Skip to main content

tv   Anderson Cooper 360  CNN  July 17, 2017 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT

6:00 pm
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 shortly.
6:01 pm
first, justice correspondent with breaking news on who was at that fateful trump tower meeting. you've learned about the eighth person at the meeting. >> that's right. don jr.'s attorney tells me he has tone to him over the phone in the last couple of weeks. while he declined to provide his name he said he claimed to be a u.s. citizen over the phone and shedr said he was not employed or working on behalf tv russian government at the time of the meeting. of course, since we don't know his name, it is unclear what his history is. he also caution he doesn't know more than what he has claimed. there are questions about why he was there. the aguilar family nor their attorney has publicly said why as you pointed out in our last discussion, the attorney last week claimed that the aguilares had nothing to do with the meeting even though they were mentioned in the e-mail exchange that don jr. released. but he says that his impression
6:02 pm
from speaking with the eighth person if we want to call him that over the phone, thaefs there to make sure that the attorney, the female russian attorney got to the meeting. there's still many questions and mystery continues to shroud who this person is. really the only person we know of that hasn't been publicly identified, anderson. >> yeah, you know, we talk about the aguilaras, the attorney for both the father and son came forward and i spoke to him and said, look, they basically had nothing to do with this, the pop star son was an acquaintance with this russian attorney and as a favor made the introduction through goldstone to donald trump jr. if they have a representative of the family at that meeting, that seems to undercut what their own attorney said last week. >> right. and to be fair, i spoke to that attorney this past friday when we were reporting there was a representative of the aguilara family at that meechlgt he was trying to figure out who that
6:03 pm
person is, or so he claimed to me that he was trying to piece it all together and he was learning about it as well. and in the conversation i had with don jr.'s attorney, he says that during his conversation with this person that he corroborated what had already been reported about this meeting, that the first couple of minutes there were press apl were exchanged and then she discussed information she had about russia and dealing with the dnc and then moving on to adoption. he said no one he has spoken to has any recollection of a document that the russian lawyer claimed to leave behind in that meeting, anderson. >> what did trump jr.'s attorney say about the initial conflicting statement? >> i asked him about that. he defended his client as being willing to tell the story even before that initial new york times article. he said don jr. and his counsel were fully prepared and absolutely 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
6:04 pm
conversation was in the meeting. now, clearly that didn't happen, anderson, and when i asked -- >> right, because he knew the initial statement was basically saying, this was about adoptions. >> right. if you look through the timeline, the initial statement was this was only about adoptions. the next day a statement came out and said actually i took this meeting, you know, because it was about incriminating information with the russians donating to the dnc. we weren't sure what it was but b about but i took the meeting. i asked, why did it play out the way it did few were fully prepared to be up front and transparent from the get-go? he wouldn't comment. if you read between the lines, what was implied is they were not fully consulted with about the misleading statement about adoption, only saying the focus of the meeting was about adoption. my colleagues first reported that the statement was drafted
6:05 pm
aboard air force one and there was a big concern about protecting jared kushner. it raises a fair amount of questions. >> we should point out the president's own attorney, sekulow, at the end of the week was saying the president did not sign off and i believe it was his -- he was saying in the new york times and the reporting was inaccurate. pam brown, i want to bring in the panel. kirsten, does it make sense to you that the president tweets out in the morning, anybody would have done it to get opposition research, sean spicer then in the briefing room in front of, you know -- not in front much cameras. >> yeah, right. >> but says this was -- there's no evidence this was about anything other than adoption and, you know, the sanctions? >> no, it doesn't make sense also because donald jr. -- i don't remember the exact tweet but he tweeted something along those lines. i'm sure i'm the first person who got -- >> right, he said for me it was about opposition research. >> right, and he put out a
6:06 pm
tweet. i don't know why sean spicer would try to change the story back to something both don jr. and his father said weren't the case, and if anything were saying, what's the big deal, anybody would do this? that's been the argument of most of the surrogates, to say everybody does this even though everybody doesn't do this. >> it is one thing to lie. it is one thing to lie in a way that's a reliant on that y'all are stupid and all of the facts you have been hearing about over the last week, we're just going to pretend they didn't happen. >> to me think it reinforces the notion that the white house press briefing is a waste of time, if it ever -- if it ever really was worth anything it is now completely pointless. >> you don't think there's a value in hearing people in the white house saying things which are demonstrably false? >> i don't think there's a value in sean spicer who is not inside, who doesn't know what he's talking about. he is either lying to us and spinning us -- which doesn't advance -- doesn't inform the public, or he doesn't know. >> but does anybody know -- >> doesn't he read the
