tv The Intelligence Report With Trish Regan FOX Business October 31, 2017 2:00pm-3:00pm EDT
neil: boy this was busy two hours. right? we'll have a white house briefing on these developments, taxes, manafort thing, et.al., et.al. trish regan to you. trish: neil, busy hour and another busy hour coming up. we're moments away from white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders who will talk about the tax plan and the investigation into the russian investigation. welcome to the teleagainst -- welcome to the intelligence report on this halloween. this is a very, very big week for the country, for our markets, for the economy as president trump tells reporters he wants to pass the bill by thanksgiving.
he has put in a deadline on all of this. we'll give you the latest straight ahead. former trump campaign manager paul manafort indicted on multiple charges, tax fraud, money laundering conspiracy against the united states, all stemming from transactions years before the 2016 campaign. will this be a distraction? or will the president push forward with a pro-growth agenda? does that literally no pun intended, trump all? the russian dossi and sketchy uranium one deal saying quote, the american people have the right to know what the government does. they do. why isn't the congress investigating democrats in all of this? we'll tackle it. first new details on uranium one. first to our top story, republicans set to unveil the historic bill bill on capitol
hill. we have adam shapiro. adam, big week for the nation, for the economy and for tax reform. reporter: trish, it is. you can feel excitement on part of republicans on capitol hill. the democrats came out fighting. we know talking points. there was discussion of three points of attack on the bill they will attack. they are saying this bill will help the wealthy and nobody else. let's get right into this. the president has spoken about the tax reform bill. remember key parts of this reform bill will be simplicity and what the president says will be a middle class tax break. here is what he said about the democratic opposition to all of this. >> we'll have no democrat support. we may have on the tax cut because i think it will be very hard for five or six of them to run successfully saying they want to raise taxes. the democrats want to raise taxes, really create obstruction. the republican want to lower taxes. reporter: the question, can chuck schumer and democrats hold
their minority coalition together in the senate because they are going to be close with but there are democrats that worked with the president in other situations. think of joe manchin from west virginia. here is what chuck schumer, the minority leader in the senate said in response to the tax reform bill. >> the republican tax plan will be full of tricks for the middle class, and full of treats for the wealthiest americans. this theory churned out by right-wing think tanks that growth will occur because of these tax cuts is absurd. it is utter self-serving bull. reporter: so chuck schumer calling it what you heard him say. let's hear what kevin brady said this morning what is coming tomorrow, he is the one writing tax reform bill in the house. there is tax relief at every level. we're doing it in the way people keep more of what they earn regardless where they live. back to you, trish. trish: thanks so much, adam.
joining me for more, bell point chief strategist david nelson and heritage capital president paul fast. president putting a deadline on this thing. looks increasingly it might happen. white house thinks it has got the votes it needs. david, will we look at lower taxes come the new year? >> i certainly hope so. the hope is the corporate tax code, we have to 20%. my hope they won't phase it in. the president is right. it will only stall the process. you will hear from the left, marginal tax rate for the united states corporations is lot lower. that is simply doesn't take into account thousands of companies that have left the united states for a lower tax status. if our tax reform or rather our tax system is so star-spangled awesome, why have thousands of companies left the country. we have 77,000 page encourages them to do just that full speed
ahead. get it done. >> is messed up. you heard the president earlier say, look this is long time coming right? we've been basically waiting 30 years for any meaningful tax reform. what i'm stunned by, you have seen taxes creep higher and higher and higher. act really as a penalty on businesses, small business owners. yet, chuck schumer as you heard, there are tricks not treats. this is the argument that the left always pushes, right? over and over fenn. somehow this is just all for the rich, paul. >> that's right. listen, you can search history. there has never been a country that taxed its way to prosperity. that is because you can't do it. we all require basic services. i fully understand and appreciate why you need taxes but clearly, clearly, in the last nine years our tax system is choking our economy. we got a little bit of relief from regulations. we have to have tax reform.
