tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN July 17, 2017 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
>> at least one critic agreed adding, i would sit next to one over year any day. this turned into a real aerial dog fight. >> thanks for joining us. ac 360 begins now. >> good evening a lot happening tonight including republican senators at white house talking healthcare with the president. new poll numbers and a new record lowest job approval number at the six month mark of any president in polling history. democrats shouldn't get too quick to gloat. their poll numbers make them come off as a party without a plan. also breaking news on the russia meeting and word of an eighth person in the room. strange and conflicts accounts from the white house on that meeting. donald trump jr. had with the russian lawyer. two saturdays since the news broke. jared kushner and paul manafort met with a russian lawyer last
year. trying to justify and explain away the meeting. most politicians would have gone to a meeting to get information on a opponent. that's politics. never mind the idea he ran on being a non-politician after draining the swamp of politics. what makes the statement even stranger that later today, during another no cameras a i lou allowed press conference. sean spicer gaifr an explanation. that's flat out false. >> the president made it clear through his tweet, and there was nothing that as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe there was anything except adoption of the magnitsky act. >> to discuss russian adoption and sanctions. that answer it ignores the chain of e-mails na donald trump jr. himself released under pressure saying the meeting was about information on hillary clinton provided by the russian
government. as if all the revelations this past week about who was at the meeting and what was said simply never happened at all. that defense didn't even work two saturdays ago. it started crumbling the next day. tonight, just a monster bli false. the president's own tweet from this morning, even that contradicts spiceers history. most politicians would have gone to a meeting in order to get information on an opponent. that's politics. the president himself is making it plain donald trump jr. wasn't there to learn about sanctions and russian orphans. he attended to get information on an opponent. frankly he's been saying the same thing for days now and his son is talking too. saying it wasn't about adoption and sanctions. the meeting was sold to him as a chance to obtain official documents and information to incriminate hilary and her dealings with russia and useful to your father.
this is obviously high level and sensitive ngs. just two passages from the mails that trump jr. put on on tuesday and sean spicer simply read. he spoke as if the e-mails don't exist and we haven't seen them. he talked about it on tuesday. >> for me this was opposition research. they had something maybe concrete evidence to the stories i had been hearing about. probably under reported for years not just during the campaign. >> as far as the president's claim that most politician would have gone to a meeting loik that. it's just politics. most politicians insist they wouldn't do what the president's son did. >> you were told that a lawyer wanted to share information with you as part of the russian government effort to help you get elected, how would you respond? >> well i would respond in the negative. >> any time you're in a campaign and you get an offer from a foreign government to help your
campaign the answer is no. >> the president said today that anybody in politics would have taken that meeting that his son took with the russian lawyer. what's your reaction? >> doesn't include me. >> would you have taken the meeting. >> no. absolutely not. >> any scenario in which you would accept that meeting. >> absolutely not. >> with all due respect to president trump, the answer is no. you don't take meetings from foreign governments to help you. >> maybe the politicians are not telling the truth en even though many voted for president trump and support him today. >> let me ask you this. if i got a call from somebody saying the russian government wants to help graham get reelected they have dirt on graham opponent. should i take the meet? >> i think you want to consult with legal add vie tors before you do that. >> should i call the fbi? >> it would be wise. to the members of this committee, any threat or effort
to interfere with our elections from any nation state or any non-state is the kind of thing the fbi wants to know. >> one thing for the president to disagree with that advice. another false to claim that everyone does it. that i don't. just as it's one thing for sean spicer to wish the meeting looked good or. another to speak as though the facts don't exist and people don't know it. breaking news on this and also contradicts sean spicers explanation today. you're learning about who was the eighth person in the meeting between donald trump jr. and the russian attorney. >> right. there's so much mystery surrounding this eighth person. this is the only person that we know of who hasn't been named in the meeting at trump tower. this infamous meeting. i spoke to trump jr.s attorney. he has spoken by phone to the eighth pemrson in the room. he was a representative of the agalarov family. last june.
