tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN September 19, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
here we go. top of the hour. i'm brook baldwin. thank you for being with me. we are just now here at the top of the hour getting our new advisory on hurricane maria barreling toward puerto rico. it could be catastrophic and life-threatening devastation all across the island. maria made landfall crippling dominica with winds as high as 65 miles an hour and ripped the roof off the home of the prime minister and the prime minister says they have lost pretty much all of what money could buy. that's a direct quote. right now there is a hurricane warning in effect for puerto rico with all kinds of concerns about water levels could rise as high as nine feet. cnn meteorologist allison is in the weather center tracking maria's path. you got that update.
what's the news? >> we just got it in at the top of the hour. it is still a category 5 storm. winds 160 miles per hour. in reality this is about the exact conditions that dominica had to deal with yesterday. it has exited other than a few rain bands and making its way towards the virgin islands and puerto rico. you can see it on puerto rico's radar because it is finally getting close enough. you can see the outer bands as well as the eye. here's a look at the track. we still expect it to be a category 5 or high-end category 4 as it makes landfall. the winds will be between 150 and 160 miles per hour. so in terms of the category number you're talking semantics. it's going to be an incredibly strong storm when it makes landfall over puerto rico.
it heads towards the dominican republic as well as the turks in caicos. six to nine feet of storm surge. some of the countries to the east could be looking at 7 to 11 feet of storm surge. in addition to the flooding is a big threat widespread. 6 to 10 inches of rain and several spots that could pick up 15, even 20 inches of rain. not just a problem because it triggers flooding but because of the elevation in a lot of the islands. it's very high which could trigger mud slides because of the amount of rain. we have seen it in the past with other tropical systems and possible to have it happen again. here's a look as we zoom in even tighter into puerto rico. again, most of these areas you're seeing that widespread about 8 to 10 inches of rain but there are a couple spots that could pick as much as 15 inches of rain and that will just
prolong a lot of folks getting the cleanup process or getting their power back which is probably the last thing those folks want to hear. >> still reeling from irma and now marimaria. let's do to puerto rico outside of san juan. you have been talking to people and they're still hurting from the most recent hurricane. what are they telling you? how are they preparing? >> reporter: a lot of people are trying to get their hands on generators, get any water they can. take a look at the coast so you get a idea of what it looks like. on the northern coast. this is pretty cal for right now. i'm not sure that we're necessarily starting to feel maria come in. this is what we typically see. this is the coast on this side. i definitely want to take you over here. this is actually the line for ice. this is a rare line. a lot in this line have told me they had been to two or three and one woman told me up to
seven locations trying to find water, trying to find ice and they haven't been able to do so. i want to ask this gentleman over here -- [ speaking foreign language ] >> he says he's been here since 10:00 a.m. and we're in the same time zone. it's about 1:20 and he's been here for several hours. [ speaking foreign language ] >> so he's saying he's not scared of anything. but this is part of the preparation which is typical. i mean this is a tropical caribbean island. they are used to these types of storms. [ speaking foreign language ] >> he's saying these the easiest place to find but it's about
patience and this being an easy process. let me show you the front of the line so you can see what it is they're dealing with. they pay a few dollars over here and the ice comes out and they are each allotted two bags and already on the sign you can see that they're going to -- they are going to close at 6:00 p.m. right now the line continues to grow. we have been here several hours. these people not only concerned about hurricane maria but what could come after. there's something else looming over this island and that is the economic crisis. $70 billion in debt. they have not seen a storm of this magnitude since 1928 make direct landfall. a lot of people concerned about what could come after the hurricane makes its way through this island. >> ice, the magic word. clearly in san juan.