i'm a little disappointed frankly, the republicans won and they're trying to hold the process hostage. i wish they come together, just because it impacts people, doesn't make it bad. everybody has to give a little to take a lot. if they take step back they would have much better margin to pass this without negotiating one off here and one off there. one thing they don't do, i'm surprised, take the amt, reach across the aisle, tell democrats, look it if we keep -- trish: tell them this, right? democrats, if they actually looked at this thing, by the way you have chuck schumer talking about how bad it was before even saw a darn thing. it is a little political in that sense, david. >> yeah. trish: they have one note. that one note is lower taxes are bad. and that is what they're selling. >> it's a great sound bite from chuck schumer. he is trying to be cute here. paul brought up a very good point. we're really hostages here because lobbyists literally
descended on washington. every lobbiest will have agenda to push. some loophole they're trying to save. it makes the job very difficult. it is not surprising it has taken 30 years to get us to this point. i hope kevin brady and the team and president can hold it all together and see this through. trish: ultimately, they say okay, we'll not push that agenda in terms of the asking people in new york, and california -- >> but that is the problem, trish. you have a 77,000 page code. the idea was to make it simpler. you can end up gumming up the works, not accomplish what you really set out in the first place. i don't want to add 2,000 pages to the 77,000 already. trish: do you like what the president is talking about, what we're hearing, they would like to get rid of salt and state and local tax deduction? >> i agree with that. i think it is right thing to do. it is unfair to the center of the country they're subsidizing our state and local taxes. trish: i have no interest in
seeing this. >> i live in connecticut. i'm just as bad. trish: okay, paul -- >> time to get rid of salt. time to get rid of hedge fund carried interest and energy subsidies. david said, simplify everything. get rid of loopholes. get rid of special interest subsidies. have a simplified tax code. trish: talking something that is good for the middle class, all right? >> agreed. trish: chuck schumer, nancy pelosi, they don't see it that way. they really just don't. do you think they're being intellectually dishonest paul. >> of course, that is the system we're in now. i guarranty you, they have read nothing and they won't read anything. you know what? that is the system. the hand you're dealt. all they care about is poking holes so the middle class may reconsider their votes for 2018. the manchins and heitkamps will be hard-pressed not to support
this when all said and done. >> what they care about, paul, they want something to fight for in the election cycle next year. they want to gum this up. if they slow the economy down in any measure or form, that plays to their hand. trish: isn't that triage schnick. >> that is the truth. trish: they want to see our economy slow down the you heard donald trump out there today, looking we have 3% growth, better than considering what we had. >> consumer confidence through the roof. trish: i said over and over again, if he becomes president, you better believe, he will say, hey, did you see that 5%? suddenly all of america will know what gdp is? you know what? that is a good thing. ultimately if everybody is doing better, some of this political bickering maybe the why the democrats don't want the economy to do better, to your point, david, some bickering will have to fall by the wayside. thanks so much, guys. we have a lot to get to right now. white house chief of staff john kelly saying there should be an
investigation into the democrats involvement in the russian dossier and uranium one deal. here he is with fox's laura inghram on her brand new show. watch. >> do you think there should be a special counsel appointed to investigate all these narratives coming out with the dnc and the clinton campaign actually funding research that was in part compiled by the kremlin? , kremlin associates? >> i'm one of those people who think american people have the right to know what their government does. have a right to foe what their government is doing on any given day. by the same token what private citizens are doing if they break the law. doubly important when these kind of accusations are made they should be investigated. trish: joining me right now, trial attorney, legal analyst, miss at this morris. good to see you misty, what do you think about this other issue? >> they absolutely need to dig.
isn't this what is all about russia influencing election? clearly we get more and more facts this is not limited to the trump campaign. we're learning that the dnc actually hired opposition research, hid that from the american people and their donors and then also involved with the russians. clearly we need to get answers. trish: but this is where it becomes difficult, right? in other words, we don't know for sure that the dossier is what eventually caused the fbi to say okay, we need to wiretap the trump building and keep an eye on those phone calls in the trump campaign camp. we don't know that yet, but there is a lot of suspicion as to whether or not that dossier in fact did fuel some of those wiretapping concerns. if that is the case, misty, then, hey, that's not good. >> no, absolutely not. trish, you make a great report. no, we don't know. that's why you conduct a full
and thorough investigation of those facts to get down to the bottom of it and find out what exactly happened with the clintons, with the dossier, with the dnc. trish, i know one thing for certain. one of the big issues with this, opposition research was done, but it was not disclosed to the federal election committee that is a requirement. we know there is one law broken. what else is going on? what are the ties? why aren't we digging deeper to figure that out. trish: there was a guest on the program yesterday, misty, that worried that the u.s. got played effectively. what happened in all of this, was, that the russians figured out that various political operators were trying to gain opposition research and they fed quite deliberately a bunch of misinformation to that british spy christopher steele, who then in turn brought that back, then turned everything on its head. is there a danger here we got
played, and doesn't that need to be looked into? >> certainly trish. this is exactly what we're talking about. because the whole idea why we have special counsel appointed to see, is russia trying to improperly influence elections in and exactly what you pointed out, we need to know what was going on. could the u.s. have been played. how could we avoid it in the future. avoid these types of situations we need to appoint a special counsel to get to the bottom of it. certainly issues that need to be investigated. trish: let me ask you about uranium one. this is story i've always been fascinated with. i've been stunned to learn as we recently did, that the fbi was looking into vladmir putin was trying to gain outsized influence in our atomic energy market at same time they went ahead, cfius went ahead and approved that deal for the russians effectively to gain a 20% stake in uranium, rather gain control over 20% of the
night's uranium supply. misty, i mean i keep going back to what i said over and over again. as far as hillary clinton went, $146 million going to the foundation while secretary of state while a deal like this is getting approved. how did we wind up doing a deal like that? >> how was this deal not blocked is question of the hour. certainly doesn't taking a lawyer or being a politician to know, common sense would say, the fact that there was this investigation, would put up a red flag. hey, maybe this deal shouldn't have gone through. trish, we learned a former fbi informant set to testify before congress who said they would testify talking about how russia was trying to gain influence with the clintons at that time. there are some pieces to this puzzle. the only way to get down to the bottom of it is make this a part of investigation. trish: you're right. i don't know how you can't.
