tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN July 17, 2017 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
a lot happening tonight, including republicans senators talking health bill with the president. democrats shouldn't get too quick to gloat. their poll numbers make them come off with a party with not much of a plan. breaking news on the russia meeting and word of an eighth person in the room. we begin with strange and conflicting accounts on the meeting donald trump jr. had with the russian lawyer. you remember it's been two saturdays since the news broke. president trump today again tried to justify and explain
away that meeting. quote, most politicians would have gone to a meeting in order to get info on an opponent. that's politics, the president tweeted. never mind the idea he ran on being a nonpolitician. but what makes that statement from the president even stranger is that later today during a no cameras allowed press conference, sean spicer gave an explanation for donald trump jr.'s meeting that's flat out false. >> the president made clear from his tweet and there was nothing as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe there was anything except for discussion about adoption and the magnitsky act. >> he was say iing -- that answ ignores the chain of e-mails donald trump jr. released himself saying the meeting was about hillary clinton provided by the russian government. sean spicer's answer as if all
the revelations this past week about who was at the meeting and what was said simply never happened at all. >> thankly, he's been saying the same thing for days now and his son has been talking, too, admitting it wasn't just about adoptions and sanctions as i noted in the e-mail chain he released that the meeting was a chance to obtain official documents that would incriminate hillary clinton and her dealings with russia. it went on to say this is
obviously very high level and sensitive information but it is part of russia and its government support for mr. trump. >> they had maybe concrete evidence to all the stories i was hearing about that were underreported for years, not just during the campaign. >> as far as the president's claim that it was just politics, most politicians insist they would not do what the president's son did. >> if you were told that a lawyer wanted to share information with you as part of the russian government's effort to help you get elected, how would you respond? >> well, i would respond in the negative. >> any time you are in a campaign when you get an offer from a foreign government to help your campaign, the answer is no.
>> the president today said that anybody in politics would have taken a meeting that his son took with the russian lawyer. what's the reaction on that? >> doesn't include me. >> would you have take tennesn meeting? >> no. >> is there any scenario under 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 you think this politician is not telling the truth. perhaps you might believe the president chose to run the fbi. >> let me ask you this. if i got a call from somebody saying the russian government wants to help lindsey graham get elected, should i take that meeting? >> senator, i would think you want to consult with some good legal advisors before you do that. >> so the answer is should i call the fbi. >> i think 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 nonstate actor is the kind of thing the fbi would want to know. >> now, it's one thing for the president to disagree with that advice, it is also claim that everyone does it. they know. just as it is one thing for sean spicer to wish this is just about what looks good or easy to explain. it is another for him to think the facts don't exist. also there is breaking news on this and, yes, it also contradicts shaean spicer's explanation today. you are learning more about who was the eighth person in the meeting. >> right. there has bandage so much mystery surrounding this person. this is the only person we know of who hasn't been named in this meeting. and i spoke to john junior's attorney who says he has spoken by phone to this eighth person who was in the room. he was a representative of the family during that meeting at trump tower last june.
