tv At This Hour With Kate Bolduan CNN July 13, 2017 8:00am-9:00am PDT
investigation. what are you picking up? >> reporter: they want to interview donald trump jr. as soon as next week. i'm told by the chairman of the committee, republican chuck grassley, he is writing a letter that will be sent to donald trump jr. asking him to appear in a public session before the senate judiciary commit tie. this is as the ranking democrat told me earlier, she would like to see him as soon as next week. they are not ruling out the idea of issuing subpoenas if he does not comply to the request. now, this comes, of course, after donald trump jr. revealed following a number of revelations in the media, he did have a meeting in 2016 with a russian lawyer. the lawyer who apparently wanted to help them find dirt on the clinton campaign as part of an effort donald trump jr. was told by the russian government to help his father's campaign. this caused a lot of concern
among both parties on capitol hill and questions that members from key committees want to get answers, answers from donald trump jr., himself. that is one reason why chuck grassley and dianne feinstein are discussing bringing forward donald trump jr. as soon as next week. this is as the senate intelligence committee expressed interest in speaking to him. it's unclear if it will happen and when it will happen. if it were to be done in a public setting or behind closed doors. grassley wants to talk to donald trump jr. and paul manafort, the campaign chair manager who was in the meeting. we'll see if they agree to testify or need to issue subpoenas. >> this isn't just a big deal because it's someone who is a close adviser to the president in light of the bombshell news.
this is the president's eldest son being sent a letter, asked to testify in a public setting before the senate judiciary meeting. >> that's absolutely right. it's coming from republicans, too. >> right. >> the question i asked chuck grassley, i said what do you want to hear from him? they said there have been a lot of questions. this will be an opportune toy for him to explain what happened. what will be significant about this is this would happen under oath. everything donald trump jr. said so far, of course, hanover twitter or his appearance on sean hannity's program. it has not come under oath. you have to tell the truth under oath and means that his -- all questions about his any past conversations he had with any russian officials, any past ties to moscow in any way, all which will be explored. donald trump jr. said he would
be willing to testify under oath. he said that, so presumably, he would be okay with the request. we'll see what he says when the letter comes later today. they are planning on sending the letter today, asking him to appear before the committee. >> thank you, i really appreciate it. we'll continue to follow this. happening right now, president trump is meeting with french president emanuel macron in paris. very soon, the president will face reporters in a news conference. it is a safe bet he will likely be asked about an entirely different meting, the one between his son and a russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign. we are going to bo watching that very closely. we are also watching this. years of promises. days of threats and now a new version of the republican plan to overhaul obamacare is about to hit the senate. a plan that could affect every american in one way or another. this hour, republican leaders will be unveiling the plan to senators behind closed doors. the big question, of course,
does this bill change the math? remember, they can only afford to lose two of their own to get the plan over the finish line. also, breaking news at this hour, we have the new details of a new alternative that two republican senators are getting ready to roll out to the health care plan. first, we'll get to that in a moment. first, to ryan nobles on capitol hill. what are you hearing? what is the state of play? what are you hearing? >> nervous anticipation. the bill yet to be released to the public. we expect it some time this hour, then republican senators are going to gather for a gop meeting to discuss the details of the plans. most republican senators have not seen the actual bill itself. they have been relying on bits of information here and there from the gop leadership team that is crafting the bill. a big controversy this morning, will there be an amendment crafted by senator ted cruz and