>> it can't be ignored. it is absolutely so interwoven. the fact it is just now coming to light is pretty shocking i don't misty, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. trish: white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders will speak in a few minutes. we'll bo to her live as soon as that begins. we have a whole lot in the meantime. indictments against paul manafort and his business partner rick gates. all the accusations against them was before they actually worked with donald trump. is there any there there? james rosen has been following the story from the very beginning. he is here, he is with us, next. who knew that phones would start doing everything?
entertaining us, getting us back on track, and finding us dates. phones really have changed. so why hasn't the way we pay for them? introducing xfinity mobile. you only pay for data and can easily switch between pay per gig and unlimited. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit or go to xfinitymobile.com.
trish: let's go to a live picture. you see it there of the white house, where we're waiting on press secretary sarah huckabee sanders. she will speak any minute from now. as the president doubles down on twitter on the assertion there was no collusion. no collusion between the russians and his campaign during last year's elections. meanwhile, a number of new developments in the case of george papadopoulos. this is former foreign policy advisor for the trump campaign whose guilty plea was unsealed yesterday. let's go to fox news chief washington correspondent james rosen for the details. reporter: trish, good afternoon.
we have fresh reaction in the george papadopoulos plea deal, from sergey lavrov. russia's foreign minister. >> translator: if the meeting was about russian-american relations i don't see anything illegal or about it. i'm looking with skepticism and lack of interest of new and continuous reports how donald trump won the presidential elections. reporter: meetings minister lavrov cite those taken by george papadopoulos, low level foreign policy advisor to then candidate donald trump and professor overseas who introduced the younger man to figures advertised as having strong kremlin connections. this led to papadopoulos to arrange a meeting an initiative trump campaign rebuffed. the professor told defendant papadopoulos as defendant papadopoulos described to the fbi, that they the russians have
dirt on her, hillary clinton. the russians have e-mails on clinton. they have thousands of emails. today the telegraph newspaper identified this professor as joseph misuod teacher professor at scotland in may whose online rest may is sketchy defined and expressions of support for laugh love and the putin regime. mifsud acknowledged meeting with papadopoulos later last year. he was upset by claims being privy to dirt on hillary clinton because they were incredible. he described as a laughingstock, a suggestion in the report that he introduced papadopoulos to a female russian national described as relative of president vladmir putin. so while mifsud hardly most eminently academic, and pro-putin is he official challenge to the version laid out by the special counsel and
his team. trish: james, there is a lot of questions here. what does it cross the line? you are having a meeting because you're interested in getting some information and that person happens to be from russia. i have joked, you can't really have had a white russian in washington and get away with it these days just at a bar but there is real concern if you any connection with russia whatsoever, met with anyone from russia, concern on side of people looking into donald trump and his campaign team, while smallly, james, $146 million going to the clinton foundation. $500,000 speaking fee to bill clinton? i wonder if we're not applying same standards across the board to everyone? reporter: by all accounts, and estimates of all legal analysts who looked at the papadopoulos plea deal yesterday, everything he was doing in terms of his contacts with these foreign nationals was probably not illegal at all but he got into
trouble because he lied about the contacts and circumstances to the fbi. i heard in the earlier segment you maybe the suggestion you don't know how the special counsel can fail to include the uranium one deal and the contributions to the clinton foundation in his scope of investigation. another issue that some are suggesting today should properly be part of the special counsel investigation if he is looking into the tax returns of paul manafort from a decade ago, presumably mr. mueller will look into how secret grand jury information from his own very investigation made its way into the hands of cnn this past friday night when they were in a position to report there were sealed indicts that had been filed? trish: that's a good question. james rosen, thank you so much. reporter: thank you, trish. trish: we'll keep on eight. we await white house briefing, "wall street journal" editorial page, that the none of this involves trump's 2016 election. i mean all of this noise around
this, and yet, they weren't able to find anything about the actual campaign? we'll talk about it right after this. infrastructure mlps? think again. it's time to shake up your lineup. the alerian mlp etf can diversify your equity portfolio and add potential income. bring amlp into the game. before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. read the prospectus carefully at alpsfunds.com/amlp
our recent online sales success seems a little... strange?nk na. ever since we switched to fedex ground business has been great. they're affordable and fast... maybe "too affordable and fast." what if... "people" aren't buying these books online, but "they" are buying them to protect their secrets?!?! hi bill. if that is your real name. it's william actually. hmph! affordable, fast fedex ground. (honking) (beeping) we're on to you, diabetes.
