tv State of the Union With Jake Tapper CNN July 23, 2017 6:00am-7:00am PDT
staff shake-up, shawn spicer is out, a fresh face is in. >> the president is a winner. what we're going to do is a lot of winning. >> can anthony scaramucci right the ship? he'll be here with me in minutes. and trump team under fire. a new report says jeff sessions maybe did discuss trump campaign m matters with the russian ambassador. >> i never had meetings with russian operatives about the trump campaign. >> as the inner circle prepares to talk to congress. al franken is going to grill them and he joins me.
health care in the balance, another effort to repeal obamacare fails. >> it's pretty obvious we had difficulty. republican leaders still say they're dead set on voting this week. >> i intend to keep my promise and i know you will too. >> do you have the votes? >> hello, i'm jake tapper in washington. the state of our union is defiant. congress ignoring the white house's appeals and reaching an agreement to slap new sweeping sanctions on russia from meddling in the presidential election. this now the first real test for president trump on this issue. he is willing to punish vladimir putin for the election interference snt white house says they want to move on. he is really contemplating the first ever veto of the bill, siding with putin over the overwhelming sen overwhelming sentiment? the white house says they to be the a provision in the sanction bill that gives congress the
power to override the president should he choose to ease the sanctions. the house plans to vote on the bill tuesday. it could reach president trump's desk before the end of the month. joining me to discuss this is the incoming white house communication director anthony scaramucci. congratulations on the new job. >> thank you for that. >> you come at a white house when the time that president trump has low approval ratings. he signed into law zero major pieces of legislation. health care is on life support. i guess the big question is president trump facing a communications problem or is it a substance problem? >> did you leave anything out? i mean, you were doing pretty well there. >> i gave you a short version. >> okay. listen, there is obviously a communications problem because there's a lot of things that we've done as it relates to executive orders, bills that have been signed, economic progress. i don't want to cite all the economic data. the economy is super strong. business optimism is way up.
and over the next six months we're going to have phenomenal achievements. i think we'll get the health care situation done. one of my closest friends is secretary of treasury, very confident on tax reform. the president gets those two pillars done which i predict he will over the next six months, you and i will sit down around christmas time and be having a different conversation about the presidency and the communication coming out of the white house and our achievements. these things go up and down, jake, as you know. the president is an experienced business person. he is a very effective politician and i just think we need to deliver the message a little differently than we've been doing it in the past. and my prediction is this stuff is going to start to come to fruition quite quickly. >> as you know, one of the problems that shawn spicer and others in the white house have faced is president trump undermining his own message. you said on friday that the nation needs to see more of the authentic trump.
just this week president trump set up an interview with the "new york times" in which he attacked the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, the special counsel, the former fbi director, the acting fbi director. he then went on a tweet storm saturday that additionally distracted from his agenda. another question is it more authenticity that president trump needs or is it more restraint? >> listen, i don't want to be a career guidance counsellor for the people he's talking about. let me give advice to the people on your show. that's the president. the president likes speaking from the heart. he likes telling what he likes and dislikes. he's the type of coach that i worked very well with in high school football. it's okay with me if the president doesn't like certain things that i'm doing. we're all on the same team. i would prefer that direct and immediate feedback as opposed to anything else. what i don't like about washington if, we say one syllable or one sentence this guy said something bad about me then all of a sudden they have to be my mortal enemy of i don't think that's how it works in american business.
i consider across the table from somebody that worked with me and my company that i founded and say here are five things i don't like about what you're doing and we have to fix it. by the way, tomorrow i'm having a meeting with the communications staff and say i don't like the leaks. so we're going to stop the leaks. if we don't stop the leaks, i'm going to stop you. let me just finish. so for me, i would tell people that that's the president. he is 71 years old. we're not going to change him. by the way, the last time i checked, he wouldn't presidency handedly of he's going to win it gh again in 2020. he's our word. learn to work with and operate with him. >> congressional leaders reached an agreement on sanctions to punish russia for the election meddling. is president trump going to sign the russian sanctions bill? >> we got to ask president trump that. it's my second or third day on the job. my guess is that he's going to make that decision shortly. you know, there is a lot of questions out there, jake. you know this is another thing i
don't like about the process. this man, our president, he has phenomenal instincts, a lot of the stuff that people said in the mainstream media that was supposedly true turned out that it wasn't true. i think there were three or four weeks ago there were 17 intelligence agency that's were saying something. then we realized that there is only one intelligence agencies. i'm just saying there is a lot of disinformation out. there somebody said to me yesterday, i won't tell you who, that if the russians actually hack this situation and spill out those e-mails, you would have never seen it. you would have never had any evidence of them. meaning they're super confident in the deception skills and hacking. my point is all of the information isn't on the table yet. i don't know who this anonymous person is that said if the russian has done it we wouldn't have been able to detect it. but it is the unanimous consensus -- >> how about it was the
president, jake. i talked to you yesterday. he called me from air force one. he basically said, you know, this is -- maybe they did it. maybe they didn't do it. i'm going to maintain for you -- hold on a second. >> this is exactly theish uchlt we have experts, the u.s. intelligence agencies unanimous both obama appointees and trump appointees, the director of national intelligence, the head of the national security agency, the head of the fbi, i mean, all of these intelligence experts saying russia hacked the intelligence -- russia hacked the election and tried toinlt fear to interfere in the election. no votes were changed. president trump is contradicting it and you're siding with president trump. >> i didn't say i was siding with president trump. he hasn't made the decision yet to sign that bill one way or the other. and so when he makes that decision, i will 100% side with him. because i am his communications director. i'm his advocate on a show like this. last time i checked the way the
founding fathers put the constitution together, they made one person the commander in chief. it happens to be president donald j. trump. he'll make that decision when he makes it. then you -- i'll come back on the show and explain it to you and explain to you why he made the decision that way. but what i'm saying to you and you may not want to agree with me and we can litigate this, there is a lot of disinformation out there, jake. and so one of the things i'm going try to do is speak very transparently to you and the american people. get the president's message out there. i have found in my life experience with president trump when he's out there himself and he's being his fresh authentic self, it's very appealing to the people of the united states. and we don't need to closet him up or coach him on certain things. we need to allow him to be himself so we can get the policies out there. they would be very good for the american people. >> this is exactly the point. because here you have a bill, legislation that was passed 98-2 in the u.s. senate. the house is about to pass it.
