing their health care, even if it evens out in the longer term, getting worse in the short term, how is that going to affect midterm elections, when will these cuts kick in and what are the political ramifications? i would be very worried about that if i were a republican. >> and that is part of the calculation for any members of the house. >> are you saying they take politics into account? shocking! >> i want to just point out, trump can do as much negotiating as he wants, he can have as many bowling parties at the white house -- >> bowling parties are funny for some reason. keep going. >> there are fundamental differences within the republican party on what they want. conservatives do not think this bill in its current form goes far enough. moderates basically think that it goes too far. and i don't know how trump, even if he negotiates a lot, how he can bridge those differences. and i think the big question is,
at some point does he decide in conjunction with leadership, this is as far as the bill is going to go? and then does he actually pick up the phone and do the kind of lobbying individual members that we have not seen yet? >> when does he determine which group, faction, it's okay to -- guys, stand by, manu raju was in the press conference with speaker ryan, asking some questions, you asked that first question out of the gate. he seemed to make news, again, manu, as devin nunes made news yesterday on the wiretap front, sounds like we heard some news from paul ryan as well. >> reporter: that's right, specifically on whether he believes president trump's assertion that he had been wiretapped and trump tower had been wiretapped under the orders of barack obama. now, that is of course something we have not seen any evidence of. members of congress have not seen any evidence of. paul ryan has said for the last couple of days he has not seen evidence. what he said today was
interesting, i asked him, do you believe the president, and he said, "no, and we've cleared that up." that is an indication that members of congress really want to get past this story as the white house struggles to clear this up and the president himself seems to double down and suggest he didn't say anything incorrect and there will be evidence that he will present to the house and senate intelligence committee in the couple of -- in the coming weeks. now, also president trump saying last night, citing press reports about being -- although those press reports never really said president obama ordered those wiretaps, i tried to ask paul ryan about that, if he was comfortable with the president suggesting that. he said that -- he sort of the sidestepped that question but specifically said he does not believe the president about being wiretapped, another sign that there's so much skepticism and that president trump either clearly misstated, clearly was wrong, was false, on his statements, or needs to actually provide some evidence
immediately to members of congress who are investigating this very issue. they have not seen anything yet. we'll see if james comey, when he testifies next week, adds any more clarity to the situation. >> without implying any intention to what the president was intending to do with the tweets, you can be sure if this was a headache for congress and the speaker, the headache isn't going away, from what we just heard from president trump last night. manu, thank you so much. guys, i want to finish out, talking about the other big policy issue that landed on the plate of congress right now is the president's budget blueprint. yes, they're always wish lists coming from any president. how much wishful thinking is in this budget? >> it's an opening bid. one of the things i see in this budget is, it's exactly what donald trump said he was going to do, has been saying he's going to do for six months. he's increasing the size of the military, to increase our national security. he's going to build a wall. he wants money for infrastructure.
and he wants to cut other programs. >> on the flip side, aren't you also seeing that he's not -- it doesn't include some of his promises like balancing the budget, bringing down the deficit? he's not touching entitlements. >> no reduction in taxes on the very wealthy, things like that. >> wait a minute, though. i mean, he just came out -- the republicans just came out with a plan on health care that cuts federal spending by a trillion dollars over the next ten years, and reduced the deficit by $300 billion, yet people in the media are criticizing it, and saying he doesn't want to cut the deficit. you can't have it both ways. >> there's also an issue with the fact that the health care plan being proposed is potentially going to leave a huge gap in the middle and lower end, which efforts has -- no, itself has economic costs. a third of americans that cycle in and out of poverty every year do so because of a health care emergency. it depresses wages. companies have to pay more for rising health care premiums. i think that they will rise in the short term under this republican plan. that is a huge issue.