time's up, insufficient prenatal care. and administrative paperwork, your days of drowning people are numbered. same goes for you, budget overruns. and rising costs, wipe that smile off your face. we're coming for you too. at optum, we're partnering across the health system to tackle its biggest challenges.
abetty called me attnering she thought it was a fire.m it was worse. a sinkhole opened up under our museum. eight priceless corvettes had plunged into it. chubb was there within hours. they helped make sure it was safe. we had everyone we needed to get our museum back up and running, and we opened the next day.
trish: it is last day in october. we're still in positive territory. dow may end month of october up 4%. s&p up better than 2%. good earnings season. good gdp reports. low unemployment numbers. so far, so good. the big question, will republicans fet tax reform through? will they continue this move higher? liberal media has been having a field day following news that paul manafort and his associate have been indicted in special counsel robert mueller's russia probe but, take a breath for a second.
yes, they have been indicted. they have been indicted for tax fraud but anything that that happened during the 2016 campaign, that wasn't in there. this is all stuff from way back before. "wall street journal's" editorial board sums it up here, saying, quote, the most striking news is that none of this involves the 2016 election campaign. it goes on to say, the main charge against donald trump is poor judgment for hiring notorious beltway operator. kind of like what i said yesterday, right? joining meed tomorrow page writer for "the wall street journal," jillian meltzer. jillian, i was saying yesterday the republicans must have been breathing a sigh of relief. this is hanging over their head. all of sudden indictments come out, and it is from two years ago. >> this shows what extraordinary poor judgment to hire man for the. this guy represented kovocich
who turned his bun on his own people. this is about money laundering and tax fraud. the only 2016 charges related to lying to the fbi. one thing we have here, the mueller investigation being really broad but so far we haven't turned up anything that shows collusion or shows criminal conspiracy. so i think that is kind of where things stand. trish: so the goal, i would think as far as members of the left were concerned, that you needed to somehow weave this story how manafort in direct up to with the russians, somehow he is getting kickbacks along the way and russians are manipulating this campaign from afar. at least so far they haven't come up with anything that looks like that. >> so far they haven't proven it. we also have a lot of charges filed against manafort, but that is kind of a suggestion or an indication that, you know they're not trying to use him,
flip him, turning against other people. usually you do that before you file charges. trish: what about papadopoulos? >> that is really interesting one. i remember laughing at him a while ago. he is a model u.n. guy. what this shows russia was attempting to interfere with our election, which is what we've seen all along. it does not prove that the trump campaign was take. this needs to be thoroughly investigated. i want to see lots of congressional involvement because the american public need this to be done in open and accountable way. trish: as long as that is on the table, what about uranium one? what about compilation of dossier and faulty intelligence fed to the christopher steel and fed to the u.s. >> that is important thing to look into as is the fbi's involvement. we have questions whether the dossier prompted fbi to begin a investigation to prompt wiretapping. there is lot of focus on trump
collusion, not on the democratic party and hillary clinton collusion. also not how russia interfered and potentially affected fbi's actions. trish: people don't like to go back to the clinton thing because for some reason she got a free pass for all of that. i question how much you get that much russian money going to your family foundation while being secretary of state and not having eyebrows raised. nonetheless she got a pass. but now we're looking if fbi was vladmir putin was trying to get into the outsized influence of uranium here in the u.s. eric holder should have known that at the time but he was on the cfius committee, russians, you want to buy 20% of u.s. uranium, go for it. i do not understand how they allowed that to happen. >> there is a lot of potential for conflicts of interest throughout this. one of those things with mueller. this is a guy in charge of the
fbi for years. it is not a slight on his tin integrity that he should step aside for somebody who does not have the conflict of interest to investigate. the american people really need to know what russia's role was in this election. that raises a lot of questions. and we need to get those answered. trish: "the wall street journal" has raised this point, that mueller may not be the best one for the job at this point, although if the president were to go out and sack him, you can imagine the political ramifications of that right now. >> i don't think the president should do that i think mueller should step aside. it is disservice to the country not to have no taint of potential conflict interest, no questions about how this investigation is is being conducted. i think his very presence there raises questions, not through his fault but it would be good for him to step aside. >> make an important point. you can not ever have the perception of conflict of interest because in some ways
perception becomes reality and frankly this is hillary clinton's problem. no matter what, even if she had nothing to do with anything regarding that deal for uranium one, knowing her foundation received all the money, knowing that her husband received all the money, brings up these questions and mueller, questions about him as well. jillian, thank you very much. >> thank you. trish: good to see you. s from tock top tech companies in washington, questions about russia using their platform to influence elections. we have the intel for you. see you here in two. retire until he was 68. the client realized, "i need to get back into the markets- i need to get back on track with my plan." the financial advisor was able to work with this client.