thank you for that. thank you for talking to him as well. not afraid he says. meantime, the president of the united states defiant and scornful as he faced a curious united nations today for the first time outlining an america first approach to foreign policy and lashing out at north korea's leader kim jong-un the man he called rocket man warning the u.s. would quote, totally destroy the country of 25 million people. >> the united states has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies we will have no choice but to totally destroy north korea. rocket man is on a suicide mission fror himself and for hi regi regime. the united states is readying willing and able but hopefully this will not be necessary. >> and he continued on, the
president using this global stage to tick through his list of enemies, also signaling he could withdraw from the iran nuclear agreement which he called an embarrassment to the united states. >> the iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transaction the united states has ever entered into. frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the united states and i don't think you've heard the last of it. believe me. >> let's discuss. i have aaron david miller and former middle east negotiator and heather connelly former secretary of state. now the senior vp for europe and eurasia. welcome to both of off. aaron, before we get into the nuts and bolts just a big picture, this is the first time he spoke in front of this body
which he previously criticized. how do you think he did? >> you know, largest speech, largest stage this president has had in nine months. i think in some respects he exceeded expectations. for two reasons. it was two speeches. the tough guy speech in which he felt most comfortable elevating the senior access of evil, north korea and iran and the junior access which is maduro, venezuela and cuba. syria fits somewhere in between. i think he was more comfortable with that speech. second part of the speech was the globalist speech in which he tried to reconcile his america first speech with what i would call planetary humanism. he talked about women's empowerment, global health, anti-ma larl programs and for trump life is about addition and
not subtraction. this is an effort to placate some of his critics. the problem is these two speeches in some respects just don't fit together because last point, if trump is going to solve problems like north korea and iran, he's going to have to depend on those people in that room. and the reality is that doesn't square all that well with america first. >> let's talk about north korea and a senior u.n. diplomat described to my colleague jim sciutto the shock in the room as president trump threatened to destroy north korea. this is the quote. you could feel a wind had gone into the room. people were taken aback. it was an emotional reaction. the rocket man and the whole destroy you piece, listen, the
world is accustomed to him on twitter but how do you think this language sat with world leaders in the room yet alone over in pyongyang? >> those were the words that the entire speech melts away and all focus is on his extraordinary words. when the president of the united states calls for the total destruction of 25 million people, it's extraordinary and i'm sure the air really went out of the room. this is a really important speech. it's a critical venue to lay out where the global super power thinks about countries and the use of both its economic power. the president talked about the marshall plan and america's generosity and juxtaposed against this extraordinary statement. it does not help when you call another leader by a derogatory name. president trump wouldn't want that either. this is a very serious issue. america's forces are poised.
>> if i may, there are americans especially trump supporters and others saying listen, the sanctions haven't worked so far, the north korean economy hasn't been crippled. they keep advancing their missile program. what's wrong with a little tough talk? >> well, the tough talk if you recall when president obama gave a tough line about a red line, america's creditability is hurt when the president speaks such extraordinary language, you place the -- america's creditability on the line and that's what made this statement so extraordinary and that's why people are extremely concerned. this is a dangerous situation. we need to make sure that we are doing everything possible to not resort to conflict. we have a lot of tools at our disposal but you eliminate those when the president of the united states escalates to that type of rhetoric in a forum dedicated to national peace and security.
very extraordinary. >> aaron what about iran? we're talking on this october 15th is the deadline when the u.s. must certify if iran is compliant with the nuclear deal. we heard the president saying it's time for the world to join the u.s. and demanding iran's government in the pursuit of death and destruction. it sounds like he is ready to walk away from this deal. >> i mean, i don't think you have to read much between the lines. this is the strongest signal yet by october 15th when he's compelled to certify whether iran is in compliance with the four conditions set in the deal that it seems as if he's going to not certify. now, does that mean not certify and kick it to congress? does that mean not certify and try to renegotiate additional terms? this clearly i think he's prepared -- and he's climbed up a tree on this one. tough to climb down.
