tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN March 28, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PDT
breaking news. growing calls for the chairman of the house intelligence committee to recuse himself from the russia investigation. this is cnn tonight. i'm don lemon. nunes defending his visit that he says suggests trump teams may have been picked up by foreign nationals. the top democrat has yet to see those documents and calls on nunes to step aside from the russian probe. growing number of democrats
calling for him to step aside. let's go right to cnn's evan perez. what do you have? >> well, there's been a lot of twists and turns in this story in the last 24 hours and of course towards the end of the day in an interview with phil mattingly, a top democrat said one or suggested one reason why the chairman of that committee should step aside from this is the communications he's talking about, the intelligence reports he might be talking about may include his own name. you know he served on the trump transition as a member of -- as an advisor, donald trump's transition to the now president. and so devin nunes might be conflicted according to adam schiff in his handling of the investigation earlier in the day nunes began the day by essentially outing his source as someone he met with at the white house. that was an unusual statement today from him. and we still don't know know
what intelligence reports he's talking about. one intelligence -- one republican the hill who talked to gloria tonight says one of the things he might be talking about is simply capturing foreign diplomats in their interactions with the trump team. >> and he says he's done nothing wrong despite those calls. and previously undisclosed meeting that took place between jared kushner and a russian banker. what do you know? >> that's right. this is a bank called veb. it's a very closely tied to the kremlin and the russian government. and jared kushner met with the chief of that bank. his name is sergei gorcov.
he met with him according to the white house this was a routine part of him serving as essentially the top conduit for meet shz with foreign officials during the trump transition. we have seen a statement provided by the new york times and they say that they met with kushner in his capacity as a developer, as the president of his own development team in new york. so the question is what -- which story is it? we know the white house has had trouble explaining all these meetings with russian officials. we've even tried to get to the bottom of this in the past week and they've sort of been very reluctant to provide all this information. but this could pose a new legal problem for jared kushner, don. simply because if he's using a transition meeting, an official government meeting for his own business purposes, that could raise some legal questions for him and for the white house. >> i want to bring in now bill
crystal, the editor at large of the weakly standard. betsy mccoy, the former republican -- and good evening to all of you. what's your reaction? >> first of all, i think it'ser shameful the effort on the part of the democratic party to taint, to smear devin nunes, a person of great integrity who was done something very import ntd for this country. not just for the trump administration or the republican party. he is unmasking the -- he is disclosing the efforts of the permanent establishment in washington to taint, to undermine the effectiveness of the trump administration. and i'm very glad he did it, and i wish he had done it before last monday. >> you have no problem with him going to the white house first? >> i don't. >> in that role, first and foremost is to notify your colleagues in your committee. democrats and republicans.
>> because the evidence doesn't change no matter who you take it to. >> absolutely. and at the very beginning he would brief the committee and have a press conference. otherwise he's going to be bum barded by every reporter in town but the fact he went from a press conference to the white house and his colleagues, i understand their frustration. >> and he's actually apologized to them for having side stepped and gone instead to president trump. perception matters and it matters because we're talking about something that is the pillar of our democracy. the integrity of our elections. if i were a trump supporter i would want an investigation that is above board in every aspect so they can finally get this monkey off their back. i think it's time for republican voices to raise the question about his ability to conduct a full and fair investigation
because americans watching this are going to wonder if republicans who are in charge are capable of doing this and if they're not, they're going to take it out in the ballot box, maybe not against nunes but certainly republicans in tight districts. >> president trump could do it tomorrow. he could appoint any two former attorney generals and say have access to all the documents. if there's no problem here writhey make it all public. i don't understand it. why don't they tell us everything? why do you find out one thing after another? the reason they're not telling you is because they don't want you to know everything because there might be problems there otherwise this is pretty easy to handle. is this really a tough challenge? if there's nothing to hide hire two people to look into it and no problem.