we reported he was there on behalf of the agalarovs. but this person who he declined to name claimed in this phone conversation that he was a u.s. citizen and he also said that he was not employed by the russian government at the time of this meeting but acknowledged that he didn't know his entire history. of course, we still don't know his name. they have not publically explained who this employee was who attended but based on this information, that he was also there to help that the russian attorney who was mentioned in that e-mail exchange get to the meeting. >> what i don't understand about this is i talked to the attorney for the family early last week, and he never mentioned there was a representative for the family at the meeting. in fact, he said that they really 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., and that was basically it. it seems to contradict what their own attorney said early on. >> this was really fascinating because i thought the same thing, anderson. i had spoken to their attorney on friday and it seemed like he was trying to figure it out because we were the first to report there was a representative on behalf of the family. i called him shortly after that last friday and he was trying to figure out who this was. in fact, it seemed as though he didn't know there was a representative in this meeting. and, so, now he apparently is representing this so-called eighth person. so it seems to me that the attorneys have been trying to piece together themselves who was at this meeting, why they were at the meeting. i can tell you don junior's attorney has been talking to these people trying to piece together what happened. and he tells me, anderson, that
this person who we can't name, we don't know the name who was there on behalf of them corroborated what has lr been out there who occurred in this meeting, that there were pleasantries exchanged, that the russian lawyer discussed the information she allegedly had about russia donating to the dnc and hillary clinton, so that also flies in the face of what sean spicer said today, that this is only about adoptions and there is no reason to believe there is anything else. >> did he give any indication as to when donald trump jr. might receive in front of congress. >> all he would tell me is that they are in discussions with the various committees and apparently there is one committee wanting him to come in and testify. he really wouldn't go any further than that because of course the big question is if he doesn't voluntarily testify then we've heard today there have been discussions about issuing a subpoena for him to testify. and so he would only say there
were discussions. i also want to mention this. i found this really interesting. in regards to how this was handled early on with the statements surrounding "the new york times" article about the meeting, his attorney said don junior and his counsel were fully prepared, absolutely prepared to publish a statement about the meeting, what led to the meeting, what the conversation was in the meeting. if you recall, that didn't happen. there were various statements initially. one only about adoption and the follow up statement saying it was about the incriminating information. what you infer from the statement is that don junior's lawyer was not a part of these initial discussions when the statements came out. >> so donald trump jr.'s lawyer is saying they were ready to make a for fulsome statement on that saturday. >> right. so this is what i found so interesting. so if you read between the lines, he said don junior and his counsel were fully prepared and absolutely prepared to make a statement that was a fulsome
statement about the nature of the meeting, what led to the meeting, what the conversation was in the meeting. so clearly that's not what actually happened. there was contradicting statements. there was, as you'll recall in that 48 hours, there was various explanations and they released the e-mail exchange. what i believe he is trying to insinuate here is that clearly don junior's jr. and perhaps don junior were not involved in that initial statement. they reported last week it was the president and his aids that crafted that first statement aboard air force one. it appears that don junior's attorney wasn't fully involved in the initial statement. >> the times broke that story it was worked on the way back from paris and the president signed off on it. the president's own attorney has denied, i believe if i'm correct, if memory serves me from last friday, that the president signed off on it, that this was something that donald
trump jr. worked on with his attorneys. so that again seems contra dig soir. appreciate the reporting. ron is one of the senators investigating trump/russia tieing or alleged ties. he's a democratic member. i spoke to him earlier this meeting. >> does that make any sense to you? >> none at all. and it is hard to see how spicer could say that with a straight face because the subject line, anderson, makes it clear that it is private, that it is russian, it is confidential. that is not adoption. >> yeah. i mean, is it -- i was trying to imagine is it just -- i mean, is it anything other than just a lie? it can't be that they are misinformed or is it a strategy to try to misinform other
people? >> my sense is we have so many different versions of these stories, and then they come back and somehow try to find a path to correct it and it sort of reminds me of lather, rinse and repeat. this is what they do again and again, and they just are under the theory that it would be hard for the truth to catch up. that's why it is so important that democrats and republicans now come together and focus on making it clear that collusion is not acceptable and that oversight is not just for the party who is not in control. >> it does seem that it's gone from their message earlier on, which was there is no evidence of any collusion to collusion is not illegal and to 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 rsht going to let the russians or any other country use our democracy as a playground. >> when it comes to jared kushner's role, this weekend, his attorney said that his security clearance form had been prematurely submitted. while it contained errors, it was an oversight. could this have been an oversight on jared kushner's part? >> you and i have talked about this before. 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 reck less 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 a security clearance. >> at this point have you evolved on that, that you believe he should not now have a security clearance, which it seems different than what you were saying last week? >> i definitely believe if you look at all of this evidence, you can feel the contacts with the russians on the security clearance reforms. then he attended a meeting billed as a session that in effect would have russia helping the trump campaign against hillary clinton. then 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. >> senator, appreciate your time. thank you. >> let's bring in the panel. david, how big of a problem is it for the white house to have sean spicer come out and say basically just sort of ignoring all the facts that have been revealed over the last week and saying this was about adoptions? >> it is possible, anderson. they have a theory that if we just lie that we'll get so confused, the public will be so confused, these stories get really down in the weeds about who is who and the public can't follow it and if they can maintain their base, they think they can get through it. i think it is a mistaken theory. i think there is a direct line from the kind of lying they have