rereported previously the individual was there on the behalf of the agalarov and asked for the family as you know asked for meeting to be set up according to to two sources familiar with the circumstances. he told me this person who he declined to name claimed the phone conversation that he was a u.s. citizen and also said that he was not employed by the russian government at the time of the meeting. but fast acknowledged he didn't know his entire history. we don't know him name. agalarov and their attorney haven't publicly explained who the employee was. attorney tells me based on his conversation with agalarov he was there to help that the russian attorney who was mentioned in the e-mail exchange get to the meeting. >> what i don't understand about this is i talked to the attorney for the agalarov family early last week, and he never mentioned that there was a representative for the family at the meeting. in fact he said that the agalarov's knew nothing about this. that the younger son the pop
star simply was doing a favor for an acquaintance in making the introduction to donald trump jr. that was basically it. it seems to contradict what the agalarov's own attorney said early on sfwl that was really fascinating. i thought the same thing. i had spoken to the agalarov attorney on friday and it seems like he was trying to figure it out. because we actually were the first to report that there was a representative on maf of the agalarov family. i called him after that last friday and he was trying to figure out who was this. he didn't know there was a representative in meeting. and so now he apparently is representing this so called eighth person so it seems to me the attorneys have been trying to piece together themselves who was at the meeting. why they were at the meeting. i can tell you has been talking to the people. don jr.'s attorney. he's been talking to the people trying to piece together what happened. and he tells me that this person
who we can't name we don't know the name who was there on behalf of the agalarov. corroborated what has been out there about what occurred in the meeting. pleasant tris exchanged that the russian lawyer discussed the information she allegedly had about russian shadow nating to the dnc ask clinton before moving onto the topic of adoptions. that too, that also flies in the face of what spicer said today. this was only about adoption and no reason to believe it was anything else. >> donald trump jr. attorney give indication to if and when he might testify in front of congress. >> all he would tell me that they are in discussion with the various committees and apparently more than one committee wanting him to testify. they're trying to work it out. he wouldn't go further than that. if he doesn't voluntarily testify, then we have heard today there have been discussions about issuing a subpoena for him to testify. so he would only say there were
discussions. i want to mention this. i found this interesting, in regards to how this was handled early on with the statements surrounding the new york times about the meeting. don jr. and the counsel were fully prepared to publish or make a statement that was a fulsome statement about the nature of the meeting, what led to meeting, what the conversation was in meeting. if you'll recall that didn't happen. there were various statements initially. about adoption and a follow up saying it was about the incriminating information. what you infer is don jr.'s lawyer was not part of the initial discussions with the stalt that came out. >> so donald trump jr.s lawyer is saying they were ready to make a fulsome statement on saturday and the initial statement that jr. made. >> you have to read between the lines. he said don jr. and his counsel were fully prepared to publish or make a statement that was a
fulsome statement about the nature of the meeting what led to the meeting, what the conversation was in meeting. so clearly that's not what actually happened. there were contradicting statements, there was the as you'll recall in the 48 hours varts explanations and flinlly don jr. released the e-mail exchange. what i believe he's trying to insinuate. the attorney and perhaps don jr. were not fully involved in the initial statement. my colleague had a reporting last week it was the president and his aids that crafted the first statement aboard air force one. it appears don jr.'s attorney wasn't fully involved in the first statement. >> it was worked ob on on the plane on the way back from paris. and the president signed off. sekulow denied if i'm correct, that the president signed off on it. this was something donald trump
jr. worked on with attorneys. so again that seems contradictory. i appreciate the reporting. ron white is one of the senators investigating trump russia ties. he's a democratic member of the senate intelligence committee. i spoke to him this evening. >> senator what was your reaction when you heard smaean spicer say today that leeting up to the meeting there was nothing to lead anyone to believe it was anything except a discussion about adoption. does that make any sense to you? >> none at all. it's hard to see how spicer could say that with a straight face. because the subject line makes it clear that it's private. that it's russian. it's confidential. that is not adoptions. >> is it -- i was trying to imagine is it just. is it anything other than a lie? it can't be they are misinformed or it is a strategy to just try to misinform other people.