it will probably also be an overwhelming vote to sanction russia and he tells you that he doesn't believe russia is trying to interfere in the election, even though the overwhelming body of the u.s. senate which is controlled by republicans and his own intelligence experts are telling him the opposite. you're saying you're going to side with the president. don't you owe a duty to the truth? >> hold on. what about the conversation are you missing, jake? there are checks and balances in the system for a reason. the president will make that decision when he make it. you're telling me that something is true that in fact could in fact be true. i don't have the information in front of me. if i think it's true behind closed doors, i'll turn to the president very directly and say, sir, i think this stuff is true. i don't have it in front of me right now. here's what i know about the president, he may not like it.
he has phenomenal instifncts. he is a phenomenal politician. he started two short years ago and he's already six months into his presidency. how many people can do that, jake? being an american successful business person and television personality, hit a button on june 16th, 2015 and race his way to the presidency clearing out 18 people. you know a lot of people that can do that? i don't know a lot of people that can do that. >> there's no question it was a phenomenal victory. it was a huge surprise. it shocked the system. all of that is true. and it's true as of november 8th. my question right now is the fact that a political foe of the united states, russia, interfeared in the u.s. election according to every intelligence expert both under the obama administration and under the trump administration. one of the reasons he's upset about it is that this sort of --
the mainstream media position on this that they interfered in the election, it actually in his mind what do you suggest? are you going to delegitimatize his victory? >> no. >> is that going to make his victory illegitimate? >> no. >> he legitimately won the presidency. >> absolutely. >> do we both agree on that? >> he legitimately won the presidency. absolutely. >> so at the end of the day, let him make the decision and as i said to you once i got a security clearance and i meet with those people myself, if i think it's true, i'm going to turn to the president very honestly. we have a great relationship. sir, i think this is true. >> that's good that you'll do that, anthony. the point is like -- >> i'm doing it on the show. >> it's almost irrelevant if you think it's true and what president trump says. it's unanimous con sense yusens intelligence community that this happened. it is a threat to the united states. russia is going to try to do it again. that is also the consensus. >> i got all of. that but let me tell you something. a person that's going to be
super, super tough on russia is president donald trump. if he believes that -- >> but he doesn't. he doesn't. that's the problem. that's the problem. >> you know what the problem is? you know what the problem is? let him run the presidency the way he wants to run the presidency. >> he is. >> he's representing the american people. the people voted him in. and so he'll make the judgement. he'll make the decision when the time is right. what i don't like about the whole direction of this stuff in the mainstream immediate yaenme narrative is you're saying this stuff is 100% true. if he makes a decision that it's 100% true, he'll be super tough on russia. but let him do it at his own time and pace. he's not hurting anybody by doing it at his own time and pace, jake. >> i think that the issue is that the intelligence -- i didn't say 100% true. i said it's the consensus of the intelligence community that it is true. the issue is that president
trump, as you raise the subject, is so worried, it seems, based on things you said and he said that people are trying to delegitimatize his presidency based on what the intelligence community said is a fact. he so focused on that that he's not focused on protecting the united states from another hack. >> he's actually really not that focused on it. he just happens to not like it. he is super focused on his agenda. he is super focused on getting the hk refo the health care reformed. he's super focused on cleaning out all the deregulation -- all the unnecessary regulation in the united states. he's super focused on manufacturing jobs. 50,000 new manufacturing jobs and getting people back to work in the united states much that's the stuff he's super focused on. >> he's not tweeting about those things. he's tweeting about russia and hillary clinton. >> because he doesn't feel -- he doesn't feel that he's being effectively defended in the mainstream media with the nonsense narratives out. there we're going to change that
for him. we're going to defend him very, very aggressively when there's nonsensical sfuf being sa nonsensical stuff being said about him. >> president trump asserted this weekend in a tweet he has the complete power to pardon. this is what he wrote. we all agree the president has power to pardon, why think of that when only crimes so far the leaks against u.s., fake news? anthony, who is the president thinking about pardoning? >> go over the tweet one more time. i'm a pretty good proof reader. he is saying he doesn't have to pardon anybody. >> so far. >> no. >> i'll read the tweet again. i'll read it again. that's fine. >> put the tweet back up. there. >> while i'll agree the u.s. president has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when all crimes so far is leaks against us fake news? so he's talking about pardoning. >> jake, let's cut through it all. you and i right here, let's cut