senator mike lee that will deal with insurers, allowing insurers to offer plan that is do not fall under the regulations of the affordable care act. this is a key provision they were looking for. there's talk a version of the cruz amendment will appear. mike lee from utah tweeting he has not seen the bill, but the one he and ted cruz wrote will not be in the bill. some version of it, but he doesn't know if he can support it. a very small margin for error if republicans want to get it pass zed. >> it has been since the beginning. the devil is in the details. we are watch thag closely. it's happening this hour. now to the new, new alternative we can call it. dana bash has more on this. dana, lindsey graham, bill kassidy, they think they have the collusion and can thread the needle. what do we know about what they
are planning to roll out? >> reporter: as ryan laid out, kate, the prospects for the current health care which will be unveiled is very much in jeopardy. lindsey graham and kassidy have been working to craft a gop alternative. the health care bill is something we have the first details on right here. first the gist is, it would keep federal taxes on wealthy americans in place and block grant the money to states. graham and kassidy, who have been working closely with rick santorum argue that one of the main reasons republicans are having a hard time agreeing on a health care replacement bill is because they are working from the obamacare template. another big problem with the senate republican bill unveiled is it gives a tax cut to wealthy americans and makes cuts to
medicaid which helps many afford health insurance. the key to whether or not this new alternative will work is whether they can get buy in from republican governs. that is the focus. many republican governors feel their states and constituents benefited from obamacare. many of them have a lot of sway with pivot ol gop senators. the hope among graham and kassidy is that this is, you know, politically probably a hail mary. policy wise, they argue it is good for republicans because it makes conservative happy by sending control to the states and gop moderates happy maintaining the critical help their constituents need. kate? >> they are just rolling this out. do you get a sense of where the buy in, forget the governs but the senators at the moment? >> reporter: the answer is, they don't know. they say they are having a lot
of people, conversations with a lot of people who like the idea, but you can't underestimate the republican governors, particularly for some of the vulnerable republican senators. again, some of whom represent states where obamacare is working. they feel if those republican governors say hey, this is a good idea and i can work with this, that could get the ball rolling. look, here is the reality. what the republican leadership and what the president wants is 50 votes. they want to get 50 republican votes. they want something that can pass and what they are working on to fix the underlying, the current republican bill to get 50 votes, okay. if not, what graham and kassidy are hoping is this is an alternative that is different to shake things up. >> you mentioned a hail mary. maybe that's what they need. we will see. we are in hail mary territory. we are so good at football. great to see you.
thank you so much. we are going to have senators lindsey graham and bill cassidy and join me live ton health care effort. that is coming up. stay with us. also, any moment now, we are expecting to see president trump and president macron sitting down for a bilateral meeting. the two leaders and their wives met this morning. president trump and macron exchanging another handshake. i'll leave you to decipher how it compares to the last handshake. sarah murray is standing by, traveling with the president. we saw the greeting and saw them touring around. what are we expecting today? >> reporter: they are in a more formal, bilateral meeting. this is where the substantive stuff will happen. counterterrorism, strategies for dealing with syria. they are areas where president
trump and french president emanuel macron see the world in a similar light. what was not listed as a key topic is climate change. it's certainly something that could come up. this is a place where the two world leaders differ. as always, with president trump, you never know what is going to come up in bilateral meetings. he might bring up something else. they might compare notes like who they met with at g-20 and how they felt about different world leaders, for instance, vladimir putin. after that, the more unpredictable part. we will see them both in front of the camera and make statements and take questions from the press, two from the american press and two from the french press. you can bet president trump is going to be asked about this meeting his son donald trump jr. had with a russian lawyer. this will be the first time president trump is answering these questions publicly in front of cameras. he's made a couple comments about how he doesn't necessarily blame his son in interviews.