>> my sense is we have so many different versions of the stories and then they come back and somehow try to find a path to correct it. and it short of remind me of lather, rinse and repeat. this is what they do again and again. and they just up ended the theory it will be hard for the truth to catch up. and that's why it is so hard -- important that democrats and republicans now come together and focus on making it clear that collusion is not acceptable. and that over sight is not just for the party who's thnot in control. >> it's kbon from the message earlier on. there's no evidence of collusion. to collusion is not illegal. and no the president saying everybody does this. or everybody would have done this. >> the president himself has gone in effect from saying there was no collusion to so what.
and i just don't buy that. i don't know of another instance where a presidential campaign has so embraced the aid of a hostile foreign power. i don't know of another instance where a president excused this sort of behavior. and now again it is important for democrats and republicans to make clear that we americans decide our elections. and we aren't going to let the russians or any other country use or democracy as a playground. >> when it comes to jared curb ne kushner's role. his security clearance was an over sight and has been corrected. could this have been an over sight on jared kushners part. >> i have long felt that congress traditionally isn't in the business of making judgments
about security clearances. but as you get more and more information about this, you really are just stunned at how reckless almost cavalier this white house is with respect to security clearances. and as more information rolls in from jared kushner's activities, you just cannot make a logical case that he should keep his security clearance. >> at this point have you evolved oen that. you believe he should not have a security clearance. >> i definitely believe if you look at all of this evidence he concealed contacts with the russians on the security clearance reform, and attended a meeting billed as a session that in effect would have russia help handgun t . there was a question from reports about back channels and
yes i just think the evidence piles up and i don't see the case for him being allowed to keep his security clearance. >> appreciate your time. thank you. >> thanks for having me. >> bring in the panel. david, again, how big of a problem is it for the white house to have smaun spicer come out and say just sort of ignoring all the facts that have been revealed over the last week. and saying that was about adoptions? >> is it possible, anderson. they have adopted a theory that if we just lie and put tissue on tissue of lies upon each other that we'll get so confused the public will be so confused. the stories get really down in the weeds about who was who in the public can't follow it. and if they can maintain their base they think they can get through it. maybe that's what they're doing. i think it's a very mistaken theory if they have that. there's a direct line from the kind of lying they have been doing to the drop in his opinion
polls to 36% in the washington post. to his difficulty in persuading senators to sign up for the healthcare bill. when you're at 36% that's the perception you're a weak president. it's much harder to ask senators to take hard votes. >> jeff, is it -- do you agree that sean spicer said something that's not true. >> i will say this. i do think when you're getting your message out, whatever it is. it should be clear and crystal and out there from a to z. everybody should be on the same page. >> he says one thing the if the president tweeted something completely different. >> this can happen. you want to make sure as best you can that it doesn't happen. >> i don't get -- i get the mixed messages. i understand how it happens. particularly in this white house. but for sean spicer to say there's no evidence this had anything to do with anything other than adoptions. when we have seen the e-mails.
>> donald trump said. he wouldn't i adwree gree. there's one i found something very interesting. there's a web site called law news. and the headline from a lawyer over there, article who is constitutional his name is robert barns the constitutional lawyer. the headline says if trump jr. is guilty so is every democrat that takes information from dreamers and uses the phrase that. >> like dreamers the students? >> correct. because they are in the words of the fbi director non-state actors. they are foreign. foreign nationals. and every democrat out there. >> there's offensive. you need to stop. that's ridiculous and offensive. >> they are not -- >> they are not american citizens. >> please. >> that's the charge here. >> this is yet a new and offensive spin from trump attacking immigrants. >> look. this guy to the best of my naj
has no connection to donald trump. his point is a very serious one that every democrat out there has had these kind of meetings. >> o you know what a serious point? that either the trump white house thinks they can now switch gears from lying to not lying to lying again and america's is just going to stand for it. that's serious. or there's some tortured game to make sean spicer look like an idiot. which they're doing very well. which leads to america and americans not having confidence in what comes out of the white house. that's dangerous. talking to children and students who have come to america brought here by they parents who want to seek the american dream. >> they're exchanging. >> a dreamer asks for a college tuition to be supported. they're not foreign nationals. it's the most pathetic. >> they are. >> it's the most pathetic trump twists i have ever heard. >> let's move on.
from the obscure professor. just read his article today on the internet. i'm sure he's very. >> let me get back to the other important story of the day. what the president is arguing. that everybody does this. every politician would take this meeting. that often happens in domestic politics. it's extraordinarily rare that a government like the russians would come forward like this. but we don't know of any ore president accepted it. it's been widely reported that same kind of information or something similar happened in the al gore campaign. they went to the fbi. it is widely reported the same thing happened to john f. kennedy in 1960. they turned him away. they wouldn't take it. there's nothing the president can point to that i'm aware of that says. >> there is david. >> a russian? >> michael reagan wrote a column in december saying president carter himself in 1980 sent to
the russian embassy to speak to the russians about doing something to encourage the jewish. directly from carter white house and president himself. >> that maybe true. that's a good point if it's accurate. i don't know if any place that's been reported other than you saying it right here. and if that's true, power to you. >> ted kennedy. >> the notion about trying to appeal to the base. i get it from a political standpoint. that's politics. he won the base and needs to keep them more than anybody else. just as a practice of actually leading the country forward, that's, that's a kind of -- it seems. paying attention to the. >> the president is a place of marl leadership.