one of my old bosses, george schultz a very wise man said when you don't have a policy the temptation is to give a speech and both on north korea and iran. the underlying substantive problem for the trump administration is we do not have an approach to deal with the reality of north korea's nuclear stockpile or the prospects that iran may well turn into a punitive nuclear power. >> that's a problem. >> keeping the agreement as imperfect as it is is important because there ain't a plan b on this one and that's the real problem and the president couldn't cover it up i suspect in the speech he gave. >> well the president of france who we'll talk to next hour, you know, wants the u.s. to stay in and is hoping to have some conversations to dissuade president trump from pulling out. we'll talk about that at the top of the next hour. heather and aaron, thank you so
much. coming up, under pressure. cnn learning that the president's former campaign chairman paul manafort was wiretapped. both before and after the election by the u.s. government. why he was under the microscope and was president trump also monitored while manafort was wiretapped? senate republicans meeting and discussing a hail mary attempt to overturn obamacare. their effort is gaining momentum. we are learning what president trump is doing behind the scenes to also patch things up with members of his own party including senator lisa her cowsky. got a lot to talk about today. i'm brooke baldwin. you're watching cnn. and we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression, including preservision areds 2. my doctor said preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula the national eye institute recommends to help reduce
the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd after 15 years of clinical studies. preservision areds 2. because my eyes are everything. you myour joints...thing for your heart... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. outer layer of your enamel tooth surface. white, the thing that's really important to dentists is to make sure that that enamel stays strong and resilient for a lifetime the more that we can strengthen and re-harden that tooth surface, the whiter their patients' teeth are going to be. dentists are going to really want to recommend pronamel strong and bright. it helps to strengthen and re-harden the enamel.
it also has stain lifting action. it's going to give their patients the protection that they need and the whiter teeth that they want. ♪ we believe in food that's anaturally beautiful,, fresh and nutritious. so there are no artificial colors, no artificial flavors, no artificial preservatives in any of the food we sell. we believe in real food. whole foods market. i'll have the langoustine lfor you, sir?i. the original call was for langoustine ravioli. a langoustine is a tiny kind of lobster. a slight shellfish allergy rules that out, plus my wife ordered the langoustine. i will have chicken tenders and tater tots. if you're a ref, you way over-explain things. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance you switch to geico. sir, we don't have tater tots. it's what you do. i will have nachos!
[he has a new business teaching lessons. rodney wanted to know how his business was doing... ...so he got quickbooks. it organizes all his accounts, so he can see his bottom line. ahhh...that's a profit. know where you stand instantly. visit quickbooks-dot-com. and when youod sugar is a replace one meal... choices. ...or snack a day with glucerna... ...made with carbsteady... ...to help minimize blood sugar spikes... ...you can really feel it. now with 30% less carbs and sugars. glucerna.
i'm brooke baldwin. to an exclusive where sources are saying federal investigators wiretapped paul manafort both before and after the presidential election. the sources say the government snooping continued into early this year including during a time when manafort was believed to be talking to the president. these sources point out the surveillance on manafort began not over russia, rather, ukraine and any possible role manafort had had involving its ruling party there. the surveillance at some point ended in 2016 but then the wiretapping on manafort started back up. let me get to the justice reporter who was part of this team that broke this story wide open. let's start with the when and why. when and why did federal investigators revive their
surveillance on paul manafort? >> we have been told it started back up sometime after the fbi began its investigation into trump campaign associates in july. contained intercepts that showed russians were talking about trump associates and ways they could influence them and also showing suspected operatives communicating with trump associates. all this led the fbi to open an investigation and obtain a fisa warrant on paul manafort. >> we remember when president trump tweet add couple of times that the obama white house had wiretapped him but there was zero evidence of this. do we know if the president was at all caught on any of manafort's wiretaps? >> we don't know. but what we have been told is the fbi was listening to manafort's conversation earlier this year well after the campaign. told by our sources the president and manafort were speaking during that period and
so it is possible that those conversations were collected by the fbi. >> we're going to have more on that piece in a moment. thank you so much. first paul manafort is the central figure in another bombshell investigation. "the new york times" reported that when investigators raided his home in july prosecutors told him they planned to indict him. this was just a glimpse of how mueller is playing hard ball. his team is using shock and awe tactics to intimidate witnesses and potential targets. we should point out paul manafort has disaiaed participating in any collusion with russians to undermine u.s. interests. with me now one of the reporters who wrote this story. matt, nice to have you on.
