at ac 360" begins right now. >> we've learned more about the investigation in the links between trump campaign and russian government. those who broke the story join us. pam, what are you learning? >> the fbi has information that indicates associates of president donald trump communicated with suspected russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to hillary clinton's campaign u.s. officials told us. fbi director james comey made his bombshell announcement monday before congress that the fbi is investigating the trump campaign's ties to russia. so the fbi is now reviewing this information which includes human

intelligence, travel, by, an phone records as well as accounts of in-person meetings according to officials we've spoken with, and the information is raising the suspicions of fbi counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials we've spoken with cautioned this information but not conclusive and that this investigation is ongoing. the fbi would not comment nor would the white house though. trump officials have denied there is any evidence of collusion. >> evan, this gives more insight into what director comey knew when he spoke on monday. >> well, that's right, anderson. if you recall, in addition to comey saying the investigation includes looking at connections of trump associates, he also explained what it means that the investigation is actually being done. take a listen. >> don't you need some action or some information beside just attending a meeting, having been paid to attend a conference that a picture was taken or that you travel to a country before you're open to investigation for

counterintelligence by the fbi? >> a credible allegation of wrongdoing or reasonable basis to believe an american may be acting as an agent of a foreign power. >> one law enforcement official said the information in hand suggests, quote, people connected to the campaign were in contact and it appeared they were giving the thumbs up to release information when it was rae. other u.s. officials who we spoke to said it's premature to draw that inference from the information they've gathered so far. it's largely circumstantial. collusion is a large part of the focus of the investigation according to officials we've talked to. >> what sort of coordination is under investigation? >> we're told mostly the fbi is focused on the stolen and published e-mails by wikileaks including the dnc and clinton's

campaigns' john podesta. the information said the information being investigated was not drawn from the dossier from the british intelligence official for trump's political opponents though it also suggested coordination between trump campaign officials and russian operatives. >> do we know who is being investigated? >> the sources would not say who was being investigated but we know that the fbi was already investigating four former trump campaign associates -- michael flynn, paul manafort, roger stone, and carter page -- for contacts with russians known to u.s. intelligence. all four of those people have denied improper contacts. we have obstacles now in the way of the fbi investigation. they're facing the fact that trying to find this conclusive evidence. they're facing the fact that communication between trump's associates and thee russians has

ceased in recent months given the public focus on the russia ties and the trump campaign. some of these russian officials have also changed their methods of communications, making monitoring that much more difficult according to officials we talked to. >> evan, pam, thanks very much. want to bring in our panel. maggie haberman and carl bernstein. also phil mudd. and cnn political director david chalian. maggie, you heard that reporting. would seem to underscore why the fbi is investigating coordination between the trump campaign and russians. >> i think two things are happening. that information suggests there is a basis for what the fbi is doing, why they are trying to get to what was at the heart of these contacts. we still don't know what they were. also the second piece of it is that as you have sort of a chess game going on where you have nunes from the house committee,

the republican chairman tell reporters today there is some intelligence that suggests that trump campaign aides maiy have been intercepted by ways that president trump said, president obama. now the russia aspect. the russian question remains unsolved. it is still not clear what we're looking at, the skoem. we know the figures involved and they were looking at communications and travel it sounds like in meetings which we basically knew. but this is becoming a low-grade fever that shows no sign of breaking for this administration. and that's very challenging as you go on. either in a campaign or an administration when you're trying to do something legislative and you have this going on. this white house has a habit of creating all kinds of self-inflicted wounds without this. this is deeply troubling for them. >> whether it's a low grade feve as maggie describes or the drip, drip, drip of information coming out, how significant is this

information we're learning tonight? again, there's been mplenty of smoke and still no fire. >> we know as the fbi director said monday, this investigation is about looking into possible coordination. that's the ball game here at the end of the day. whether or not there's "there" there means whether or not there's provable coordination between the trump campaign and russian associates to help him win and beat hillary clinton. this reporting is a step in that direction. it's certainly not good for the trump administration. but, you know, both president trump -- and sean spicer as recently as monday had been asked this question directly about whether or not they were aware, if president trump is aware of any of his associates during the campaign talking to russian officials, he's on record saying no, not at all, on record saying paul manafort denied it and went on to say russia is a ruse. >> david, let me play that sean

