Skip to main content

tv   CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin  CNN  March 29, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT

12:00 pm
good about sharing information with us, because that enables us to do our oversight job that much better. >> and let me just -- i have confidence in richard burr that we together, with the members of our committee are going to get to the bottom of this. and if you get nothing else from today, take that statement to the bank. >> have you guys been in contact with michael flynn or, representatives of michael flynn quality also, can you go into a little bit of the thought process between why you would have an interview behind closed doors, and why would talk jared kushner behind closed doors or you would do it publicly, why would do that? >> well, i think it's safe to say that we have had conversations with a lot of people. and you would think less of us if general flynn wasn't in that list. from the standpoint of the interview process, if you feel like you're being cheated because they're not in public, if there's relevance to them, they will eventually be part of
12:01 pm
a public hearing. but any investigation of this kind will start with private interviews to determine the value of what a witness has to provide for the committee. one thing we're really conscious of, we weren't given a free pass to do a witch hunt. we were asked to do a real investigation and we'll see high-profile people and we'll see analysts from the intelligence community. or we may see a 28-year-old that happened to answer the phone at the white house on the wrong day when an ambassador called him and when they went around and said, who talked to the ambassador, they raised their hand. mark and i don't want that person to have a get a lawyer to be interviewed. we would like to bring him up and understand what role he played, if any, without any liability that extends to him. so we're really trying to assess each individual person of what the need is, but don't rule
12:02 pm
anything out for anybody relative to how public the information might be. i'm not going to tell you one way or another. yes, ma'am? [ inaudible question ] >> i think they start as early as next one, but i would probably be the wrong one to verify that. but they are immediate. >> and remember, the people who put together the january 6th report, most fall into that category. >> when you see a movie, it's roughly two hours. when you see how much film went into a movie, it's probably 50 hours. we don't want to just look at what was in the report. we want to look at what was cut and thrown on the floor. either an analytic product or an intelligence, to figure out whether an analyst made the right determination, with what we know today. what we know today is a lot more than what we knew in december, when they went through this
12:03 pm
process. got time for a couple more. right here. >> you said you're looking at connections with involvement with russian government. you're also looking at people involving organized crime in russia? >> i don't think we said anything about organized crime. we said anybody that had connection s to the russian government in connection with the campaign. >> but unfortunately, many people in russia who are part of an organized crime network seem to have ties to the russian -- >> i'll let that be attributed to him. >> [ inaudible ] 2018 election. so does this investigation need to be completed -- >> we sure hope so. >> tomorrow's hearing is with specifically that in mind. that we provide more public awareness, not just in this country, but throughout the world, as to what russia is up to. i think it's safe to say that u.s. officials have pushed what
12:04 pm
we know, not we the committee, what we the government know about russia's capabilities and intend, we've pushed it out to those countries that are most imminent to have elections. but i remind you that we're within 30 days of the first french election, four candidates. it will go down to two candidates with a runoff in may. i think it's safe by everybody's judgment that the russians are actively involved in the french elections. last one? >> [ inaudible ] thousands of documents, are they by hand or a similar setup to the senate program where the documents online? >> i'm not going to be specific as to how we're doing it, but there is no shared drive this time around. that didn't have a happy ending. so again, this gets back to what we said about every iteration is a new negotiation, and we're not
12:05 pm
complaining about that. we think it's really, really important that we had a clear understanding up-front, who has access, how do they treat the information they've got, how do they store the information, who's responsible for the security of the information. because you've got to understand, we're going to go through our investigation. the same people, asking about document documents, and in fact, to the security that we promise them, then you're going to have a committee that can't successfully do its job. >> one of the things we're doing, this is where part of the rub comes, the way i understand it, we're basically trying to get access that even goes beyond what the gang of eight has had. and how we have all of that in terms of raw products, and how
12:06 pm
we make sure that every committee member has said they've got to see or know some of this information of before they can sign their name on a finished product. there's some healthy tension there. >> for any of you that have been any at the confirmation hearings, one question you have heard of every person who was nominated and eventually confirmed, would you ask if the committee provided raw intelligence data. this is rarely a time a committee would ask for that. we'll test some people to see if their commitment is 100% correct. let me end with how we ended the first part. that is the committee will go wherever the committee leads us. you can continue to ask us 30 different ways about a person. trust me, when we have them scheduled, we will tell you we hope to make updates a periodic thing. we're not going to do them
12:07 pm
