tv State of the Union With Jake Tapper CNN July 23, 2017 9:00am-10:00am PDT
these make cleaning between myi love easy.sy. gum brand for healthy gums. soft picks, proxabrush cleaners, flossers. gum brand. staff shake-up, sean spicer is out, a fresh face is in. >> the president's a winner, okay? and what we're going to do is do a lot of winning. >> can anthony scaramucci right the ship? trump team under fire. a new report says jeff sessions maybe did discuss trump campaign matters with the russian ambassador. >> as the president's inner circle prepares to talk to congress. one of the senators set to grill
them al franken -- >> republican leaders say they're dead set on voting this week. >> i intengd to keep my promise and i know you will too. >> do they have the votes? >>. hello, i'm jake tapper in washington, where the state of our union is defiant. congress ignoring the congress's appeals and reaching an agreement for new sweep iing sanctions on russia. is he prepared to punish russia for the election interference. is he contemplating his first ever veto of this bill? the white house objects to a provision in the sanctions bill
that gives congress the power to override the president should he choose to ease the sanctions. the bill could reach president trump's desk before the end of the month. the incoming communications director anthony scaramucci. first of all, congratulations on the new job. >> it's a pleasure to be here, and thank you for that. >> you come to the white house at a time when president trump has historically low approval ratings, he's signed into law zero pieces of legislation. multiple investigations are underway. i guess the big question is, is president trump facing a communications problem or is it a substance problem? >> did you leave anything out? >> i mean, you were doing pretty well there. >> i gave you the short version. >> listen, there's obviously a communications problem, there's a lot of things we've done as it relates to executive orders, bills that have been signed, economic progress. i don't want to site all the economic data, but the economy is super strong, business
optimism is way up, and over the next six months, we're going to have phenomenal achievements. i still think we're going to get the health kash situation done. one of my closest friends, very confident on tax reform, if the president gets those two pillars done over the next six months, you and i will sit down around christmastime and be having a different conversation about the presidency, the communication coming out of the white house and our achievements. and so these things go up and down as you know, the president is an experienced business person. he's a very effective politician. and i just think we need to deliver the messaging a little differently than we've been doing in the past, and my prediction is, this stuff is going to start to come to fruition quite quickly. >> one of the problems that sean spicer and others in the white house have faced is president trump undermining his own message. you said on friday, the nation needs to see more of the authentic trump.
just this week, president trump set up an interview with the new york times in which he attacked the attorney general, the special council, the former fbi director, the acting fbi director, he went on a tweet storm saturday that distracted from his agenda, i guess another question is, is it more authenticity that president trump needs or more restraint? >> i don't want to be a career counselor for those people he's talking about, let me give advice toed people on your show. that's the president, he likes speaking from the heart, he likes telling you what he likes and dislikes. he's the type of coach i work very well with in high school football. it's okay with me that the president doesn't like certain things i'm doing, we're all on the same team. i would proceeder if the direct and immediate feedback as opposed to anything else. if we say one sylla bell or one sentence, this guy said something bad about me, they have to be my mortal enemy.
i can sit across the table from somebody that worked with me and say, here are five things i don't like about what you're doing, and we have to fix it. and by the way, i'm going to have a meeting with the communications staff and say, hey, i don't like these leaks, we're going to stop the leaks, if we don't stop the leaks, i'm going to stop you, it's that simple. for me -- >> well -- >> for me, i would tell people that that's the president, he's 71 years old, we're not going to change him. by the way, the last time i checked, he won the presidency quite handily, he's going to win it again in 2020. learn how to work with him. >> sanctions to punish russia, is president trump going to sign the russian sanctions bill? >> we have to ask president trump that. it's my second or third day on the job. my guess is, he's going to make that decision shortly. there's a lot of questions out
there, jake. this is another thing i don't like about the process. this man, our president, he has phenomenal instincts. a lot of stuff that people said in the mainstream media, turns out it wasn't true. there were 17 intelligence agencies saying something, then we realized there were oath four intelligence agencies. i'm not saying four is insignificant. i'm just saying, there's a lot of disinformation out there, somebody said to me yesterday -- and i won't tell you who, if the russians hack this situation and spilled out those e-mails you would have never seen, you would have never had any evidence of them, meaning they're super confident in their deception skills and hacking. my point is, all of the information isn't on the table yet. but -- >> anthony, anthony. >> you're making a lot of assertions here. i don't know who this anonymous person is who said if the russians had done it, we wouldn't be able to detect it. >> how about it was the president, jake?