i think the fundamental issue in our economy is a lack of demand, the fact that most people in the middle haven't seen real wage increase in 20 years. and health care is a big part of that. lowering taxes on the wealthy -- >> you're right about that. the big increase in health care costs are what are happening right now under the current system. the obamacare is like the hidden enbe hiddenenberg. . >> the republican plan will cost premiums to go up in the short term. >> that's what they said about obamacare and it passed. this year, 25% increase in premiums. next year, 25% increase in premiums. one of people's biggest concerns is the rising cost of their health care under the current system. >> our health care system is an accident of tax policy since world war ii that we need to fix at a base level. both of these things are band-aids on an underlying problem. >> what i love right here, this is what i love, even when you ask about a budget blueprint,
with anyone who covers congress knows, congress decides what the budget will be, if they get to it. but the important thing to think is when you're talking about budget, the focus is exactly where it is. it has to be about health care. that's where the budget is pointing to. >> i've lived through a lot of these budgets before. i worked for ronald reagan. >> and you're still alive and smiling. >> if the president wants to get the budget, congress likes to play santa claus, they don't want to cut these programs that trump wants to. we'll see if he succeeds. but when you have a $20 trillion national debt, you have to do something about downsizing. >> those priorities don't line up with pet projects for congress back home. >> indeed. >> guys, great to see you. m.j., thank you so much, my dear. coming up next, a second judge putting the president's travel ban on hold. why the president's words are coming back to haunt him. say when you mean and mean what you say.
or maybe not. after republicans leading the investigations into the president's wiretapping claims say there's no evidence. is the president trying to wiggle out of it? lots of wrinkle creams believe the more mysterious they sound, the more... powerful you'll think they are. it's time to see what power really looks like. new neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair with accelerated retinol sa. clinically proven to reduce wrinkles in just one week. wrinkles? your time is up! rapid wrinkle repair. and for dark spots. rapid tone repair. neutrogena® see what's possible. dearthere's no other way to say this.
it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced. our senses awake. our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say...if you love something set it free. see you around, giulia sugar, we're letting you go. what? who's replacing me? splenda naturals? look, she's sweet, she's got natural stevia, no bitter aftertaste and she's calorie-free. so that's it? we made you a cake. with sugar? oh, no. (laughing)
breaking news on the revised white house travel ban. on the day it was supposed to be taking effect, which is important to note, the new and improved version is now facing legal trouble on two fronts. a federal judge putting a hold on the president's executive order. that piggy backs a similar ruling in hawaii just yesterday. both judges slamming the order for religious discrimination against muslims. president trump had something to say about that last night. >> this ruling makes us look weak. which by the way, we no longer are, believe me. this is the opinion of many, an
unprecedented judicial overreach. >> let me bring in right now justice reporter laura jarrett. laura, the white house rewrote this order, remember, to avoid legal challenges like this. what exactly are the judges taking issue with? >> reporter: that's exactly right, kate. it's really a constitutional problem at this point. the judges in both hawaii and maryland this morning are saying, yes, the trump administration may have excluded travelers with green cards and visas this time around. but that doesn't remedy the fact that there's still a 90-day ban on foreign nationals from the six muslim majority countries in the revised order. it's that ban, kate, combined with what trump said about muslims during the campaign that has led courts to conclude that this order was infected from the very beginning with religious animus. the judge in hawaii said, look, this is a preliminary determination, it doesn't necessarily foreclose future legislative action. but the taint of the campaign,
he found, hadn't changed. and based on the current record, the revised order has to remain on hold, kate. >> no word yet from the justice department in response? >> reporter: so far no reaction from the justice department or the white house, but both came out hard last night against the ruling in hawaii. the justice department vowing to fight the ruling. the president saying he's ready to take it to the supreme court if necessary, kate. >> it might just end up there. laura, thank you so much. joining me now, cnn political commentator jen psaki, former white house communications director under president obama and former state department spokesman. cnn political analyst david drucker. and cnn political commentator kayleigh mcenany. guys, great to see you, thanks for coming in. so kayleigh, the president last night, he called it a watered-down version, the revised version, a watered-down version. does that imply two things, one,
he thinks it's less effective, and two, the arguments against the first ban still hold against the second? >> i do think he thinks it's less effective. he said, "i want to stick with the first ban, it was more effective." it doesn't matter so much what the president said, whether he calls it watered down or not. he referred the fact that this second ban was produced with the efforts of the department of homeland security, the i didn't want of tinput of the attorney general. this one was put together with a lot of thought and effort. i don't think it matters if president trump says it was awarded down or not. >> it's funny, but when it comes to the president's statements, the judges care a lot about that, about then-candidate trump's statements, and even those close to the president. i want to play two sound bites of statements essentially that were referenced in these rulings by these judges. one is the president,
then-candidate, and then another is not, this is one of his aides. listen, jen. >> donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. >> fundamentally, you're still going to have the same basic policy outcome for the country but you're going to be responsive to a lot of technical issues that were brought up by the court. and those will be addressed. but in terms of protecting the country, those basic policies are still going to be in effect. >> general, you're no fan of the ban, but from a communications at some point, from all the conversations that you were ever involved in, what's your reaction when someone who is not the president himself, his aide, stephen miller who you saw right there being used against the ban in this court ruling?