unless we have something to share with you that's educational, that shows you a little bit of the road map we're going down is just right now, we're not at a point that's every two weeks or three weeks or a month. we want to do it based upon the changing conditions of investigation. >> my last comment is simply a comment i've made before. when we started this, we saw the scope, what was involved. i said it was the most important thing i have ever taken on in my public life. i believe that more firmly now than even when i started. we'll get it right. thank you. >> we're going to get it right. the chairman and the ranking member of the senate intelligence committee. and that, ladies and gentlemen, is apparently how you handle a congressional investigation. devin nunes could learn a lot. david chalian, cnn political director, let me begin with you. agree? stark difference on the senate side? >> it's like night and day! remember, though, the house process started somewhat along these lines. i remember, i'm old enough to
12:08 pm
remember when devin nunes and adam schiff stood side by side. that's completely disintegrated now and this is in clear contrast. and you heard richard burr say at the top, we're not even going to entertain questions about that house process over there. clearly trying to distance himself from it. but i do think you have to -- what i take away from this, brooke, is the magnitude, the enormity, the seriousness of purpose that both of these men seem to have been bringing to this job. richard burr said, this is the biggest investigation hill investigation in his tenure on the hill. he got there in 1995, that's 22 years ago. and clearly they are committed to working together and i think if you're at home watching this after seeing all the shenanigans on the house side, if you're an american at home watching this, you've got to feel a little bit better that this senate committee is going to take this a little more seriously. >> do you agree, gloria? that people in america should
12:09 pm
feel more confidence listening to those two gentleman? >> it's an alternate universe over there. and i think we also learned some things here today, brooke. which were interesting to me. that they have 20 requests out there for interviews, five have been scheduled. they also -- senator burr seemed to imply that general flynn may either had been interviewed or will be interviewed. he said it was safe to say. he said, we have had conversations with a lot of people and it would safe to say general flynn is a part of that list. i also think one thing we learned here is that sometimes, congress can have a problem with getting all the documents it wants from the intelligence community. and that they're clearly right to work out how to do that. i mean, i think it was senator werener who called it a challenge. because sometimes congress wants more than the intelligence community is willing to give. so there's going to be a lot of
12:10 pm
give and take there, but what i got out of this, was that, as david was saying, these guys are serious about this. senator burr stood out there and said, i voted for donald trump, okay? let's get that on the table. i voted for donald trump, and we look at politics differently. but we're not going to let that get in the way of getting to the bottom of election year hacking and beyond. and this investigation will go beyond, they made it very clear, if that's where it leaks. >> and to add to that, mark warner stood by and said, let the rofecord reflect, i have fu confidence in my counterpart, perry bacon, over at 538. that is quite the contrast to juxtapose the chairman and ronking member on the house side, one of whom wants the other to recuse himself.
12:11 pm
>> i thought burr said two really important things. the first was, we're going to investigate this to wherever it leads, we're going to keep going. which means he's committed to taking this wherever it goes. which could mean big trouble for donald trump, it could mean anything. but burr, the republican, was dedicated to a big investigation. the second thing he said was, we're not going to coordinate with the white house. that's a huge contrast with burr versus nunes. i think various statements, burr was saying, i'm doing this. i'm not calling donald trump or coordinating with their office. i think those are two signs that he's going to be much different and that's going to be reassuring to americans. we assume mark warner, schiff, wants to investigate trump. it's important that burr is taking a much different approach than nunes is. >> jeff, let me bring you in. former kgb spy. you just wrote a book about your experience called deep undercover. my secret life entangled, allegiances at a kgb spy in america. let me ask you about another name we heard floated out there, who will be talked to as part of this investigation, jared kushner, the president's
12:12 pm
son-in-law, top adviser. and so we know that he had met with this russian banker, a man by the name of sergey gorkov. we know he graduated from a school that trains kgb agents. can you talk about vladimir putin and how he likes to bring in kbg agents to come in and help him out? >> it's a little bit different. when the soviet union collapsed, this was a big feeding frenzy about who would get the pieces that were being dismantled? and of course, kgb agents and folks who had some idea how to operate in a competitive environment were right there and a lot of those became oligarchs. and the ones that didn't want to play ball with mr. putin eventually either were eliminated or put in jail or left the country. so what we have now in place is a system that, an economic system, if you do business with russia, you have to be aware you
12:13 pm
are doing business with somebody who has the blessing of mr. putin. >> off of that, david chalian, back on this specific investigation and the house side. there was supposed to be a hearing yesterday, that got canceled. nunes wants to hit to comey privately, that's not happening. now he says, no meeting until easter recess. so then what? >> well, you heard trey gowdy this morning say, hey, we clearly have lost some time, but we can get back on track and play catch-up. they can certainly try to do that. but i don't think the house investigative -- the house intel committee and that investigation is going to be the place that you're going to find -- an american sitting at home is going to find the nonpartisan thorough answers they're looking for. >> perry, does nunes recuse himself? >> i'm pretty sure he went do