and that is the president focusing on what's wrong in the country what's right in the country and tries to follow a path. when you demolish and get rid of and destroy your moral capacity to lead, you are a weakened figure for the rest of the time you're there. it's very hard to come back from that. and that is that's the pit this president and his. >> scorched earth strategy. destroy everything -- keep the base and at all costs and destroy any confident in institutions and news organizations and other politicians. >> that's the steve bannon theory of governing. tear it all down. >> from the moral and leadership problem. the political problem with that as we're seeing in healthcare is he has no leadership to keep his republican senators in congress people with him. if he was a leader, even if one i disagreed with in a great way, he would be able to hold more of
those republicans. but his numbers are plummeting because he lacks leadership and the republicans are scurrying away like rats off of a sinking ship. >> we have to take a break. a former cia officers take on the russia meeting and how it closely fits the russian intelligence play book for recruiting people. on the call to revoke jared kushner's security clearance. did the entire bill just land on the critical list. more on that, ahead. here's to the safety first...
i think i might burst... totally immersed weekenders. whatever kind of weekender you are, there's a hilton for you. book your weekend break direct with hilton.com and join the summer weekenders. pain can really pain is sometimes in my hands, right before a performance especially. only aleve has the strength to stop minor arthritis pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. this is my pain. but i am stronger. aleve. all day strong.
last year to russian election hacking. following late developments joins us now. u.s., rush officials met at the state department today. what have you learned about what went on? >> this is the meeting with his russian counter part about the irritants in the relationship and how to move forward. this was supposed to happen a month ago but it was cancelled by the russians because the u.s. imposed more sanctions. that tells you how bad the relationship is when you can't even talk about what's bothering you in the relationship. it's a big deal this meeting happened today. and what's really been bothering the russians. they have been trolling the u.s. about it. tweeting about it almost daily. is they want their properties back. the sweeping mansions on acres and acres of land on long island and on the eastern shore of maryland. that were seized at the end of the obama administration. along with 35 diplomats kicked out of the country as a punishment for russian sha's
meddling in the u.s. election. today the deputy foreign minister sounded a little optimistic about what happened. listen. >> what does that mean exactly. the state department is saying sheer row about what happened in the meeting. we will here from the russians probably not until tomorrow. we have been hearing from the trump administration talking about how they're thinking about returning the properties in the interest of bettering the relationship and maybe getting something from russia in return. which infuriates russia. calling it highway robbery. there's an effort urging the white house not to give these properties back. saying it's only rewarding the kremlin for bad behavior. >> thanks very much for that. now the call for pulling jared kushner security clearance if light of the russian meeting.
before the break you heard ron widen say he'd like to see the security clearance pulled. >> jared kushner the president son-in-law and senior advisor is regularly at president trump's side. whether the president is mulling national security decisions, meeting with foreign leaders or attempting to strike a mideast peace deal. without a security clearance, some say it would be impossible for kushner to serve in the west wing. for now kushner has been operating with an interim clearance. the final decision could come down to trump. he can over ride any reservations from others in the white house to ensure kushner receives full clearance. it would likely come with a political price. at a time when he has little capitol to spare. raising red flags. >> it is very bothersome to me that jared kushner ner has
forgotten not once not twice, but three times to put down the information. >> that's an issue we need to look at. right now we don't have enough evidence. >> the first version of kushner's security document left the foreign contacts blank. he updated a multiple time ts to include a hundred contacts. with donl trump jr. and a russian lawyer peddling dirt about hillary clinton from the kremlin. his original paper work was submitted in error before it was completed and kushner hasn't intentionally omitted any information. he's eager to cooperate and share what he knows his personal lawyer said in a recent statement on the matter. >> has jared kushner's legal team had any additional response today by calls to be stripped of security clearance. >> we went back to them today amidthe continuing controversy and instead of weighing in again the team referred us wac to that
statement. from kushner's lawyer from last week. the white house suggested that anyone who is calling for his security cleern to be revoked is doing this to play political games. it's worth noting these are from both sides of the aisle. to down play it. whoever there is no doubt it does fall far oud the campaign norm. more intriguing question is how typical or not in the espionage world. here to talk about it the director of the intelligence. lar son a former krrkcia intelligence officer. he's currently a senior director at the university of pennsylvania pen biden center. i have heard you say this meeting with the russian lawyer looks to you like something taken straight from a russian espionage play book.