what do you think of that? >> look, i don't think the intention of president trump or his team is unclear here. they want to prevent individuals from muslim majority countries from entering the united states. many of whom would obviously be muslim. that's what the judges took issue with. the other problem they have here is they say this is an effort to keep the american people safe. you can't find a national security expert around the country who is going to argue that that's true. in fact the opposite is true. it will give more fodder to our enemies. i don't think it's unclear what their intention is, which is why you heard the judges say that in both remarks. >> politically speaking, david, where do you think this goes from here? if it goes to the court, it could take some time. do you think there is a going back and doing this a third time or do you think politically the white house, the president, has already had a political win, he promised he would try to do this
and he's tried? >> well, there are two different issues here. there's a national security implicat implication of whether or not the ban can take effect, then there's the political implication of how the country views how the president is handling national security. i think this second ban, given the care that went into it and all the exceptions that were made, i think the president is on much firmer ground both legally and politically. first of all, as a matter of politics and policy, this puts him much closer to where republicans in congress have been on this issue, believing that there are certain countries that are just so lawless and broken down, you can't consult with people and do the kind of proper vetting that can prevent potential terrorists from taking advantage of western refugee policies. the issue with the president is that this for him is always going to be colored by the fact that during the campaign, he calls for a muslim ban. he called for a religious test for people entering the united states. and his first ban right out of the gate was all about that.
and so that's always going to color the politics of this. there is also the issue of, even though this falls into standard republican national security policy, and republicans were talking about this a couple of years ago, long before donald trump, before we knew he would be president, we haven't seen a lot of national security studies backing up, even coming from his own administration, backing up how this would help him prevent domestic terrorism. and so that is a part of what he's dealing with. but i think eventually he could win this on appeal and this ban could go into effect. >> this comes, jen, as a button in a rough 24 hours for this president. you've got health care on the rocks, unless you talk to paul ryan, then everything is great. you have the house intel saying there is no evidence to back up the president's claims of being wiretapped by president obama. and now you have his revised travel ban being put on hold by the courts. of these three issues facing the
president, these three problems, which is the most urgent for him to deal with? >> it's hard to pick. i think the health care bill is in a pretty precarious spot right now, you see republicans dropping off on a daily basis and there are significant changes that would need to happen to that bill i think to keep their support, whether it's on the medicaid cuts issue, planned parenthood. there are a lot of areas where people in his own party are running away from this bill. how much he cares about getting that through, i don't know the answer to that. but i would say that's one of the most urgent pieces on his agenda right now. >> we have to leave it there, great to see you all, thank you so much. coming up for us, president trump changing his story over his explosive and now proven baseless wiretapping claims. why he is defending his tweets, and where he now says he got the information. plus live pictures of capitol hill where president trump will be heading very soon as his party's health care bill just passed one hurdle, on to the next. straight talk...