through it all. you're basically saying that tweet is suggesting that the president is going to pardon himself and every unof his family members. what you are suggesting? >> i'm saying -- >> he's not going to do that. >> anthony, i'm suggesting one thing. the president tweeted about pardons. i'm asking who is he thinking about pardoning? >> nobody. >> that's all i'm suggesting. >> nobody. >> the president is thinking about pardoning nobody because it has been coming up a lot. there's an undercurrent of no nonsensical stuff. >> he asked advisors about it. >> this is the problem with the whole system. he's the presidentst united states. if i turn to one of my staff members and ask them a question, they run out to the news media and tell everything i'm thinking about, is that fair to the president? >> if you turn to one of your partners and say do you have $100,000 for bail money in case i need it, people say why is he talking about bail money? >> jake, that's a super ridiculous hypothetical. i appreciate you're on the fly
trying to think of them. the truth of the matter is that the president's not going to have to pardon anybody because the russian thing is a nonsensical thing. i was there early on in the campaign. i didn't have any interactivity with the russians. it is a complete bogus and nonsensical thing. and this is the stuff that happens in washington. >> anthony -- >> it is scandals incorporated. you have to manufacture the scandals to take the president off of his agenda. we'll put the president right back on his agenda. >> there was an fbi investigation. >> he needs to be presented to the american people. >> there was an fbi investigation. there is a senate intelligence committee investigation. republicans control the senate. >> of course. >> there is a house intelligence committee investigation. republicans control the house. none of that is manufactured, none of that. >> have they found any evidence that the president or anybody in the campaign has clueded with the russians? >> i don't know. >> okay. you are know what? a lot of people said. that like you're saying with 100% certainty they have
affected the election or turned over the e-mails. there are a lot of people saying with 100% certainty that there is not one person in the trump campaign that colluded with the russians. paul manafort is going to testify this week. jared kushner is going to testify tomorrow. i predict that is last time that jared kushner talks about the russians. he was very honest guy, jake. >> you said, i have no reason to think that he's not honest. >> very honest. they'll be done testifying. there is nothing to the story. and we'll be moving on. >> you said just a few minutes ago that nobody in the campaign met with anybody -- >> that i saw, sir. that i saw. >> okay. but we know. >> i didn't taenld eveattend ev meeting. >> you didn't -- did you know about the meeting that donald trump jr., jared kushner and paul manafort had with a number of russians including that woman? >> i didn't know about the meeting. but what i don't like about the way the thing was hand frld a communications and strategy per
inspective, i think donald trump jr. got bad advice. they told him to put out a small statement. donald trump jr. is a very honest, very high intel rgrity person. i have known him for a long time. there are guys on wall street and said criminals are bad guys and everyone in the system said they were, i want out there and said they weren't. and i was proven right. i'm telling you, donald j. trump jr. is a great guy. dent do anything wrong. i just think the mistake was in the way it was communicated. we started with one person and now we have an auditorium of russians that he was speaking to or whatever the hell it was. it's ridiculous. >> let me finish, jake. it was a nonevent meeting. and he's a political neophyte in june of 2016. someone from the clinton organization would put an arkansas lawyer in that meeting. but it you're trying to suggest and tell me that people on the other side wouldn't have taken a meeting like that, that's ridiculous, jake. >> i don't know it's
hypothetical. there are a lot of republicans, a lot of republicans and i have asked if you like donald trump jr. were told that russian government attorney wants to meet with you to provide incriminating evidence about your political opponent directly coming from the russian government to help you and hurt your opponent, would you take that meeting? i have asked republican after republican and every single one of them said absolutely no. so when you say donald trump jr. didn't do anything wrong, a the love people would call what he did wrong. >> jake, i have to stop you. you're talking to republican experienced political people, politicians and political operatives. >> i'm talking to people who know that russians are a geopolitical foe of the united states and you don't take dirt from their foreign government intelligence service on your political opponent. >> i stand by the president's tweet which your production people will find that a lot of people would have taken that meeting. donald trump jr. loves his father. he was an unbelievable
campaigner. he is one of the reasons -- can you ask david urban, he's one of the reasons we won the state of pennsylvania. this guy, my friend donald trump jr. eastern i traveled all over the state of pennsylvania. the first time the republicans won it in 32 years. we should be talking about that. we should be talking about the president's agenda. the kid took a nothing meeting, i think reince priebus called it a nothing berber since that is overused. >> would you have taken that meeting? >> i'm not sure. how is that? i'm going to answer it honestly and tell that you i'm not sure much since i went to harvard law xooshlgs school, i probably would have asked a few people. someone would say get a cutout to see if there is any liblg mittcy to it. once they realized there is no legitimacy it to, people were walking out or on iphones. it was a nonevent, jake. we want to make that into a two week, four week news cycle. that's fine. it was a nonevent. it had no impact on the campaign. >> the only reason i brought it up is because you said nobody from the campaign met with anybody from russia. let me ask you about the pardon