when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. ...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy.
trish: sarah huckabee sanders speaking now. let's listen. >> see some of the costumes. >> just as reporters. >> that is not nearly as exciting what you could have come but we'll let it slide for today. today i'm once again pleased to talk about the topic that we and more importantly the american people are all very excited about, tax cuts. we're approaching the release of legislation based on the tax reform framework that the president supports. unfortunately no matter how great the plan is for the hard-working families, democrats are expected to criticize the tax cuts as they have done in recent years, putting partisan politics ahead of their constituents pocketbooks. arguing over president reagan's 1981 tax cuts, democrats claimed it would only benefit the rich. democrat speaker of the house
tip o'neill, he caught them royal tax cuts because he claimed they favored most wealthy americans. what happened, 14 million new jobs were created five years, incomes grew over 22% for next seven years and economy grew by over 3.5% on average for rest of the decade. some democrats must have been paying attention to history, as recently as last year they publicly supported many of the principles for which the president is advocating today. that include lowering the corporate tax rate, which is the highest among developed nations so that our greatest businesses can be more competitive. in fact presidents obama and clinton both advocated for cutting corporate tax rates. senate democrat leader chuck schumer in the past called our tax system, upside down and inside out, and last year he actually admitted that cutting corporate taxes is quote, really important for american competitiveness. minority leader nancy pelosi apparently agreed because she said quote, it is long past time for tax reform that would lower
the corporate tax rate. the only thing that seems to have changed since then is who occupies the white house. since day one the president has been committed to jump-starting our economy and giving hard-working americans the raise they deserve. under the framework supported by the president, our economy will grow, businesses will invest back in the country and american workers will see their wages grow. in fact, the council for economic advisors estimates that a typical hard-working american family would get a $4,000 pay raise. so to democrats in congress, particularly those that like to place american jobs and middle class tax relief ahead of partisan politics, the question is very simple, do you believe the american people deserve a pay raise? we certainly do and that's what we'll be focused on fighting for. the choice is yours, and with that i will take your questions. reporter: sarah, where does the president stand on tax deductiona for state and local
taxes? >> we laid out the priorities for the tax cut plan of the those haven't changed. the president will continue working with house and senate and push forward to make sure principles he laid out are achieved. we haven't made any adjustments to that at this time. reporter: what about the mortgage interest deduction? >> again same point here. we haven't made any changes to the priorities that we laid out. i'm not going to negotiate between you and i but the president is going to be involved in ongoing conversations with members of both house and senate. we laid out what our priorities are. we'll stick to those as we move forward. reporter: conversation with speaker ryan just now? >> they're still meeting now. we'll have readout on meeting once it is completed. matthew. reporter: sarah, question on yesterday's mueller news. nominee to serve chief finance adviser, sam clovis, he was the cam sane supervisor cited in the papadopoulos plea. the lawyers acknowledgeed he encouraged papadopoulos in 2016
make a trip to russia, to meet with russian officials about the campaign the given all that is president still comfortable with him sam clovis in the administration. >> i'm not aware any change would be necessary. reporter: on that note, is the administration aware who three or forecampaign individuals referenced in papadopoulos plea, were be and serving in or advising the situation? >> i'm not aware of specific individuals. what i can say i think papadopoulos is example of somebody doing the wrong thing while the president's campaign did right thing. all his emails were voluntarily provided to special counsel by the campaign. that is what led to the process and place we're in right now was the campaign fully cooperating with that. what papadopoulos did was lie. that is on him. not on the campaign. we can't speak for that. jonathan. reporter: chief of staff john kelly says the council investigation has been very
distracting to the president. can you elaborate on that? what it is affecting to get his job done here? >> i don't think at all it is affecting his job here. you twice completely obsessed with this, while other things are happening a lot around the country. frankly people care a more about. media refuses to cover it. that is the distraction shun. instead of focus on tax cuts, tax reforms. my guess look at record, questions i take here day out, have far more to do with investigation frankly most americans don't care too much about and whole lot less of policies that impact them. reporter: why are you so confident that the investigation won't go on much longer? >> because we have confidence that it will come to a close in short time. glen, go ahead. glen, got a call. needed to phone a friend to get help with his question. [inaudible conversations] glen, i had more faith to ask a question all by yourself but.