...so you can take and share pictures any time of day. with a network that helps you save the day... bunny! ...for half the cost. bunny wants to go one more time! here we go! alright, i'm coming home! get an iphone7. unlimited plans with 5gb of high-speed data start at just $45 a month... ...on america's largest, most dependable 4glte networks. straight talk wireless. only at walmart. neutrogena® hydro boost hydrating tint. wake up skin. the first water gel foundation with hyaluronic acid it plumps, quenches... delivers a natural, flawless look. this is what makeup's been missing. neutrogena®
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. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide. these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here. all while reducing america's emissions. say goodbye to extra taxes and fees on your wireless bill... ...and hello to t-mobile one. right now, get two lines of unlimited data for a hundred bucks. taxes and fees included! two lines, a hundred dollars, all in, all unlimited. switch today.
only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol® and her new mobile wedding business.tte at first, getting paid was tough... until she got quickbooks. now she sends invoices, sees when they've been viewed and-ta-dah-paid twice as fast for free. visit quickbooks-dot-com.
president trump defiant, defending his claim that president obama wiretapped trump tower. it all started with a series of tweets talking about wiretapping, and tapping his phones more than once, and pointing the finger at president obama, evening calling president obama a bad or sick guy. the white house says the tweets speak for themselves. here is the story now. >> on march 4th, 6:35 in the morning, you're down in florida, and you tweet the former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me at trump tower during the last election. how did you find out? you said i just found out.
how did you learn about that? >> i've been reading about things. i think it was january 30th, a "new york times" article that talked about wiretapping, i think they used that exact term. i read other things. i watched your friend bret baier the day previous where he was talking about certain very complex sets of things happening and wiretapping. i said, wait a minute, there's a lot of wiretapping being talked about. i've been seeing a lot of things. now, for the most part i'm not going to discuss it because we have it before the committee, and we will be submitting things before the committee very soon that hasn't been submitted as of yet. but it's potentially a very serious situation. >> so 51,000 people retweeted that. so a lot of people thought that was plausible, they believe you, you're the president. you're in charge of the agencies, every intelligence agency reports to you. why not immediately go to them and gather evidence to support that? >> because i don't want to do anything that's going to violate any strength of an agency.
we have enough problems. and by the way, with the cia, i just want people to know, the cia was hacked and a lot of things taken. that was during the obama years. that was not during us. that was during the obama situation. mike pompeo is there now doing a fantastic job. but we will be submitting certain things. and i will be perhaps speaking about this next week. but it's right now before the committee. and i think i want to leave it. i have a lot of confidence in them. >> why not wait to tweet about it until you can prove it? >> the "new york times" wrote about it. not that i respect "the new york times," i calling it the failing "new york times." they wrote about it using the word wiretap. >> but you're the president. you have the ability to gather all the evidence you want. >> i do. but frankly we have a lot right now. i think if you watch -- if you watched the bret baier and what he was saying and what he was talking about and how he mentioned the word "wiretap," you would feel very confident
you could mention the name. he mentioned it. and other people have mentioned it. if you take a look at some things written by wiretapping and eavesdropping. when i say wiretap, those words were in quote. that really covers -- because wiretapping is pretty old fashioned stuff. that really covers surveillance and many other things. and nobody ever talks about the fact that it was in quotes. but that's a very important thing. but wiretap covers a lot of different things. i think you're going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. >> all right. that was last night. what you already heard in that interview, the president mentioned the cia was hacked. moments ago the top democrat on the house intelligence committee released a statement and raised the question, did the president -- did president trump, if this is proven true, reveal classified information during that interview? let's get over to cnn's senior congressional reporter manu raju. adam schiff just put out this statement, manu. what is he getting at? >> reporter: well, he thinks he