12:14 pm
that. i think the key thing to think about now, it sounds like nunes wants to run a leaks investigation to figure out what -- who leaked what about trump. that's what it seems like he's doing to me. where it seems like burr and warner are more focused on that story, but also the broader, what happened with the elections. i think these two investigations are going different directions. >> that was striking, that was striking. you didn't hear talk of unmasking names or anything like that. what you heard from burr and warner is, russians tried to hack the election, we're going to get to the bottom of it and let it take us wherever it take us. period, you know, stop. so very different kinds of investigations. >> yeah. thank you all so much. and let me just add a quick programming note to all of you. stay with cnn, because the current ranking member of the house intelligence committee adam schiff will join wolf blitzer in "the situation room" today at 5:00 eastern here on cnn. meantime, bill o'reilly makes fun of a councilman's hair. sean spicer dresses down a veteran white house correspondent.
12:15 pm
they're now reacting. and both of those moments inspired hillary clinton to speak out in her most political speech since the election. we'll discuss all of that. also ahead, president trump's remarks about iraq that american military are fighting even harder than they ever have. that's raising eyebrows. hear whou ohio how the white ho explained them, and was the president joking when he said health care would be easy? that a new deal can get finished quickly? more on that, ahead. i'm brooke baldwin. your insurance company
12:16 pm
12:17 pm
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
12:18 pm
12:19 pm
welcome back to the breaking news here on cnn. i'm brook bae baldwin. the senate intelligence committee announcing the boundaries of its investigation into the trump campaign potential ties to russia. a stark contrast, as you just heard all the different voices on my panel explain to the shenanigans on the house side, with the republican chairman of the intel committee on the house side, devin nunes, essentially not saying he won't recuse himself, despite calls from the ranking member for him to do so. phil mattingly is with me. he's been covering all the zigs and the zags on this. so, still, you know, you listen to these white house daily briefings, phil. the questions are the same with regard to, you know, sean
12:20 pm
spicer, do you net know hyet kn nunes was cleared to get into the skiff and what did he see, and still coming up with nothing. >> yeah, the questions are the same, brook, and the answers up to this point have been the same, as well. it's worth noting, when it notes who gets into the white house and how they get into the white house, according to former administration officials i've spoken to, they say that takes a matter of seconds, maybe minutes, at most, for senior white house officials to figure out if they want to figure out. but this is what press secretary sean spicer had to say today. >> you talked about on monday, monday you said to us from the podium that you would look into how chairman nunes was cleared here and with whom he met. can you give us -- we tried to ask you that yesterday as you walked out. do you have any information to live up to the commitment you gave us on monday to provide more details about how that happened, in a process you have just told us, yet again, is aboveboard and totally appropriate? >> i don't have anything for you on that, at this time.
12:21 pm
but again, i don't -- >> have you looked into it? >> i have asked some preliminary questions. i have not gotten answers yet. and i think there's a -- but -- so, no, i don't have anything further on that. >> reporter: the white house, obviously, not trying to figure this out. or if they know, they're not telling right now. sean spicer has made very clear. he was asked directly today, book, if he knew the source of devin nunes' information? he said, no, he did not. but what this has all done. we saw a very deliberate, very purposeful effort of the top two members of the senate intelligence committee to let everybody know, all is well, we are moving forward. one of the primary reasons for that is because of what's happening over on the house side, because of what has happened with devin nunes. because that investigation has essentially devolved into nothingness over the course of the last couple of days. and in talking to both democrats and republicans on the kicommite over the last couple of days, there are republicans who are just as frustrated with democrats. and one of the primary reasons why is not just the white house visit, it's not just chairman
12:22 pm
nunes talking about the new information that he has, it's the state of the investigation. the canceled hearings, the whether one was going to be public, one was going to be private. whether invitations were going to be sent out. and we're learning that the fbi, an official with knowledge of director james comey' scheduling says he did not say he wouldn't show up for a scheduled hearing. and they also have not received an official invite for another appearance on capitol hill. that directly contradicts what chairman nunes has been telling reporters and been telling committee members over the course of the last couple of days. basically, to kind of underline all of this here, this is an issue that is ongoing. it doesn't seem to be getting any less complex. and all this does is kind of cast a very dark cloud over an investigation that by all accounts, republicans or democrats, has ground to a halt over on the house side. >> phil mattingly, thank you. joining me now, dutch rutersberger. so congressman, a pleasure to have you on.