been doing, to the drop in his percentage polls to his difficulty in persuading senators to sign up for the health care bill. the perception is you are a weak president in the country, it is much, much harder to ask senators to take hard votes. >> jeff, is it? do you agree that sean spicer just said something which is factually not true? >> i will say this. i do think when you are getting your message out, whatever it is, it should be clear and crystal and out there from a to z and everybody should be on the right page. >> one thing the president tweeted something completely different. >> i have been a press secretary. this can happen. but you want to make sure it doesn't happen. >> i get the mixed messages. that i understand how that happens given this white house, which is a different set up for many. but for sean spicer to say there is no evidence this had anything to do with other than adoptions,
we have all seen the e-mails. >> right. i agree. there is one point that i want to make, anderson, in doing some research today, i found something very interesting. there is a website part of dan abrabs media. and the headline from a lawyer over there, an article, robert barns, a lawyer, the headline says if trump junior is guilty, so is every democrat who takes information from dreamers. and he goes on to use the phrase that -- >> mean like dreamers vesuvs. >> yes. >> these absurd. >> they're foreign nationals. >> that's offensive. he needs to stop. that is asinine. >> that's the charge here. >> this is yet a new and offensive spin from trump. >> this guy to the best of my
knowledge has no connection to donald trump. his point is a very serious one that every democrat out there has had these contacts. >> you know what's a serious point is that either the trump white house thinks they can now switch gears from lying to not lying to lying again and america is going to stand for it, or there is some torture game of making sean spicer look like an idiot, which if that's the game they're doing very well which only 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 who want to seek the american people. >> they're foreign nationals. >> that's ridiculous. a dreamer comes in and asks for their college tuition to be supported, they're not foreign nationals. >> they are. >> it is the most pathetic -- one of the most pathetic trump twists i have ever heard.
>> let's move on from this obscure professor. >> who went to trump university. >> i'm sure he's -- >> let me go back to the other important story that the president is arguing, that everybody does this, every politician would take this meeting. that often happens in domestic politics. it's extraordinary rare like a government like the russians would come forward like this. but we don't know if any other president accepted it. it has been widely reported that something similar happened in the all gore campaign. they went to the fbi. same with john f. kennedy's campaign in 1960. they turned it away. they didn't take it. there is nothing i can point to -- >> yes, there is. >> michael reagan wrote a column saying president carter himself in 1980 sent arm and hammer to
the russian embassy to speak to the russians about doing something to encourage the jewish vote. >> that may be true and that's a good point if there is accurate. i don't know any other place that's been reported. >> but the notion you mentioned before about just trying to appeal to the base, i mean, i get it from a political standpoint. that's politics, which is, you know, you won the base and that's who he needs. he needs to keep them more than anybody else. but just as a practice of actually leading the country forward, that's -- that's a kind of -- i mean, kind of just paying attention to the percentage of people that voted for you seems -- >> president said long ago that the president is a place of moral leadership, and that is
the president focuses on what's wrong in the country, what's right in the country and tries to follow a moral path. when you destroy your moral capacity to lead, you are a weakened figure for the rest of the time you are there. there is very, very hard to come back from that. that's the pit this president and his aids have gotten themselves into. >> the strategy is destroy everything other than -- keep the base at all costs and destroy any confidence in institutions and news organizations, in other politicians. >> that's a steve bannon theory of governing, right. >> tear it all down. >> the political problem with that as we're seeing in health care is he has no grav tas, no leadership to keep his republican senators and congress people with him. if he was a leader, even if one i disagreed with, you know, in a great way, he would be able to
hold more of those republicans, but his numbers are plumeting because he lacks leadership and the republicans are scurrying away like rats off of a sinking ship. >> we have to take a quick break. up next former cia officers take on the russia meeting and how it fits into the russian intelligence play book for recruiting people. and late word on the gop effort to replace obama care. the senators hashing out tonight. the entire bill just land on the critical list?
what should i watch? go to depend.com - show me sports. it's so fluffy! look at that fluffy unicorn! he's so fluffy i'm gonna die! your voice is awesome. the x1 voice remote. xfinity. the future of awesome. more breaking news tonight on russian involves talks of returns two of moscows american compounds seized in respondent 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'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 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 times to
include a hundred contacts. with donald 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 amid the 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 clearance 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 outside 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 cia 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 was 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 would have 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. the average family's hectic home: its witnessed 2 diy duos, 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.
helping small businesses.ut, jamie -- damage your vehicle? we got you covered. [ glass shatters ] property damage? that's what general liability's for. what?! -injured employee? -ow. workers' comp helps you pay for a replacement. what's happening? this is carla. how's it going? and if anything comes up, our experts are standing by. ♪ boo!