nothing was done that was wrong. kushner is fine. he can meet with this guy under sanctions in his capacity as a businessman and representative of the white house, there's no problem with that in america. we're used to having people do both things at once, right? i mean that's why this meeting wasn't made public. this is a problem. >> steve hall is on the retired chief of cia russian operations. he says this whole masking thing is a ruse. >> totally. >> i do not believe it's a rouse. >> it's ludicrous. what was leaked? >> it's an inappropriate method by which the establishment in washington attempts to discredit members of the trump administration. >> what has been leaked? >> look otwhat they did to michael flynn? >> nunes says this has nothing to do with russia. you are saying intelligence officers -- let me finish. intelligence officers in the
cia, the nsa, people who have worked 20, 30, 40 years for this country are doing the obama administration's bidding. >> and it's true in the justice department. we saw early on that high ranking members of the justice department were disloyal to the new president and spoke against his policies. >> spoke against his policies. what a horror >> instructing their underlings to defy the president. >> this is such a side show from the real issue. how did this begin? did russia interfere with our elections? that is a concern everyone -- >> you're saying the phrase you don't believe russia interfered with our elections? >> yes, because it's an incorrect phrase. >> did russia tamper with our ballot boxes, with our voting machines? >> so interfering with public opinion is fine.
stealing emails and releasing them strategically is fine for a foreign power. >> that's not the same as tampering with an election. >> how is that not the same? >> because interfering with public opinion is very different than tampering with how the votes are counted. or how the votes are -- let's make this zngz. >> if they had interfered or tampered with the voting booths, we would have a measurable metric of what they have done. what the result and the influence they did wield and with the cyber hacking, we cannot measure. >> foreign governments did not attempt to influence public opinion. >> does that mean we should allow it? does that mean we should allow our democracy to be threatened? >> i'm objecting to the phrase influencing public opinion.
it has nothing to do with tampering with the election. >> how does that have nothing to do with tampering with the election? >> donald trump said release these emails. >> and it undermined a credibility of a presidential candidate. >> why did he quote from these emails? >> i think he quite correctly understood that this is just craziness to attribute the outcome of an election to the releasing of a bunch of emails. that's ridiculous. >> do you think it was appropriate to site those emails, it was a great thing they released them? >> it's irrelevant to the outcome of the election. >> donald trump thought it was very helpful. >> when you say tampering with an election or -- >> that is the bottom line. >> there's an illegitimate outcome. >> the truth is we are never going to know that the influence wielded by russia had on the election. we'll never know if donald trump won or would have lost.
i frankly accept that. what i don't accept is that we, as americans are not going to vigorously investigate to the last dam thing what happened so that we don't allow it to happen again. >> let me get this in. i don't even have to say remember the old phrase don't touch that dial. i don't think you will because we're coming right back. i'm only in my 60's. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs.
call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. see why millions of people have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now.
how bad was the health care loss for the white house? was it like hitting a pot hole or driving off a cliff? joining me now new york times robert draper whose new article is called "trump versus congress." the washington post contributor join me as well. thank you both so much for joining us. robert, you first. you wrote an in-depth article on where the president and his advisors find themselves after
the epic defeat of the health care bill on friday. is health care dead and what's the impact on the rest of his agenda you think? >> it's a dead for the moment. that's for sure, don. the influence of factors. a house republican conference that has no experience in getting to yes. republicans as a whole not really ever forming a consensus on what they wanted an alternative to obamacare to be and obamacare changed the paradigm by adding 10s of millions of people to the rolls and the prospect of them going off the rolls turned up the tension and left a lot of people at sorts as to precisely what's going to happen. i think they have to abandoned it for the moment. the president has said over and over he wants a win. he didn't get it here. he thinks tax reform will be that win for him and there's a report they'll do tax reform and
infrastructure at the same time. i think they need to master the art of the deal with one thing at a time. >> and if he goes back to it and loses again, that would not look pretty. he says he'll work with democrats on healthcare. is that likely? >> i think that donald trump has created an atmosphere in washington of hunger games. someone is going to have to die every week and he may ultimately be the one who shoots himself in the foot and head. if you look at the people around him or people who have stuck by him, everyone steams to be getting hurt. it just keeps rubbing off. people who try to help him and there's paul ryan who is ended up practically losing his reputation because of his involvement with health care and reince priebus is probably on his way out if you read the
inside white house gossip. gary cohen is probably on his way out. bannon is strong. jared kushner may be one of the people who has to die if things do not go well in the intelligence committee briefing. of course. >> you mean all this metaphorically, sally? you know what i'm talking about, the hunger games. >> okay. just want to put it in the right context. people get alarmed when you say shooting and things. >> but what i'm talking is all a metaphor. somebody has to go. walk the plank is what i'm talking about. >> that's a better analogy. thank you. >> you had flynn and who might be about to rat on trump, who knows. and you've got all these people on both intelligence committees
in fighting with each other. and i just don't see the atmosphere changing. i think it's so toxic and poisonous and people are scrambling away. i just don't see the cooperation coming in any of the other projects that they try to get involved min. >> here's what robert gets into in this article. you go into great detail about stephen bannon and his pursuit of economic nationalism. is there any doubt in your mind that bannon is the intellectual driver behind the president's agenda? >> there's no doubt and he's achieved a mind meld with the president that goes beyond.