how so? >> i would say it's not just from the russian espionage play book which we know very well. it's from the standard or classical play book. in that's it a meeting that involves sizing up your target. in this case the trump campaign, with what we know to be the russian objective of influencing the campaign and trying to establish connections with the trump campaign in order to enter into some form of collusion. for which by the way paul manafort, michael flynn and carter page all were banished from the campaign and from the administration because of their inappropriate contacts with the russian. having established that as a basis for looking at this meeting, what makes it a classic espionage feeler or you would say trial balloon. is the fact they didn't take too many risks. the russians would have wanted to take an initial reading, especially on u.s. soil.
not sure how the trump campaign would handle the campaign. they would know they weren't interested in an inappropriate relationship. which is why they took such pains to signal it was russian government and it was totally inappropriate information they were planning to bring. secondly if they reported it after the fact that would be an indication of course their plan had gone awry. because the trump campaign would have signalled they weren't interested. >> they didn't report it to the russians that would have been a signal of maybe they're still in play or they're vulnerable. >> it would have to be taken as a signal. that's exactly what we would do if we approach a target. and the target does not report what is clearly something that has been developed to the target as an intelligence approach. which certainly had to look like. one can say that one thought it was it this or that. or was naive or innocent of understanding it's true purpose. the russians would not have
thought of it as anything other than an intelligence approach and would have signalled the possibility for future relationship with trump associates when the time came up and pursue it in greater depth. >> when donald trump jr. said -- we don't know the details. >> we he says the person didn't have any dirt, does that would that surprise you. if this was a soft approach if this was a probe, would they actually come with information or would that come later? >> this is exactly keeping in how they operate. they dangle dirt on clinton. and promise to follow up with something later on. and by the way using a cut out like the one they did with natalia veselnitskaya. is also classic. >> you believe she was a cutout. >> she would fit the profile. she's not a formally affiliated with the russian government and yet she claims to know the prosecutor general. extremely well. and so that shows she's
obviously linked to the upper echelon of power in the kremlin. that's the perfect way to dangle someone in front of inner members of the trump circle. >> you said that the way the russians you know, they may have had some sort of cooperation to figure out where to target social media campaigns or influence came campaigns in the u.s. during the election. can you explain that? >> when the russians conduct these campaigns and i have seen them all over from ukraine. to georgia to various countries in europe. they inevitably try to penetrate political circles and seek guidance from parties that are like minded or which they can align. in order to perpetrate what they want to do. in this case information about a political candidate. to my mind the notion they would have launched the operation as a distance and everything would have been remotely controlled from gru or military
headquarters in moscow doesn't make sense. it would have relied on folks on the ground here in the united states. >> do you agree with that. whether it's american citizens or russian. or espionage intelligence officials from russia on the ground here that local knowledge would be key. for any intelligence service i assume they would have to have local knowledge. just like the u.s. in iraq would have to have -- it's better to have locals giving information. >> absolutely. at this point in the campaign we now know that the fbi notified the dnc about the hacking activity that occurred for almost 17 months prior to this meeting in june. so the russians have been gathering book and what they consider to be compromising material on the candidates chlts they have been hacking into the dnc. now they're thinking about how are we going to use the information, how is the best way to influence the campaign. do we have a whiting can we
develop a witting partner in the trump campaign to utilize this information. this meeting fts key in assessing the prospect for future cultivation. the fact the meeting was not reported, is also hugely significant because the russians would have had to go back and conduct another entire risk versus gain calculation. if this was reported to the fbi and the fbi can factor this into the ongoing investigation, perhaps it woup stopped the meddling in its tracks. >> this is not the only contact that russians had with operative in the united states. it reached into inner members of the trump circle and operate i have in floor. a former intelligence agent who is now the head of -- the largest russian development bank met with kushner. with different stories as to what they discussed when they met. so there are many contacts that
we already knew about publicly. where the russians tried to make entrees into political circles here in the united states. >> another meeting that wasn't known about at the time wasn't reported and differing explanations why a meeting with that russian bank. >> by the way i'm hearing from sources as well. that at the g 20 in addition to the meeting that president trump had with mr. putin the formal by lat ralt. there was a leaders dinner after wards. and during that leaders dinner, mr. trump and putin conversed for the better part of an hour. there hasn't been reporting oen that. all of these meetings all of the contacts which are being underreported and underread out to the american public, it leads to a string of data points that point to some degree of what's really going on here. >> gentlemen love to have you back to discuss this more in the future. coming up next the white house celebrating made in america week. but trump family products don't
exactly set the best example. we'll tell you how. somewhere along the great journey of self-discovery: a breakthrough. ♪ it's in our nature to need each other. ♪ yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's complete with key nutrients we may need. plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets.