reporter: other thing that general kelly said yesterday was, in left reference to general lee, he says the civil war was as a result of failure to compromise of the was he suggesting that there would be compromise on abolition of slavery? can you expand on exactly what he was talking about. >> all of our leaders have flaws. washington, jefferson, jfk, roosevelt, kennedy. that doesn't diminish their contributions to our country. certainly can't erase them from our history. general kelly was simply making the point that just because isn't perfect, that it is not our history. reporter: let me follow up. you are a proud daughter of the south. when you see -- [inaudible] someone like nathan bedford forest who was responsible for the fort hill massacre and other folks are there different ages, are there certain confederate figures don't deserve to be
honored like nathan bed for forest. >> i don't think we should debate every moment of history. there are moments that took place. there are moments we're a lot less proud of than others. we can't erase the fact that they happened. you have to determine where that line is. the president said those are something that should be left up to sit and local governments and that is not who i am representing here today. i will not get into the back and forth on it. john. reporter: thanks a lot, sarah, follow up what you said yesterday, what you have reiterated today about this investigation, and your belief it will be wrapping up soon, yesterday you said that those are the indications that we have at this time. from your point of view, is what you're saying, wishful thinking? is it spin? are you getting leaked information that gives you that indication? why do you continue to say that you believe that it is wrapping up soon? >> again, that position has not changed and we do think that it will wrap up soon. i didn't say it would be three or for days. i said soon. we hope that is the case.
in large part because we know that the facts are on our side. there was no collusion. we're looking forward to moving forward. hoping that you guys can as well. we can actually start talking about focusing on some of the things that i mentioned to jonathan. that we feel the american people would rather conversation be turned towards. jessica. sorry keep moving john. reporter: ask you one thing about, one of the prosecutors on bob mueller's team, the plea hearing for mr. papadopoulos last month he hinted at possibility of more to come in the investigation. he said the mueller probe is quote, a large-scale, ongoing investigation of which this case, papadopoulos case, is small part. so, given what he said, as an officer of the court, are you disagreeing with anything that he said in his remarks during that plea hearing? >> maybe his references in looking more to come between the democrats and clinton campaign since i think if there is any
evidence we've seen to date, it is between them, colluding with the other foreign governments. certainly not from our side. jessica? reporter: one question about what the president said today, then asia trip question broadly. first question is, the president mentioned in the tax reform meeting there he was going to be announcing, quote, soon, some companies that are coming back to the united states. can you either name them or give us the industry that we're talking about? >> i will not get ahead of announcements the president will make. if he wasn't willing to tell you i will certainly not step in and do it. >> the speech at apec is being a theme for the trip as well as indo-pacific. this administration see india as pivotal part of your strategy when it comes to the asia-pacific more broadly. >> certainly plays a big role and general mcmaster will be here later this week to discuss the trip in greater depth and more detail. he will be happy to address more of those questions at that time. reporter: -- steve bannon is
saying administration should push back harder against special counsel robert mueller. does the president support the -- special counsel? >> no. i'm not sure we push back against. all they have come up with ways shows there is no connection between the russian campaign and collusion. john the. reporter: thank you, sarah. first the president is quoted last year as calling mr. papadopoulos, and i quote a great guy. and today it was a liar. and, i wonder, just kind of clear the air, how well did he actually know him, and did he, was he briefed by him often? did he have frequent meetings? how well does he know this man? >> my understanding the only interaction he ever had was one meeting that the advisory counsel gathered together where he was in a large group of other people in the room, and to my knowledge that only interaction they ever had.