they're peers. bannon is successfully financial just as the president is. he works late in the life. he basically has no social life, much like the president himself as far as i know golfing and yelling at you guys on the tv has no known hobbies. i would inject a note of caution to what sally has just said. sheez i think we've heard this before the 2016 presidential campaign and bodies were thrown over board, pick your metaphor. >> wait a minute, wait a minute. careful. >> but trump prevailed. i don't think he's going to bend washington to his will, but i'm not sure washington is going to bend trump to washington's will. >> do you think democrats would work with the president and vice versa? >> it depends. on a bill like infrastructure, they're going to be tempted to because there may be goodies.
>> on healthcare? >> on healthcare, no. >> because they say repeal is off the table. >> that's right. and unless president trump says we will go into obamacare and try to fix it as it is, the notion thatd democrats were going to come on board and participate in the repealing of the one great piece of legislation, monumental that the democrats participated in, in the last few years was never a realistic possibility and president trump is now tweeting to the effect and saying out loud this is all the democratic party's fault doesn't really pass the smell test. >> i do agree with robert that i don't think congress is going to or washington is going to bend trump to its will. that's never going to happen. but and just don't see -- i think that trying to sort of create some sort of a -- you're going to have to have an incredible blender to put these two together. the trump white house and the
washington quote establishment and you're not going to come out with a smoothie. and i don't see the democrats in any mood to do anything to help trump on any level. and it ends up being determining how these people are seen back in their home districts. and if they get any whiff lat that they're hurting, they're not going to play. >> and by the way, don, and sally, i just mentioned that one body we have not spoken about is not just the democratic party but the senate. obamacare repeal and replace failed in the one body that we thought would be the most hospitable to president trump, the house republicans. he has yet to deal with democrats and the senate. when he tries to get tax reform and the border adjustment tax through the senate, he's going to find a wall waiting for him. >> okay, thank you all. i appreciate it. i'm going to get back to my panel now. please no metaphors.
i love those guys but how am i going to clean this one up? so let's talk about -- i think we talked about this russian investigation a lot. can we talk about -- unless you had something else to add, i want to talk about the president's tweeting and the first thing out of judge geanine's mouth is paul ryan must resign. do you think that's a coincidence? >> it doesn't take judge janene to interpret what was a debacle for the republican party. you can try to blame it on them all you want but the bottom line is it was republicans who defeated the repeal and it's the question is, is it precedent set ing.
you had right wing republicans and the freedom caucus who both had so many issues with this piece of legislation that together they coalesced to bring it down. steve bannon went into freedom caucus meeting and told them you've got to vote for this. and someone said nobody's told me what to do since i was 18 and i didn't listen to them either. i think they've learned, some of the opens thatb they can buck the president, buck leadership and win, pay no consequences. >> they're answering to their constituents back home. and when you have a bill with 1/6 of the economy drafted really not with input from the two main facets of the republican party. those in the tuesday meeting as well as the house freedom caucus and it is brought forth and says we're going to pass this thing in 18 days without more input and that was frustrating to them. and the freedom caucus members were loyal to their people. they were not going to be swayed by bannon or any of the top
officials. it demonstrated more than anything they were going to keep their promises to the people in their district. >> do you think i'm going to ask you this can they really work with democrats on a bill for health care? what's interesting to me is it seems like the affordable care act was the best option out of all of the options on the table and it's not really on the table because it's still here.
and we're back with my panel. will he work with the democrats on health care? >> he could do small bite size thing. he has to give up a comprehensive replacement of the tax code. repeal and replace of obamacare. he can work with moderates to get prescription drugs down. he could say i want money for the defense. he hasn't asked my advice. but if he did, he could do a few things. >> americans want the penalty for not having the insurance repealed and they want the employer mandate repealed so employers can hire more people full time. >> does it have to be repealed or can they make adjustments?