you know, reading your whole piece today and putting it all together. what does it tell you about how aggressive bob mueller is being? >> well, you know, when the two roads diverge it seems like mueller and his team are steadily taking the more aggressive path here. it's really unusual to see prosecutors in a special counsel investigation using special warrants to begin with. then to turn around and tell somebody we expect to indict you and then subpoenaing their lawyer to testify against them. we know they have been telling people come testify and say we're going to dispense with the preliminary steps of going an interview. either come in or just take the 5th and take your chances. >> so the question is why do
this so aggressively? let me read your quote. solomon wisenburg in the investigation that led to the impeachment trial of the president clinton it's important early on to strike terror in the hearts of people in washington. he went on to say people saying to themselves man, i had better tell these guys the truth. is that the sense you got as far as why this is happening the way it is? >> sure. i mean, i think it's a combination of things. one, mueller and his team clearly feel pretty good about the evidence they have developed and on some tracks, the michael flynn track and the manafort track. they don't need to take anything but aggressive posture. to the point of the quote you read, if that's not the intention that has an added benefit when you take an aggressive posture, you set a tone. you know, he has really rubbed a
lot of people in that way. made them feel like he's out there just trying to do shock and awe trying to send a message like nothing but extreme cooperation will do. >> matt, thank you. ahead here empty threats or promises not yet fulfilled. my legal panel weighs in on the details surrounding what we discussed, the wiretapping of manafort, where the special counsel's investigation goes from here and also republicans preparing a hail mary on health care. the outcome is nowhere close to certain. patrick woke up with back pain. but he has work to do. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol,
do what i did. ask your doctor about humira. it's proven to help relieve pain and protect joints from further irreversible damage in many adults. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. 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. ready for a new chapter? talk to your rheumatologist about humira. this is humira at work. dental professionals recommend using an electric toothbrush. for an exceptionally fresh feeling choose philips sonicare diamondclean.
hear the difference versus oral b. in a recently published clinical study, philips sonicare diamondclean outperforms oral-b 7000, removing up to 82% more plaque and improving gum health up to 70% more. its sonic technology cleaning deep between teeth. from the most recommended sonic toothbrush brand by dental professionals. switch to philips sonicare today. philips sonicare. save when you buy now. deni . fresh out of lunch with republican leadership. here's the senate majority leader on health care today. mitch mcconnell. >> have at it. >> number one, i never felt better about where we're at. it's pretty well clear to me where the country is going under
obamacare and berniecare. it's going into further bankruptcy. it's more decisions further away from where you live and in 1996 we blocked money for welfare reform and it worked like a charm. we put governors in charge of the program and held them accountable. here's the choice for america. socialism or federalism when it comes to your health care. four states get 40% of the money under obamacare, new york, california, massachusetts and maryland, they represent 20% of the population. our goal is by 2026 to make sure every patient in every state gets the same contribution roughly from the federal government and allow people in your states to make decisions that would have been made in washington. the most beneficial aspect follows. if you don't like obamacare who do you complain to?