6:07 pm
newspaper? >> it was in every newspaper. it is not possible he didn't know. >> i totally disagree with matt. there's great value in sean spicer. he has given us great "snl," "saturday night live" skits. please do not go against sean. look, so sean spicer says there's no evidence it was about anything other than this adoption act. well, there's no evidence it was not about opposition research. what we do have are players in the room who we know have no credibility because they have lied publicly, indignantly, emphatically and constantly for months and months and months. we all know but for the fact that he got caught that these e-mails were going to be released, he would have kept on -- don jr. -- with his story that this -- that he had never had any contact with russia. so my question is why should we believe anything any of these people are saying when they've got such a track record of lying? >> jeff, you know, it is such a cliche now to talk about the
6:08 pm
drip, drip of information and, you know, trey gowdy last week said, look, anybody who has ever met, you know, somebody who may be connected, you know, should just talk to the special counsel, but now, you know, pam brown talking to donald trump jr.'s attorney who seems himself to be trying to figure out who was in the room and the purpose of everything, and now you have the eighth person was this representative from this russian family who last week the russian family's lawyer was saying, no, no, they had nothing to do with it, it was just an acquaintance, and now nary sending a representative. >> get it all out there. get it all out there. to me don trump jr. is saying, i'll come and talk, i will come and testify, i'm happy to do it. i mean that's the attitude that you should have and get this all out there. that said, anderson, for all of the talk that we're doing at this, there's no there there here. i mean colluded to do what, carry pennsylvania? pennsylvania was carried because pennsylvanians were upset about
6:09 pm
jobs, trade, health care, else. i would go to these rallies. not a single person mentioned russia to me, not one. >> no, but isn't the there there -- i mean it's -- no one is saying that ballot boxes were missed with. >> well, the implication is -- >> well, no, but to me it is more about the future and figuring out what happened this past time in terms of what did the russians actually do and what is going to happen the next time and what's going to happen in europe and understanding the mo of russian intelligence seems there's value in that. >> there's another implication though. there's an implication -- and we don't know what happened, but there's an implication that someone was helping the russians figure out how to target certain districts with certain fake news. >> right. we had a former intelligence guy on last night -- or tonight. >> so the idea that nobody mentioned kushner -- >> and jared kushner was in charge of the data. >> so it is pretty far fetched to think that the russians would know in this district african american voters are thinking this and if you tell them this fake news, this is going to get
6:10 pm
through to them. the assumption is someone in the united states was helping. the question is was it someone on the trump campaign or someone associated with the trump campaign. so nobody is going to say russia because they're not going to know where it is coming from. all they know is they read a news story they think is true. >> to me it doesn't look good if the people involved aren't coming forward and saying, yeah, this happened, there was this meeting, eight people were there. it is like every day late in the day, it is like, oh, my gosh, here's another piece of information that seems to contradict was everyone else has been saying. >> right. frankly, anderson, this is why all of these new people who keep emerging like russian nesting dolls in this meeting are going to become important, because what happened in that meeting is going to be critical to giving context for everything that came after. i think it is important to not make this as a mutually exclusive thing between dirt on hillary and adoptions. remember that adoptions is a euphemism -- >> right, it is not adoptions, it is sanctions.
6:11 pm
>> exactly. this is sanctions, this was a foreign policy discussion. >> it is a prid kwo pro. >> thank you. >> it is like i give you this stuff, is there going to be movement on sanctions. >> it is a foreign policy discussion by people associated with the campaign mixed in with information that might be helpful to that campaign, and how did those two things come together in that meeting? now there are, you know, several people who can be questioned about that and who can give an account of that meeting even if don jr. doesn't come clean. >> could be under oath. >> yeah, much more to talk about ahead including calls for jared kushner's security clearance to be revoked in light of all of this. also shortly despite efforts by the senate leadership we're learning the obamacare replacement bill may be all but dead. there's a meeting at the white house with senators on 360 ahead. radio: scorching heat today, stay cool out there!