>> those two elements must be repealed and the democrats have made it very clear that they're not -- >> i think on the repeal of the entire affordable care act. >> that's different. >> they're going to have to act soon because in literally five weeks insurers are required to announce whether they're participating in obamacare for the coming year and what their premiums are going to be and most insurers are running for the hills. >> don't you think they're hurting people at home by saying by the white house being so down on obamacare, don't you think it's actually hurting people? >> they lost enough. >> in an ideal world you'd think we could put partisan aside and fix what both sides need fixing and we don't and if democrats are hearing donald trump say i'm going to let obamacare collapse on its own, they're saying you have a 36% approval rating, i'm going to buy a bag of popcorn
and watch you collapse because after this failed attempt, the big problem republicans have is that they now own this ugly baby. >> yeah, it's a pottery barn rule. you break it, you own it. >> this exchange between sean hannity, ted copal also took place. >> we have to give some credit to the american people that they're somewhat intelligent and know the difference between an opinion show and a news show. you're cynical. >> i am cynical. >> you think i'm bad for america? >> yeah. >> you do? >> in the long hall i think you and all these shows -- >> that's sad. >> it's because you're very good at what you do and because you have attracted a significantly more -- let me finish the sentence.
>> i'm listening. with all due respect. >> you have attracted people who are determined that ideology is more important than facts. >> i'm not saying just about sean but there are people who think ideology is more important than fact. and every single night on this program you try to point out what is true and people do not believe the truth, they believe ideology but you've been talking to sean and what does sean say? >> he said it was a good substantive interview. it was about 45 minutes, and he went away feeling good about it. but seeing the one minute that koppel used, he's trying to point out that opinion hosts and sean will openly admit he's a talk show host, use their opinions to sway people and it's not based on fact. which is not true. they use their opinions and sean says i respect the intelligence
of the american people to make up their mind. they know i'm a host and not a journalist, whereas koppel says he's a journalist and he's supposed to be the journalist and he is the one using his opinions. >> i give sean some credit for bringing on ted koppel, a newsman and sean could have expected would be critical. >> it was on ted koppel's show. >> well, i give him credit for having gone on that show. because this whole issue of fake news to real news from ted koppel, it was going to come up. i will tell you something. i really hate this cackling hen between the anchors of the different networks. it's bad enough we have to deal with the president of the united states being a cackling hen but joe scar borough, versus hannity, versus cuomo.
it just drives me crazy. >> i will never -- exactly. always take the high road. and we're all in the same business. >> i don't say sean hannity has changed anybody's mind. he doesn't make arguments. it's all about reinforcing people's true believes. so i don't think he's doing any damage. i don't think he's doing any good. >> but this is like making a argument we shouldn't have marine dowd. the same people who read the editorial page read opinions at night. >> you have 24 hours. when people he's saying what's bad, don't believe facts. when people believe ideology over facts. he's talking about people. >> you want to live in political isolation, fine. if you only want to read things that affirm your believes and
watch things that affirm your believes, you can. we don't understand everybody else. >> that's why i like being on with you. >> i watch and read everything and i think people should do that as an exercise all the time. if you're conservative, you should watch something you believe to be liberal. >> actually they -- >> i just -- i'm liberal, i'm conservative, i'm crazy. i'm just like my mother. no, contrauversy. wrong song. we'll be right back. rough ances through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian. he was 34% eastern european. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors we thought was italian was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about.