there is a broader question about credibility in this white house. why should the american public or the world community believe what the president says after they gave so many blanket statements about no meetings, then drip, drip, drip, more meetings occur like the one we have been talking about with donald trump jr. and the russian lawyer. that is something to watch for. >> great to see you, thank you so much. we are going to keep an eye and waiting for that news conference to start. we'll bring it to you live. with me now, cnn national security and legal analyst and former nsa attorney, susan hennessey is here. national security correspondent for "the new york times," david sanger is joining us now. david, on the news manu rogers brought to us. the security is sending a letter to donald trump jr. requesting
he come to testify in a public session before the committee and they were talking as early as next week. that's a big development. >> it's one you have to expect. once, you know, if you think about the sequence of events that started this, jared kushner, the president's son-in-law failed to disclose meetings he had been in. he submitted his form, updated form. it revealed this meeting. that led to the cascade of events that took the times to the e-mails which ultimately donald trump jr. revealed. here you have where it feels like it's playing catch up to the media and to a white house that keeps saying, as -- meetings with the russians and there's one more. this one, being particularly notable for one reason. what those e-mails establish,
more than anything else is that the campaign was notified by an intermediary that a russian government wanted to help them and provide them information. the usual thing to do when you have that about an adversary government is turn it over, immediately torks the fbi. >> that's not what appears to have happened here. >> that did not happen, yes. >> exactly, by anyone's account. open to more information coming to light. at this point, the white house has to expect the president is going to get questions about this today, not only the evolution of defenses that came from donald trump jr. but kind of an evolution in the statements coming from the president as well. it started out as a terse statement. i didn't know about the meeting. then it turned into denying knowing anything about the meeting, now he's defending the meeting saying anybody would have taken it. >> the central question that
underlies this whole thing is, did the president know about this meeting? did he know about the context which this meeting happened? there were a couple things in the e-mails that emerged in the last couple day that is struck out at me. one of the most important, i think, is this idea that don jr.'s intermediary, who conveyed to him the russian government wanted to help his father also asked and suggested that he might present this information directly to trump himself, through trump's sort of secretary, who would have been a sort of gate keeper for the president. that is unresolved. was there ever an attempt to pass this information directly to the president. hours after don jr. confirmed that he was going to go ahead and meet with this russian lawyer, the president went out and said, you know, i have information about hillary clinton and her dealings with foreign governments, including russia that i'm going to present
to you in a press conference next week thach. that press conference never happened. a lot of people were saying what is he referring to? what he suggesting the information he would have conveyed to the american public in a press conference? because the meeting turned up nothing, the press conference never really happened. there's a really big question mark here. there's a reason why nobody wants to talk about what the president knew and when. the statements he only found out in the last couple days are going to become extremely important as more information is uncovered about what happened here. >> don jr. says he never talked to his dad about it because he didn't think it was worthwhile. he was asked the question under oath. we'll see what happens then. susan, the president did an interview with reuters and spoke about this and also his meeting with president putin where there are obviously conflicting
reports about what was said and what came out of it. to reuters, the president would not say if he believed putin's denial of interfering in the election. he also wouldn't clearly say if he trusted putin at another point of the interview, which i find fascinating. are they hard questions to answer for a president? >> it shouldn't be difficult. his decision not to include anybody other than secretary of state, rex tillerson in the meeting, there wasn't anyone with credibility that can say this is what happened. the president has not been consistent with whether or not he believes there was russian interference. he says it could have been anyone. it's clear he is not convinced or not willing to consistently publicly acknowledge this reality. >> guys stand by if you will. we have a lot more coming up. what did the president know? what did the president know and when about this meeting?
lawmakers are demanding answers with an urgent push to get donald trump jr. and others to testify. i'm going to speak live with with a member of the house intelligence committee. republicans will be holding an all hands on deck meeting with the state of health care efforts. before they do, i'm going to speak live with senators rolling out an idea. that's next. tech: when you schedule with safelite autoglass, you get time for more life. this family wanted to keep the game going. son: hey mom, one more game?
tech: with safelite, you get a text when we're on our way. you can see exactly when we'll arrive. mom: sure. bring it! tech: i'm micah with safelite. mom: thanks for coming, it's right over here. tech: giving you a few more minutes for what matters most. take care! family: bye! kids singing: safelite® repair, safelite® replace.