this afternoon's made in america week celebration in the white house. trump called for an end to unfair trade practices from other countries and return of american manufacturing. a common refrain during the campaign. >> clearly it's time for a new policy. one defined by two simple rules. we will buy american, and we will hire american. >> behind that proclamation however is the trump family history of out sourcing all of its own products. randi kaye has more. >> from this day forward, it's going to be only america first. >> from the day he became president, that was his promise. but what about all those trump products apparently out sourced to more than a dozen other
countries. including turkey, india, and vietnam. even countries that donald trump himself has railed against. like mexico and china. it's an issue he's been called out on before. >> the ties are made in where. china. >> reporter: not only clothing. but other items too like his brand of eyeglasses and hotel pens. vases. mirrors, lighting, shampoo, bath towels. all made over seas. back during campaign 2016, hillary clinton made sure voters knew it. >> trump ties made in china. trump suits in mexico. trump furniture in turkey. trump picture frames in india. trump bar ware in. and i could go on and on. be u you get the idea. i'd love for him to explain how all that fits with his talk about america first.
>> reporter: and the out sourcing runs in the family. ivanka trump no longer runs her company but she owns it. last january as her father was being inaugurated the washington post found a container ship carrying about 500 pound of her branded blouses was arooiing in california. on a ship from vietnam. another ten ships the paper says later brought to the u.s. shoes, cardigans and handbags. branded with ivanka's name. from places like japan, and south korea. her brand won't disclose the countries or factories that make its goods. but the post traced clothing labels on her products. in doing so, it logged more than 2,000 shipments of her goods from foreign ports in the last seven years. donald trump says it's cost
prohibited. with too many regulations to manufacture some goods in the u.s. white house communication director sean spicer was asked about ivanka's trump out sourcing at today's press briefing. >> if there's no -- purses whatever, if there's no capacity. is it appropriate to make the things over seas? >> obviously we want to create an environment which more things are made here. more things are exported from here. >> does that mean ivanka's trumps products will be made in america soon? >> there are certain things we may not have the capacity to do here. in terps of having a plant or factory to do it. >> joining me now. washington post reporter. along with his colleagues wrote the piece. revealing her clothes are entirely made in foreign factories. the company really didn't -- they met with you. fact they wouldn't tell you
where the products are made or under what conditions. there seems like other countries even small companies even manufacturing over seas try to ensure that the workers in the factories are well treated is well paid. >> that's right. that's one of the big surprises that we found with the company. there are a lot of clothing companies that don't share which factories they work in or which countries they work in. there are a lot of countries that out source and get stuff made over seas. 97% of the thijs we buy in the u.s. every year are made over seas. this was such a level of no transparency. they said they had a code of conduct for their factories but wouldn't share anything. we were surprised to know there are companies clothing companies sort of similar to theirs that are smaller, younger. that were doing these things and sharing these things and sharing more about how their workers are treated over seas. >> some companies. even a company she herself had
noted in a book. some companies actually hire or employ outside auditors to ensure ta these factories these contracters who are not directly working for them are using best practices. >> that's right. that's becoming really common. two decade ago or something, nike had this huge sweat shop scandal. and increaseingly since then there's been an interest in american shoppers knowing their clothing isn't made in exploited conditions and workers are being treated the right way. when you see a company that isn't investing in those over sight mechanisms. it's surprising. a lot of people we talked to were stunned that ivanka's company this many years on is sort of committing to a level of very low transparency and now that she's in the white house and grazing a profile. >> levy, i guess the irony is
ivanka trump says the mission of her life is empowering women. it's largely women working the factories in incredibly difficult circumstances in many cases. >> yeah that's right. a lot of these women in the countries where ivanka's clothes are made, vietnam, india, ind in each. women work forces. low pay, difficult sometimes unsafe work environments. sometimes verbal abuse from supervisors. this is the reality of life for women who are making ivanka trumps goods. it's a world apart from the glamorous life she's selling and marketing as part of women who work campaign. the controversy is only growing. >> just to be fair the explanation you got from the company, i understand that i said the company is because it's newer sp smaller, at the time they weren't able to do this stuff. but they're looking into it now. >> they're committing to doing
these things. their interest in having more transparent si about the supply chain. this company has been running for several years. it's something she's interested in, she made a lot of profile moving -- a lot of moves about her profile suggesting she cares about these things. why did it take so long to become a priority. >> really fascinating reporting in the washington post. thanks so much. up next. breaking news with gop senators talking healthcare tonight in the white house. the bill is now near legislative death. live update on that ahead.