>> okay, it's the consensus of the intelligence community. >> he basically said to me, this is -- maybe they did it, maybe they didn't do it. i'm going to maintain for you -- >> hold on a second. >> this is exactly the issue here, we have experts, the u.s. intelligence agencies, unanimous both obama appointees and trump appointees, the director of national intelligence, the head of the national security agency, the head of the fbi. all of these intelligence experts saying russia hacked the election, they tried to interfere in the election, no votes were changed, but there was this disinformation and misinformation campaign. president trump is correcting it, and you're siding with president interrupt. >> i didn't say i am siding with president trump. he hasn't made the decision to sign that bill one way or the other. when he makes that decision, i will side with him. i'm his communications director and his advocate on a show like
this. the last time i checked, the way the founding fathers put the constitution together. they made one person the commander in chief. it happens to be president donald j. trump, he'll make that decision when he makes it. and i'll comeback on the show and explain it to you, and explain why he made the decision that way. what i'm saying to you -- you may not agree with me, we can litigate this, there's a lot of disinformation out there, jake. one of the things i'm going to try to go is speak transparently to you and the american people, get the president's message out there, i have found in my life experience with president trump when he's out there himself, and he's being his fresh authentic self, it's appealing to the people of the united states. what we need to do is allow him to be himself so he can get these policies out there that are going to be good for the american people. >> here you have a bill, legislation that was passed 98-2 in the u.s. senate. the house is about to pass it,
it will probably be an overwhelming vote, to sanction russia, and president trump told you that he still doesn't believe that russia was trying to interfere in the election. even though the overwhelming body of the u.s. senate which is controlled by republicans and his own intelligence experts are telling him the opposite. you're saying you're going to side with the president. don't you owe a duty to the truth? >> what about the conversation are you missing, jake? there are checks and balances in the system for a reason. the president will make that decision when he makes the decision. you're telling me that something is true, that in fact could be true. i don't have the information in front of me, once i've cleared my security experiences and looked at the stuff, if i think it's true, i'm behind closed doors, i'll turn to the president directly and say, sir, i think this stuff is true, but i don't have it in front of me right now. here's what i know about the president, you may not like it, he's got phenomenal instincts,
great judgment on people, he's a phenomenal politician. he started two short years ago, and he's already six months into his presidency. how many people can do that, jake? be an american successful business person and television personality. hit a button and race his way to the presidency, clearing out 18 people. you know a lot of people that can do that? i don't know a lot of people that can do that. >> there's no question, it was a phenomenal victim, a huge surprise, it shocked the system, he proved all the pundits wrong. all of that's true. it was true as of november 8th. my question right now is about the fact that a geo political foe of the united states interfered in the u.s. election, according to every intelligence expert both under the obama administration and under the trump administration. the one person in the government who says it's not true, is president trump. >> well, i got to -- again, one of the reasons why he is upset about it, is that this sort
of -- the mainstream media position on this, that they interfere in the election, it actually -- in his mind, what are you suggesting, you're going to delegitimize his victory? is that going to make his victory illegitimate? >> no. >> he legitimately won the presidency. >> yes. >> do we agree on that? >> yes, absolutely. >> so at the end of the day, let him make the decision, and as i said to you, once i got a security clearance and i meet with those people myself, if i think it's true, i'm going to turn to the president very honestly and say, sir, i think this is true. >> that's good you'll do that, anthony. >> i'm not going to do that right now on the show. >> it's almost irrelevant whether you think it's true and what president trump says, it's the unanimous consensus of the intelligence community that this happened. and it's a threat to the united states. russia is going to try to do it again. that is also the consensus. >> let me tell you something, the person that's going to be
super super tough on russia is president donald trump. if he believes -- >> but he doesn't. that's the problem. >> you know what the problem is? you know what the problem is, let him run the presidency the way he wants to run the presidency -- >> he is. >> he's representing the american people, the people voted him in, and so he'll make the judgment, he'll make the decision when the time is right. what i don't like about the whole direction of this stuff in the mainstream media, and the whole narrative, is that you're saying this thing is 100% true. if in fact he makes a decision that it's 100% true, he's going to be super tough on russia, let him do it in his own time and pace. he's not hurting anybody by doing it at his own time and pace, jake. he's not hurting anybody. >> i think the issue is, that the intelligence -- >> i didn't say it was 100% true, i said it's the consensus of the intelligence community