this was campaign volume teamer he wasn't somebody that was senior advisor, as many of you want to bill him to be. he was somebody played a minimal role, if one at all, was part of a voluntary advisory board. that is it. reporter: candidate trump, one time? >> that is my understanding. only incident we're aware of. reporter: other thing i wanted to ask a few weeks ago when the president sent out twitters about the media, he suggest equal time should be applied. to many people that was euphemism, fairness doctrine, something that president ronald reagan eliminate, democrats leader pelosi tried to revive. is he seriously in favor reviving fairness doctrine? i might add peer opponent of revival was a young congressman named mike pence? >> i don't know he is deep into the weeds of the fairness doctrine but i think he believes in fairness. i think he would like to see
that applied certainly to his administration in a way that is probably hasn't been so far. charlie? reporter: president, sorry, republicans senate candidate roy moore is on capitol hill today. does the president have plans to meet with him at any point today or this week before leaves for asia? >> no, there is no planned meetings at this time. blake? reporter: a lot to be negotiated on taxes. salt which was just brought up, possible phasing in corporate rate, just to name a couple, when the tax bill, whatever of it is released tomorrow, will the president wholeheartedly endorse this as his plan? >> as of right now we see no reason to feel otherwise. until we see the details of that, i'm not going to speculate on where we are. we laid out what our principles are. we expect that that piece of election to reflect those principles. if it does you will see the administration come in with full-throated support. reporter: with the fed, i know you will not give us a name, i
will not ask you to give us a name -- >> if i did. would it be fun? [shouting] >> that is the most excitement we have ever gotten out of this room. sorry. reporter: if you want to give us a name, we'll take it, my simple question has the president made his decision or is he still debating it? >> i can tell you it is not major garrett. but beyond that i don't have anything to weigh in on. reporter: during the campaign repeatedly castigated hillary clinton for not coming forward and coming clean when she got debate questions ahead of the debates. why didn't anyone in the trump campaign including his son, come forward, when there were solicitations from russian agents to provide dirt on his opponent? >> i'm not sure how those two things are even remotely related, so i couldn't begin to figure out how to answer that? reporter: getting sense of proactive duty to come mean when there is an ethical question. is the president upset people in his campaign did not come mean
when there were ethical questions -- >> i don't believe that to be ethical question. that is pretty standard campaign operating procedure. reporter: the russians -- >> that is not collaboration with russians. i know you want it to be but it just isn't. reporter: i have two questions. you've been very clear trump didn't collude and hillary did. what is your definition of collusion? >> exchanging millions of dollars to create false information is a pretty big indication. taking millions of dollars into a foundation that benefits you, while making decisions that impact people that behave that money. i think those are certainly areas of collusion that certainly should be looked at. reporter: my second question, follow-up from glen. robert e. lee, aside, i understand how all leaders have flaws, what kelly said yesterday was inability to compromise led to civil war. back in the spring the president said he thinks that andrew jackson could have made a deal to avoid the war.