12:23 pm
welcome. >> well, good to be here. a lot going on. >> not a dull day for quite a while, sir. let me first get your reaction to both of the chairman burr and the ranking member, warner, over on the senate side. when it comes to this whole controversy, does it seem to you that the senate is acting a tad more mature? >> well, to begin with, witand having a hard time hearing you, i was glad to see burr and warner coming together. this issue involving russia is very serious. it's not going to go away. i think the american people know that we have to find out what the facts are, with who was involved. and if i was recommending something to the president, you know, when you have an issue that's very controversial, you need to get it all out on the table. and then move on. and do things that we need to do in this country. whether it's health care, taxes, infrastructure issues, that type of something. as far as denver nunvin nunes i
12:24 pm
concerned, i worked with devon. he has good intentions protecting and working in the intelligence area. but he made a mistake. and he admitted he made a mistake. but what's happening right now, devin nunes has become viral, and that's affecting his committee, which is a very important committee in congress and these people, republicans and democrats on the committee are very good people who want to get to the bottom. so -- i would -- >> but can you -- and hopefully you can hear me, but can you understand, it was such a stark difference between how we heard the senate side talk about this, on time, taking questions, you know, these two standing together. you take that and you compare it to what we've seen, this mess on the house side, i just want your read on that, because it's making, you know, your colleagues look bad! >> well, it's extremely disappointing. chairman rogers and i, when we were in leadership, we pulled everyone together. we worked together. we thought, but came together for the benefit of the country. and also, we oversaw that
12:25 pm
committee, the intelligence community throughout the world. and as a result of this issue, and devon's speak, he has put the whole committee in a situation where they're all being criticized and not being respected. and that has to stop. and i think devon, if you sit back and look at it, he could say he these to recuse himself from this russian investigation. and the same thing, there's precedent here. attorney general sessions did the same thing. because the american people, it's not about the person anymore, it's about getting to the bottom of this russian issue, once and for all. they're dangerous, they attacked us, and we have to find out the voflt of anybody involved in that -- in those instance incidents that occurred. go ahead. >> forgive me, i hear you use the word "mistake" in describing what devin nunes has done. i'm curious since the white house very easily could figure it out who it was who cleared him ooh into the scif, and informs that he has yet to share
12:26 pm
with other folks on his committee. do you think on behalf of the white house not being transparent, is that a mistake? >> i would be concerned if the white house played devin. i know devin thought he was helping the new president of the united states. but if you look at why our country is the greatest country in the world, our forefathers created a great system of checks and balances. and where devin went and where his problem is right now, is there's not the confidence that the checks and planses are there between the house sbleblintelli committee and the white house. >> how do you get the train back on the tracks, congressman? >> say again? >> how do you get the train back on the tracks? >> you get the train back on the tracks by devin saying, based on what has happened, it's not about me, it's about our country following the facts and finding out once and for all what's happening with respect to russia. all the facts that we immediate to know. and then if he recuses himself, then the committee comes together. the republicans and the democrats. and whoever would be assigned to take his position on this
12:27 pm
individual russian case, they would be able to move forward, just like the senate. you know, there's a lot to do here. the fbi has to continue to do their job. they're the best in the world, what they do in investigations. the intelligence committee gets classified information, and when they can, they give as much to the public, and eventually the public will have to know what's going on with the russia issue. this is why i hope the president understands this job that he has, that this issue has to be resolved for him to get credibility to do things that are successful, with taxes and health care and infrastructure and those type of issues. and so, you know, it's -- it can very easily in my opinion be fixed if devin could recuse himself like sessions did and then the committee does the same work as you saw the house and the senate. those two leaders there, we assuring the public that we're going to follow the facts, we're going to be transparent and we're going to protect america from russia. that's the key. >> congressman, i appreciate your time. i truly do. congressman dutch ruppersberger,
12:28 pm
thank you very much. >> okay, thank you. meantime, hillary clinton calling out racism, calling out sexism in washington after incidents involving two prominent african-american women, one by fox news host bill o'reilly the other by white house press secretary, sean spicer. we'll chat about this and we'll debate this, next. whether it's bringing cutting-edge wifi to 35,000 fans... or keeping a hotel's guests connected. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink. crazy. [ chuckles ] [ male announcer ] you get it all started... you bring them all together... [ chatter ] ...and sometimes cart them around, too. and when it comes to making custom t-shirts that make the event, you do it all with customink. with the best collection of styles and graphics to choose from, it's easy to go online and create custom t-shirts and more for all of life's events. free shipping and on-time delivery is guaranteed. go to to get started today.