6:12 pm
6:13 pm
6:14 pm
[ barks ] walter! stop suffering with hot ac. cool it yourself with a/c pro. in just 3 easy steps, enjoy the comfort of 2 times the cooling boosters from the #1 selling coldest air. nothing cools like a/c pro. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
6:15 pm
♪ . we're back talking about the trump campaign and the trump administration, questions of ties to russia in the wake of all of the revelations about that meeting last year, legislative calls to revoke jared kushner's security clearance are growing louder. earlier i spoke with oregon senator ron white. >> 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
6:16 pm
case that he should keep his security clearance. >> back now with the panel. kirsten, i mean, you know, easy for democrats to complain about it. unless the president decides -- first of all, he doesn't have a final security clearance yet and we understand some staffers in the white house are concerned he may not get the final security clearance, but if he does it is up to the president to take it away. >> yes, it is up to the president. i can't imagine that the president would ever not -- would ever pull his security clearance once he gets it. i think it is true that if he was just any other staffer and any other administration, he would have that security clearance put on hold. that would be the responsible thing to do but i don't expect that's what is going to happen here. >> used to work as an fbi special agent, what is your take on security clearance? would it be possible he wouldn't be granted a security clearance? he's high level? >> fe weif he were a normal int
6:17 pm
agency employee or someone who works in one of the agencies, his clearance would be on hold as they examined the update, made sure the contacts were vetted not to raise concern. when i was an fbi agent i had to report every single contact i had on an ongoing basis. i did that reporting, but had i not i would have been pulled out, polygraphed, zd wasked why didn't pull it. he probably will get it as kirsten said, but he would not be treated like every other employee who gets one of these clearances. >> there's a republican congressman from texas who said it would be in the president's best interest if he removed all of his kids from the white house. he said, i'm going out on a limb but i would say it would be in the president's best interest if he removed all of his kids from the white house, not only ivanka and donald jr., but jared kushner. what do you think of that? >> presidents have been employing their children and
6:18 pm
other relatives since john adams who made use of his son, john quincy, all the way through to the kennedys and clintons, et cetera. you can say good, bad or indifferent, but the fact of the matter is presidents are human. >> what children of the clintons? >> wife, hillary in charge of health care. >> she was the first lady and that was her agenda. >> yes, but also children -- >> what children did the bushes employ, what children did the obama's employ. >> andrew jackson, martin van buren. >> you are talking about kennedy, are you talking about children -- >> you guys, look, i mean this has been done. all i'm saying is that presidents -- >> you're telling me if chelsea clinton sat in on the president in the g20 in china and reporters would not be like why is chelsea clinton -- >> that's my point, is that
6:19 pm
presidents trust whom they trust. the rest of us can agree or disagree. if they've got in this case with jared kushner, you know, a real trust in somebody, there is lots of precedent for this and they're going to keep -- >> that's part of the problem. part of the problem is that he trusts, that it skews your judgment that you would strus -- and you're not going to fire -- that was one of the big problems -- by the way, i think you're totally right about the historical precedent but i don't think it is a good thing, this nepotism. become couldn't fire hillary clinton, and if you were a staffer in the white house and you had an issue with her or disagreed with something -- >> woe betide. >> exactly. >> how do you have a fight with jared kushner? >> exactly. nobody who is a ceo or running for something, should hire no one they can fire. donald trump would have a hard time firing his favorite daughter's husband, and his favorite daughter's husband has had to amend his security clearance forms three times.