republicans have a 52-vote majority. they can only afford to lose two of their own and pass a health care overhaul. two senators, exactly, two republican senators are coming up with an alternative plan which they think is the answer to getting this done. joining me now are the two senators. gentlemen, great to see you. thanks for coming in. >> thank you. >> senator graham, in a
nutshell, you are taking obamacare money and giving it back to the states. >> yeah. >> why is this plan better? >> in a nutshell, we are keeping the taxes in place on the wealthy. we are repealing the individual mandate, the employer mandate that 75 senators voted to repeal. there are $500 million of money. rather than running health care from washington, we are going to block grant it to the states. here is what will happen. if you like obamacare, you can reimpose the mandates at the state level. you can repair it if you think it needs to be replaced. you can replace it if you think it needs to be replaced. it is up to the governors. they have a better handle on it than any bureaucrat in washington. >> how does this way of putting forth health care insure people can afford the health care they need? >> you are giving money back to the states. they are able to have their
needs addressed. if we couple it with the ted cruz amendment, which allows people to get it through a health savings account. they put money in with which to purchase the insurance you need. the essential benefits will be there. we can't repeal those as part of the process. you have the protection. this perfectly fulfills the jimmy kimmel test. >> does every state give the same amount of money from the federal government? how does its decide? >> we will come up with a formula that is fair to the states. it will have an inflation rate regionally based. inflation will be there but based on region. we are going to incentivize states if they beat the rate. the formula going back to the states is important. here is the main thing. instead of a refundable tax credit going to individuals and
the tax code being used to manage health care, we are going sever health care policy from the federal tax code, block grant the money back to the states. it will be a state block grant to individual entitlement and each state treated fairly and the more efficient you are, the more money you have. >> speaking of entitlement, senator graham, what does it mean for medicaid. through this alternative, you guarantee they don't lose coverage? >> medicaid is a completely separate issue. we are going to make it more sustainable. i'll let dr. cassidy talk about medicaid. we are talking $500 billion that didn't exist under previous republican bills. the thing we are doing is leaving in place the taxes on the wealthy, taking that money and giving it back to the governors to come up with bert health care. if you like obamacare and want to repair it you can. if you want to replace it you
can. as to medicaid, i'll let dr. cassidy tell you what we are doing. >> go ahead, sorry. >> it may be the taxes are revealed, but on the comprehensive tax reform, part of this. the problem has been trying to combine tax reform with replacement of obamacare. putting them together has not worked. we sequence it and accomplish both. >> on the taxes, if you leave them in place, are you no longer -- are you giving up on repealing obamacare? >> no! absolutely not. we are actually giving, as senator graham said, the money back to the states. the states decide what they can do. a blue state can do a blue thing, a red state a red thing. my state is going to repeal and replace obamacare with giving power to the patient. it starts with giving power to the state. we give the money to the states.
>> senator graham, let's talk about politics. is mcconnell on board? >> we are going to support his effort with his plan, but we want an alternative. we are not undercutting mitch, he's not undercutting us. here is the politics. itis hard to take money from the poor to give to the rich. when you combine tax policy and health care policy, it's a losing proposition. we are going to leave in place the obama tax increases on the wealthy, but take that money and give it back to the states, rather than giving it to bureaucrats in washington. if you like obamacare the way it is, you can do that. if you want to replace it like south carolina and louisiana will do, you can do that. that's the lift to republicans, keeping the money in place. here is the challenge for democrats. particularly moderate democrats. tough go to your governor in your state and say we don't trust you with this money.
we trust the bureaucrats more. that's tough politics. they have to pick between a washington bureaucrat and people in their own state. >> if this amendment does not make it in the final bill, are you a no on the republican effort? >> um, i'm not -- i've not seen the final bill. what i am trying to do is, from what i have heard, make it more likely to get 50. you are more likely to get 50 if you return power to states. traditional proposal, by the way. it's a tenth amendment proposal. we actually think it works better. whatever that final bill is that we are going to be presented, we think it makes it more likely to get to 50. it's more in concert to republican principles. >> from the democratic pounlt of view, it's no longer about the money. we are going to have money. we are going to keep the taxes in place on the wealthy. i think some democrats will be attracted to the idea of power
out of washington as long as you have the money. >> right now, no democrat on board? >> not yet. just to be continued. >> to be continued. let's continue to this. i want to ask about the breaking news. we'll see where your republican colleagues land on your alternative you are throwing out today. we learned that chuck grassley, the chair of the senate judiciary, is sending a letter to donald trump jr. to request he appear before the committee in a public session to testify about the news, his e-mails, the meetings. what questions do you have for donald trump jr.? >> you need to listen to the hearing. i'm not going to tell you now. we agreed on this yesterday. he's a relevant witness in terms of judiciary jurisdiction. mr. manafort will come. we are going to get to the bottom of what happened the best way we can. we are going to give donald trump jr. a chance to tell his side of the story. you have to watch the hearing to know what i'm going to say. >> thank you for the tease.