and move on. does the white house -- >> time out a second. let me restate. that i said no -- i didn't see anybody do that. and nobody in my knowledge for the last year. >> my point is -- you didn't see it. that doesn't mean it didn't happen. >> i agree with. that but that was a ridiculous nothing meeting. >> okay. does the white house believe the president has the power to pardon himself? >> i don't know. i don't think -- we haven't even really looked into that. i don't know. i took constitutional law from larry tribe. and if he is listening, i know he doesn't like the president. i did get an a minus in your course. i don't know if he has the right or not. that is another one of the stos stupid hypotheticals. we don't have to worry about it. let's let the next president answer the question for you. i don't think we need to be discussing it. >> my colleague noted in january
2016 you wrote a rather scathing op-ed for bfoxbusiness.com aime at donald trump saying unbridled demagoguery has driven the gop to an inflection point from which there is no turning back. a lot of people will read that op-ed and read the tweets you spent the weekend deleting that were pro gun control, pro action on climate change and they'll think, wow this guy is willing to suppress everything he believes in order to get close to power. what is your answer to that? >> see, that's a ridiculous washington sort of narrative. that is, number one, totally not true. number two, all i'm doing by deleting the tweets is sending people a message. what i hate -- here's what i hate about it. i hate a lot of things about washington but we only have a one hour show. one thing i really hate about washington. we have this political purity test on policy. and so if i'm for something and then i'm against something then all of a sudden i'm a hypocrite. the greatest leaders known to man kind, winston churchill
started out as a liberal and then he became a conservative. reagan became a conservative. some of the smartest minds and political leaders had changed and evolved and adapted their opinions. >> but you evolved -- >> let me finish. i didn't say that donald trump was a demagogue. where does it say in that article that donald trump is a demagogue? >> you were referring to demagoguery. the whole article -- >> let me tell you something about demagoguery that i don't like. okay? demagoguery, okay, creates a lot of nonsense like this. so we're going to dial back all of that stuff and we're going to focus on the agenda. >> people should read the op-ed. >> read the op-ed. >> it is clearly referring to donald trump. you're talking about the person that is going to win the primaries and experienced several bankruptcies and you tied moral bankruptcy to donald trump. >> okay. jake, you're doing a really good job on this.
so you're trying to nail me. you're going to play the gotcha thing with me. >> no. >> it's fine. i don't care. who doesn't care? the president doesn't care. when i was with -- first of all, i tried to back him early. he tweeted about that yesterday. he called me from air force one to remind me about. that he said he wasn't running at that time. i told him i had a back somebody and then he's like what you are like a horse race? a horse race play here? look, i'm involved in the political establishment. i'm going to back somebody. i chose scott walker. >> this is back in january 2016 when trump was in the race. this is before the new hampshire primary. >> i was supporting scott walker at the time. i'm a very competitive person. i have no problem being combative. when mr. trump then the candidate, the president went after the hedge fund industry, that's when i hit back on him on maria's show. we were laughing about it yesterday. if you want to bring up the fact that i was supporting another person in politics and then switch to the eventual republican nominee and working
for the republican nominee and that makes me a hypocrite or dishonest or -- >> i didn't call you a name. >> whatever it s whatever you're trying to stugt uggest by bring this story up. i do not care. i love the president. i got to know him unbelievably well over the last 18 months. he's a fphenomenal fighter for the american people. i grew up in a middle class family where we had a tight budget. i see people come up to the president that are struggling. i'll say smig to you on national tv. i should have seen the economic desperation in the neighborhoods like the one i grew up in. i did not see it. mr. trump then the candidate saw it. he now has the opportunity and the mantle of the president stoi change it. i'm going to be there with him trying to change it every stepst way. if i said something about him when i was working for another candidate, mr. trump, mr. president, i apologize for. that can we move on off of that? i know you and i have moved off of. that jake hasn't moved off of that, obviously. that's okay, jake.
i don't care. but i'm going to be working for you and i'm going to serve the american people and we're going to get your agenda out into the heartland where it belongs and we're going to turn this thing into a movement, a bigger movement than we have already. >> i love how you're talking to one specific viewer right now, the most important audience that there s. >> i like talking to him. but you know who else i'm talking to snt people i grew up with. >> i get it. >> they get me and they get him. >> i grew up in a very similar neighborhood. >> he's going to win again, jake. he's going to win again. i'll bring a box of kleenex over to cnn. >> we don't need kleenex. >> he'll win again, jake. we're going to get this agenda prosecuted and win again. >> last question four, you've been a good sport. you've been here all this morning. there are reports twheekd thhis that ez loved your performance on friday. vicinity checked the twitter. maybe he is talking about how much you're killing it right now. are the cameras going to come back to the briefing? will we see you more at that podium? >> okay. so let's talk about that.