12:29 pm
bring you more ways to helps reduce calories from sugar. with more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all, smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels, and signs reminding everyone to think balance before choosing their beverages. we know you care about reducing the sugar in your family's diet, and we're working to support your efforts. more beverage choices. smaller portions. less sugar.
12:30 pm
12:31 pm
12:32 pm
one of president trump's most vocal critics on this russia investigation is also at the center of a heated debate at race and gender many america. democratic congresswoman, maxine waters, targeted by fox news host, bill o'reilly. he set the twitterverse on fire
12:33 pm
when he made a joke about the california lawmakers' hair. hours later, white house press secretary sean spicer got into a testy exchange with april ryan, a veteran member of the white house press corps. first, let me play you both of those exchanges. >> when we fight against this president and point out dangerous he is for this society and for this country, we're fighting for the democracy. we're fighting for america. we're saying to those who say they're patriotic, but they turn a blind eye, to the destruction that he's about to cause this country. you're not nearly as patriotic as we are. >> so what does that mean, bill? we've been listening all morning, we can't -- >> i didn't hear a word she said. i was looking at the james brown wing. if you have a picture of james brown -- >> it's the same one. >> okay, i've got to defend her on that. >> you're all wrong about this. >> i have to defend her on this. she's a -- you can't go after a
12:34 pm
woman's looks. i think she's very attractive. >> i didn't say she wasn't attractive. i love james brown. >> april, hold on. you -- it seems like you're hellbent on trying to make sure that whatever image you want to tell about this white house stays, because at the end of the day, let me answer -- >> [ inaudible ] -- >> okay, you were asking me a question and i'm going to answer. which is the president is -- i'm sorry. please stop shaking your head again. but at some point, the reality is that at some point this president will continue to reach tout to individuals who supported him, who didn't support him, republicans and democrats to try to bring the country together and move forward on an agenda that's going to help every american. that's it, plain and simple. >> even now, hillary clinton has weighed in. in her most political speech since losing the 2016 presidential election, she ripped both o'reilly and spicer's comments as racist and sexist. >> just look at all that's happened in the last few days to women who were simply doing
12:35 pm
their jobs. april ryan, a respected journalist with unrivaled integrity, was doing her job, just this afternoon in the white house press room, when she was patronized and cut off, trying to ask a question. one of your own california congresswomen, maxine waters, was taunted with a racist joke about her hair. >> we've got a lot to get to. angela ry is with me, former director of the congressional black caucus. joe walsh is here, former congressman and conservative radio host. it is wonderful to have you two on. and we booked you to talk about your, you know, twitter battle, which i promise, we'll get to. but news has been made since. so, joe, let me begin with you. you heard hillary clinton's response. do you agree? do you think the original comments were either racist or
12:36 pm
sexist? >> hey, brooke. no, i'm rolling my eyes right now. because this is what the left always do. always does. they always go to racism. now, assume for a minute, brooke, that sean spicer was a condescending jerk yesterday. and i think he probably was. but what does that have to do with race? and what does that have to do with sex? brooke, sean spicer has been a condescending jerk to white male reporters a whole heck of a lot. if -- and prapril is a great reporter, but doesn't she want to be treated equally? why does this always have to do with race and sex? it's ridiculous. >> angela, how do you feel about it? i don't know if sean spicer is a racist. i don't know if donald trump is a racist. i don't know if the fallout that april experienced with omarosa, who's a white house staffer, has
12:37 pm
challenges because of racial anim animus. what i do know is april ryan was disrespected yesterday and unwarranted. what i do know is sean spicer is not april ryan's father, so he should not tell her what she should and should not do. what i do know is that i'm sick and tired of this white house, as i was sick and tired of the campaign, treating people less than. whether they're different because they are black or they're different because they cross the border, or they're different because they worship a different god or their god is known by a different name. i am tired of difference being disrespected and mistreated by this white house. >> so let me move on -- hey, bro brooke, brooke -- >> i'm not talking to bigots, joe. i'm not talking to bigots. >> no, no, no, angela had me. i agreed with the first 30 seconds she went off there. >> i didn't go off. >> i greed with everything she said. sean spicer was a condescending jerk yesterday. but then angela had to go to race. why did it have anything to do with race? angela, he has treated male,
12:38 pm