spicer saying that for our viewers. >> now that we know there is an ongoing investigation by the fbi, does the president stand by his comments he's not aware of any contact that his campaign associates had with russia during the election? >> yes. >> the second one is has anyone from the white house -- >> can i just amend it, though? >> sure. >> obviously, just to be clear, i know that -- i'm trying to think through this for a second because obviously general flynn, but again -- [ inaudible question ] and i'm not aware of any at this time but even general flynn was a volunteer of the campaign and obviously there's been discussion of paul manafort, who played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time. but beyond -- johnathan, can you stop interrupting other people's questions? jonath jonathan, somebody is asking a question. it's not your press briefing. julie is a asking a question. please calm down. >> are you saying the president

a ware of contacts with paul manafort -- >> nothing that has been previously discussed. i don't want it to look like we're not aware of this. >> it is telling they are distancing themselves from the former campaign chairman paul manafort saying he had a very limited role for a very limited amount of time. he was everywhere. >> they're trying to erase a five-month period of the campaign where he was for a big chunk of that time running the campaign. you heard him say, nothing that hasn't already been discussed. new reporting tonight, hasn't been discussed before about alleging potential coordination here. this will continue to ask the question as maggie was saying in terms of the low grade fever if you're going to continue to have the question asked of the white house, what exactly did the president know, when, or his closest aides? >> you worked in the fbi and cia. if you were part of the fbi investigation and this was the information you were seeing,

what would your next move be? >> first of all, we have to show down here. the fbi director has announced the investigation. i would be telling the counterintelligence guys take your time. when this one goes public, regardless of whether the fbi decides to bring charges or not, this is going to be picked over even more than the clinton e-mail investigation. so if you're in a leadership position, the first thing you have to do is cross every t. this is not about whether we have suspicions of contacts. this is about whether you can prove that in a court of law. the second thing we haven't talked about, this is not simply about whether there was contact or collusion between trump officials and the russians. if you're inside the bureau, this is about whether someone lied to a federal law officer during the investigation. that is there were contacts whether they are illegal or not, and they told the federal investigator something else. inside the bureau that will tick people off, and furthermore that is a federal violation. >> can't lie to the fbi. it's a crime. >> you would be looking at the facts of the case, still murky,

and what people have said along the way and whether their stories are changing. >> carl, what new questions does tonight's reporting raise and certainly nothing i guess that will be answered in an open hearing? >> well, i've been saying for a while there's a cover-up going on here and the cover sup among those who worked in the trump campaign and associates of trump and it's now becoming much more clear what it is that they have been concealing, which are these contacts, and which revolve around leaked e-mails from podesta's account. the questions that i would want to know is actually of the white house. why cannot the president of the united states and sean spicer and others instead of pushing back xweps the investigations say we want to get to the bottom of this, we want to open up everything? i, the president of the united states, want to call these people in and ask them what happened, what is this all about. what we're seeing is pushback, smokescreens, and attempt to

keep away from what really happened here by the president of the united states, by sean spicer, and that ray raises a sf additional questions. >> maggie, not just the smokescreens. also divers, shiny objects, allegations against other people, allegations against the clinton campaign, having contacts with russia. going to be interesting to see how president trump or sean spicer respond to the latest reporting if they do. they pointed out before clapper said he didn't see anything conclusive there was coordination. he clarified. he was referring to before january 20th and obviously the investigation is still ongoing. >> i think it was about a week and a half ago sean spicer said we'll have nothing further to say on this topic. not talking about russia but the president's allegation of surveillance against him. either the candidate or during the transition. these two things have been tethered together and spicer has continued to comment on it. basically every briefing. including today where he read will it any of allegations and

related facts about the clintons. the election is over. so at a certain point i think it will be really hard for the white house to keep trying to pivot to either, you know, a vanquished candidate or the media is out to get us. at a certain point they are either going to have to say, to carl's point, an important one, the president has not expressed much concern or worry that a foreign entity did meddle according to the intelligence community in the election that he won. he sees it as delegitimizing and therefore never addresses it that way, but there is a broader problem here and the white house has both been undus palestinianed about this and has had contradictory messages. >> the president and sean spicer have talked about the importance of investigating leaks. so if they -- certainly have not shown the same enthusiasm for trying to get to the bottom -- i think sean spicer generally his comments have been along the lines of if they want to do that, go ahead. >> right. the leaks are frustrating and