that it's true, the issue is, president trump is so worries, it seems, based on things you've said and he said, that people are trying to delegitimize his presidency, based on what the community said is a fact. he's so focused on that, he's not focused on protecting the united states from another hack. >> he's not that focused on it, he happens to not like it, he's super focused on his agenda, on getting the health care reform passed. super focused on working on tax reform. the two main pillars of what we're going to do this year, he's super focused on cleaning out all the unnecessary regulation in the united states. he's super focussed on manufacturing jobs, 50,000 new manufacturing jobs and getting people back to work in the united states. that's what he's focused on. >> he's not tweeting about those things. >> he doesn't feel that he's being effectively defended in the mainstream media, with the nonsense iksal narratives that
are out there. we're going to change that for him. we're going to defend him aggressively, when there's nonsensical stuff being said about him and he'll probably dial back some of those tweets. that's the way it works. >> he has the complete power to pardon. we'll all agree the u.s. president has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when only crime so far is leaks against u.s.? fake news. who is the president thinking about pardoning? >> read the tweet again. you want to go over it one more time? he's basically saying he doesn't have to pard anybody. >> so far. >> no -- >> i'll read the tweet again. >> no, let's put the tweet back up there. we'll read it together. >> the u.s. president has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when only crime so far, which is also an interesting phrase, is leaks against us. fake news. >> okay, so -- >> he's talking about pardoning, who is he thinking of pardoning? >> jake, let's cut through it
all. you and i, right here. >> do it. >> you're saying that tweet is suggesting the president is going to pardon himself and every one of his family members. >> no. >> what are you suggesting? >> no, i'm saying. >> he's not going to do that zm. >> i am suggesting one thing, the president tweeted about pardons, i'm asking you who is he thinking about pardoning? >> nobody. >> why say it? >> the president is thinking about pardoning nobody, it has been coming up a lot, there's an undercurrent of nonsensical stuff -- >> because he's asked advisers about it. >> come on, jake, he's not allowed. he's the president of the united states. if i turn to one of my staff members, ask them a question, and they run out and tell everyone in the news media what i said. >> if you turn to them and say, do you have $100,000 for bail
money in case i need it? >> the president is not going to have to pard anything, the russian thing is a nonsensical thing. i was there early on in in the campaign, i didn't see anybody have interactivity with russians. it's a complete bogus and nonsensical thing. this is the stuff that happens in washington, we don't like. you guys manufacture these scandals to take the president off his agenda. we're going to put the president right back on his agenda. >> anthony, there's an fbi investigation -- >> and the way he needs to be presented to the people. >> republicans control the senate, there's a house intelligence committee investigation. republicans control the house. none of that is manufactured. >> and none have found any -- jake, have they found any evidence that the president or anyone in the campaign has included with the russians? >> i don't know many. >> a lot of people have said in a, you're saying with 100% certainty they have effected the
election, or turned over the e-mails, there are a lot of people saying, there was not one person in the trump campaign that included with the russians. paul manafort is going to testify this week. my very close friend jared kushner is going to testify tomorrow. that will be the last time jared kushner talks about the russians, i predict. >> here's the thing -- >> jake -- >> i have no reason to think jared is not honest. >> he will be done testifying, there's nothing to the story, we'll be moving on. >> you said nobody in the campaign met with anybody -- >> that i saw, sir. >> okay, i -- >> but we know -- >> i didn't attend every sin el meeting. that was very early in the campaign. >> did you know about the meeting that donald trump jr., jared kushner and paul manafort had with a number of russians including that one, natalia? >> i didn't know about the meeting, but what i don't like about the way the thing was handled from a communications
and strategy perspective, i think donald trump jr. got bad advi advice. they told him to put out a small statement, donald trump jr. is a very honest, very high integrity person, i've known him for a long time. i have an enormous amount of resbekt for him. on other shows, people said criminals are bad guys. i went out there and said they weren't bad guys, i was proven right. i'm telling you, donald j. trump jr. is a great guy, didn't do anything wrong. the mistake was in the way it was communicated. we started with one person, and now we have an auditorium of russians that he's speaking to or whatever the hell it was. it's ridiculous. >> anthony. >> let me finish. he's a political neophyte in june of 2016. someone from the clinton organization, would probably put an arkansas lawyer in that meeting, but if you're trying to suggest that people on the other side wouldn't have taken a meeting like that, that's ridiculous. >> i don't know, it's
hypothetical. there are a lot of republicans that i have asked if you like donald trump jr. were told that a russian government attorney wants to meet with you to provide incriminating evidence about your political opponent directly coming from the russian government, would you take that meet something i have asked republican after republican and every single one of them says no. when you say he didn't do anything wrong -- >> time out. time out. i have to stop you. >> a lot of people would call what he did wrong. >> jake, i have to stop you. you're talking to republican experienced political people, politicians and political operatives. >> i'm talking to people who know the russians are a gee ye political foe of the united states and you don't take dirt from your foreign government intelligence service on your government. >> i stand by the president's tweet which your production people will find, a lot of people would have taken that meeting.