white reporters horribly before, too. what's the big deal? >> hold on, why -- why use the b-word, angela? >> because joe is a bigot. and i'll give you an example of why. since you brought up twitter yesterday, here's joe's tweet. "and you're way wrong on your main point, angela. we lowered the bar for obama. he was held to a lower standard because he was black." that is joe walsh's tweet. you all decided to give joe walsh a platform today. i'm not giving him the time of day. i'm interested in having conversations, brooke, that will move racial people of all races forward in this country. i'm interested in having a conversation that will help us to admit the wrongs that were done in this country and how we move forward. i am not interested in trying to convince and change the mind of a bigot. someone who will openly troll me and say things that are offensive, that he knows are not true. >> okay, okay. >> here we are -- >> let me just ask you, can you explain to me what you meant by
12:39 pm
your initial comments and about the so-called presidential bar. let's just back up for a second. >> hey, brooke, that's me? >> that's for angela. you were -- angela was on "a.c. 360," and she had had this conversation about lower the bar for president trump. here's the clip, and then angela, i want you to explain what you meant. >> sure. >> i think that the bigger issue that i have, speaking of having no chill, is that if this would have been under the obama administration, there would be no end to this. barack obama had to be the next best thing to jesus. and here we are, just two months in, and there is issue after issue, maybe it's not russian collusion, maybe it's collusion with the intel committee chair, but it's highly problematic. >> angela, first to you. tell me what you were getting at? >> sure, i think it speaks for itself. this president has been in turmoil since the campaign. he talked about grabbing women by their private parts.
12:40 pm
he is -- this is a man who, let's put the shoe on the other foot. barack obama, a black man in this country running for president with not one, not two, but three baby mothers. let's, you know, put the shoe on the other foot. someone who took a loan from their father that they call a small loan of $1 million. let's talk about all of those things. someone who discriminated against people who were trying to just find spots in his housing facilities. someone who took out full-page ads calling for the death of five young black and brown boys. if barack obama would have done any of that, brook, he would have never even made it to the general election. and that is the point. we're talking about a double standard. we're talking about lowering a bar. barack obama hurdled every bar that was put in front of him. when michelle obama talked about going high when they go low, they did it at every turn. this is a woman who was called an eight. who they put pictures up of barack obama looking like a monkey. these are the people i'm talking about. they hurdled everything that came their way, every obstacle, and this man, it is, it is, it's
12:41 pm
asinine to even think that this man is now in the white house. here we are in the middle of an investigation, but hillary clinton's e-mails. so, yeah, i mean, it's very fruf frustrating and i'm tired of people telling me that black people are beneath a standard when we have to be twice as good all the time. and that is why i said, i'm not interested in having a dialogue with someone like joe who has demonstrated a propensity towards bigotry. and he did that on twitter yesterday in 140 characters or less. >> whoo! >> hey, brooke. >> joe? >> i apologize, brooke, that you invited a bigot on your show. look, my disagreement -- >> whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. >> wait, are you now calling angela a bigot? >> no, he's the bigot. he's apologizing for himself. >> no, no, no! no, i'm sorry that angela feels like i'm a bigot, and i apologize that you invited me, a bigot, on to your show. i know you wouldn't do that knowingly -- >> okay, i appreciate that. i don't need an apology. i brought you on because of this
12:42 pm
conversation that y'all -- that happened over twitter. i'm just trying to understand. i want to understand where angela was coming from, from her initial comment. i want to understand why you had such a problem with what angela said, and you took to twitter and you let everyone know about it. i want to understand what your issue is. with that. >> and brooke -- and brooke, thanks, my disagreement had nothing to do with trump, when angela was making her case, she said that barack obama somehow had to live up to this perfect jesus christ standard that no other president had to live up to. my disagreement, brook, we, was about that. because i find that laughable. and it's got nothing, again, to do with race. never in our country's history have we had a president so like colded and pampered and protected by the media like barack obama. you talk -- that's not a high standard, brooke. he was held to a very low standard, because -- >> ridiculous -- >> -- because the media so loved
12:43 pm