we will watch. this happened in a hearing yesterday, senator graham, you made clear with the confirmation hearing of christopher gray, what you thought a politician should do when it comes to if they were ever approached bay russian promising dirt on an opponent. we can play that for viewers to remind them. >> the director of the fbi. so, here is what i want you to tell every politician. if you get a call from somebody suggesting that a foreign government wants to help you by disparaging your opponent, tell us all to call the fbi. >> the president said in an interview just yesterday that many people would have taken that meeting. he said this, senator, most of those phony that is act holier than thou, if the same thing happened to them, they would have taken that meeting in a heart beat. what do you say to that? >> the president would be wrong to do so.
one, the russians are not going to come to help me because they hate me and i hate putin. if any government tried to help my campaign, i would say no. if the ukraine government is trying to help hillary clinton because they don't like manafort and trump, most republicans wouldn't like that. we are not going to let foreign governments interfere in our election process by helping one candidate over the other. with all due respect to president trump, the answer is no, you don't take meetings from foreign governments to help you. you can go to jail for this, maybe. >> maybe. that is to be determined. senator cassidy, the president still says this. here is another part of the interview with reuters. there was zero coordination. it's the dumbest thing i have ever heard. there's no coordination. this was a hoax. this was made up by the democrats. can the president still say that after these e-mails were released, that it's a hoax? >> clearly, he can say it.
but i'll trust the judiciary committee and senate intelligence committee and the fbi to exonerate. it's not up to me. it's up for these folks to investigate and the american people will know the story. >> here is what i can say, kate, the fbi director doesn't believe it is a witch hunt. the e-mail in question for donald trump jr. basically talks about receiving help from a foreign government. apparently the meeting did not materialize in help, but you don't want to go down that road. all i can say is president trump looks forward to helping us pass a health care bill. i will pursue justice where it takes. i will get to the bottom of russia without favor to anybody on the republican side. but, i am trying to work with the president to pass health care that most americans care a lot about. i'm going to do two things at once. i hope he does, too. something tells me president
trump welcomes this idea. we met with the white house and they were excited about our approach. >> do you believe the president wasn't aware of this meeting when his son, son-in-law and campaign chair sat in on it? >> kushner and manafort were copied on the e-mail chain. i don't know how many e-mails they would say. i could see you could have a 20 minute meeting and the president not know about it. nobody was overly impressed with what she had to say. here is the point. the contact was about the russian government wants to help the trump campaign. this person may have information disparaging to clinton. it was a mistake to take that meeting. i think donald trump jr. said in hindsight i shouldn't have done it. nobody suggests that any information was pass zed. we are going to keep looking. were there other meetings with other russians? i'm going to go where the facts take us and try to be a senator on health care also. senator cassidy and collins had
a really good idea. i jumped on board early. we are taking their original concept and making it more robust and more palatable. governors are going to like what we are doing. >> walking and chewing gum at the same time. what a novel idea on capitol hill and beyond. senator graham, senator cassidy thank you for coming on and taking my questions. thank you. good luck. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. a member of congress investigating the trump campaign's contact with russia, a different member of congress. you are going to hear what he says about the president's defense about his son's meetings and why president trump says vladimir putin would have actually preferred hillary clinton be president. that's coming up. plus, we are going to show you live pictures. right now, we are moments away from president trump facing the media, holding a news conference in paris. stay with us. we'll be right back. (dog) mmm. this new
beneful grain free is so healthy... oh! farm-raised chicken! that's good chicken. hm!? here come the accents. blueberries and pumpkin. wow. and spinach! that was my favorite bite so far. (avo) new beneful grain free. out with the grain, in with the farm-raised chicken. healthful. flavorful. beneful. finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor.