consuming to the west wing. they are personally grating and troubling to the president i've heard from several people, my colleague said the same thing. and they are finding a way to deal with it. some is the newness of this president in a government that -- and a leaky bureaucracy he cannot control. he's used to having full control as a businessman and candidate. some is just the information is not a great fact set for them and they haven't figured out how to deal with it. >> sorry, carl. >> i don't want to draw the watergate analogy substantively here, but the heros of watergate were really republicans, republicans in the house and the senate who wanted this investigated to the bottom, what did the president know and when. that's what we're not seeing here. we're not seeing it from the republicans on the hill either who are consumed by supposedly looking for leaks. many of the same republicans

decrying the leaks are those who have leaked classified information themselves on numerous occasions which i'm sure maggie, others on our panel tonight can attest to. i certainly can. look at the benghazi inquiry and what was leaked there. so the smokescreens instead of us hearing that we want to get to the bottom of this from republicans, not just the white house, is becoming very conspicuous. >> more with the panel coming up. the breaking news to carl's point, the lead republican on the house intelligence committee did today that's raising eyebrows. what the chairman did that left some jaws on the floor, not just eyebrows raised. and why the ranking democrat on that committee said the chairman took, quote, a wrecking ball to the idea that the committee can impartially do its job. vote scheduled for tomorrow but is it already dead on arrival? i'm claudine and i quit smoking with chantix.

smoking's a monkey on my back. it was, it was always controlling your time, your actions, your money. it had me. it had me. i would not be a non-smoker today if it wasn't for chantix. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. some reported seizures or sleepwalking with chantix. if you have any of these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of mental health problems, which could get worse or of seizures. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you have these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have heart or blood vessel problems, or develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery.

most common side effect is nausea. it's me in control now. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. this is pete's yard. and it's been withered by winter. but all pete needs is scotts turf builder lawn food. it's the fast and easy way to a thick, green, resilient lawn, with two simple feedings. one now, and one later this spring. it takes grass from hungry - to healthy. pete may not be an expert, but look at that grass. this is a scotts yard. for a quick and easy lawn care plan, download the my lawn app. [ om[ sniffs ]c ] easy llittle girl: daddy! trapped by your unrelenting nasal allergies? [ meow ] [ sneezes ] try clarispray clarispray provides unsurpassed relief.

it's 24 hour, non-drowsy and prescription strength. free yourself with clarispray, from the makers of claritin.

chairman devin nunes didn't hold his regular news kchs instead faced cameras alone and

made what sounded like a startling revelation. >> on numerous occasions the intelligence community incidentally collected information about u.s. citizens involved in the trump transition. >> he also said some of the names were unmasked and suggested it was done improperly. turns out he made that announcement without telling congressman schiff anything about it nor showing anyone on the committee the evidence he says he saw. then at the white house press secretary sean spicer was asked about what chairman nunes said and essentially said it's all news to him. >> there's a lot of questions that i think his statement raises and i hope we can continue to get to the bottom of. right now we we're not there yet. i think there are a series of questions that need to get answered as to what happened, why it happened, and hopefully we will be able to share more with you going forward. >> a short time later chairman nunes visited the president at the white house and stepped in

front of the cameras suggesting something was very wrong. >> this was information brought to me i thought the president needed to know about incidental collection where the president himself and others in the trump transition team were clearly put into intelligence reports that ended up that this white house and across a whole bunch of other agencies and i thought it was important for the president to know this, that's why i briefed the speak they are morning and came down here as soon as i could. >> minutes later from the president when asked if he felt vindicated. >> i must tell you i somewhat do. i very much appreciate the fact they found what they found. i somewhat do. >> to democrats the timing of all this seemed questionable and also threw new light on something sean spicer said yesterday. >> can we expect the president to this week present evidence he was wiretapped by barack obama or will he speak about it? he didn't mention it last night in his rally.