6:20 pm
unless you prove he has early onset dementia, i don't understand how he was able to forget 100 contacts with foreigners. i mean this kid is -- >> oh, anna. >> i'm guessing that his attorney by -- by round three just made him put down everything. so i mean not to say that that excuses it, but it is possible that the 100 people are over inclusive, but that should have been there the first time around. >> you realize you're not talking about ten? i mean 100 is a lot. >> exactly. my point is it should have been -- >> it is not like 30,000 missing e-mail also though. >> oh, for the love of god. can we stop talking about -- listen, she is in the woods of chappaqua picking up mushrooms. this man is in the white house. can we focus on the ball? >> i want the same standard for everybody. >> sure, let's have the same standard. if chelsea kliclinton sat at th g20 you would have been
6:21 pm
screaming bloody murder. >> you have no problem with her sitting at the g 20 with her father? >> no, if the president wants anybody, his daughter, anybody else to do it, that's the president's choice. we hold the president responsible for -- for his decisions. >> okay. hand on your heart, would you have had a problem with chelsea clinton sitting there? >> no. >> nobody watching believes you. >> wait. if hillary clinton wanted her daughter there and is making her daughter like ivanka is, that's her choice. her right to do it is undisputed. >> i used to think that this -- i used to think they were a good influence on him, and we can go back and pull tape from six months ago or so. >> a lot of people said that, that they were a moderate influence. >> look, they're more liberal than i care for and they don't have any experience, but they're scene and compared to some of the trump whisperers they're going to keep him in line. i actually have changed my mind about that. i actually think now it is pretty clear that they should
6:22 pm
go. >> what made you change your mind? >> part of it is this three -- you know, not being honest about disclosure forms, the fact they're not embroiled in the don jr. e-mail. i mean, again, if these were normal staffers you could dispatch them. they may not make these mistakes because they would probably be -- if you were at that level of a white house, you would have the experience presumably, the wisdom to not make some of these mistakes. >> also with jared kushner, there's so many blurry lines when it comes to the private sector, to his businesses, to his real estate business and how, you know, he's been able to use the government platform to in some way influence loans and other different activities in his private sector. i mean they're like piggish, they keep eating at the trough. >> sorry, that's a visual i'm not going to be able to get out of my head. we have breaking news coming up on the gop senate health care bill. the president has been lobbying just tonight with senators, late
6:23 pm
ward coming out which senators have turned against it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. visit booking.yeah! tais really quite simple.est it comes in the mail, you pull out the tube and you spit in it, which is something southern girls are taught you're not supposed to do. you seal it and send it back and then you wait for your results. it's that simple. [woman] we did it. [man] we're campers. look at us. look at us. it's so nice to get out of the city. it's so... quiet. is it, too quiet? it's awful. yeah. feel at home, pretty much wherever you are. t-mobile is america's best unlimited network.
6:24 pm
with a stunning 4k displaydow and graphics thates. bring them to life. peter! you still with us? the dell inspiron 15 7000 gaming. dell, as real as it gets. it's easy-drinking... it's refreshing... ♪ if you've got the time ♪ it's what american lager was born to be. ♪ we've got the beer. ♪ welcome to the high life. ♪ miller beer. over the course of 9 days sthe walks 26.2 miles,. that's a marathon. because he chooses to walk whenever he can. and he does it with support from dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort to keep him feeling more energized. so he even has the energy to take the long way home. keep it up, steve! dr. scholl's. born to move.
6:25 pm
hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch.
6:26 pm
remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote. more breaking news tonight in a potential big setback for the president who spent the evening lobbying republican senators on their health care bill, a bill which late tonight looks to be all by legislatively dead. ryan nobles has the latest. how did things come unraveled tonight? >> reporter: anderson, essentially you had two republican senators right out of the gate, susan collins of maine and rand paul of kentucky, that said they were opposed to the bill. one more senate vote was enough to topple the bill. there's been a sense around here for the last several weeks there were basically a bunch of
6:27 pm
senators that were unhappy with the progress of this bill, but no one wanted to be that next vote, essentially the 49th vote to prevent this bill from moving forward. so that's where you are tonight, jerry moran of kansas and mike lee of utah together released a statement at exactly the same time announcing they could not support the bill, meaning two senators were pulling back and essentially killing the bill at this point. even though for a long time it seemed as though mitch mcconnell was sort of holding the ship together and put them into position where they would at least be able to get the bill to the floor, there's been some sense there was actually a much greater number of senators uncomfortable with it. that was revealed here tonight as two more senators have said that they cannot support the bill and it essentially makes the situation for mitch mcconnell untenable, there's no health forward if he wants to see this version of health reform passed. >> what were their oppositions, the two senators that came forward, because obviously you
6:28 pm