so sarah huckabee is the president secretary f you're asking me for my personal opinion and maybe the president be upset for giving my personal opinion, put the cameras on. no problem. i don't think we need to have cameras off. but if the president doesn't want the cameras on, guess what? we're not going to have cameras on. it's going to be up to him. i think we should put the cameras on. i think sarah does a great job. she's incredibly warm person. she's incredibly authentic. what i told sarah on friday, you get the big office. i'll take the small communications office. you deserve the big office because you're taking the hits from the press and bring the press into the office. let's soften up our relationship with the press. they're tough on us. let's be tough on them. i have no problem with. that and my job as i see it, jake, is that these people work with me and i'm there to serve them. if you think about the american military, the leaders eat last. if you think about the american military, the leaders job is to serve the people that are working alongside of them. so me, from sarah hucka bee,bee
think she is incredible. every day we have to make ourselves incrementally better. the only thing si ask sarah, i love the hair and makeup person we had on friday. i'd like to continue to use the hair and makeup person. >> you can swing by here. we have hair and makeup here. >> you have a lot on today. you look very tan, jake. you look tan and refreshed. >> anthony scaramucci, thank you so much for being here. we appreciate it. we have lots to talk b the incoming white house communications director anthony scaramucci saying the president told him if the russians hacked and released e-mails, we would have never seen it. senator al frank season here to respond to everything you just heard next. this is crabfest at red lobster. and right now, we're serving up more delicious crab than ever. classic favorites like crab lover's dream. and new dishes like southern king crab
and dueling crab legs with delicious dungeness and sweet snow crab. it's all happening at crabfest. and crabfest is only happening at red lobster. now this is seafood. the unpredictability of a flaree may weigh on your mind. thinking about what to avoid, where to go, and how to work around your uc. that's how i thought it had to be. but then i talked to my doctor about humira, and learned humira can help get and keep uc under control... when certain medications haven't worked well enough. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain
fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. raise your expectations and ask your gastroenterologist if humira may be right for you. with humira, control is possible. its witnessed 2 diy duos,s 31 crashes,: 4 food fights, and the flood of '09. it's your paradise perfected with behr premium plus paint. the best you can buy starting under $25. only at the home depot. when you're close to the people you love, does psoriasis ever get in the way of a touching moment? if you have moderate to severe psoriasis, you can embrace the chance of completely clear skin with taltz. taltz is proven to give you a chance at completely clear skin. with taltz, up to 90% of patients had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. in fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin.
do not use if you are allergic to taltz. before starting you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you are being treated for an infection or have symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz. including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. now's your chance at completely clear skin. just ask your doctor about taltz. now's your chance at completely clear skin. it's so... quiet. is it, too quiet? it's awful. yeah. feel at home, pretty much wherever you are. t-mobile is america's best unlimited network. we come into this world needi♪ others. then we are told it's braver to go it alone. ♪
but there is another way to live. ♪ a way that sees the only path to fulfillment- is through others. ♪ welcome back to "state of the union." hours before friday night deadline, leaders of the senate judiciary committee struck a dweel donald trump jr. and paul manafort. they no long ver to testify in a public hearing this coming week. in exchange the two turn over records and they'll be interviewed privately. the deal comes just days after donald trump jr. said he would testify under oath.
joining me now is senator al franken of minnesota. he's a key member of the senate jew dushry committ judiciary committee. >> thank you for having me. >> i want to start with something that incoming white house communications director anthony scaramucci just told me. take a listen. >> somebody said to me yesterday, i won't tell who you, that if the russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it. you would have never had any evidence of them. meaning, they're super confident in their deception skills in hacking. my point is all of the information isn't on the table yet. >> anthony, you're making a lot of assertions here. i don't know who the anone puym person is. >> how about it was the president, jake. >> okay. it's the consensus of the intelligence community -- >> he called me from air force one. >> so? >> i thought when he brought it up, i thought it was a
disinterested intelligence expert. >> originally. but actually -- >> you asked a good question. >> i don't know who this person s and he said it was the president of the united states. so here we have the consensus of both obama administration and trump administration intelligence community leaders, naem tru people that trump appointed and president trump still doesn't believe it. >> that's -- what can you say? it's just bizarre. i mean, it's clear that we're seeing now that members of his campaign met with russians even though they were testifying before the judiciary committee answering a question from oh, say me. >> jeff sessions. >> yeah. >> saying that he had not met with russians during the campaign. now it turns out, it sound like
that kislyak said they net april which is a meeting that we -- that he hasn't said that he had. and in which they talked about subjects regarding the campaign and about russia, about sanctions and -- >> so you're talking about a "washington post" report that quotes government officials saying that there were intercepts of ambassador kislyak talking with presumably the kremlin or people back in moscow. >> yep. >> about his meetings with sessions. do you know anything about the intercepts? >> i don't. what i do know is what i read which is that i guess someone in kislyak's position can sometimes distort what he said when he is reporting back to say -- to build himself up. i also saw in those reports that kislyak isn't that type. and seems to me that since attorney general sessions hasn't been terribly truthful regarding
these things that it's more likely that what kislyak was saying was the case. >> do you want sessions to come back to the senate judiciary? >> absolutely. >> are the republicans -- do they agree with you? >> i think the chairman grassley does want him to come back. i'm not sure there is some order involved in terms of i thought we were going to get donald trump jr. and manafort in. we're going to have them behind closed doors. i intend to be asking them questions. >> let's talk about that. donald trump jr. said very clearly that he was willing to testify under oath. take a listen. >> you said in a tweet you would fully cooperate with any investigation. >> of course. >> completely. >> 100%. >> turn over everything you want and you feel you already have? >> yes. >> and you have nothing to hide? you want -- that means you'll testify under oath? >> all of it.