>> right. >> let's see how the week goes. >> so there's that, the odd timing of it all and the fact that the chairman of what's supposed to be an independent committee investigating russia and individuals in the trump campaign possibly having connections that that chairman would have hustled over to the white house to talk to people who may be under investigation about what may be classified information. even beyond questions about appropriateness and timing there's also the question does this really partially vindicate the president for his tweets accusing president obama of wiretapping him and being bad or sick. the president wants you to think he's partially vindicated. if chairman nunes was giving him cover, it certainly wasn't on that. >> the president said president obama tapped his phones. >> no, no, no. that did not happen. i've said this for many weeks including the day after, a couple days after in front of the press, that never happened. i think the wiretapping, if you

use it generally hike the president has said, you know, he clearly, you know, used it differently than what i think a lot of people took it which was did obama actually wiretap trump tower, which we know didn't happen. the president has been clear on that. >> advertise physical act of wiretap, do you see anything -- >> no. and i said that on day two. >> president trump said he felt somewhat vindicated by what you told him today. just to be clear, there's still no evidence that president trump himself was wiretapped. >> that is correct. that is correct. >> more reaction from democrats and the white house. jeff zeleny has the latest. congressman schiff, the ranking democrat on the intelligence committee, didn't know about the information until it was released publicly. he's responded several times today. >> he has. congressman schiff was blunt about this. he said he was blind-sided. he found out about it only after the republican chairman came here to the white house to talk about this.

he says it compromises this entire investigation. he was very fired up about it earlier this evening. let's watch. >> the chairman will need to decide whether he is the chairman of an independent investigation into conduct which includes allegations of potential coordination between the trump campaign and the russians or he is going to act as a surrogate of the white house because he cannot do both. >> reporter: as you were laying out earlier, the timing is definitely interesting to say the least. the white house saw this as something of a lifeline this afternoon. however, if it sparked some type of independent investigation up on capitol hill, it might be a short lived lifeline. >> the president is saying he felt partially vindicated by the findings. to we know what the administration's next steps will be? >> reporter: he said he felt somewhat vindicated, in the room asking him that question. he said i was vindicated they found what they found. i asked him what they found and

he didn't answer. we don't know. an interesting exchange earlier with sean spicer in the white house to ask him why only the chairman has come here to the white house. the fbi director hasn't. the nsa director hasn't in the last three weeks and this is what sean spicer said. has the president asked the fbi director or nsa or any other agencies involved to come to the white house and brief him on this new information or is it just the intel chair? if so, why not? >> well, jeff, it just happened. so it's a silly question to ask mely rally as i'm walking out here when the chairman was wrapping up an event saying that he is announcing that he's coming down here, not like we picked up the phone and called everyone else. the first step is to hear what he has to say and who else he's briefed, where he got the information from, and then we'll take the next steps. >> reporter: to answer the question about the next steps, it is an open situation. it's a day by day changing narrative. the president still says he stands behind and stands by the

wiretapping allegation that has been debupged again today. so who know what is tomorrow might bring on this, but it is not over. new partisans fights. >> no doubt. jeff zeleny, thanks very much. connecticut congressman jim himes, i spoke to him today. i want to get your reaction to what chairman nunes announced today. >> my reaction was what in world is happening right now. here's material that presumably would be relevant to the investigation that may be classified if it's surveillance, and that the chairman would take it first to the media and second to the white house which of course is one of the parties being investigated here without even sharing it with the ranking member or the other members of the committee, that is i guess wildly irregular is an skrund stateme understatement. it was disconcerting. it drives a stake into the heart of the perception of impartiali impartiality. >> can you say the committee

you're on is impartial? >> hard to do that, isn't it? this isn't a one-off. the chairman who i consider a friend, a couple weeks ago stands up for michael anyone and says he's being brought down by swamp creatures and a day later fired by the white house for lying to the vp and then chairman nunes and chairman burr wrapped up in this of trying to knock down a "new york times" story. today, this behavior. i hope schiff can reach an agreement with the chairman to proceed here. or better yet that the investigation be kicked out of this crazy political realm because this was a political move the today, make to mistakes and into the hands of an outside bipartisan commission. >> when you say a political move, do you believe that chairman nunes is basically trying to give white house cover here or give them something to divert attention from the testimony this week? >> all i can say is you awe is a wildly irregular action by the chairman of the committee charged with being objecti and thorough in an investigation fly