have the other two in terms of republicans, kind of rand paul very different from susan collins? >> in many ways jerry more and and mike lee are on different ends tv spectrum. mike lee is maybe in the rand paul camp, certainly a conservative, and he did not like the language in the new cruz amendment which he initially was a kau author of. at one point senator cruz stepped away from mike lee and was directly negotiating with mitch mcconnell and the latest version is something senator lee was not happy with, and he says it specifically in his statement. he said, after conferring with trusted experts regarding the latest version of the consumer tree dom amendment and that was the amendment he was coauthoring with ted cruz, i'm decided i cannot support the current investigation. in addition to not repealing all of the owe bake awe care taxes it doesn't go far enough in lowering premiums for middle
6:29 pm
class nor does it create enough free space. he is somebody that we've been watching closely and his displeasure with the bill has not been necessarily that vocal but he was against the bill when it was the first version of the health reform bill but he said he was open to working and negotiating on the second bill but he never fully embraced it. he was very concerned with the way medicaid would pay out in this version of health care reform. he was somebody that was never really comfortable with it and today he made it official that he kaecan't support it. >> is there a plan b or plan c? >> that's a good question. we have contacts in to senator mcconnell's office to see what their next plan is. at this point mcconnell's office has been reluctant to say let's go back to the drawing board and start from scratch. keep in mind, anderson, it will be a much more difficult process if they decide to do that because they're attempting to pass this bill through
6:30 pm
reconciliation, which would only allow them to do it with the 50 votes. if they create a whole new bill, then that reconciliation option isn't back on the table and, of course, you have to get the house back involved. so at this point, no, there isn't a plan b or a plan c. >> wow. >> you know, there were seven republican leadership members over at the white house tonight. perhaps this is something that they were talking about, but there's certainly a long road ahead if they hope to pass any form of health care reform. >> ryan nobles, thanks very much. back with the panel. amazing after so long, republicans running on this, the idea of not actually -- >> yes. >> the damage of not having something versus -- >> correct. >> -- doing something that people don't like. >> correct. they should have been ready the day after the inauguration with this, and they weren't. >> i mean they passed how many, you know, bills -- >> right, countless, countless. my point is if they don't get this done, when we get to 2018 -- off year elections are hard for presidents anyway, but
6:31 pm
what you could have here is the curious phenomenon of the base of the republican party turning on their own members of congress for not doing what they said and saying, "look, why vote for you if you're not going to do what you told us you were going to do?" >> they did not -- i wrote a column in january for "the daily beast" saying republicans should punt on this. i started off trying to write a column that would be "this is how republicans are going to fix health care." every conservative, center right leaning health care expert i talked to -- and i talked to them over and over -- there was no solution. the fundamental problem of this is that americans after obamacare basically came to the conclusion that it is the government's responsibility to take care of your health insurance. >> that set the precedent. >> once that becomes a political reality, now there's really no free market solution, right? so if you're a conservative who wants competition, who wants the free market solution, you're not going to have it. so then if you actually want -- if you can't -- if you are a
6:32 pm
conservative, you can't out spend liberals. the more generous plan, you can't compete with obamacare, but you're not going to have the conservative plan. it is a debacle. i think this is donald trump's vietnam. it is basically a boondoggle. they thought they could do it quickly. this is not trump's war. he didn't want this. >> you think it is donald trump's vietnam? >> thati think it is. >> something he got into that is lard to get out of? >> exactly. we're in june and how do you do tax reform, there's no infrastructure -- >> kirsten, what does happen now? if you believe republicans who say obamacare is dying -- and certainly they're not doing anything to help you not die -- and yet if there's not something passed what -- >> well, i never thought it was going to pass, so i will be surprised if it does pass. sort of for the reasons you were saying, i have a slightly -- the idea they want a free market solution, mine a free market solution is what we had before.
6:33 pm
>> that's not true. we did not have a free market solution. >> you would have even more -- just not providing anything then is what you mean, right? >> no, no, look. the problem is that america's health care starting aftworld w ii because of wage and price control made it so you were tied to your employer. i never neglected -- >> i understand how it works, but that's not the solution. my point is that they never -- republicans have never had a solution to this problem because it is not a problem they want to solve. >> well, look, think this shows you the enormous speck trump right now within the republican party. you've got moderates like susan collins. you have libertarians like rand paul. you've got conservatives i h had -- ideologues like mike lee. it is hard to come up with a product that passes muster for everybody to get the votes, particularly when all you have is a two-vote margin in the senate. >> do they try to work with the
6:34 pm
democrats to do something with obamacare? >> the big threat from mitch mcconnell was, lo and behold, get yourselves ready, please, buckle up, we may have to go work with democrats. god forbid, we may see a bipartisan compromise if republicans cannot get something done unilaterally. >> we're going to take a quick break. a lot more on collapse of the gop senate health care bill in a moment. we will be right back.