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. but 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 arriving 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 terms 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 things 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 that 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 increasingly 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,
indonesia. 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 and 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 transparency 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. le mo when it comes to helping her daughter, shopping for groceries, unclogging the sink, setting up dentist appointments and planning birthday parties, nobody does it better. she's also in a rock band. look at her shred. but when it comes to mortgages, she's less confident. fortunately for maria, there's rocket mortgage by quicken loans. it's simple, so she can understand the details and be sure she's getting the right mortgage. apply simply. understand fully. mortgage confidently. what are all these different topped & loaded meals? it's an american favorite on top of an american favorite, alice. it's like abe lincoln on top of george washington.
yonder. get your favorites on top of your favorites. only at applebee's. get your favorites on top of your favorites. time's up, insufficient we're on prenatal care.es. and administrative paperwork... your days of drowning people are numbered. same goes for you, budget overruns. and rising costs, wipe that smile off your face. we're coming for you, too. for those who won't rest until the world is healthier, neither will we. optum. how well gets done. just like the people every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be with customer contracts, agreements to lease a space or protecting your work. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you, every step of the way. so you can focus on what you do
and we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here. itthe power of nexium 24hr protection from frequent heartburn. all day, and all night. now packed into a pill so small, we call it mini. new clearminis from nexium 24hr. see heartburn differently. of your back pain?trol
new icyhot lidocaine patch. desensitizes aggravated nerves with the max strength lidocaine available. new icyhot lidocaine patch. more breaking news tonight. more like make-or-break news, the senate gop bill to replace the so-called affordable care act, obamacare. it's a setback for the president who has been spending the evening wooing reluctant lawmakers on the hill. so what have you learn, ryan? >> anderson, basically, this is a worst case scenario for senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. two more senators in just the last 15 minutes have announced that they also cannot support the version of health care reform that is 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 even get this bill to the floor, much less get it passed. he needs at least 50 votes. this would mean there are four
senators of the 52 unwilling to support this 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. >> right. but that was after 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. >> oh, 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 health scare came up and he was unable to come here. this has been a problem for mitch mcconnell from the very beginning, anderson. because the longer they had to debate the bill the more difficulty the senators had to wrap their arms around it. and being able to embrace the plan. the more they go back to their constituents when they hear from stakeholders, the more problems that come up as a result. this process continues to get more difficult for senate
leadership. >> we'll have more in our next hour. also more on senator mccain's medical condition. our medical correspondent dr. gupta joins us. what do we know about senator mccain's surgery? what was it for? >> what the hospital statement basically said was to remove a blood collection from just above his eye. but in more detail what it was an incision in the eyebrow basically to hide the incision, but then to gain access to the bone. you feel the bone right behind your eyebrow. that's the frontal bone. they wanted to remove the bone to get access to his brain. 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 a couple of weeks typically. there's no hard and fast rules here, 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.
they arrive and an officer shoots and kills her. the questions as you might imagine, how could that happen? details next. americans - 83% try to eat healthy. 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. and when youod sugar is a replace one meal... choices. ...or snack a day with glucerna... ...made with carbsteady... ...to help minimize blood sugar spikes... ...you can really feel it. now with 30% less carbs and sugars. glucerna. is america's number-one you kmotorcycle insurer. yeah, she does purr! best bike i ever owned! no, you're never alone, because our claims reps are available 24/7. we even cover accessories and custom parts. we diget an early start! took the kids to soccer practice. you want me to jump that cactus?
a yoga 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 later. more now from cnn's ryan young. >> reporter: shortly before 11:30 on friday night, minneapolis police received report of a possible sexual assault. 40-year-old justine ruszczyk made the call to 911, told the dispatcher it was happening in an alley outside of her on the southwest side of the city, a low resident crime area. 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 have said little about the incident, calling it a, quote, 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 or what happened wi