what is compromise they're talking about? leave the southern states slave and northern states free, what is the compromise could have been made. >> i will no that i won't get into debating the civil war, many historians, including shelby-foot in ken burns civil war documentary was failure to compromise was a cause of the civil war. a lot of historians think that. there are a lot of different versions of those compromises. i will not get up lear to relitigate the civil war. there are certainly historical documentation that many people, and there are pretty strong consensus, people from the left, the right, the north and the south believe if some of the individuals engaged had been willing to come to some compromises on different things, it would not have occurred. reporter: thanks. apropos what is going on the hill, facebook disclosing 100 million americans were exposed to what amounts to russian propaganda, what is the
white house's view of that notion that more than 100,000 people reading washing what the russian outlets are putting out? what do you make of the notion there ought to be some kind of requirement that facebook be required to disclose the way that many broadcasters are required to disclose when political ads are made? >> i think we need to see you who the process works out over next several days. that is process you need to ask questions of facebook. that is not something the federal government can weigh in until findings of those investigations and hearings are completed. halle. reporter: follow up on something you said earlier. i want to follow up on conversations happening about the slavery compromise. i'm not asking you to relitigate the civil war. we don't need a history lesson on compromise that happened, does the white house at least acknowledge that the chief of staff comments are deeply offensive to some folks and historically inaccurate. no, as i said before, i think that you can't -- because you
don't like history, doesn't mean that you can erase it and pretend that it didn't happen. i think that is the point that general kelly was trying to make and, to try to create something and push a narrative that simply doesn't exist is just frankly outrageous and absurd. i think the fact we keep trying to drive, the media continues to want to make this and push that this is some sort of a racially-charged and divided white house, frankly the only people i see stoking political racism right now are the people in the groups that are running ads like one you saw take place in virginia earlier this week. that is the type of thing that i think really is a problem, and i think it is absurd and disgraceful to keep trying to make comments and take them out of context and mean something that they simply don't. [shouting] reporter: poll out that shows the public seems to have trust many of the mainstream media outlets that the president
criticizes more than they trust the president himself. why do you think this would be? and do you think that the white house agrees with that? reporter: i haven't seen anything to suggest that. i would have to look into it. i certainly can't comment on some study i know nothing about, don't agree with. reporter: sarah, given some criticism of the president -- advisors is the president happy with his legal team right now? does he feel well-represented, well-defended when it comes to the mueller probe? >> i'm not sure how he couldn't, considering as i said yesterday, i repeated several times today, all revelations taken place over the last several days and hours have and i think the further we get into it, the more and more we see that happening. kevin? >> thank you, sarah. i just wanted to ask about taxes and maybe just a very quick follow on the discussion about compromise. if i'm understanding you correctly, what you're really saying is he's not suggesting a compromise on slavery, he's
talking about other compromises that may have been germane to that part of history -- >> look i think that was part of the conversation a lot of people have had. he didn't get into the specifics because that's something that's been discussed very widely by many histarians from both the left, the right, the north, the south, however you want to look at it. and he didn't get into the details of it, because it wasn't the point he was making. >> on taxes, i just want to get a sense of what the president might be really interested in as far as the child tax credit and as far as the obamacare individual mandate. is it your opinion that the president would be supportive of both, meaning that may need to be a major tenet of the tax reform unveiled this week? >> he certainly supports the childcare tax credit. i'm sorry, what was the other piece? >> the obamacare individual mandate, does that have to be a part of tax reform? >> i don't believe it has to be part of tax reform, but the childcare tax credit is
something he'd certainly like the see. i'll take one last question. major. >> sarah, you said a few moments ago the papadopoulos plea agreement is an example of an individual doing the right thing, but the campaign doing -- doing the wrong thing, but the campaign doing the right thing. is that encouraging papadopoulos the go to russia on behalf of the campaign to so plus sit information -- solicit information? >> my understanding is he made false statements to investigators. that's something that the campaign, nor the administration would ever support. all of his e-mails, again, were voluntarily provided to the special counsel by the campaign, and that is how they got to the place that they're in right now. >> are you saying that clovis is being misinterpreted by george papadopoulos? >> i'm not getting into the detail, i'm talking specifically about the multiple attempts that he made in setting up a variety of meetings. there were more than one instance in which he tried to set up meetings that were rebuffed about the campaign.
he lied about a lot of those activities, and that is the place that you, i think, see come i through in the e-mails that were voluntarily turned other. >> you asked at one point during yesterday's briefing when the president became aware that -- [inaudible] you said i'm not sure of the specific date when that took place, so i'd have to look and get back to you. >> yeah, i can respond to that now. the president was briefed in a pretty widely-publicized meeting back in january. later that very day he said publicly he'd received the intelligence briefing, and he believed russia was behind the e-mail hacks. thanks so much, guys. hope you have a happy and safe halloween. thanks. [inaudible conversations] >> and she exits. manafort, gates, papadopoulos, all of that coming up with the media just now. we just have 30 seconds left, but i'm here with deirdre, and we've been watching the whole thing. the president probably feels like it's one giant tax -- one giant distraction from tax
reform. >> so while sarah huckabee sanders was speaking, the markets did lose a few points, since regaining. and, of course, this idea of whether or not corporate taxes will be phased in or not is one that many investors are focused on. getting town to that 20% rate by 2022. trish: deirdre, thank you. liz, over to you. liz: trish, of course, i was listening right alongside you and deirdre as sarah sanders said donald trump did not collude with the russians to throw the election. we know that the cold war is long gone, but the old soviet art of espionage is alive and kicking online. who let it happen? at this hour the big trifecta of social media goliaths under fire on capitol hill. facebook, google and twitter fending off questions from lawmakers on just exactly how russia was able to push thousands of political ads and bogus election articles in front of hundreds of millions