donald j. trump jr. is one of the reasons we won the state of pennsylvania. this guy, my friend donald j. trump jr. and i travelled all over the state of pennsylvania. it's the first time the republicans won it in 32 years. we should be talking about that and the president's agenda. the kid teich a nothing meeting. i think reince priebus called it -- >> would you take that meeting? >> since that's been overused. would i have taken that meeting? i'm not sure, how's is that. i'm going to answer it honestly, and tell you i'm not sure. >> since i went to harvard law school, i probably would have asked a few people. somebody would have said to me, get a cut out to take the meeting and see if there's any legitimacy to it. once they realized there wasn't, people were walking out or on their iphones, it was a nonevent. we want to make that into a two-week, a four-week news cycle, that's fine. but it had no impact on the skpan. >> the only reason i brought it up is it because you said nobody
from the campaign met with russian. >> okay, but, time out a second. i said i didn't see anybody do that, and nobody in my knowledge -- >> okay, so that's my -- >> the last year. >> my point is, just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. you didn't see that one and that one happened. >> i agree with you, but that was a ridiculous nothing meeting. >> does the white house believe the president has the authority to pardon himself? >> i don't know. we haven't looked into that. i took constitutional law from larry tribe. and if professor tribe is listening, i know he didn't like the president but i got an a minus in your course. it doesn't matter anyway, he's not going to have to pardon himself, he's done absolutely nothing wrong. we don't have to worry about it, let's let the next president answer that question for you. i don't even think we need to be discussing it. >> my colleague andrew kaczynski noted you wrote a rather
scathing op ed for fox business.com directed at donald trump saying, unbridled demagoguery has driven the gop to a point where there is no turning back. a lot of people will read that tweet and others you spent the weekend deleting, they'll think, this guy is willing to suppress everything he believes in order to get close to power. >> that's totally untrue. that's a ridiculous washington sort of narrative. that's -- number one it's totally not true. number two, all i'm doing by deleting the tweets is sending people a message. here's what i hate about washington -- i hate a lot of things about washington, but we only have a one hour show. we have this political purity test on policy, and so if i'm for something and then against something, all of a sudden i'm a hypocrite. yet some of the greatest leaders known to mankind, winston
churchill started out as a lib roll and a conservative. ronald reagan started out as a democrat under fdr and then he became a conservative. some of the smartest minds have changed and evolved and adapted their opinions. >> yeah, but you have -- >> let me finish. >> from thinking trump was a demagogue to thinking he wasn't. >> i didn't say donald trump was a demagogue. >> where does it say donald trump is a demagogue. >> you were referring to demagoguery. the whole article -- >> let me tell you something about demagoguery that i don't like. it creates a lot of nonsense like this, we're going to dial back all of that stuff and focus on the agenda. >> people should read the op ed and -- it's clearly referring to donald trump. >> jake, jake, jake. >> you're referring to this person who's going to win the prima primaries, who is a populist and experienced several bankruptcies. >> jake, you're doing a really
good job on this, you're going to try to nail me. >> no. >> i don't care. the president doesn't care. i tried to back him early, he tweeted about that yesterday, he called me from air force one to remind me about that, he said he wasn't running at that time. i told him i had to back somebody. he said, what are you like a horse race player? he said, i'm involved in the political establishment. i chose scott walker, i met him through reince priebus. >> this is back in january 2016 when trump was in the race. >> let me finish. i was supporting scott walker at the time. i'm a very competitive person, i have no problem being combative. when mr. trump, then the candidate, the president went after the hedge fund industry, that's when i hit back on him on maria bartiromo's show. if you want to bring up that i was supporting someone else in
politics and then switched to the republican knee. if that makes me a hypocrite or dishonest. >> i didn't call you a name. >> whatever you're trying to suggest by bringing this story up, i don't care. i love the president, he's a phenomenal fighter for the american people. i grew up in a middle class family, where we had a tight budget, and i have seen people come up to the president that are now struggling, and i'll say something to you on national tv that's embarrassing to me. i should have seen the economic desperation in the neighborhoods like the one i grew up in. i didn't see it. mr. trump saw it, he has the opportunity to change it, and i'm going to be there with him, trying to change it every step of the way. if i said some things about him when i was working for another canningdy date, before trump, mr. president, i apologize for that, can we move on off of that. i know you and i have moved on off of that. jake hasn't moved on off of that
obviously. that's okay, jake, i don't care. i'm going to be working for you, and i'm going to serve the american people, and we're going to get your agenda out into the heartland where it belongs. and we're going to turn this thing into a movement. >> i like how you are talking to one specific person. >> i like talking to him, but i also like talking to the people i grew up with. >> i grew up in a similar neighborhood in philadelphia. >> he's going to win again, i'll bring a box of kleenex here to cnn. >> we don't need kleenex. >> he's going to win again, jake. once he gets his agenda prosecuted. he's going to win again. >> there are reports this weekend that president trump loved your performance on friday. i haven't checked my twitter since we've been talking, maybe he's talking about how much you're killin' it right now, are the cameras going to come back to the briefing? will we see you more at that mode yum? >> so let's talk about that,
sarah huckabee is the press secretary, if you're asking me for my personal opinion, we should put the cameras on. that's no problem. if the president doesn't want the cameras on, guess what, we're not going to have the cameras on. it's going to be up to him. i think sarah does a great job, she's an incredibly warm person, incredibly authentic. what i told sarah on friday, you get the big office, i'll take the small communications office. you deserve the big office, you're taking the hits from the press. let's bring the press into the office about they're tough on us, let's be tough on them. my job as i see it, is that these people work with me, and i'm there to serve them. you think about the american military, the leaders eat last. the leaders job is to serve the people that are working alongside of them, me, for sarah huckabee, i want to do
everything i can to make her better at that podium, i any she's phenomenal there now, like every athlete, we have to make ourselves incrementally better, the only thing i'd ask, i love the hair and make-up person we had on friday, i would love to continue to use hair and make-up. >> we have a good make-up person here if you ever need some. >> you look very tan, jake. you have a lot on. we have lots to talk about, the incoming white house communications director saying if the russians had hacked and released e-mails during the election, we would have never seen it. senator al franken is here to respond to everything you just heard next.