tonight the trump administration is cracking down, on sanctuary cities and ranking up deportations even undocumented immigrants who have lived in the u.s. for decades is at risk and one of those people, his wife voted for president trump because she liked the idea of keeping criminals out of the country, never imagining that her husband could be a target. so joining me now is a spokesman
for the family. adam, thank you for joining us. how is the family doing? >> you know, they're doing as best they can. they're obviously distraught right now. they have a father that is going to be removed from this country any day. >> give us a background on this story. your client has been living in the u.s. illegally while checking in with immigration officials every year for five years to show he was say staying out of trouble. so why is he being detained now? >> quite honestly it's the administration. in early february when the administration said that they were going to make individuals with a prior order of removal arb final order of removal a priority as well that's when roberto, like he had been doing the past five years, walked in for his yearly check in and was immediately detained. it wasn't that they went to find
him, he voluntarily walked in to their offices. >> it's per plexing to some people because his wife actually voted for president trump because she believed his campaign promise that he'd only removed bad hombres and when we interviewed his wife, she had this to say. >> i think our president is going to keep all the good people here. he's not going to tear up families. i don't think he wants to do that. he just wants to keep us safe. >> then a couple of days ago she told her local newspaper "i wish i didn't vote at all. i did it for the economy. we needed a change." does she regret voting for president trump? >> absolutely. she only got bits and pieces from what president trump actually was saying during the candidacy. i think we can all agree this run for president was on the news constantly and only heard a
little bit about that and it is saying they're only going to remove dangerous people. so if she had heard absolutely everything and was listening to your show, she may have voted differently. but she listened to him at his word on a couple of instances and unfortunately his word just -- he doesn't follow it. >> which is part of our last conversation about being informed and out of the bubble. you told our producers that helen feels ashamed. not that she wishes she hadn't voted for him. she's ashamed of her vote and her children had been asking her why she did it. what can you tell us about that? what is she saying to them? >> you know, i think these rr saying -- she wasn't full y informed that time. she didn't necessarily believe that president trump was going to start targeting every single
illegal immigrant, including the ones that were law abiding, documented, showing up every single year into i.c.e. immigration offices. she didn't believe that this president was going to start targeting absolutely everyone, especially ones that were contributing to her community. in her mind her husband wasn't really illegal. he was a productive member of the society. >> if he had been here for so long, why wasn't he able to become legal? >> so in the year 2000, he had been here roughly two years at that time. him and helen were trying to take a vacation to niagara falls. they sort of missed their exit started going towards canada. at that time they started to pull a u-turn and ins thought
that was suspicious, detained him and he was detained for two weeks. it's unclear but it sounds like he didn't have adequate legal counsel and he entered into a voluntary deportation order. that voluntary deportation order turned into a final order removal when he didn't leave the country. and he didn't leave the country for very good reasons. he had a then fiance that was pregnant with his first child and she was having a little bit of complications with the pregnancy. he did what any good father would have done and stayed with his wife. >> thank you, adam. i appreciate it. >> of course. we'll be right back. if you have medicare
parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients.
rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long. when president trump spoke of the people he called bad hombres, he probably didn't mean people like roberto bernstein. i want to bring in -- everybody in the studio is cracking up because i said bad andres. i didn't even realize i said it
until my floor director told me. so you guys heard it. you were cracking up i'm sure >> i was like, no, don, no. >> hombres. so, peter we just heard from adam, the attorney for that family. her family doesn't understand why he -- she voted for him. i'm sure the husband doesn't understand why now. what do you think of their case? >> the government has to make decisions about how they prosecute the law. there are limited resources so when you decide you're going to spend taxpayer money to deport this guy, by all accounts a really upstanding person, beloved by their community, been in the united states a very long time and only made this country better at the same time time you're not going to enforce environmental laws. these are decisions the trump administration is making based on its priorities. >> but look i was interning at an immigration nonprofit when obama was president.
i was in a city where people like roberto said to me i was caught up in obama sweep of my house and i'm being deported. i heard these stories first-hand. they happen in every administration. i'm sympathetic to them. there are a lot of good immigrants in this country. roberto is one of them. we also have to be sympathetic to people on the other side of the story like kate. there are sympathetic stories on both sides, and we have to fine a pallose of compromise who takes into the account the innocent person who wants to work here and a person who loses their life to the hands of an immigrant. >> i think we need a humane immigration policy. we do not currently have that. the obama administration has deported a lot of people, actually more people than any other president in u.s. history.