him. >> no, no -- >> did you or did you not say that you lowered the standard because he was black. did you or did not say that the standard was lowered because he was black. did you or did you not say that? >> absolutely. >> and that is what makes you a bigot, joe. >> let me answer, angela -- >> that's what makes you a bigot! >> let me read the tweet, just to be precise on the language. on your main point, angela, we lowered the bar for obama. he was held to a lower standard because he's black. >> and who's the "we"? >> who's the "we"? >> the we is all of us. the "we," brooke, is the media. the "we" is wlhite liberals. >> you're not a white liberal. >> angela, are you going to let me speak or not? >> are you going to say something while your mouth is moving? >> yes. >> go ahead, joe. go ahead, joe. >> this is horrible. >> i'm talking about all of us. it was a big deal. we elected our first black president. that is a big deal. and because of that, we lowered
12:44 pm
the standard. we did not criticize him like all of our other presidents. we did vet him like all of our other presidents. >> oh, my god! >> we were invested in that first -- >> he was elected -- >> y >> are you kidding? >> -- just as president trump was elected. >> i'm just telling you what i think. >> i'm sorry, where are donald trump's tax returns? >> that's racist. >> what our talking about? >> i'm not defending donald trump. >> so donald trump's standard lower than barack obama's? please tell me you see that? >> okay -- >> barack obama had no experience and donald trump had no experience. >> that is not true! barack obama was a constitutional law professor! barack obama was a state legislator! barack obama was a senator in the united states senate! >> a state senator in illinois for ten years? >> i'm sorry. we elected a state legislator? >> he actually served in congress longer than you did. >> he was a united states senator, guys. >> you did one term.
12:45 pm
>> he got elected -- >> you did one term zp. >> no, he wasn't. >> you did one term. he served longer than you. so what kind -- >> angela -- >> but it's about you attacking black people for having lower standards. really? come on, man. >> can you, hey -- angela, angela, can i not attack barack obama and not be a racist? is that possible? is that possible? >> did you not say it was because he was black in the tweet? i didn't bring up race, joe, this is all you. >> okay. >> you went on twitter yesterday and accused me of saying and you later had to apologize for -- >> oh, my gosh. >> angela, is it possible to attack barack obama and not be a racist. >> okay, we're all talking each other. no one can understand what anyone is saying. no one can understand. i think we heard from both of you. i'm just sorry, i had no idea it would go this way. b but i do appreciate hearing two very different voices on something very, very important. >> thanks, brooke. >> let's just please be
12:46 pm
respectful to one another. we can have different opinions, but let's respect one another. angela and joe, thank you both so much. >> thanks, brooke. >> thank you. coming up next, president trump tells senators a deal on health care will be easy, just days after the first big attempt failed in a massive way. now the white house is reacting. we'll be joined live by former senator alan simpson, who is famous for working across party lines. his take on whether there is a bipartisan way forward. what makes this simple salad the best simple salad ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple veggie dish ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple dinner ever? heart healthy california walnuts. great tasting, heart healthy california walnuts. so simple. get the recipes at
12:47 pm
hi, i'm frank. i take movantik for oic, opioid-induced constipation. had a bad back injury, my doctor prescribed opioids which helped with the chronic pain, but backed me up big-time. tried prunes, laxatives, still constipated... had to talk to my doctor. she said, "how long you been holding this in?" (laughs) that was my movantik moment. my doctor told me that movantik is specifically designed for oic and can help you go more often. don't take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. movantik may cause serious side effects, including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and/or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. why hold it in? have your movantik moment. talk to your doctor about opioid-induced constipation. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
12:48 pm
12:49 pm
12:50 pm
just days after getting shelved, president trump's health care plan may be getting a reboot but instead of
12:51 pm
centering on a second chance at a vote it's the president's comment at a white house dinner that is garnering the most attention. let me play this for you first and then white house spokesman's sean spicer's explanation. >> and i know that we're all going to make a deal on health care. that's such an easy one so i have no doubt that that's going to happen very quickly. >> you have to review the tape. he was having a light hearted moment. he was spoking fun and making a joke. there's been comments before about how he didn't get it and he was joking about how easy it was. it was a light hearted moment. it was on tape. i think everybody -- and the idea that there is like -- trying to make it look lyrics you know, he was being utterly serious at the time is a little bit of a stretch. >> with me now former wyoming senator alan simpson, a man famously known for being a model of bipartisanship and bargaining and the republican half of the so-called simpson/bowles commission. senator simpson, long time no see. welcome back. >> how are you?