down the street to the white house and lo and behold immediately thereafter president trump says that i've been partially vindicated. odd sort of language in that outrageous tweet that barack obama had wiretapped him in trump tower. then you have speaker paul ryan reiterating, look, there was something there. this is the most pathetic fig league because it has nothing to do with president obama wiret wiretapping donald trump in trump tower but shows maybe they were only partially liars rather than full bore. >> the chairman has not provided documentation of the intercepts to the intelligence committee and it's being reported he doesn't even have the documents. should he have provided them to the committee before going to the white house or should he have gone to the white house at all? >> he shouldn't have gone at all. imagine you're investigating somebody in a law enforcement context, you turn up an interesting fact and you run to subject of the investigation to

share that information. no circumstances under which that is right. i would add -- i have not been briefed so i'm learning much of what i know from cnn and others but i understand he doesn't have them in his possession because he had to go to one of the elements of the intelligence community to review them. that would imply whatever it was he reviewed was classified. then for the next step to be to talk about that classified information to the media raises some really tough questions for him. >> what is the next stem? what happens now? >> i think that, you know, ranking member schiff and chairman nunes need to sit down and figure out if there is any way far for this investigation to go forward. we as democrats are not sticking around in the face of this behavior or the face of other on instructions. we are not going to lend some bipartisan sheen to what is starting to look more and more like an effort to back up donald trump, to obfuscate. we haven't talked about why would it happen today? we are not talking about the story that paul manafort

apparently went to work for one of putin's chief oligarchs in order to advance the interests of russia. his campaign manager. we're not talking about that because we're talking about this. i see a pretty artful deflection for some pretty big issues but sadly one that may damage our ability to do this investigation going forward. >> do you trust the chairman? >> after today i am very shaken. i've been telling the media a couple weeks outside statements notwithstanding about trying to knock town "new york times" stories or whatever, inside things have been constructive. five-hour meeting, no holds barred but i don't know how you recover from tod"todaytoday's a. how can you say we can still do an impartial investigation. >> i appreciate your time. thank you. jeffrey toobin is joining us. maggie, how extraordinary is it you have the house intelligence

committee chairman, a political ally on the president's transition team, committee investigating the president's campaign, publicly announcing he's seen intelligence that could dpif the president some sort of without informing the rest of the committee and then going to the white house? >> long list you went therough. others may have. this was astonishing when i found out. i don't understand why he's briefed the president. i haven't heard an explanation that makes sense. it was the kind of thing guaranteed to inflame democrats. nunes had been complaining about leaks the other day as the big problem. today he seemed to think they were the answer. again we don't know what this information is. i heard from a lot of trump allies who said see, this confirms what we all thought. we believed this. this proouchs it.

but i don't know what we're talking about. in the same way with the russia stuff, i still don't have a great grasp on the granular of what we're talking about but there seems to be more in public domain. this is all very aten wayed. >> jeffrey toobin, chairman nunes said he saw no evidence of legal surveillance. adam schiff said today only one name was unmasked in intercepts and it was not connected to the trump organization. what's the league substance? >> i'm having a little trouble following. could you repeat all of today's developments quickly? >> how much time have you got? >> what is going on? let me make two points. one, devin nunes is so far over his head, he has no idea what's going on here. you watched his interviews today. deer in the headlight. every time different stories to different people. this guy has no idea what he's doing. second point, donald trump is on

more tapes with international figures. like what's that about? and who are they? i mean, it's just like the idea that this is somehow exculpatory for the white house, i mean, it's just -- the whole thing is so bizarre. and, you know, obviously completely unresolved. >> david, you heard adam schiff rip apart devin nunes' claims based on what the that i remember told him because the chairman says he can't show anyone the actual intelligence. now congressman shich is underscoring the need for an independent commission. where does it go from here? >> i find an independent commission hard to believe at this stage in that republicans will get on board with that especially with this ongoing house intel investigation and the investigation in the senate. but i don't think that will stop democrats calling for it. but remember devin nunes but at that hearing. you heard jim himes talking about it. at the end of the five-hour hearing with jim comey, he was the one, this ally of the trump

white house, month who said you've put a great cloud over this white house. i think it was clear that devin nunes' goal today was to rupp down to white house and try to move aside that cloud. >> carl bernstein, can only imagine the pressure nunes is under from the white house and fellow republicans. what do you assess his credibility as tonight? >> i don't have the slightest idea. i think he has a history that would make us doubt his credibility. particularly what he said during the hearing the oh tay. more importantly, i think incidentally the press especially need to report as aggressively as we can what facts can be obtained about these allegations that nonetheless is making and whether they are true or not. but apart from that, we are seeing today and tonight why we need a special prosecutor. there is abundant evidence that there's something that has happened in terms of those in