this summer hbo and xfinity have you covered. and catch the game of thrones season 7 premiere on july 16th. winter is coming to xfinity. very soon we will hear from president trump in his first news conference since his son's e-mail stirred more controversy. the president will take questions next hour. this comes as republican sources describe the white house as paralyzed after the development that donald trump jr. not only took a meeting with someone billed as a russian government attorney, but one promising information that would damage hillary clinton and help his father's campaign. that would come straight from the russian government. trump jr. now says he would have handled the whole thing differently. the president, himself, however, said to reuters yesterday, many
people would have taken that meeting. joining me now to discuss, democratic congressman from california, eric swallow. thanks for coming in. >> thanks for having me on. >> we have the news that cluck grassley is sending a letter to don jr. to ask him to testify in a public session. your committee, however, wouldn't say if you want don jr. to come testify. do you have any indication that he's going to be asked? >> i hope he does. he's a relevant witness that met with russians during the russian interference campaign and before the election. if you have a list of people who should be before the committee, he ranks at the very top. >> you already, as far as we know, have one person from that meeting scheduled to come before the meeting, paul manafort. what questions do you have now, in light of this news that was scheduled before. what questions do you now have
for manafort? >> we have an agreement that we don't go into who is coming and when. generally, what we want to know is who met with russians during the interference campaign. what was the purpose of the meeting. what information was exchanged and why weren't contacts reported to the fbi. why have they only been reported once reported in the press. those are fair questions and can tell what the trump campaign was up too. >> is there an urgency in light of the e-mails to get these individuals before the committee? >> yes. there's always a fear of once information like this becomes public that witnesses could destroy evidence. that's in any case. we want to gather the evidence, talk to the witnesses as soon as posz zable. we don't want them to work together and work up a story. we want to talk to them while
the information is still closely guarded, before it's too public and they can come up with innocent explanations to cover what could be quite a concerning behavior. >> let me ask you, congressman, president trump argued regardless of meetings, he doesn't think vladimir putin was in his corner. listen to this. >> if hillary had won, our military would be decimated. our energy would be much more expensive. that's what putin doesn't like about me. that's why i say, why would he want me? i want a strong military. he doesn't want to see that. i want fracking and everything to get energy prices low. he doesn't want that. he would like hillary, where she wants to have windmills. >> congressman, would vladimir putin been better off with hillary clinton as president? >> kate, i don't want to go there. if you think about the trajectory of what donald trump
is doing, no collusion, never met with russians. he's confronted with a number of contacts his team had with russia. it looks like the explanation was, well, we have to do this because hillary was going to be awful and we are going to make america great again. it's sickening that's where he wants to take us. the evidence is so overwhelming they were working with the russians. >> there was a willingness to have a meeting. if you listen to what president trump says, he was careful saying i was never aware of and i never had a meeting. >> it's clear his son did and his campaign chair did and his son-in-law did. again, kate, what i'm afraid of is he is going to try to turn this to, well, we are all better off. wouldn't we have all wanted to know this information by the russians? so what that we had to cheat?
that is very disturbing movement we are seeing. it started with no russians, no collusion. now, it's starting to drift more towards, well, we would be better off without hillary. >> a few democrats now have said that with the e-mails, this is approaching treason in their view. i'll tell you, i don't think i have heard a single legal analyst say that is where we are at this point. are your fellow democrats going too far? >> my job is to make sure the american people understand who, if anyone was working with the russians. what we can do most importantly so this never happens again. i will leave the conclusions to what it was criminally to robert mueller. we want to put out information to the american people about what happened. once people are judged on what they did and held accountable, the most important thing we can do is make sure we are never in a position where a foreign adversary can do this.