may have actually revealed classified information if this is true. now, remember, president trump said this last night, "i just want people to know the cia was hacked and a lot of things taken, that was during the obama years." schiff is saying in his effort to blame president obama, president trump may have revealed classified information that the cia was hacked. schiff was careful in his statement about saying whether or not the cia was actually hacked, but his warning to president trump is this, if you want to declassify something, it should be done in a thoughtful manner, not done shooting it off your head and just saying something that could be classified and something that ordinarily would be considered in a leg an illegal leak. remember, kate, the president can declassify anything he wants. the question is if the president wanted to declassify this key piece of information, if it's true, and if it's true, that's something that other people would not be able to discuss because of its classification,
so an interesting new wrinkle here as the president appears to have said something that may have gone a lot farther than other people who know this information are willing to go, kate. >> of course what exactly is the president getting at, what piece of information, what hack as he talking about, not explained in that interview, clearly adam schiff will be following up. manu, thanks for jumping on it, we appreciate it. let me bring in republican congressman charlie dent from pennsylvania. congressman, great to see you, thanks for coming in. >> thanks, kate, for having me. >> i hope you were able to hear it, adam schiff raising the question of president trump, if he was discussing classified information in that interview. what's your take on this? >> well, i don't know what the president actually said except the president has the ability to declassify anything he would like. i think the larger issue is, the large issue for the president is, when he made that charge that former president obama surveilled him, and president
trump must provide proof or evidence to substantiate that claim. if he cannot, then he should retract it. >> i do want to ask you exactly about that. the last time we talked, which seems like eons ago but was only a few days ago, you said if the president's wiretap claims were proven wrong, if there was not evidence, it would damage his credibility. now we have the house intel chairman saying the president is wrong on this. you have paul ryan, house speaker, saying this tap didn't exist. so has the president damaged his credibility? >> well, look, let me say this too, kate. first, the easiest thing to do to verify whether or not there was surveillance is to check the fisa orders. in order for any american citizen to be surveilled, candidate trump or anyone else, there would have to have been a warrant, go before the fisa court, and somebody can go check those fisa orders fairly quickly to determine if such an order was ever granted. i suspect there wasn't one. >> it seems that the house intel
chairman says definitively there wasn't one. paul ryan today said the same thing. he says we've cleared this up. so it seems that they are saying that the president was wrong on this one. do you think this is now -- do you think this damages his credibility? >> it certainly doesn't help. sure, it's important, i always say, when you're president of the united states, your words are policy. so any time you make an utterance, that's the policy. so i think it's very important that the president, you know, measure his words very carefully, because in this case, it's clear that there was no surveillance based on all the evidence that i've heard so far. so it does damage. and so when you're president of the united states, you only have so much political capital and moral authority. so any time, you know, your statements can be proved inaccurate or incorrect, it just does damage to your credibility. >> devin nunes kind of raised the question, if we should take the president too literally. but as you're saying,
congressman, you take the president literally, right? >> i do. like i said, when you're president of the united states, your words are policy. and so i think it's very important that all of us be measured and temperate in our words, because those words, by the way, they can be interpreted in different parts of the world in different ways. that's why i think politicians get a bad rap sometimes for being very careful and measured in their language, because we know that what we say can have consequences. and i think that's particularly the case if you're the president. >> let's talk about health care, the big issue facing you all on capitol hill right now. since the cbo report came out on monday, it sure looks like the indications are that the white house and the speaker are leaning more toward appeasing the conservative faction right now in the republican -- in the house republicans, not moderates like yourself. is that your sense right now, congressman? >> i believe this process is continuing to evolve. i was in a meeting yesterday with vice president pence, a
very constructive meeting where he largely listened. i guess the point independent to mak i want to make, i shared with him concerns that we have. in my view, moving the medicaid transition back would be an unfortunate thing. >> you think that would cost them more votes than it would gain them? >> yes, it would cost a significant amount of votes. >> you know at the end of the day, it's going to have to come down to a calculation. it might be close, and are they going to gain more, if they move back that window, appease conservatives in the house freedom caucus, can they get it over the line with that. you're saying i don't think so. >> like i said, i think there are plenty of members with whom i have spoken who said that moving that medicaid window from 2020 back to 2018 or even 2019 is a nonstarter. they couldn't support it.