the campaign of donald trump and the russian leaks of these e-mails that requires a kind of impartiality that only a special prosecutor under what we are seeing here on the air from these guys on this committee. we need a special prosecutor, particularly given the bombshell story, not just the cnn story, but the app story today about manafort literal lly proposing paper that he can do things for putin a few year back and that's what he wants to be paid tens of million os dollars for. an extraordinary story that requires extraordinary investigating by an independent body by a special prosecutor and, yes, we need a 9/11-type commission that can also look at what the trump white house is claiming and see if there's anything there or put it to rest in a way that the american people can believe. >> phil mudd, as a former cia

officer and fbi, the terms that are being thrown around, obviously president trump was talking about president obama wiretapping him in trump tower, you know, used wiretapped in quotes twice, talked about it not in quotes twice as well in two tweets, called him a bad and sick guy. there are various forms of surveillance, incidental surveillance. it doesn't stem from what nunes was saying this was targeting people in the trump campaign or transition. this was basically incidental. they were picked up. how does that work? what is he talking about? >> this is simpler than it sounds. this is a political job by the white house and republicans on the committee, congressman nunes. this is not about intelligence. what the president-elect a few weeks ago was an illegal wiretap against americans directed by the president, no against foreigners or conducted and supervised by a court, all illegal. what we're seeing today is standard operating procedure for years.

i saw this all the time. this is how it works. a foreigner is intercepted. that interception is authorized by a u.s. court. when that intercepted communication comes in, sometimes that foreigner is talking to an american citizen. that's the incidental collection you hear referred to. to protect that citizen when you read that document if you're in a senior position it refers to that u.s. it senanayake as, for example, american person number one. if you have a need to know in an investigation, as in this one, you go to the national security agassi and say can you unmask that person, i have a need to know. ain't that complicated. happens all the time. ha nothing to do with what the president alleged two weeks ago, legal versus illegal. >> thanks to everybody. up next, crunch time for the gop health care bill. the house is set to vote tomorrow. a full-court press is under way to try to win over reluctant conservatives to get the votes they need. we'll look at what kind of progress if any they are making. ♪

blue moon is brewed with valencia orange peel, for a taste that shines brighter. donai am going to takey's care of everybody... everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're taken care of now. announcer: 20 million americans gained health coverage under the affordable care act... ...including millions of our most vulnerable citizens - children, the disabled and the elderly. now, under some plans in congress, millions of these americans could lose that health coverage. the women and men of america's hospitals urge congress to protect affordable coverage for as many americans as possible.

what twisted ankle?ask what muscle strain? advil makes pain a distant memory nothing works faster stronger or longer what pain? advil. e*trade's powerful trading tools, give you access to in-depth analysis, and a team of experienced traders ready to help if you need it. it's like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. it's your trade. e*trade

more breaking news on capitol hill tonight. republicans are down to the wire in the race to nail down enough

votes to pass the health care bill. the vote is scheduled for tomorrow. at this hour they seem to be coming up short. by cnn's count, 27 republicans say they are voting no or leaning no. they can only afford 21 nos. tweaks have been made to bring doubters on board, changes that haven't been scored yet by the congressional budget office. sunlen serfaty has the latest in the crucial hours. >> reporter: it's the final stretch. and house republicans and the white house are scrambling for winning votes. there are precious few hours left on the clock. >> thursday is the big day. >> reporter: before the bill faces a vote in the house tomorrow. >> it really is a crucial vote for republican party and for the people of our country.