6:35 pm
fothere's a seriousy boomers virus out there that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. one in 30 boomers has hep c, yet most don't even know it. because it can hide in your body for years without symptoms, and it's not tested for in routine blood work. the cdc recommends all baby boomers get tested. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us it's time to get tested.
6:36 pm
ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. it's the only way to know for sure.
6:37 pm
6:38 pm
before the break matt lewis called it donald trump's vietnam which could make this 1975 complete with choppers on the embassy roof, the seeming collapse of the health care bill, something the president before said would be easy. >> real change begins immediately with the repealing and replacing of the disaster known as obamacare. >> get rid of obamacare. it's going to be gone. it's going to be terminated. >> obamacare is a disaster. >> repeal it and replace it. >> repeal and replace. >> repeal and replace. >> obamacare, we're going to repeal it, we're going to replace it, we're going to get something done. repeal it, replace it, get something great! >> we're going to repeal and replace the horror that's known as obamacare. it is a horror. >> i will repeal and replace obamacare, which is a catastrophe. >> we're going to kill it, let it die. let it die. >> and we're going to come up
6:39 pm
with something much, much better. >> you're going to have such great health care at a tiny fraction of the cost, and it is going to be so easy. >> back now with the panel. obviously not so easy. i mean you were talking about it during the break, kirsten, just the, you know, different size. you have susan collins, you have rand paul. >> you have susan collins opposing it, pretty dug in. you have rand paul, pretty dug in. you're not looking at a problem going, i have susan collins, say it was two moderate, you could say, okay, i have a problem with mod ra moderates. but you have a problem with a conservative and a moderate. there's no way to fix it so it pleases both of those people. >> we have markets where we know there are few choices. what happen cincinnati. >> it will keep collapsing on its own. >> at some point isn't there an obligation to try to do something to keep it from collapse sning. >> yes, there is. i think they're going to have --
6:40 pm
the figure six opens in my head here in terms of the possible gains for republicans next year in the senate that's been mentioned. if they do not get this done, i really do think the bails of the republican party, they're not going to blame the president. they're going to blame member also of the house and senate who didn't get this done, who had seven years to -- >> they might blame them if they do get it done, too. you know, this is -- >> you have a president who six months into the administration there's massive numbers of investigations going on and the signature piece of legislation he campaigned on as being easy and something you can do in the first week or first day, if it fails he's anti-not in a good s. you don't think it hurts the president, people won't blame the president? >> i think some people will, but i think his base -- remember his famous comment about he could go out on fifth avenue and shoot somebody? i talked to a lot of these folks. they're sticking.
6:41 pm
they really think he is up against the denizens of the swamp and they're more inclined to go after the republican members of congress. >> the truth is i think if it was just donald trump negotiating the way he wanted to negotiate, he could probably get a deal and deal with democrats and probably would do something that's a lot more liberal than what the republicans are willing to do. so i think to a certain extent it is kind of the fault of the republican congress because they're the ones not willing -- they're not willing to -- >> do you think the president then tries to reach out to chuck schumer. >> frankly, he should. >> look, he has got a unique opportunity. he's let the congressional leadership lead on this policy issue, and they're not getting anywhere. they're not making nil progress. he is the art of the deal guy. this is time for him to show it. go out and reach out to democrats and try to do some bipartisanship. it might mean some of his base don't like it, but it might also mean he expands his base.
6:42 pm
right now one of his biggest problems is not only has he not expanded his base, he's cut into anybody other than a base that might have at some point thought of supporting him because of the failures, because of the investigations, because of the tweets, because of the -- you know, because of being such an infantile human being. >> friday is six months for this administration. >> you're kidding me. it's only been six months? >> it feels like only five years. the amazing thing is that republicans have a president, senate, house, state houses, governorships, more attorneys general. you go down the list. >> right. >> they have everything and they haven't been able to pass a single big piece of legislation, anything that would, you know, be significant. i don't know if there's any, like, light at the end of the tunnel. when would that happen? >> it was interesting because i think it was today or yesterday that the president was saying yet again he signed more bills into law than any president -- >> which is not true. >> i mean if you look at the
6:43 pm
actual bills, some are like renaming things. >> the countervailing pressure for democrats which i don't think we should lose sight is if this continues to implode, then there will be pressure on democrats to do something. >> democrats can't do anything. they're not in control of anything. >> what? >> democrats are not in control of anything. >> they're in control of negotiating with the president. >> right now we own this building. >> here is the thing -- >> i understand. >> -- we're pregnant with this baby, we own this baby. they owned this baby for eight years, right now it is ours to figure out. >> i understand. but if it goes down the tubes and they're not negotiating with republicans -- >> the reconciliation thing is a problem in terms of making that argument. you know, the republicans tried -- they wanted to do health care and tax reform through reconciliation, and maybe that now looks like the -- >> do you think the president could reach out to democrats? >> the democrats will not repeal obamacare. that's not going to happen.