>> nothing to hide. you're willing to testify under oath, all of that. except we're being told now that they're going to testify behind closed doors and not under oath. is that good enough? >> no. that's not good enough. they should be under oath. and i did not know it would be not under oath. it should be under oath. i'll be talking to -- >> that's our understanding. >> okay. well, that's the first i heard of that. you may be right. i don't know. >> are you disappointed that it's -- the very least we know it's going to be behind closed doors. are you disappointed that grassley cut that deal? >> if it's not under oath i am. yeah. i think that they need to be under oath. and they need to release all the documents. i mean he didn't say he would testify publicly. but under oath he said. so he should definitely do that. i have a lot of questions for him. >> should the transcripts be
released? >> i think they should be. >> can you give us an idea of the questions? >> i -- i would like to ask some questions that had he had other meetings with russians? >> do you know of any? >> no. but he seems like if you ask -- you're a really great questioner. you asked him who that authority was on russian hacking. and it turned out to be the president. who isn't actually very authoritative on all of that. >> well, he definitely has a take that is at odds with his own intelligence community. >> yeah. >> the white house has been questioning the credibility of robert mueller's investigation by noting the people he brought onboard to conduct the investigation and have given money to democrats in the past. if people were leading an investigation into you or one of your friends, one of your colleagues and it turned out one of your democratic colleagues and turned out that they had given a lot of money to donald trump, wouldn't you that i is a fair question to ask?
>> well, why don't we ask the lawyers for donald trump where they gave money. >> but you see my point. is it a fair question to raise about the investigators? >> yeah. so, for example, trump gave money to hillary clinton and to chuck schumer. >> i think he was chuck schumer's biggest donor at one point. >> probably. and ty cobb, the lead attorney now gave money to obama. he gave money to the current junior senator from the state of minnesota. >> he gave him money to you? >> yeah. he did. so that's very suspicious. >> so i think he should leave, frankly. >> so you think he's giving money to you? >> disqualify him? >> i think it would be, yes. >> last question. your fellow democratic senator
in the state of michigan which is close to minnesota -- >> gendepends what you call clo. it's a great lakes state. >> i don't mean emotionally, geographically. she might face a challenge from kid rock. the performer. there is a long list of celebrities starting with the president but also arnold schwarzenegger, your former governor jesse ventura who were dismissed when they first talked about running for office. >> right. >> what's your take on the challenge that kid rock might pose? >> well, you know, i ran, of course. and had been a comedian. >> she's done an incredibly great job on the ad committee, both the chairman and ranking member. she is great on mental health.
she's been a leader on. that that is something i care a lot about. i'm going to be supporting her against whom ever that nominee is. and i think that kid rock will have to make his case. >> al franken, thank you so much. good to see you. we'll have you back soon. appreciate it. joining me now, the man president trump called out at a private dinner for holding a a vote. rand paul, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> so you played a key role in the collapse of the senate republican health care bill. majority leader mitch mcconnell is looking to revive it. he is looking to hold a debate tuesday to begin. will you vote yes to begin debate on the bill? >> the real question is what are we moving to? what are we opening debate to? last week senate leadership said it would be a clean repeal. like the 2015 bill. in fact, the 2015 bill that we all voted for. i think that's a good idea. the other alternative is the senate leadership bill that
doesn't repeal obamacare, is obamacare light and loaded with pork? it's become a pork fest where they're dumping billions of dollars into pet projects for individual senators. i'm not for that because i'm just not for taxpayer money going to rich insurance executives and uber wealthy insurance industry. i just don't think the taxpayer should be funding that. so it depends on what we go to. i told them i'll vote for a motion to proceed if we're proceeding to the clean repeal vote if it fails, they can put up the monstrosity that they want to put forward. i'm not for that. i'm just not for the taxpayer subsidizing private industry. >> you've talked up the idea of repealing obamacare first and then worrying about a replacement down the road. back in january you said something different. take a listen. >> we need to think through how we do this and it's a huge mistake for republicans if they do not vote for replacement on the same day as we vote for repeal. >> so that was your take in
january. a huge mistake then. why do you have a different opinion today? >> actually, i still like that guy from january. i still agree with him. really i've always been talking about replacing the same time. the problem is republicans can't seem to agree on what replacement means. to me, replacement is legalizing inexpensive insurance. that means the federal government doesn't regulate it and allow the sale of inexpensive insurance again, legalizing the ability to join an association across state lines. i thought that is what we as republicans believed in. but it turns out many republicans actually believe in this giant insurance bailout super fund. nearly $200 billion that they're going to give to the rich insurance executives and rich insurance companies. so i'm not for that. and so if we can do both at the same time, absolutely, i'm still for that. i could even say you could do it in separate bills. and that's the other thing i've been saying. i'm looking for a way to get this done. if you divide it into a cleaner repeal, then you take the pork
fest and big government spending and put that into another bill, i think they probably get democrats. i don't know a democrat that won't vote for a big spending bill. they could work with democrats if they want bigger government and let conservative vote for a repeal of obama care. >> you're clearly disappointed in the fellow senate republicans that voted for a clean repeal in the past. but have said that they are not willing to do so now. i guess the question is how disappointed are you? will you be comfortable with conservative groups targeting the senators? challenges? face primary - >> i think disappointed is the right way to put it. you know, i think what is really occurred to me is so many of these republicans in washington, not out in the land when you go home you find that most republicans still want full repeal. but what disappoints me about senate republicans, they seem to have insufficient confidence in what made america great. what made america great were not insurance regulations, insurance stabilization funds. what made us great is leaving
people free to trade with each other, not regulating trade, getting the government out of it. there has to be regulations at the state level. but having this -- they're going to keep in place the obamacare regulatory structure that causes the death spiral. the death spiral will continue. >> narrator: republican plaunde republican plan. they're going to give billions to insurance companies. it's really not what we're for. it's not what ever were for. i don't know how we got there. >> should there be primaries? >> that's for somebody else to decide. the thing is i'm disappointed. we'll continue to distress xpres d stress disappointment. we want voters to do what we said. and we should have confidence that we with present market alternatives. 27 million people don't have insurance under obamacare. half can't get it because it's too expensive because of obamacare regulations. we should be for repealing all of the regulations and saying we're going to get those people insurance. we're not going to have people losing insurance like cbo says.