i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. more breaking news tonight. more like make-or-break news,
the senate gop bill to replace the affordable care act, obamacare, it is a setback for the president who has been spending the evening wooing reluctant lawmakers on the hill. what have you lirpd? >> reporter: it is the worst case scenario. two more senators announce willed they also cannot support the senate version of health care. senator jerry moran of kansas and mike lee of utah. that brings the number of four republican senators who say they cannot support this bill. it is not enough for senate majority leader mitch mcconnell to get the bill to the bore much less get it passed. he needs at least 50 votes. this would mean there are four senators of the 52 under willing to support the bill. essentially at this point this bill is dead. anderson, i want to point out the language in the statements put out by moran and lee. they don't appear to be in a negotiating mood. in fact, they're very, very disappointed with the progress
of this bill. in fact, jerry moran suggesting they need to start fresh, essentially start from scratch. he says they need to open the legislative process and that he's not interested in supporting what he calls a stamp of approval for bad policy. mike lee in his statement said that the bill does not go far enough to lower premiums for middle class families. so mitch mcconnell has been struggling as you know, anderson, for the last several weeks to try to get these 50 votes. right out of the gate with the second version of this health care bill he lost two senators right away, susan collins of maine and rand paul of kentucky. now with moran and lee out of the mix, those are four votes he had to have. he doesn't have them now. so at this point it is very difficult to see a path forward for this bill, and it comes, anderson, as you mentioned as seven senators, most of them in the leadership of the republican conference, are at the white house right now presumably to come up with a strategy to hold on to those 50 votes. it looks as though at this point they will not be successful.
>> yeah, i mean is it possible i mean it could change? a lot of folks said, look, on the house side it wasn't going to happen and then it did. >> reporter: right, but it was after, you know, a second attempt and it was after a lot of back door negotiating. we've already had a second attempt here, we've already had the back door negotiating, and the response we have hearing from these senators is anything but positive. this language does not appear to open the door to try to take a second run at this, and we've heard senators up here for some time talk about opening up the legislative process. they want more hearings. they want to bring democrats on board to open up this conversation. so it seems unlikely now that there's some sort of a rabbit mitch mcconnell can pull out of a hat to try to perform some sort of a magic act to try to get this bill back on track. it is as difficult a position as he's found himself in throughout the process, and it comes at a time where they're missing another vote in senator john mccain and they have no idea
when he will be able to return here to be a part of the process. >> obviously his health is a factor in all of this. >> reporter: it absolutely is. it was a factor this morning. there was a plan to release the congressional budget office score, and their hope was that tomorrow the bill would be up for the motion to proceed which would essentially open up the debate on the house floor and begin the amendment process. that had to be pushed back when senator mccain's hlgt scaealth came up and he was unable to come here. this has been a problem for mitch mcconnell, anderson, because the longer they had to debate the bill the more difficulty the senators had to wrap their arms around it. the more they go back and talk to constituents, the more problems come up. this continues to get more difficult for senate leadership. >> more in the next hour. also more on senator mccain's medical condition. our medical correspondent dr. gupta joins us. what was it for?