>> reporter: house leaders locking in at least one new vote today, congressman lou barletta, who was leaning against the bill, declaring he's now a yes vote. >> we're adding votes by the day, not losing votes. we feel like we're getting close. >> reporter: but the bill is still in serious jeopardy. >> we still haven't seen the movement we want. >> reporter: according to cnn's latest vote count, at least 23 house republicans have said they'll vote against the bill. more have indicate caited they'll likely oppose it. speaker ryan can't lose more than 21 votes or the bill fails. >> there's no plan b. there's plan a and plan a. we'll get this done. >> reporter: this reality setting off an aggressive last-minute offensive to make deals and change minds before the vote. in public -- >> this is called legislating. there are people who want various provisions in the bill but what's important for us is we have to broker compromises to make sure we draft legislation that can actually pass. >> reporter: and behind closed doors today. president trump ramping up his personal pleas to some of the holdouts.

so with so many members of the conservative house freedom caucus to the white house today. >> big vote tomorrow. >> reporter: sources tell cnn the president is telling skeptical members "i'll have your back" if they sign on. >> obamacare is making their lives so much more difficult as we know. >> reporter: but that presidential arm twisting for some isn't enough. >> i don't think the votes are there today. >> reporter: after the white house meeting today, the chairman of the house freedom caucus is still a no. >> we believe the best approach is to actually start over and do something that actually lowers premiums. we need changes to the underlying bill before we vote on it in the house. sunlen joins us from capitol hill. new information, understand paul ryan is open to making more changes to parts of the bill to be voted on tomorrow. >> reporter: that's right. changes are being discussed on capitol hill. for the moment, much of the discussion seems to be revolving around obamacare's essential health benefits. potentially eliminating that, making changes to that could potentially win over house

freedom caucus members who just a few hours ago were very against this bill. there has been a minor shift in tone, though, coming from many members of the house freedom caucus. tonight mark meadows saying he is working with the white house, that they're going to work through the night on changes to potentially come up with something, but again, the situation very fluid, a lot of fast moving parts but certainly a definite shift in tone coming from many on capitol hill. >> thanks very much. joining me, christine quinn and steven moore. steven, you have this late word about possible more deal making. how confident are you it's going to go up tomorrow, get passed, or -- >> the reason there's a bit of a revolt on the right on this bill is a lot of the kefbs are saying why don't we repeal the whole obamacare bill. >> right.

>> that's the position of some of my conservative friends in the house including congressman meadows. there is arm twisting, deal making. i'm pretty confident this will either pass tomorrow or maybe an extra day, friday. but it will pass and the reason is there's no room for failure. the republicans have to get this done. you heard donald trump say that this was one of the central promises he made to voters. i think there's a pretty high likelihood by friday this will have passed the house but there will be some furious deal making in the next 48 hours. >> i think last week there were questions of how committed the president would be to this. he is all in on this. he was on capitol hill, today talking to freedom caucus members. >> the president seems certainly now to be all in. but you have to ask yourself might they be in a better position if he had gotten more active and all in earlier but you can't question his resolve at this moment in time. >> he has a lot riding on it.

>> has everything riding on it. >> not just political capital but his whole persona as a deal maker and deal finisher. this is the first real test of that. >> without a doubt. i think we're seeing how he doesn't understand that deal making in legislation with actual people's lives up in the balance is very different than, you know, cutting a deal around a building or an acquisition of a piece of property. it's very different. i think what you're seeing now is that last-minute fury that happens in lots of different big pieces of legislation but when you're over where you can be in votes lost -- where you're over where you can be and start making changes and you're rushed, you inadvertently give person x something that screws up the only thing that made person y be your vote. >> that's what's so complex about this kind of legislation.

you have to make sure pulling one lever doesn't affect -- >> of course. it's a complicated system. we're talking about one-seventh of our economy, our health care system. frankly i don't think republicans are going to be able to fix all the myriad problems. our health insurance system in america today under obamacare, it was happening before that, is truly imploding. we have to change it. people are going to start seeing massive additional increases in their health premiums if we don't do something to fix it. i disagree with one thing. trump has been masterful. he's gone to the house, spoke to the freedom caucus, people on the right. some members said we were reassured by donald trump. he's pretty good at this. he's a newcomer but he's pretty good at the political game. >> even if you don't like his policies, he can be an incredibly charming guy. >> art of the deal. >> i can't say that, but, you know, i think the issue of

whether it gets through the house is almost not the big question. >> true. >> because the senate -- >> exactly right. >> the process it has to go through is reconciliation, a budgetary process. even speaker ryan in early march, on the tucker carlson show, laid out all of the reasons the changes that are wanted, many of the changes we are hearing could be last-minute ones and ones that are now in the bill won't get through senate reconciliation. >> the big issue of contention, your reporter had it spot on, the essential benefit program which requires people to buy all sorts of, you know, coverage for all sorts of policies. the conservatives can be live with that. i think that has to come out. >> but it will make it through reconciliation -- >> we'll see. >> a lot to look for tomorrow. up next, terror in london, four dead, 40 others hurt. just getting some surveillance

video showing the attack. we'll have the details. atives. stimulant laxatives make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. unblocking your system naturally. miralax. various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide. these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here.