[car tires screech] [bell rings] about to see progressive's new home quote explorer. where you can compare multiple quote options online and choose what's right for you. woah. flo and jamie here to see hqx. flo and jamie request entry. slovakia. triceratops. tapioca. racquetball. staccato. me llamo jamie. pumpernickel. pudding. employee: hey, guys! home quote explorer. it's home insurance made easy. password was "hey guys." it's home insurance made easy. you...smells fine, but yourin your passengers smell this bell dinging new febreze car with odorclear technology cleans away odors... ...for up to 30 days smells nice... breathe happy, with new febreze. what are all these different topped & loaded meals?
it's an american favorite on top of an american favorite, alice. it's like abe lincoln on top of george washington. yonder. get your favorites on top of your favorites. only at applebee's. get your favorites on top of your favorites. on a hotel just go to priceline. they add thousands of new deals every day at up to 60% off. that's how kaley and i got to share this trip together at this amazing hotel. yeah ash and i share everything - dresses, makeup, water bottles... we do? mmhmm. we share secrets, shoes, toothbrushes... what? yeah i forgot mine so i've been using yours. seriously? what's the big deal? i mean, we even dated the same guy. who?! uh, go to priceline and get the hotel deals you won't find anywhere else.
introducing the easiest way to get gillette blades noo text "blades" to gillette on demand text to reorder blades with gillette on demand... ...and get $3 off your first order i'start at the new carfax.comar. show me minivans with no reported accidents. boom. love it. [struggles] show me the carfax. start your used car search at the all-new carfax.com. peobut they're different.ind
it's nice to remove artificial ingredients. kind never had to. we choose real ingredients like almonds, peanuts and a drizzle of dark chocolate. give kind a try. ♪ of your back pain?trol new icyhot lidocaine patch. desensitizes aggravated nerves with the max strength lidocaine available. new icyhot lidocaine patch. welcome back to "state of the union." leaders of the senate judiciary committee struck a deal with donald trump jr. and paul manafort. they no longer will have to testify at a public hearing this coming week. they will turn over records and be interviewed privately. this deal comes days after
donald trump jr. said he would testify under oath. joining me now, senator franken. >> thank you for having me. >> i want to start with something that the incoming communications director just told me. take a listen. >> somebody said to me yesterday, i won't tell you who, that if the russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it, you would have never had any evidence of them. meaning they're super confident in their deception skills and hacking. my point is all of the information isn't on the table yet, but here's what i know about the president. >> anthony -- >> let me finish. >> you're making a lot of assertions here, i don't know who this anonymous person is, who said if the russians had done it we wouldn't be able to detect it. >> how about it was the president, jake. he called me from air force one. >> so i thought see, when he brought it up, i thought it was
a disinterested intelligence expert that brought that up to him. >> you asked a good question. >> i said i don't know who this person is, and he said, it was the president of the united states. here we have, unanimous consensus of both obama administration and trump administration intelligence leader leaders, and president trump still doesn't believe it. >> what can you say, it's bizarre. it's clear, and we're seeing now that members of his campaign met with russians, even though they would testify before say the judiciary committee answering a question from oh, say me. saying he had not met with russians during the campaign. now it turns out it sounds like
kislyak said they met in april, which is a meeting that he hasn't said that he had in which they talked about subjects regardinged campaign. >> you're talking about a washington post report that quotes current government officials that are saying there are intercepts with kislyak and the russian government talking about the meeting. do you know anything about the intercepts? >> i don't. what i know is whey read. someone in kislyak's position can distort what he said when he's reporting back, to say do build himself up, i also saw in those reports that kislyak isn't that type and it seems to me that since attorney general
sessions hasn't been dashably truthful regarding these things that it's more likely that this -- that what kislyak was saying was the case. >> do you want sessions to come back to the senate judiciary? >> absolutely. >> do the republicans agree with you? >> i think the chairman grassley does want him to come back. i'm not sure if there's some order involved -- i thought western going to get donald trump jr. and manafort in. we're going to have them behind closed doors, and i intend to be asking them questions. >> well, let talk about that, donald trump jr. said very clearly to sean hannity, that he was willing to testify under oath. take a listen. >> you said in a tweet you would fully cooperate with the investigation. >> 100%. >> you feel you already have? >> yes. >> and you have nothing to hide. that means you'll testify under oath, all of that.
>> all of it. >> you're willing to testify under oath, all of that, we're being told now they're going to testify behind closed doors and not under oath, is that good enough? >> no. that's not good enough. they should be under oath. and i -- i did not know it would not be under oath. it should be under oath. >> that's our understanding. >> well, that is the first i'm heard of that. so -- >> are you disappointed? >> i don't know. >> are you disappointed that it's -- at the very least, we know it's going to be behind closed doors? are you disappointinged that grassley cut that deal? >> if it's not under oath i am. yeah. i think that they need to be under oath and release all the documents. he didn't say he would testify publicly, but under oath, he said. so he should definitely do thatp. >> should the transcripts be released. >> i have a lot of questions for
him. i think they should be. >> can you give us an example of the questions? >> i would like to ask some questions that -- had he had other meetings? with russians. >> do you know of any? >> no, but it seems like if you ask -- you're a really good questioner, you asked him who that authority was on russian hacking. and it turned out to be the president. who isn't actually very authoritative on all of that. >> he does have a take that is at odds with his own intelligence community. >> yes. >> the question has been questioning the credibility of robert mueller's investigation by some of the people he brought on board to conduct the investigation. if people were leading an investigation into you or one of your friends, one of your colleagues, it turned out that they had given a lot of money to donald trump or ted cruz, won the you think that was a fair question to ask?