we're going to actually have people insured that never could get insurance under obamacare. but we can't make the argument because these people don't believe in the marketplace like they ought to. >> i want to ask you about made in america week. president trump, of course, when he took the oath of office he made a very clear promise. >> we'll follow two simple rules. buy american and hire american. >> i'm not going to go throughout litany of trump clothing products that are made in china and other parts of the world that are not america. but we learned this week in addition that trump's businesses have once again taken businesses to hire foreign workers. his golf course in florida filed documents to bring in additional foreign workers under the visa program. is this a problem for the president saying one strong thing about buying and hiring american while his businesses do the complete opposite? >> you know, i think all of us have this goal to buy american.
we have to think this thing through. you have to go beneath the surface to get and scratch beneath the surface. for example, i get shirts at walmart. i get them for $7 sometimes. amazing deal. target, same way. and then the thing is that that money that you save for ordinary working people is an enormous amount. it is between $800 to $1,000 the ordinary person saves. that stuff is not made here. they're richer because they got their shirts a lot cheaper. used to be a shirt just a regular button up shirt might be $20, $25. and still might be in places. at walmart, it's $7. so that savings though allows working class people to have savings to get a television set, to go on vacation, to buy gas for their truck. so trade is really a good thing. we can't get too caught up in exactly where it's made. but we want our country to be strong by lowering regulations and taxes so we can compete. >> and it's an interesting point about helping low income individuals who shop at target and walmart.
but, of course, the membership fee at the golf course is $200,000 a year much it's no really relevant when it comes to the foreign workers that they're trying to hire. >> yeah, it's a different situation. i think for arguing whether trade is good or bad and trying to figure it out, i think we all want american jobs and i think it's important to know that we have a corporate income tax of 35%. i talked to a lot of businesses in kentucky. i try to make sure that workers know that if we think oh, we're going to tax the evil corporations, they'll be less american jobs and less, you know, profit to be spread around the american economy. you have to lower the corporate income tax. you also got to lower the regulatory burden. this is what the previous administration was killing america with. so there is a way to get to the buy america philosophy if we will try to get rid of the regulations, excessive regulations and taxes that make us less competitive with the world. >> as somebody who cites the constitution all the time, holds it up as an important document, i'm wondering about your view,
"the washington post" reported this week that president trump asked his advisors about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself. as an amateur constitutional scholar, if i can kel you thcal, does the president have the authority to pardon him snefl. >> i think in all likelihood he z i think some hasn't been adjudicated. i think what the courts typically find is when something happens politically between separation of powers or between a power of one particular body, a lot of times they kind of say it's up to the electors to decide this. so a lot of things get kicked back in to political sphere. i think in a political sphere i would caution someone to think about pardoning themselves or family members or et cetera. i also understand his frustration. you know, what's going on here and i think the person who put it best say guy named herbert butterfield, he said if you look back at something in history, even recent history and say, well, there must be collusion, you find it everywhere you look
because every time someone met with the russian you think it's part of the master conspiracy plan. when in reality it's your mind create something sort of meaning to history that is actually much more random. >> the tones of herbert butterfield. thank you so much, rand paul. always great to you have on. >> thank you. >> you can feel the love at the white house podium. sd . >> i'm very loyal to the president. >> i think he has some of the best political instincts in the world and perhaps in history. thank you. >> that was new white house communication director anthony scaramucci. we are here with our panel now and david urban who won pennsylvania for trump and, scaramucci doing double duty said a lot of very forceful things. mike allen wrote that trump is
building a wartime cabinet. that's part of what's going on right now in terms of the shuffling. is scaramucci part of that? >> i think anthony is a guy that the president likes, has a great deal of confidence in. was on the team early, great-looking guy, big head of hair and engage and pleasure to watch as a smart guy. the president trusts him, likes him. and i don't think he's building a war-type guy but putting in some new players. sean spicer, like the guy. known him for a long time. anthony brings a different skillset to the table. >> he's a happy warrior. i did have to note, though, the tweets that he had before. if you told me the president was going to point head of communications who was pro-choice, anti-gun, pro gay marriage who praised hillary clinton and callanti-wall, you ,
i'd say, that's my kind of guy. >> doesn't hold those positions any more. >> so, i would say that as a communication's director you are there and you represent your client. anthony represents the client of the president of the united states. antho anthony's views aren't material. >> don't you think inside the base there will be some, what is this? >> i think the base will judge performance by performance not by anthony's views. >> what did you think? >> xi think it's clear the rnc group was rocky and as a result he doesn't have to reach out all the time to trump and say, look, i'm proving myself and you see that in a more relaxed demeanor. there is love there. the question is that love for a purpose which is to bolster himself with the president in which he can go in there and say, look, here's what i think we can do. bring a plan for communications
that doesn't seem to me the white house has right now. it's just personalities instead of a portfolio and a plan. if he can bring a plan and convince the president that would do him well, i think they would be moving in a better direction. >> donald trump continues tatreat his life as if it's a reality tv. to me not a communication's problem here. that's what what the issue is. an unpopular president pursuing unpopular policies and also getting worsening and deepening with legal problems. that's where we are with this president right now. the things he has been able to pass because he hasn't been able to pass any major piece of legislation. the muslim ban, paris accord, pulling us out of that deal, trying to get rid of obamacare. that's what he's trying to do. that is the problem is donald trump, not who the communication director is. >> unemployment, right, we've heard, low unemployment here. 4.4%.