>> you are with holding judgment. do you think your fellow democrats should as well, rather than go to treason right now? >> we shouldn't jump to conclusions until the evidence is tested. when you look at the evidence of the don jr. meeting, they are in focus with the meetings the trump campaign had where they were offering innocent explanations. now the explanations don't seem so innocent. a thorough investigation should be conducted. >> congressman, i'm so sorry. if you could hold on to me, i want to go to a different part of capitol hill. paul ryan is speaking. >> the other options, now that you have passed something do you think you have done your part? >> i want to give them the space to get their job done. we have a promise to keep. we kept that promise in the house. i look forward to seeing the senate do the same. >> would the house stay in session through august? >> the senate is going to give
us a health care bill, we are going to stay and finish the health care bill. >> senator grassley is sending a letter to don jr., donald trump jr., asking him to testify about his meeting. should the president's son testify in public? >> i think any witness that has been asked to testify before congress should testify. i'll leave it up to the congress and committee. anybody asked to testify to the senate should do that. >> authorized the faa to come to the floor next week. there's been changed to it. the crux is the same, to remove air traffic control. what's changed this year to support it now? >> i will defer to chairman shuster. it's changed. that's why you have seen so much more support for this bill than you did last year. we are going through the conversations with our members on this bill right now.
it's a big change. look, here is the problem with the faa. we are in the 20th century. we have a 20th century system in the 21st century. we need to upgrade the entire air traffic control for a lot of reasons, safety and efficiency. chairman shuster put together an effort. he's educating members. i don't think we whipped it yet. i think we are whipping it today. we'll see how that goes. >> does the president support -- >> yeah, i think the president's support did help. yeah. who you with? [ inaudible ] >> on the human trafficking do you think -- >> paul ryan is taking questions from reporters. guys do we still have the congressman with me? thanks for sticking around with me. >> of course. >> you can hear there, when asked about the grassley letter, he was careful in language saying anybody asked to testify should do just that.
i know you will agree with the house speaker on that front. a final question for you on what we are learning and what we have learned regarding the meeting, the e-mail, what folks knew and did not know. do you take the president's word that he did not know and wasn't aware of it? >> i hate saying this, but i don't think we can take the president's word for that. i wouldn't say that for any other president other than nixon. that's because the president's deceitful claims about president obama wiretapping him, the tapes with james comey, which proved to be false. i think we have to, you know, make sure we test that and corroborate whether it's true or not. >> how do you test that? one option may be asking don jr., who was in the meeting, to testify under oath. >> the way you test it is hearing from relevant witnesses, looking at documents, getting
things to verify or repudiate what the president said. >> thank you for coming in. i appreciate it. >> my pleasure, kate. >> we are following new developments just in as republicans are getting ready meet behind closed doors in the senate on health care efforts. senator lindsey graham and bill cassidy just unveiled an alternative that they think could get this effort over the line. it would keep obamacare taxes on the wealthy in place. will their republican colleagues be on board with that? we will discuss. soon, president trump will hold a news conference. we'll go live to paris. a lot going on today, stay with us. d, through sickness and in health, until death do us part. selectquote can help you keep your promise. with life insurance starting at under a dollar a day. but you promised daddy. come on. selectquote helped michael, 41, keep his promise, by finding him
a $500,000 policy for under $27 per month and found vanessa, 37 a $750,000 policy for under $21 per month. since 1985, we've helped millions of families, by finding them affordable coverage by impartially shopping highly rated insurers, offering over 70 policies. dad, don't be late, you promise? i promise. keep your promise.