you can complain to me but i sure don't run it. if i could get south carolina in charge of this money that would have been spent by a bureaucratic that's unelected. is your governor and state house representative. you can go to the state house respective who most likely goes to the same hospital you do. you can go to your governor who will listen to you because they care about your vote if nothing else. i'm trying to take the money and power in washington and send it back closer to the people. it's the best government, why not health care and finally we know how this ends if we don't change. we're going to have a single parent health care system in this country that's going to bust the budget and obamacare is failing for a reason. it's a bad idea. stay control of health care will
work because the people in charge will be accountable to you unlike obamacare where the person in charge could give a damn of what you think. >> for 25 years i've treated patients. it's been my life's work to try and bring health care and coverage to those who do not have it. so when a fellow back home with a special needs child tells me he's paying $40,000 a year in premiums and more money on top of that, we know the system is failing. those who had -- would have their needs address. his family it's almost beyond their reach. he has a job and doesn't get a subsidy and cannot afford his insurance coverage. that's not the way it should be. b what we attempt to do is take all the dollars here in washington, d.c. and dull it out at the state and return it to
the states for the states to do that which is best for that state. if you're in a state which is not expanded medicaid, you're going to do great. in all those lower income texans, floridians will have dollars in their state to help them get health insurance they currently do not have. we do you best to hold you harmless. we're running through the chip program. i hear no one complain about the chip program. the chip program has been recognized to be an effective way to provide access to quality care to those in need. we take it through the chip program. whatever waiver a state wishes to have they must ensure the secretary they continue to provided a kwat and affordable coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. that is our back stop. we preserve mental health parody but ultimately we give the
dollars to the state. we could look at the things states have done over the last ten years, some of which were squashed by obamacare. invisible high risk poll which obama lowers premiums by 20%. in indiana where they prefunded health savings account so lower income hoose chers could be empowered we give it to states. i'm a doctor. for 25 years caring for those who didn't have coverage. it is my goal to continue to bring them coverage. i think johnson does a far better job than status quo. >> i would like for senator cassidy and senator graham to handle. >> do you know that almost any
appeal -- [ inaudible ] it might be a little higher now but that's not that much better. [ inaudible ] >> well, at the end of the day we need 50 votes and if you're a republican chances are you believe in federalism because if you don't you probably are not a republican. so the last effort to repeal and replace obamacare was better than obamacare but did not embrace the concept bill was talking about. i believe most republicans like the idea of state controlled health care versus washington, d.c. controlled health care. ememployer assessments are going out next month by the end of 2017. over 90,000 businesses will get a notice from the federal government under obamacare that's $4.8 million. a lot of republicans would like to stop that from happening and
the best way to do that is to repeal the individual mandate nationally, states can reimpose it. we have come upon an idea that is uniquely republican but over time has proved to work in other areas like welfare reform. i would hate to be the democrat that voted against more money for my state and more power and keep the status quo. so if you're a democrat let's say in missouri. you're going to get far more money under this proposal than obamacare and your state would have more control over the money. to reject that money and that control means you believe that somebody in washington cares more about people in missouri than people in missouri. you believe it's okay to help california and new york, maryland and massachusetts more than missouri. that's just what a democrat would have to face. if they voted no.
if you're a republican and vote against federalism you got to explain to people back home why washington knows better and almost every state except the four i described do very well under this new approach to taking the money out of washington. so i think the idea is more powerful. i think the substance is much more fair and at the end of the day i really believe we're going to get 50 republican votes and i make a prediction. there's going to be a lot of democrats struggling with the no vote because at least eight of them, eight of them their states do far better than obamacare in terms of funding and they have more control over the money and that's going to be a hard no. >> is it -- [ inaudible ] >> they told us they'll have a score for us.
the coverage that will be on the cash aspect of it, so we'll have a chance to look at that. >> senator graham, could you -- [ inaudible ] >> you all understand that we would have to deal with this of course september 30th. . so that's the answer. we'll have to deal with it because the vehicle expires at the end of the month. if the we were going to go forward we would have to act before september 30th. >>. [ inaudible ] >> we're in the process of discussing all of this. everybody knows that the opportunity expires at the end of the month. [ inaudible ] >> here's the test to republicans. we work as hard to repeal obamacare as they did to pass it.
mitch mcconnell and the leadership has done everything we asked and then some. i spoke to paul ryan and said i like you sent it to the pass, it's going to pass. every republican out there believes this is a fundamental reason we're in charge. that democrats have lost a lot of seats backing a bad idea and we've been the biggest political beneficiary of obamacare and we want to try to make patients the beneficiary of our idea. so at the end of the day will we try again? i would argue that yes we should because i do not want to go back to south carolina and say that i did everything i could to repeal obamacare and not believe it in my heart. so senator mcconnell is doing everything he can. paul ryan told me to my face if you pass it, we pass it. >> senator graham, this plan that's been out there for a couple of months.