12:52 pm
here i am. a beautiful day. go ahead. go ahead and give me the works. >> all right. so here's the works. the question to you first is listening to the president, did it sound to you like the president was joking when he was talking about health care and how it would be easy? >> i have given up thinking what the president is thinking when he says things that he says he's thinking about. i've given that up, and i think anyone should give it up. i have no idea. i do know when you go to those functions there's a lot of, you know, crazy stuff. they are black tie. they are waiting for somebody to get their foot in their mouth. if they like them, they treat them and hug them and kiss them and if they don't like it they cremate them. that's the way it works. >> welcome to washington. reaching across the aisle is one thing, but, you know, you saw what happened with that non-vote vote on friday, failed because of the -- you know, of the
12:53 pm
intra-party wrangling. what do you think that the hoof freedom caucus? >> i don't know them, i really don't. we have a congresswoman liz cheney who is a very thought and brightful woman who follows her own star and does it beautifully. i have said of some of the freedom caucus. they are rigid as a fireplace poker but without the occasional warmth. i did say that. i mean, they are so rigid, i mean, you could get up next to them and they have bfrmt .o., heartburn and gas and they are 100%ers. they are seithers. i'm not that you can begun all of them. i'm talking about some of them. i'd rather be with the seekers than seethers and they are very tedious and give off an aroma and got to watch them. they got b.o., heartburn and gas, i know them.
12:54 pm
>> i got you, senator. i got you. i got you on the aroma. can we talk about the seekers though because you're known for, you know, reaching across the aisle. why does bipartisanship seem extinct other in 2017? >> the coin of the realm when i was there was trust, and the coin of the realm is severely tarnished. an example would be and ted kennedy. i didn't agree with his votes. i didn't care about his lifestyle. it has nothing to do with me. that's all his, but when he shook my hand and said i'm with you or i ain't, i put it in the bank, and it -- he never lied to me once. that's what it's all about. you don't have to like the guy who is a democrat or the republican. you can hate their party. you can hate their president but for heaven's sake the only way to do business is to learn to compromise an issue without compromising yourself is to trust the other person. if they break the trust, well,
12:55 pm
then start up a new, you know, facade or burn the bridges or whatever you're doing, but trust. there's no trust among people in the same party, in the same faction of the party there's no trust. i see a couple of the freedom caucus guys quit. >> that's right. >> and over on the left, you know, you've got -- i'm surprised that chuck schumer, and i say this because i like the guy, and we worked together. we worked together on immigration. he saved -- he saved me on one and i'll never forget that. i see a harshness on him now that ugly. that's not appropriate, and -- and if he's going to be ugly, you can bet mcconnell will be ugly and so we're right back where we were with harry reid and mcconnell, both of them batting around like a couple of prize fighters, and where will the country go, and pelosi knocking this one and this one going this way and ryan. i mean, it's nuts, and the
12:56 pm
american people have had it, and that's why this -- that's why this man is president. they have said we have had it. we know one thing. they are haul jerks, and, you know, bernie, look at berniep. he was doing pretty well, too. >> and forgive me for jumping in because i'm up against a wall and i'm out of time. i can only imagine what it's like to watch from your perch in wyoming and the goings on in washington these days. we'll have you back. senator alan simpson. thank you so, so much. we're back in just a moment. [vo] quickbooks introduces jeanette
12:57 pm
12:58 pm
and her mobile wedding business. she travels far and wide to officiate i do's. and quickbooks automatically tracks those miles. she categorizes with a swipe and is ready for tax time. find more than $4000 in tax savings. visit quickbooks-dot-com.
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
there's more talk about who is doing the investigating than what they are investigating. "the lead" starts right now. the senate says we got this with trust issues paralyzing the house side. the senate intelligence committee comes forward to investigate russia, the trump campaign and the 2016 election. fighting like never before? the commander in chief's surprising remarks about iraq raising questions about the role of u.s. troops. is he on the same page as his commanders? plus, who knew the first lady appear