6:44 pm
what they would do is take obamacare and improve it and make it better in areas, and there are problems with obamacare. there are absolutely legitimate problems, and work on that. the problem with the president is that he promised to repeal obamacare. so i don't know how he -- >> he also promised to build a wall, he promised to renegotiate nafta, a bunch of things. so, you know -- >> he talked about the base with undying support for the president. coming up, what new polling has to say about that and the president's surprising take on that. and a fact check. ant for you. i like you. you want to show me your swing? it's too soon. get advice that's right for you with investment management services. going somewhere? whoooo. here's some advice. tripadvisor now searches more than 200 booking sites to find the hotel you want and save you up to 30%. trust this bird's words. tripadvisor.
6:45 pm
6:46 pm
[ barks ] radio: scorching heat today, staywalter!ut there! stop suffering with hot ac. cool it yourself with a/c pro. in just 3 easy steps, enjoy the comfort of 2 times the cooling boosters from the #1 selling coldest air. nothing cools like a/c pro. so we know how to cover almost almoanything.hing even a swing set standoff. and we covered it, july first, twenty-fifteen. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ heri 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 and join the summer weekenders.
6:47 pm
its witnessed 2 diy duos,s 31 crashes,: 4 food fights, and the flood of '09. it's your paradise perfected with behr premium plus paint. the best you can buy starting under $25. only at the home depot.
6:48 pm
president trump is defiant. the new poll suggests 36% of persons approve the job he's doing so far. that is the worst rating since modern polling began seven years ago. the president doesn't see that way, responding was just about the most inaccurate poll around election time. john king joins us tonight. is that true? >> well, i understand if you fact check the two important points in that tweet, that 40% isn't all that bad six months in, that the abc poll was way off in its tracking in the 2016
6:49 pm
election, you would come to the conclusion wrong and wrong. let's take a look at the numbers. this is the poll the president was referencing when he made that tweet on top here. new washington both abc news poll. 36% approve of his job handling. 58% disapprove. just by point of reference, a bloomberg poll out has the same numbers. 55, 56, nearly 6 in 10 americans disapprove what he's doing. the president might think that's okay or not bad according to his words. but let's take a look at history. that is a historically unpopular president. donald trump at 36% approval. gerald ford was at 39%. he took office after nixon left. 10 points, 11 points away from donald trump. he won in 1992 with 43% of the
6:50 pm
vote. remember the ross perot factor in that month. george bush 59, ronald reagan 62. these other presidents considerably higher in their approval rating, up around 60% than donald trump. so it is a plain fact historically at six months donald trump is among the most unpopular president in the history of polling. what about the other point the president made, that it wasn't good in predicting the 2016 election results? here is the final tracking. 47 to 43. let me shrink this down a little bit. 48.5 for hillary clinton. 26.4 for donald trump. so a four point gap there. so, yes, the poll was off a little bit. but they certainly had the popular vote total about right. so the president is wrong. yes, he won the electoral college, the presidency, but if you look at this polling and
6:51 pm
look at the margin of error, the president's point in that tweet, again, anderson, wrong. >> that same poll is not exactly great news when it comes to how they see the democrats. do you think the democrat party currently stands for something, 37% say it stands for something. 52% say it only stands against the president. back now with the panel. first on that democratic thing, for all the excitement of democrats at low poll numbers for the president, if 52% of the people say you don't stand for anything but to oppose the preside president, that's not good. >> if you make it all barack obama or donald trump or whatever, in the end you are going to hurt yourself. >> nancy pelosi became speaker by running against george w. bush. when we get around to a president. >> with ideas, right? >> i don't think so. i think she ran against george w. bush and it worked in 2006.