oh jane, you're getting a ticket modern life deserves a modern amerway to pay. ons. i'm going to get you out of this chair. breton. you can use it online and on your phone.

nope. it's been masterpassed. winning the little victories, priceless masterpass, the secure way to pay from your bank don't just buy it, masterpass it.

but they didn't know they were all tobacco products.e... ooh, this is cool. it smells like gum. yummy! this smells like strawberry. are these mints? given that 80% of kids who ever used tobacco started with a flavored product, who do you think tobacco companies are targeting? do we get to keep any? our breaking news from

london, a major terror investigation is under way after an attacker driving a car plowed into people on westminster bridge and continued his rampage on foot until he was shot and killed by police. this is surveillance over the bridge. the car speeding and running over anything in its path. we see one of the victims jumping into the river thames. four others are dead. more now from clarissa ward. >> reporter: about 2:40 p.m. london time, a car runs over pedestrians. >> there were people on the ground the whole length of the bridge. i saw people flying in the air. >> reporter: authorities estimate at least 40 people are h hurt, police officers with

catastrophic injuries. >> to be honest, the one i saw the person wasn't moving at all. >> reporter: one woman endsen in the river thames and is later rescued with serious injuries. the attacker speeds over the bridge heading towards parliament. crosses big ben and crashes into a railing around the parliament complex. but the attack is not over. he exits the car and runs through an open gate, heading towards parliament, armed with a knife. >> the guy came past my shoulder with a big knife and started plunging it into the policeman. i just, never seen anything like that. just can't believe it. >> reporter: the attacker is able to stab an unarmed policeman before he is shot by responding officers. one photo from the scene is of a man on a gurney being treated for injuries. multiple knives strewn about the

ground below him. it's unclear at this point who he is. a medical helicopter lands amid the chaos in new palace yard. authorities haven't confirmed to cnn who was airlifted out. but we do know tragically, the policeman died from his wounds. his name was keith palmer, a 15-year veteran. three others died in the attack. the assailant also dies from gunshot wounds. authorities almost immediately called the attack an act of terror. >> terrorists have a clear aim. that is to create fear. the police stand with all communities in the uk and will take action against anybody who seeks to undermine society, especially where their crimes are motivated by hate. >> what is the latest on the investigation? >> reporter: so anderson, we've heard recently from scotland

yard. they are saying that they do believe they know the identity of the attacker, but at this stage they are not releasing it. the only thing they have said is that they do think this was related to islamist terror. they believe the individual was inspired by international terrorism, potentially the word inspired could be quite telling, and they have $00s hundreds of officers who are combing through an area looking for clues, looking for forensics. looking to try to determine if there was possibly anyone else involved in this attack. the threat level has been at severe in the uk for quite some time, anderson. they said that that will not change. the threat level for now will remain at severe, anderson? >> much more ahead in the next hour. we'll have more from london and breaking news on the fbi investigation into potential links with the trump campaign

and the russian government. new details coming up t-mobile one save you hundreds a year. right now get two lines of data for $100 dollars. with taxes and fees included. that's right 2 unlimited lines for just $100 bucks. all in. and right now, pair up those two lines with two free samsung galaxy s7 when you switch. yup! free. so switch and save hundreds when you go all unlimited with t-mobile. today, it's the dawn of a new lawn. that's because new roundup for lawns has arrived. finally, there's a roundup made just for your lawn, so you can put unwelcome lawn weeds to rest. draw the line. with roundup for lawns, there is no better way to kill lawn weeds to the root without harming a single blade of grass. it's a great day to be a lawn. draw the line with roundup for lawns. and for weeds in other spaces, turn to roundup weed & grass killer products.

i wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. and i couldn't wait to get my pie chart. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. just to know this is what i'm made of, this is where my ancestors came from. and i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. it's opened up a whole new world for me. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.

-- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com talking this hour on 360, cnn has learned new