>> it was to remove a blood collection from just above his eye is what the hospital said. what it was was an incision in the eyelid but to gain access to the bone. they wanted to remove the frontal bone to basically get access to his brain. anderson, let me show you this. it was a bigger operation than was originally described. this is the bone we are talking about in here. you can remove a piece of the bone here, in this area, left frontal area. this is a way to gain access to the brain, and this was the area of the brain you then gain access to, the left frontal area over here. again, what they said, anderson, is he had about a five centimeter blood collection. that's about two inches. so you just saw what i showed you from the end of this ruler to the end of my finger, that's two inches. pretty sizable blood collection in brain, but that's what they said they were removing. they have sent that off to be examined under the microscope by the pathologist, but that's what they said the operation was for. >> senators on the hill are
obviously hoping he will be back next week. is that a realistic time frame based on the surgery? >> it seems early. it seems early. look, again, this is -- i think the initial descriptions maybe minimize a little bit of how much senator mccain had done. it is brain surgery. it is general anesthesia. he's 80 years old, he's tough, but still 80 years old. typically for most people that had an operation like this you would say a couple of weeks of recovery. you could be up and about, you could be having conversations, but to return to a schedule typically a couple of weeks. no hard and fast rules, but that's typical. >> as you say, he as tough. we wish him and his family the best. thank you so much. next, a bride to be calls 911 to report a possible sexual assault. the office officers arrived and they shoot and kill her. that's next. rs arrived and they
. a yoeg 'instructor in minneapolis should be planning her wedding right now. instead her fiance and family are planning her funeral. the nightmare began when she decided to be a good samaritan and call 911. her family's nightmare began moments ago, ryan young. >> reporter: minneapolis police received a report of a possible sexual assault. 40-year-old justine ruschek made the call to 911 and told the
dispatcher it was happening in an alley outside her home. two officers respond and at some point during the night one of the officers fires his weapon, hitting her and killing her. how she was shot dead by a responding officer is a mystery. police said little about the incident calling it a "tragic death" and said they are investigating the matter. the two officers were wearing body cameras but they were not turned on during the shooting. there was no explanation from police as to why the cameras were turned off and no explanation as to what happened with the possible assault called in. she was set to be married in august. she is an australian native that moved to minneapolis to be with her fiance. >> the death of justine is a loss to everyone who knew her. she touched so many people with her loving and generous heart. >> reporter: as her family mourn the loss of her life, they also press the minneapolis police for more information. >> sadly, her family and i have been provided with almost no
additional information from law enforcement regarding what happened after police arrived. we've lost the dearest of people and we're desperate for information. piecing together justine's last moments before the homicide would be a small comfort as we grief this tragedy. >> reporter: minneapolis's mayor called on police to provide information on the shooting as quickly as possible. >> i am heart sick and deeply disturbed by the fatal officer-involved shooting. i have a lot of questions about why the body cameras weren't on, questions that i hope and anticipate will be answered in the next few days. >> reporter: in a tweet the minneapolis police chief said she asked for expedited investigation into justine rusecheck's death in order to provide the answers as quickly. >> ryan young joins us from
minneapolis. tell us more about the reaction in the community. >> reporter: the reaction from the community has been quite strong. in fact, we are surrounded by people who decided to come out here. they've been standing around. you can look at the signs and see their out pouring of their emotions. look at the sign right here, why did you shoot and kill our neighbor and our friend. there are candles all over the place. we have seen kids using chalk to write names in this direction. think about this. this is the alleyway where the shooting happened so down this direction, maybe four houses down is where she lived. like we said we learned from the medical examiner it was one gunshot wound to the abdomen that ultimately killed her. we know the officer's attorney released a statement. it says, the officer extends his condolences to the family and anyone else who has been touched by this event. he takes their loss seriously and keeps them in his daily thoughts and prayers. you can just feel the pain here. people have been talking, they just don't understand why and how she would get shot so close to her home. anderson. >> ryan young, we'll continue to follow it. thanks very much.
at the top of the hour breaking news on health care, and it is thi this. it is made in america week at the white house. there's breaking news on that, and it still races questions. it caps off a day when the administrations answers clash with each other as well as the facts. >> the president made it clear through his tweet and there was nothing that -- as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe that there was anything except for a discussion about adoption and the magnitsky act. >> that was sean spicer contradicting the president today as if the meeting involving his son-in-law and son was about adoption research. most politicians would have been to a meeting like the one went to. most we have asked say thas not so, most politicians wouldn't have done this. more on that