>> why don't we ask the lawyers for donald trump where they gave money? >> you see my point. isn't it a fair question to raise about investigators? >> yeah, so, for example trump gave money to hillary clinton. ty cobb gave money to obama, he gave money to the current swrunier senator from the state of money money. >> ty cobb gave money to you? >> yeah. >> that's very suspicious. >> i think he should leave, frankly. >> you think that -- >> under that logic. >> he's given money to you. >> under that logic, i think it would be, yes. >> last question, your fellow
democratic senator debbie stabenow in the state of michigan, which is close to your home state of minnesota. >> it depends what you equal close. it's a great lakes state. >> yeah, geographically. i don't mean emotionally, that she might face a challenge from kid rock, the performer. there's a long list of celebrities starting with the president, but also arnold schwarzenegger, your former governor, jesse ventura who were dismissed when they first thought about running for office. what's your take on the challenge that kid rock might pose? >> well, you know, i ran, of course. and had been a comedian. >> yeah, you're one of these celebrity folks. >> i'm familiar with being discounted. debbie stabenow is a great senator. she's done an incredibly great job on the ad committee as chairman and the ranking member, she is great on mental health, she's been a leader on that,
that's something i care a lot about. i'm going to be supporting her against whomever that nominee is, and i think that kid rock will have to make his case. >> senator al franken, thank you so much, good to see you. we'll have you back soon. republican senator rand paul of kentucky, thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> you played a key role in the collapse of the senate republican health care bill, mitch mcconnell is trying to revive it, he's looking to hold a critical vote as early as tuesday. to begin a debate over the health care bill. will you vote yes to begin the debate on the bill? >> the real question is, what are we moving to? what are we opening debate to? last week, senate leadership said it would be a clean repile, like the 2015 bill. and i think that's a good idea. the other alternative is the senate leadership bill that
doesn't repeal obama care, is obama care light is loaded with pork. it's become a porkfest where they're dumping billions of dollars into pet projects for individual senators. i'm not for that. i'm not for taxpayer money going to rich insurance executives. i don't think the taxpayers should be funding that. it depends on what we go to. i have told them, i will vote for a motion to proceed, if we're proceeding to the clean repeal vote. if it feels, they can put up their monstrosity they want to put forward. i'm not for that i'm just not for the taxpayer subsidizing taxpayer industry. >> you talked about the idea of repealing obama care first, and working about a replacement down the road. back in january, you said something different. take a listen. >> we need to think through how we do this, it's a huge mistake for republicans if they do not vote for replacement on the same day as we vote for repeal. >> that was your take in
january, a huge mistake then. why do you have a different opinion today? >> actually, i still like that guy from january, and i still agree with him, really, i've always been talking about replacing the same time, the problem is, republicans can't seem to agree on what replacement means, to me, replacement is legalizing inexpensive insurance, which means the federal government doesn't regulate it, and we will allow the sale of inexpensive insurance again. legalizing the ability to join an association across state lines. i thought that's what we believed in, it turns out, many republicans actually believe in this giant insurance bailout super fund. nearly 200 billion fund they're going to give to the rich insurance executives and insurance companies. i'm not for that, if we can do both at the simm time, i'm still for that. i can even say you can do it in separate bills. i'm looking for a way to get this done, if you divide it into a cleaner repeal. and then you take the pork fest,
the bringing government spending and put that into another bill, they can probably get democrats -- i don't know a democrat that won't vote for a big spending bill. they can vote for am dids that would vote for a bigger government. >> you're disappointed in your fellow senate republicans who voted for a clean repeal in the past but have said they are notth to do so now. i guess the question is, how disappointed are you, would you be comfortable with conservative groups targeting those senators? should they face primary challenges? >> i think disappointed is the right way to put it. what curbed to me is not so many republicans -- you'll find that most republicans still want full repeal, but what disappoints me about senate republicans, they seem to have insufficient confidence in what made america great. they were not insurance regulations, insurance stabilization funds. what made us great is leaving
people fry to trade with each other. getting the government out of it, if there has to be regulations, have it done at the state level. they're going to keep in place the obama care regulatory structure, that causes the death spiral. the death spiral will continue under the republican plan, they're going to subsidize it by giving billions and billions of dollars to insurance companies, it's not what we're for. >> should they be primary? >> that's for somebody else to decide. but the thing is, i am disappointed, we'll continue to express disappointment and wish we could be what we said we were. we won four elections, we owe it to the voters to do what we said. we can have confidence we'll present market alternatives. 27 million people don't have insurance under obama care. half of them can't get it because it's too expensive. we should be for repealing all of the regulations and saying we're going to get those people insurance. we're not going to have people losing insurance like the cbo