and in fact it's difficult enough at 2020. there's still challenges with the medicaid piece, you know, forget about that timing for a moment, in terms of per capita, the per capita cap allotments, there are issues there that have to be resolved. the tax credits, many of the members i've talked to are concerned that the tax credits will not be sufficient, particularly for that age group between 50 and 64 years of age, people who are currently on the exchanges and being subsidized. that is a very big issue, not to be underemphasized, a very big issue for many of our members. also there is an issue for the senate. many of the members in the house don't like the idea of having to vote on a bill that may go absolutely nowhere in the senate in its current form. we know the senate is going to change it. that's a political dynamic on top of the policy issues i've just identified. >> when the house speaker said just earlier this hour, when he says we're very pleased with where we are, we're on track and on time, do you think he's being a little too glass half full on
this one? >> i've felt all along there's been too much of a focus on arbitrary timelines and deadlines all to affect the baseline for tax reform. i believe we have to focus on healthcare, and focus on the people who are going to be impacted by our decisions. i am a lot less concerned about the timing of this. i think it has to be done right. i'm of the opinion that we're moving very quickly, these are very big, complex policy issues. there is a lot of nuance here. i think we've got to get this right. at the end of the day, we know that parts of this law need to be repealed, parts replaced, parts overhauled, parts retained. we understand that. we have to get the policy right to reflect what i just said about the law itself. >> congressman dent, always great to have you, thank you. coming up any moment now, president trump will arrive on capitol hill as his party struggles to get on the same
page on their plans to pull together an obamacare replacement. we'll hear from the president live. plus why did senator john mccain accuse senator rand paul of working for vladimir putin? those are his words. you can be sure senator paul had something to say in return. budding bromance? i think not. that's coming up. wake up skin. neutrogena® hydro boost hydrating tint. the first water gel foundation with hyaluronic acid it plumps, quenches... delivers a natural, flawless look. this is what makeup's been missing. neutrogena® sir? you give me that salad and i will pay for your movie and one snack box. can i keep the walnuts? yes. but i get to pick your movie. can i pick the genre? nope. with the blue cash everyday card you get cash back on purchases with no annual fee. backed by the service and security of american express. ( ♪ ) upstate new york is a good place to pursue your dreams. at vicarious visions, i get to be creative, work with awesome people,
and we get to make great games. ( ♪ ) what i like about the area, feels like everybody knows each other. and i can go to my local coffee shop and they know who i am. it's really cool. new york state is filled with bright minds like lisa's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin. the more mysterious they sound, the more... search for our page, powerful you'll think they are. it's time to see what power really looks like.
new neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair with accelerated retinol sa. clinically proven to reduce wrinkles in just one week. wrinkles? your time is up! rapid wrinkle repair. and for dark spots. rapid tone repair. neutrogena® see what's possible. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company.
with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. then you're a couple. think of all you'll share... like snoring.
does your bed do that? the dual adjustability of a sleep number bed allows you each to choose the firmness and comfort you want. so every couple can get the best sleep ever. does your bed do that? right now, find queen mattresses starting at just $899. plus, free home delivery on select mattresses. ends sunday! only at a sleep number store or sleepnumber.com i think devin nunes and adam schiff answered that. i got the same briefing as well. but after we heard about this, we did see a number that made this suggestion. those press reports did exist.
so this is something i was unaware of until we did see a few press reports on this. but the point is the intelligence committees in their continuing widening, ongoing investigation of all things russia got to the bottom, at least so far, with respect to our intelligence community that no such wiretapping existed. >> house speaker paul ryan earlier this hour saying no such wiretap existed. he said later we've cleared that up. that's interesting we hear that today. now there's more to this story. president trump now saying that it wasn't talking about wiretaps or wiretaps per se and he's promising to prove it. let's talk about this right now. kayleigh mcenany is back with us. also with us, ned price, former special assistant to president obama, former spokesman for the national security council and a former cia official. great to see both of you. since it did just happen, i want to ask you about this, leaning on your nsc and cia chops. president trump in the interview we're talking about with fox news, he said in part of the
interview the cia was hacked. here is what -- here's the direct quote. i want people to know the cia was hacked and a lot of things taken. that was during the obama years. adam schiff, the top democrat on house intel is raising the question, did the president just release classified information, if that is proven accurate? what do you make of this? can you shed some light here? >> obviously a very wide-ranging and newsy interview the president gave to tucker carlson. this element struck me as the most newsy because it's not something i was familiar with and tweeted about this last night. previously we'd seen these reports perhaps there had been a contractor, someone with access to these files on the outside. had provided them to wikileaks. but never before had we seen this theory of a hack, and if anyone is in a position to know it would seem to be the president of the united states. >> interesting. and again, we hear over and over the president is uniquely positioned. he can declassify anything he
wants. what adam schiff is raising is reckless in how he's doing it. >> i don't think it's reckless. if he wants to share that and doesn't think it's a threat to national security, he can declassify that information. time will tell. i don't think he'd baselessly suggest the cia was hacked. if he says it, it happened and if he wants to declassify that, that's his prerogative as commander in chief. >> one thing fellow republicans have said are baseless now are his comments he was wiretapped by president obama. but what we are hearing now from president trump is that he wasn't talking about wiretapping. he's talking about general surveillance, and he's got proof and stuff and they'll be providing that within two weeks. do you acknowledge, though, that this is moving the goal post now? >> sort of. it depends how you interpreted his tweet. if you interpret it literally as obama tapped trump. >> those in charge of conducting the investigation, senator burr says his job is to take him literally. >> right.