why is it that you truly think this would lead to better health care and not just -- [ inaudible ] >> well, i think you heard the argument here from senator graham and senator cassidy. it is better than the status quo by far. >> are there any -- >> for the time left on the calender year, how concerned are you about time in terms of getting everything you want done this year? >> i think we'll be fine. as you know, the next big priority is tax reform. i think we will be fine. >> there was -- >> senator graham, earlier in the process about how this -- [ inaudible ] given the compressed timetable -- [ inaudible ] >> we have a hearing scheduled monday in finance. we had one vote on the defense
bill. why? because democrats objected to tom cotton's amendment. my friends on the other side love process when it advantages them. so there will be a public hearing what john has been asking for. you can have different opinions about the quality of this bill. at the the end of the day, this is the only process left available to stop a march towards socialism. we have between now and the end of the month to have a debate about whether this is better than the status quo. my friends on the other side are never going to agree to a bipartisan proposal that does anything other than prop up obamacare. i've talked to the president five times in the last two days. he is focused like a laser and told me he's not going to throw good money after bad. he's very excited about this state health care system and all i can tell you is that the process left to us is that the
democratic party is never going to give us anything that fundamentally changes obamacare. we have had weeks of talking and the only time they have gotten serious is when they're afraid that my bill may pass. and now they're coming to me what about this and what about that. here's what the speaker of the house told me. i will not bring up a bill for a vote in the house that props up obamacare because that is not why i came here and that is not what our majority wants to do and the president of the united states is committed to repealing and replacing this bill, not propping it up. >> thank you. >> all right. so there you have it. the republican leadership on the senate side. this is all about health care. they're still trying right? it's been a promise for years and years to get rid of obamacare and so this is call it again this hail mary option, this graham cassidy bill. you saw the cosponsors of the
bill, one of whom has been an md for 25 years. they're hoping to give the power to states with these separate proposals and they're running against the clock to get this thing through. i have cnn money writer who knows about the substance of this bill. it's also note worthy to hear senator graham that paul ryan said if you pass it, we pass it. it sounded to me with regard to cbo in terms of penniepennies, s and dimes i i don't think they know what it would cost. what's the biggest difference? >> one of the big issues is they also aren't going to know from cbo how many people might lose insurance coverage under this. cbo, one of the numbers that has scared people in previous scores is the number -- the fewer people who would have insurance under these house and senate bills. it's been 23 million or more in
some cases. we don't know what this bill is going to do. but a lot of consumer activists, the ama, aarp are saying this is going to hurt a lot of people and come out strongly opposing this. this bill contains a lot of the issues as we have seen that the republicans put forth. >> what about pre-existing conditions, would that be protected? >> not in the way it's protected under obamacare. there's iron clad protections, insurers must provide coverage to everyone. they can't charge people based on their medical history and provide comprehensive policies. under the graham cassidy bill they would be required to cover everybody, they can't just turn people away but they'll be able to charge people based on their medical history. so that means people who have cancer, diabetes, heart disease they may end up to pay a lot
more and they may not be able to afford it. comprehensive coverage, the benefits, those require insurers cover substance abuse, hospitalization, doctors, a whole suite of services. it's possible that even if the they -- those who are sick could afford their coverage their coverage might be skimpier. they might not have all the benefits they have access to now. >> let's listen to the senate minority leader chuck schumer now. >> okay. i'm proud to be joined by my colleagues. hey, folks, take it somewhere else. okay. i'm proud to be joined by my colleagues, senator durbin, senator widen to talk about what's going on with health
care. first we heard a lot of talk about the states and governors. just released was a letter, ten governors, five democrat, five republican opposed to trumpcare to the so-called graham cassidy bill and more in favor of a bipartisan negotiation such as that that senator alexander and senator murray are going forward with. i just heard our republican colleague speak. there is a word missing. people, patients, care. all this stuff. democrat, republican, governors, washington. how about how this affects people? millions will lose coverage. no guarantee of pre-existing condition and an end to medicaid as we know it. tens of millions of people could well lose coverage. people who desperately need
essential services would lose it. our republican colleagues don't seem to care about how this affects the average american. that's why trumpcare, the previous bills were so unpopular. that's why this bill is so unpopular and that's why despite all their efforts they're struggling because their own senators know that the public dislikes this bill. the latest version of trumpcare may live under a new name graham cassidy but no matter how many ways they try to hide it, dress it up, it's even more dangerous, more reckless than the previous bill that was defeated. simply put, trumpcare is a sham. they're crafting it in the dark of night. to say one hearing on one day without a cbo score and only two witnesses against the bill, that's a hearing, that's a full airing of the bill?