says, we're going to have people ensured that never could get insurance under obama care, we can't make the argument, because these people don't believe in the marketplace like they ought to. >> i want to ask you about made in america week. president trump when he took the oath of office, he made a clear promise. take a listen. >> we will follow two simple rules. buy american and hire american. >> i'm not going to go through the litany of trump clothing products that are made in china and other parts of the world that are not america, but we learned this week, in addition that trump's businesses have once again taken steps to hire foreign workers, trump's mar-a-lago club have filed documents to bring in additional foreign workers under the h 2 b visa program. is this a program for tproblem the president? >> i think all of us have this
goal to buy american. we have to think this thing through. you have to go beneath the surface to get -- i get shirts at walmart, i get them for $7 sometimes. amazing goals, target the same way. the thing is, the money you save for ordinary working people is enormous amounts. it's somewhere between $800 to $1,000 a year the ordinary person saves. a lot of that stuff isn't made here, but those people are richer because they got their shirts a lot cheaper. it used to be a regular button up shirt might be 20, $25. and still might be in some places and at walmart is $7. that savings allows working class people to have a savings, to get a television set, buy gas for their truck, go on vacation. we can't get too caught up in where it's made. we want our country to be strong by lowering regulations and taxes. >> it's an interesting point.
mar-a-lago, the membership fee is $200,000 a year. it's not really relevant when it comes to those foreign workers they're trying to hire? >> yeah, it's a different situation, but if we're arguing whether trade is good or bad, and trying to figure it out. i think we all want american jobs, it's important to know, we have a corporate income tax of 35%. i talked to a lot of businesses in kentucky and try to make sure that the workers know if we think, we're going to tax those evil corporations, there will be less american jobs and less profit to be spread around the american economy. you have to lower the corporate income tax. this is what the previous administration was killing america with. there's a way to get toward the buy america philosophy, if we will try to get rid of the regular wlagss and taxes that make us less competitive with the world. >> as somebody who cites the constitution all the time, holds it up as an important document, i'm wondering about your view.
the washington post reported this week, president trump has asked his advisers about his power to pard aids, family members and himself. as an amateur constitutional scholar, does the president have the authority to pardon himself. >> i think in all likelihood he does. i think that some of this hasn't been adjudicated. what the courts typically find, when something happens politically, between a power of one particular body, a lot of times they say it's up to the electors to decide this. a lot of things get kicked back into the political sphere. i think i would caution someone to think about pardoning themselves or family members are et cetera, i also understand his frustration. what's going on here. and i think the guy who put it best is herbert butterfield. you look back at recent history and say, well, there must be collusion. you find it everywhere you look,
because every time someone met with a russian, you think, it's part of the master conspiracy plan, when in reality, it's your mind creating some meaning to history that is actually much moran dom. >> thank you so much, senator rand paul, it's always good to have you on. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> you could feel the love at the white house podium this week. >> i love the president and i'm very, very loyal to the president. i want to serve the president. i love the mission that the president has. i think he's got some of the best political instincts in the world, and perhaps in history. thank you. >> that was new white house communications director anthony scaramucci. we're here with our panel now, and david urban who won pennsylvania for trump, and boy, scaramucci also doing double duty, your press guy today as well. said a lot of forceful things. mike allen wrote that trump is
building a wartime cabinet. that's part of what is going on. >> i think anthony is a guy the president likes. he was on the team early, great defender, great looking grow, big head of hair. engaged with you nicely for a half hour, it was a pleasure to watch, he's a smart guy, the president trusts him, likes him. i don't think he's building a wartime -- i think sean spicer, great patriot, anthony just brings a different skill set to the table. >> what do you think? >> i loved that interview as well, he's a happy warrior. i did have to note the tweets that he had before, if you told me that the president was going to point head of communications who was prochoice, anti-gun, pro gay marriage who praised hrn hrng, who called trump a hack, believes in climbed change, who
is anti-wall, i'd say, that's my kind of guy. >> he doesn't hold those positions any more, though. >> trump held most of those positions. >> as a communications director, you're there, you represent your client. anthony's views are not material here, the president 'views are material here. >> i totally agree, but don't you think inside of the base, there will be some like what? >> i think the base will judge performance by performance, not by anthony's views. >> it's clear the rnc factions marriage with the trump presidency was fracturedp he doesn't have to reach out and say, i'm proving myself, i'm proving myself. there is love there. the question is, is that love for a purpose, which is to bolster himself with the president in such a way that he can go, look, here's what i think we should do. he could bring a plan for communications that it doesn't
seem to me the white house has right now, it's just personalities in stead of a portfolio and a plan. if he could bring a plan and convince the president that would do him well, they would be moving in a better direction. >> donald trump continues to treat his life as if it's reality tv. it's not a communications problem here, that's not what the issue is, you have an unpopular president who's pursuing unpopular policies and also is -- he's getting worse and deepening with legal problems, that is where we are with this president right now. the things he has been able to pass, because i hasn't been able to pass any major pieces of legislation. has been divisive and unpopular as well. pulling us out of that deal, trying to get rid of obama care, that's what he's trying to do, and is that is the problem. not who the communications director -- >> there is a communications issue. in that unemployment. 4.4%. stock market, through the roof,