look, that's why these kfrg conversations are best left off twitter. president trump has a right to be suspicious of what happened. we had that "new york times" headline about wiretapped information. what's very troubling to me is that a trump associate, mike flynn, in the course of monitoring a foreign agent, his conversation, an american citizen's conversation was transcribed. that's not supposed to happen unless there's evidence of a crime. i think trump is on firm footing to say something nefarious was going on here. he might produce evidence in two weeks. >> but we don't know what president trump is talking about here, though he says he's got evidence and they're going to provide it in two weeks. ned, i want to get your take on this. richard burr was asked about this by manu raju. should you take the president literally or is he moving the goal post? and senator burr said i take seriously anything the president says. if i didn't, then we wouldn't have searched and talked to every federal agency about whether there were any warrants for a federal wiretap that existed. were they led on a wild goose chase here? >> this is the president of the
united states, the individual with the nuclear codes and commander in chief. we have an obli gation to take him literally and seriously. the news last night is president trump is the last man standing in the indefensible effort to defend his tweet. we've seen advisers, staff members run for the hills over the past days and weeks. sean spicer danced around this issue of air quotes. paul ryan and jeff sessions. devin nunes yesterday and i thought what was a remarkable statement said he had seen no evidence of -- to back up the president's wiretapping claim. this is a close associate of president trump. someone part of his transition and then went on to say we shouldn't take the man literally. this man possesses the nuclear codes and can start a war if he show sew choo so chooses. >> i will say as charlie dent told me, this speaks to credibility then when the president now says there's evidence and he'll provide it
within two weeks, what do you make of that, ned? what evidence could that be and regarding what? from your experience, at the nsc and being an assistant to the president, what's the possibility here? >> last night the so-called evidence the president provided was what he has previously decried as fake news. the failing "new york times," the very "new york times" article that his own chief of staff reince priebus previously dismissed and said was false. so if more evidence is to come from the white house in the coming weeks, i suspect it will be brooilt eitbart articles or articles that somehow mention wiretapping. any law enforcement information should not be coming from the white house. in the obama white house, there was a firm wall between the department of justice and the white house and as a cardinal rule, white house officials did not interfere in doj investigations. >> the onus now is definitely on the president in producing that evidence and what it is. it's yet to be seen if it goes
furth thaeer than many would sa. it should go further than any breitbart information that should come out. republicans are battling over health care. what will he say and where does that bill stand? stay with us. hi my name is tom. i'm raph. my name is anne. i'm one of the real live attorneys you can talk to through legalzoom. don't let unanswered legal questions hold you up, because we're here, we're here, and we've got your back. legalzoom. legal help is here.
the teachers, they would call us the energy patrol. so they would be like, here they come, turn off your lights! those three young ladies were teaching the whole school about energy efficiency. we actually saved $50,000. and that's just one school, two semesters, three girls. together, we're building a better california. a heart attack doesn't or how healthy you look. no matter who you are,
a heart attack can happen without warning. a bayer aspirin regimen can help prevent another heart attack. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. bayer aspirin. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thanks for sharing your day with us. house speaker paul ryan vowing to salvage the republican health care plan insisting all is fine, even as he's forced to revamp his plan because of an internal republican revolt. >> i spoke with the president about a half hour ago. i speak with the president pretty much every day. i spoke to him twice yesterday. so we are clearly in sync on this. we're working very hand in glove on this. and the president's team. so we're working extremely closely. this president is getting deeply involved. he is helping bridge gaps in our conference. he is a constructive force to help us get to a resolution so that we get consensus on h