c'mon. they're ashamed of this bill. they're afraid to find out what it actually does. and so we get another bill in the dark of night. so the process is awful. our republican colleagues, we have heard justice being blind. our republican colleagues should be walking around with blindfolds because they don't want to see what's in the bill they're being forced to vote for. with all the cuts to people. with all its unpopularity. with all the basic meanness in this bill. they don't want to go home and tell a mom who learns her daughter or son has cancer that an insurance company can make insurance unaffordable for them. no, they don't want that. they don't want to tell middle class family in the suburbs that mom or dad in the nursing home may no longer get coverage. they don't want to tell a
23-year-old young man who desperately needs opioid treatment that it may go away. this isn't simply making the decisions at the states. they make the cuts here in washington that hurt average people. and then tell the states to figure out who to cut. this is not a neutral bill that simply devolves power to the states. that is why ten governors from the states of colorado, ohio, alaska, montana, pennsylvania, virginia, louisiana, nevada, massachusetts and vermont, five democrats, five republicans have said don't do trumpcare 2. don't do graham cassidy. according to the center of budget and policy priorities it
will result in about $700 billion in cuts to health care by 2027. it will cause millions to lose coverage. millions. it would radically restructure and deeply cut medicaid, bring us back to the days when insurance companies could discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, get rid of the consumer protections that gives americans access to maternity care, substance abuse, prescription drugs and throw the individual markets into chaos, resulting in 15 million people losing coverage. if they let the cbo do its work, if cbo weren't pressured to put out something that's just a few lines, this would all be told by cbo and how do we know? because similar bills in the past have been scored by cbo with similar provisions.
they're afraid. they are afraid that the public will hate this bill. so they're trying to rush it through in the dark of night. we want above all a bill that protects average americans. not slashes the health care they need whether the governor or washington should try to do that, it's wrong. we want to work in a bipartisan process to make things better. we want the house, the president, republican leadership to stop pressuring those who want to come up with a bipartisan solution to refrain from doing it. we can make this work in a bipartisan way and the final thing i would say is this. we have seen some very, very hopeful sprouts of bipartisanship in the last month. going back to this trumpcare 2
graham cassidy would shut down that bipartisanship that america yearns for. i'm going to call on -- yeah. >> thanks but no thanks to the graham cassidy bill saying the words i kept hearing cuts, cuts and they want a bipartisan solution. we heard republican senator graham saying don't you want your home state representatives who go to the same hospitals as you to figure out what you should be doing with your health care. but to the democrats point, well that's great but there will be cuts to your money as far as health care is concerned before you can spend it in your state. >> this bill would give states more flexibility and that's a good thing. the governors and legislators know their residents and what they need. that's great but the tradeoff is it comes with less federal support.