but we're talk about the trump administration here, and donald trump and his administration and seemingly targeted anybody that is an immigrant that has not come here, quote-unquote, legally. and to be frank if y'all had to pass a test for citizenship right now, we probably wouldn't pass either. we need a humane immigration policy that folks coming here paying taxes, these are mothers, fathers, daughters, and uncles, that is currently not what we have. >> it's problematic just how big this issue is. there are some people out there that have to be targeted with those enforcement measures. but this is mbd who's emblem attic of the kind of person whooept in this country. some who helps grow our economy. and that is the challenge i
think that the trump administration is going to face. they're only 60 plus days in, but they're going to face this for the next four, possibly eight years. and the decisions that they make on a daily basis related to enforcement are much more complex than just trying to draw contrast on a campaign trail. >> wow, i think there's a lot of agreement. this panel usually disagrees. >> it's fair. >> i do think someone who owns a business who's a productive member of society,thies are the types of immigrants you want. >> absolutely. and there seems to be that realization, trump's primary candidate -- >> i just wonder if they're going to think twice now. >> there's a larger question. if you look at most of the people crossing the southern border into the united states
now, a very large number of them are refugees fleeing the violence in south america. this is an astonishing kind of moral failure by the president. >> i want to move on now because there's so much to discuss. this is president trump talking about the former president obama golfing. >> obama, it was reported today played 250 rounds of golf. he played more golf last year than tiger woods. this guy plays more golf than people on the pga tour. golf, golf, golf, more, more. learning how to hit, learning how to hit the drive, oh, i want more. i like golf, but i don't know have time. i wouldn't leave the white house very much because like little things where these little trips, they cost you a fortune. if i were in the white house, i don't think i'd ever see -- i
just want to stay in the white house and make great deals. who's going to leave? >> okay, that was president trump when he was campaigning talking about president obama playing golf. that was in 2011 and 2016. president trump has tweeted 26 times about president obama playing golf too much. trump paid for golf. we paid for obama's travel so, then we pay for his golf. i don't have to read them. however, since taking office the president has visited his golf course 13 times. how is this not completely hypocritical? >> every party usesivationing and golfing as a hit against the other party. >> you don't think it's hypocritical? >> a little. >> you don't have an issue with him golfing?
>> i do think there's a difference with president bush who took time versus president obama who -- >> you said things that benefit obama, work outside the golf course. and then you said president is annoyed. he just left the golf course is counting down the minutes until he can go back, #presidentialdebate. you tweeted about it. >> and i'll tell you why. you had president obama who after the beheading of daniel pearl spoke to how upset he was about that and then rushed off to a golf game. i think when we're in a state of war, when we're in a state of mourning, you should take time off of golf. >> hold on. there's somebody you can find anywhere in america right now,
guess what, donald trump has still been at the golf course. i think we should all agree this is contradictory. when it happens to him, all of a sudden it doesn't apply to him. >> it's not just donald trump. the answer to the question is it being hypocritical, the answer is absolutely yes. i crit cans president obama on the economy, healthcare, national foreign policy. i never even once criticized him for playing golf. why? i love to play golf. i know it's relaxing, something you do with friends, something you can do with people you work with. and we knew eventually this was going to happen. we're going to have another president who likes to play golf, and it does look hypocritical. president trump would be well served to say i was wrong, and i'm going to play golf. >> sean spicer said in 2012 about president obama wish i could go on the golf course, but
have to work. wish i could be president. >> i mean if you think about the kind of things president trump has said, we're really kind of scratching the surface here. >> we're done. i don't play golf. >> you probably shouldn't do it after an american citizen is beheaded like president obama did. >> oh, my, god. snap. we'll be back. blemat
will the chair of the intel house committee recuse himself. revelation of a private meeting before the president. >> a top trump aide and russian official, this time it is trump's son-in-law. questions about why he met with a banker appointed by vladimir putin. >> and we have details on the president's next executive order