bake to breaking news. two republicans unveiling a new health care plan this hour they think will help republicans get their efforts over the finish line. in short, leaving obamacare taxes on the wealthy in place and send that money in block grants to the states to manage health care. basically trying to take it of you 0 the hands of the federal government. this as president trump prepares for a joint news conference with french press macron in paris, expected, of course, to face questions about two of his family members. donald trump jr. and jared kushner, facing questions about a meeting with a russian attorney. rick santorum is here, former republican senator and former president candidate. hilary rosen, democratic strategist. senator, first to health care, if we could. you were deeply involved in pulling together this proposal, this idea senator graham and
cassidy just announced. how does this thread the needle to get enough republicans onboard? >> one of the reasons i brought this to lindsey and conservatives on capitol hill is because this is really a re-do of something successfully accomplishmented with bipartisan support, i might add, back in 1996 called well fehr reform. that you give sufficient amount of money to states to deal with the problem and let the states innovate. did it through a block grant, tanf. and that block grant has not been increased in 20 years. why? because the states were able to successfully drive down costs get people often welfare to work. use the same model considered the greatest republican suctis s and democrats touted it a success, too, find common ground again. get this money out of washington, drain the swamp, stop the money from being orchestrated spent in washington, give it out to the states, put cost containment to
drive innovation and better quality care and let the states do it in 50 laboratories of success. >> hilary, part of that, they're not getting rid of the obamacare taxes on the wealthy, that democrats were very upset about. is this a positive step forward? >> sure. leaving those taxes in there helped fund the bill, but this is just sort of a silly approach, i think. i get that if you were sort of starting in welfare maybe you would do that, but here we have millions of people who signed up with the federal health care system to go into a state-by-state plan, which the new plan still doesn't address how this is going to help the states bolster their individual exchanges, and then you have a complete switch now where everybody has to go reapply all over the place, not knowing whether their state is going to end up having the resources to support the plan. so it's sort of looking like a
solution without a problem, to me. i think what we're friinding is republicans are really struggling to make a bill that has this system look different than it is, but not have any of the down sides of what they know that people really don't want. which i wonder why bother doing anything at all? just support the existing system with fixes that bring people, actual health care, all the senators proposal is going to do is going to turn around -- the system upside-down and not give anybody better care. >> hilary hasn't risened to, as announced, california, new york, a state wants to keep obamacare just as-is, they can keep it they way. improve obamacare, fix it. if they want to get rid of obamacare -- 19 states had no expansion, design their own system. hilary, you couldn't be more wrong.
in new york or other states want to maintain the current system we give them the right to do so. this is the problem, the difference between hilary and me. she wants to dictate everything from washington. i'd like to give the states to design the best plan for them. >> first of all, you're not changing the care that way and second of all, if you leave -- take out the individual mandate, which i gather. by the way, think proposal has only been out 15 minutes. the real experts haven't analyzed it and i am certainly not an expert. but if you take away the mandate requiring people to buy care you are still undermining the system, because you have leaving the sickest people in the system. >> if i could -- >> that hurts the overall system. go ahead. >> i'm sorry. quickly ask -- >> impose a mandate if they want. >> i want to ask quickly -- >> it's up to the state. >> the politics where we are right now. the fact that two senators are rolling out a new alternative right now when mitch mcconnell will be rolling out the newest version of his bill and looking
for a vote tomorrow, the fact that they're rolling out a new alternative today, senator, is that just saying how little chance that mcconnell's effort has on going anywhere? >> i think mcconnell's done a yeoman's job trying to cobble together, but the bake platform of which he was working on that was delivered by the house is simply not one that's going to deliver 50 votes. the reason, i believe, we tried it with welfare reform. try to have decisions in washington. too much disparity within the republican caucus we can't get consensus what the decisions would be and made a basic understanding. it was, let's not make the decisions in washington. give them to the state and the key thing is, this is very important. the states are going to get enough money to be able to deal with this problem. we're working with governors now, in constant communication with several republican governors across the country as is senator graham and cassidy, talking to them, working on the formula, making sure whether you're a state that did expand
or a state that didn't expand, you'll be treated fairly and have the opportunity and the resources to be able to provide a great responsible network of care and health insurance for the people in your state. >> first things first. >> this is fundamentally the problem with what they're doing. which is, they are approaching this from an ideological perspective. the federal government program doesn't work. so give all money to the states. we know that means nothing but cuts, because what we've seen over time is that the states cut. what they don't talk about is how do you improve health care delivery for people? >> i'm going to jump in quick, though -- big question is -- >> and that's why republicans are feeling so against the wall on this. because their own constituents don't think it's going to give them better care. >> we're see first and foremost what happens in the senate. hilary, senator, always great to have you. thank you so much. >> thank you. moments from now, a news conference coming up from president trump, live from paris alongside president macron. will he address the latest
i'm jake tapper in washington. welcome to our viewers in the united states and indeed around the world to cnn special live coverage of president trump's trip to paris, france. in a few minutes, trump and french president emmanuel macron will face reporters from both countries in a news conference and we'll see how much the russia scandal followed the president across the atlantic. and apair of interviews before he left washington, d.c., president trump defended his