they're going to eliminate funding for medicaid expansion, for the subsidies and lump it into this block grant and as we have seen with the other republican bills they're going to cap federal support for traditional medicaid which covers 70 million people in america. let me read you what the governor of alaska told senator more kossky from alaska yesterday. it said, i understand that a block grant gives me increased flexibility but if i don't have the dollars to implement that flexibility that doesn't help us much. again, that's why he's on the letter that chuck schumer referenced. the r republicans want to give state control that may be beneficial in a lot of ways but if there's not enough money people are going to get hurt in those states. >> republicans up against the deadline. september 30th the deadline. the vice president to break the tie. we'll talk again. thank you so much. let's move on and talk about these major new developments in
the russia investigation. president trump's former campaign chief paul manafort under wiretap surveillance not once but twice and manafort hearing he might be indicted according to the "new york times." with me now two former federal prosecutors, cnn legal senior, forgive me. legal analyst. >> i would say very senior. >> very super duper senior. does that work? thank you very much. and michael moore. jeff toobin, we're having a conversation with "the new york times." we're learning how aggressive mueller is being with this whole thing then threatening manafort maybe with an indictment, maybe that sets the tone for witnesses to not lie. what do you make of how this is going down so far? >> it's a very aggressive investigation. it's an attempt by the mueller team not to spend five years on this but to try to move
aggressively, get guilty pleas if you can, get cooperation or get indictments but move this thing along. they obviously thing paul manafort is a key figure. they have tried every possible way to intimidate him. in a white collar investigation which usually operating by grand jury subpoena and requests for evidence under penalties but to search someone's house at 6:00 in the morning as they did with manafort, that's a very aggressive tact. we'll see. will it pay off with a guilty plea and let's be fair to paul manafort? let's see whether he did anything wrong. nothing has been proven or even charged at this point. >> that's on the going to his house in the wee hours of the morning. the no-knock warrant. michael, what about our reporting on the manafort wiretaps. quickly, what would the feds have to show a judge just to get
the green light to do a wiretap? >> they would have to give some indication that there was some evidence that a crime was likely being committed. it's not a simple thing to get a wiretap. my guess is they have had that for some time. whether that be through financial documents or other people talking or wires they picked up. i agree with jeff. this is aggressive on mueller's part. my guess is he's heard the concern that the investigation could take a long time and he's going to stop that. we're not talking about an ordinary investigation. it's a guy who has been dealing if the allegations and the belief is right, he's been dealing with russia. we're not talking about a check forgery ring. we're talking about one of the most significant investigations we have seen in a long time. i'm not surprised by the tactics. i think it's more of an indication that bob mueller means business. he's going to move the case forward. he's sending that as a sign maybe to the public as much as to the potential target that
being mr. manafort. he would have had to convince a judge he needed permission for the no knock for fear manafort destroyed evidence or harmed himself or somebody else, destroyed evidence, hit the button on the computer, whatever it was. they must have had some indication they picked up on the wiretap. >> on the wiretap, here's the key question, in the time he was wiretapped he was talking to donald trump. we don't know yet, it's not clear whether or not donald trump was picked up on the wiretap. if he had, can bob mueller use that? >> probably but it's not certain. i mean this is where the law gets somewhat complicated. there's a rule called minimumization where if you have a wiretap on person x you are only allowed to listen to conversations about the subject that is mentioned in the warrant. >> like ukraine. >> like ukraine or russia. but if they are talking about
other topics, the fbi agents monitoring the phone calls are supposed to not listen and not record. that's called minimumization. now the question would be if the fbi agents were listening and manafort and trump if he's speaking to trump were talking, the question would be were they discussing something that was within the ambit of the investigation where it would be proper to record it or were they talking about unrelated political matters, do you think hillary clinton did well in the deba debate, something not jermaine to the investigation. >> but if it's something questionable? >> my experience is fbi agents tend to air on the side of listen and record it. if the you minimize and don't hear it it's gone forever. a lot of defense lawyers are skeptical about the whole process of it and they think it's bogus it doesn't remove anything. but that means you can't have a
simple answer to whether trump's statements would have been recorded. probably they would have been recorded but not definitely. >> jeff toobin, thank you. michael moore thank you as well. coming up, the senate intelligence committee abruptly calling off president trump's testimony after he releases this copy of his opening statement to the media but the committee not finished just yet. and out of central mexico a magnitude 7.1 earthquake. more when we come back.
welcome back. you're watching cnn. we have breaking news news out of mexico. where a massive 7.1 earthquake just hit. the quake struck little more than three miles east, northeast of rubuso mexico. 75 miles south of mexico city. let's go straight to allison chinchar for more. 7.1. >> 7.1 and in a depth of about 51 kilometers or give or take 32 miles deep. in terms of earthquakes that is relatively deep however it's not deep enough that folks around wouldn't be able to feel it. this is mexico city. just for to understand where it is. this is where the