regulations cut, defense spending up, this president's doing lots that is not being communicated effectively, you heard anthony talk about it, you heard john king talk about it earlier this morning. you'll hear a lot more of that. i do think -- i think there's a communications issue. >> here's the thing, so he has these themes of the week, last week was made in america, which is ironic, because you're talking about a campaign that was made in russia. anyway, with that, he blows it up, donald trump blows it up every week. so he cannot keep on message. >> that is something i tried to get at with him, but he basically seemed to send the message that there is no getting -- the president can't step on himself, he's the president, we all work for him. >> i think there's some truth in the fact. he's equal part s disease and remedy. >> the president you're talking about? >> yes. he is the reason he's in the white house, there's a reason he thinks he should keep doing
this. if there is someone who has the authority, and no one has thus far, look, this is how we should do things, they could be on a slightly better path than they are right now. >> you have a president that is it now talking about this issue of pardoning, there is -- there's a reason why there is no precedent for, can a president pard himself, it's because no president in the history of the republicans had the audacity or the moral depravity to think he's above the law. if he did, let's just assume he does something dramatic like that, he would throw the country into a constitutional krigs is, you would have that going up to the supreme court. he's appointed the fifth vote on the supreme court. anthony kennedy, please stay on. if he did that, congress would step. you would see the crack and rise. congress would step in, if he decided he was going to fire mueller, you would have state attorneys general stepping in. >> he's not doing those things
yet. >> i think it's a long -- >> it's immaterial. >> i think it's a long long way to tweet -- what the president tweeted out, wasn't i'm looking to pard myself. he said the president's authority to pard is complete. >> no, why would he tweet that? >> the president -- as you heard, i watched your show last night with michael smerconish. good lawyer, as a good lawyer would do, you look at all your options, they're on the table. >> they're not sending a message to mueller. they're saying to mueller you better reign in or i'm going to fire him. >> governor, i disagree with you. i disagree completely. i think the president was simply stating, my be ability to pardon is complete. don't read that more expansively, i'm not. >> usually there's a lot of noise coming unite of the white house, and you're not -- it's not clear what signal to pay attention to. he made it real clear last week, it was his intentions on what he wanted to do, which is, if he wants to obstruct or derail this
decision, if he doesn't do that, he wants to get sessions out of the way, and to make sure that mueller is fired. he made that very clear. >> i disagree. i disagree again -- >> he said, if i had known that sessions was going to recuse himself, i never would have given him the job. >> i think the president was entitled to the investigation before you appoint somebody. you say, i'm going to step down as soon as i get appointed. i think you should know that before you get appointed. >> the chronology doesn't work out. he was named in november, his confirmation hearing was january, he recused himself in march. how is he supposed to know any of this stuff is going to happen? >> i understand. i think the president would -- he would have gone to the president brngd and said, i'm saying, before he did it, i think he should have had a discussion with the president is my point. >> i wan the to bring up one thing that doesn't have to do with this. we are all thinking about john mccain, looking at the picture
his daughter tweeted this weekend, of them going for a walk. there is one person, kelly ward, who challenged john mccain in the primary, is now going to run against jeff flake. here's what she wants the governor of arizona to appoint her to mccain's seat. >> i hope that senator mccain is going to look long and hard at this. his family and advisers are going to look at this and they're going to advise him to step away as quickly as possible. you probably realize with john mccain out of question, we don't have 51 votes. >> on friday, she put out a written statement, these end of life choices are never easy. >> i think kelly ward should step away as quickly as possible. >> she should apologize, it's a terrible thing to say. senator mccain is a patriot and thanks on her. >> president trump now six months on the job gets a crash course on leading the free world. he's boning up on the past.
comedy central has drunk history and the white house has trump history. this week's episode, french history. >> france is america's first and oldest ally, a lot of people don't know that. >> fresh off his paris trip, the president shared his newfound knowledge. paris' landmarks were designed by napoleon the concurer. they were designed by a different napoleon, his nephew. perhaps he's more comfortable with the american politics. >> why was there the civil war. >> such as this comment. >> he was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the civil war, he said there's no reason for this. >> jackson, of course, died 16 years before the civil war even started. >> president trump says he's a big fan in history.
it sometimes seems like it's his own version of history. that he's the biggest fan of. >> abraham lincoln, great president. most people don't know he was a republican, right? does anyone know? >> thanks for watching, fareed saturday kara, gps starts right now. this is global public square. welcome to all of you in the u.s. and around the president. >> how would the u.k. and the world grade 2ru7the president's performance so far? well brexit on the horizon, what is the future with