6:52 pm
but when you run for president you do have to be for something. and donald trump needs to find a third party candidate. they need a ross perot if donald trump is going to be re-elected. >> they said the sampling was overdone for democrats. right, right. but, you know, the fact of the matter is -- >> you don't buy the president was at historic lows? >> he may be. >> does that concern you if he is. >> six months in, no, no. if this were six weeks from november of 2020, yeah. but not now. >> if he doesn't get health care, what happens to those numbers? you don't think they're going to go down. >> they could, sure. they could. but they could also go up. in 1982 ronald reagan had a terrible year. i can't remember his numbers, but it wasn't good. and, you know, by 1983 when his economic package finally kicked in, which had been passed in
6:53 pm
august of '91, then things turned around. >> it is interesting, though. the president has had -- you look at illegal immigration into this country. it's down hugely just from the president threatening and using the bully pulpit. >> the stock market is doing well. >> the victory in mosul again, the fight started in the obama administration. >> the economic indicators are good. you know, he has achieved some things. but it is more than that. i think a lot of americans still care about the office of the presidency of the united states and feel that he is cheapening it, feels that he is tarnishing it. maybe not his base of supporters who do not budge. but most americans, even republicans, do not like his tweeting. find it offensive and infantile, but he continues doing it. i think it is less about the specific policy issues and the specific accomplishments or not and i think it's more about the fact that we've got this
6:54 pm
president who's kind of embarrassing a lot of times. >> i don't think those people liked him anyway. >> but then you like him less, right? >> it is hard to focus on anything he has done because he himself keep it is russia issue going and going. it is like having a stair master for president. it is exhausting. you have to go along with it. so it is hard for the democrats, i think, to actually find space in all of this noise that he himself creates, quite frankly. >> but all they focus on is russia stuff and thinking the president is somehow going to pay the price for that and it ends up that there is no there at all. do they pay a bigger price? >> you should always stand for something, not just against something as a general rule. but at the same time, your point about nancy pelosi, i agree with that. so you actually can run against people. but it is better if you have something to offer them that's an alternative that they want.
6:55 pm
>> right. van jones keeps talking about this. >> you know, democrats are having their own little situation over here. you know what i mean? they're the liberals and moderates are trying to figure things out and trying to figure out which direction the party is going in. so i think they're in the process of doing that. at this point, i don't know how many americans expect donald trump to have done anything. he hasn't been there that long. what they're judging him more on is the tone, the fact he did sort of -- let's remember. he did promise to be the guy that gets along with everybody and he likes everybody and he's going to get them in the room and get them to negotiate and he's going to be different. >> it is the deals we don't trust. >> instead, he's become this person who's, you know, just poundings on the democrats in the media and not doing the things he said he would. >> how many times -- >> how many times have we seen this before standing against donald trump. the bulk of hillary clinton's campaign was standing against
6:56 pm
donald trump and the fact he was an objectionable offensive human being. it wasn't enough. >> i think midterms are different. he's president now. he was this he could be whatever you wanted him to be in the campaign. i agree. i think if you want to win the white house, you have to stand for something. if you want to win the midterms, take back the house, i think beating up donald trump is a good way. >> we've had this conversation in the course of the campaign and he comes back. >> that's true. >> everyone, thanks. we'll be right back. award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. this july visit your local volvo dealer to receive sommar savings of up to $4,500.
6:57 pm
this july visit your local volvo dealer ♪ ♪
6:58 pm
more kinds of crab than ever, new dishes, and all your favorites. only while crabfest lasts. red lobster. now this is seafood. people would ask me that we traveled,ntries what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm from all nations. it puts a hunger in your heart to want to know more.
6:59 pm
yogig-speed you know what's not awesome? when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids. and these guys. him. ah. oh hello- that lady. these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh. sure. still yes! you can get it too. welcome to the party. introducing gig-speed internet from xfinity. finally, gig for your neighborhood too.
7:00 pm
that's it for us. time to hand things over to dom lemon and cnn tonight. >> this is cnn breaking news. >> here's a breaking news. the senate bill to repeal and replace obamacare, a top republican priority appears to be dead on arrival tonight. this is cnn tonight. i'm dom lemon. president trump marks six months in office this week and tonight his administration is consumed by special counsel investigation into possible collusion and his key legislative initiative is apparently dead. let's take a closer look at where things stand right now. republicans control the white house and both houses of congress, but obamacare will remain the law of the land. two more senators say they will not support