stock market through the roof. regulations, cut. defense spending up. this president is doing a lot that is not being communicated effectively. i think you heard john king talk about it earlier this morning. i think you'll hear a lot more of that. >> but here's the thing, so, he has these themes of the week. last week was made in america, which is ironic because you're talking about a campaign that was made in russia. anyway, with that, he blows it up. donald trump blows it up every week. so, he cannot keep on message. >> that was something i tried to get at with him. anthony basically seemed to send a message that there is no getting the president can't step on himself because he's the president, we all work for him. >> i think there's some truth in the fact. he's equal parts disease and remedy sometimes. >> the president you're talking about. >> he is the reason he is in the white house and because he did things drastically differently that he got there. reason he thinks he should keep
doing this. if there's someone on an infrastructure week, listen, this is how we should do things and you shouldn't blow it up. they could be on a slightly better path than they are on now. >> you have a president that is now talking about this issue of pardoning. there is, there's a reason why there is no -- there's no precedent for can a president pardon himself? had the moral depravity to think he's above the law. if he did, let's just assume that he does something dramatic like that. he would throw the country into a constitutional crisis. you would have that going up to the supreme court. he's appointed the fifth vote on the supreme court. anthony kennedy, please stay on. if he did that, congress would step -- you'd see the crack in rise up. congress would step in. if he decided he was going to fire mueller, state attorney's general stepping in. the congress putting -- >> he's also not doing those
things yet. >> but he's raised the specter. >> i think it's a long, long way, governor. what the president tweeted out, i'm not looking, the president's authority to pardon is complete. not what it said. let's not read -- >> why would he tweet that? >> the president, as you heard, i watched your show last night with michael smerconish. you look at all your options, they're on the table. >> they're saying to mueller, you are going to reign in and i disagree completely. and i think the president was saying my ability to pardon is complete. don't read that more expansively. >> usually always a lot of noise coming out of the white house and you're not really, it's not really clear what signal to pay attention to. he made it real clear last week. his intensions on what he wanted to do, which is, if he wants to either obstruct or derail this
investigation. and if he doesn't do that, he wants to get sessions out of the way and to make sure that mueller is fired. he made that very, very clear. >> i disagree. look -- i disagree with you. he said if i had known sessions would recuse himself, i would have never given him the job. >> the president was entitled to that information before you appoint somebody. i'm going to step down as soon as i get appointed, you should know that before you get appointed. >> he was named in november, his testimony for confirmation hearing was january and then he recused himself in march. how was he supposed to know in november that any of this stuff was going to happen? >> i understand. but i understand the president, he would have gone to the president beforehand and say, no, before he did. i think he should have had a discussion with the president is my point. >> bring up one thing that doesn't have to do this. all unanimous thinking about john mccain and looking at the picture that his daughter,
megan, tweeted this weekend going for a walk. there is one person, kelly ward who challenged john mccain in the primary in 2016 is now going to run against senator jeff flake. he wants the governor of arizona to appoint her to mccain's seat. take a listen. >> i hope senator mccain is going to look long and hard at this that his family and advi advisors are going talook at this and advise him to step away as wickly lyquickly as possibl. with john mccain out of xhi commission, we don't have 51 votes. >> these end of life choices are never easy. david, this is pretty awful. >> i think kelly ward should step away as quickly as possible. that's a horrific thing to say. senator mccain is a patriot, great american and shame on her. >> thanks, everyone, for being here. president trump now six months on the job gets a crash course in leading the free world and that's the subject of this
week's state of the cartoon. >> comedy central has drunk history and the white house has trump history. this week's episode, "french history." >> france is america's first and oldest ally. a lot of people don't know that. >> fresh off his paris trip, the president shared his new-found knowledge suggesting they were designed by napoleon the emperor and conqueror, they were designed by his nephew. it is french history, after all. perhaps professor trump is more comfortable with american politics. such as this comment about andrew jackson. >> he was really angry with what was happening in regard to the civil war. he said there is no reason for this. >> jackson, of course, died 16 years before the civil war even started. president trump said he's a big fan of history, just sometimes
seems like it's his own version of history. but he's the biggest fan of it. >> abraham lincoln, great president. most people don't even know he was a republican, right? does anyone know? >> thanks for watching, fareed zakaria "gps" starts right now. this is "gps the global public square." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live from london. today on the show, we've hit the six-month mark of the trump presidency. how would the uk and the world grade his performance so far? what do america's allies make of the president's relationship with vladimir putin? and with brexit on the horizon, what is the future of europe? i gathered a terrific panel here in london to discuss all that and more.