thanks, kate. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thanks for sharing your day with us. senate republicans short votes for their plan and the white house is helping rebut critics saying it will punish the poor and the elderly. >> the plan we have would put in place not allow people to fall through the cracks, not pull out the rug in anybody, not have

people lose coverage they want for themselves and their family. plus, russia's colorful ambassador to the united states is heading back to moscow. the kremlin says it has nothing to do with the russia meddling investigation. and several developments as the supreme court winds down its term. justices agree to decide the constitutionality of the trump travel ban, and clarify who can be blocked from entering the united states and who cannot. that clarification allows part of the trump travel ban to take effect. jessica schneider is outside the supreme court with more on this surprising feith day decision. jessica. >> reporter: for sure, john. an unexpected decision by the supreme court and a decision that could have both sides in this case, the trump administration as well as the plaintiffs, claiming small victories here. the trump administration will likely claim victory for the fact that the supreme court in a 6-3 decision allowed parts of this travel ban to take effect. saying that some foreign nationals may, in fact, be banned from this country.

but the plaintiffs call it a victory, because the supreme court has said that anybody who can claim what they're calling a bona fide relationship to any person or entity in this country, that those foreign nationals should be allowed to come here to the united states. of course, that's exactly what some of these plaintiffs were looking for. one of the plaintiffs in particular, in hawaii, looking for a visa for his mother-in-law to come here to the united states. so as to this surprising and somewhat split decision by the supreme court, the question now is, how exactly do immigration officials apply this and will thissen an onerous burden on immigration officials? a is decision came down on the final day approaching the end of the term here. included justice thomas, alito, the descenters and the newest jifts, neil gorsuch, saying the untier ban should have taken

effect and just a is thomas said it may be hard to implement saying today's compromise will burden executive officials with a task of deciding on peril of contempt werthhethe whether ind have a doekz a person or entity. yes, the travel ban in some respects decided here at the supreme court but many open questions remain. the trump administration will likely declare this somewhat of a victory and, of course, john, we look forward to the next term where the. see court will hesupreme court arguments and whether or not it is constitutional nrchlts october. jessica schneider, by october we might know more and whether that impacts the legal arguments said. julie hirschfeld davis of the "new york times," cnn's raju and others. a big deal for the president. rolled out from the outset, surprised we haven't heard

celebrating a marshall vie ingi. it the president has said, see you in court. talking about a muslim ban, even as president-elect, call it a ban. the big arguments come in october. as they implement this, isn't there a good chance if implemented in a reasonable organized way, it might be settled by their actions not the legal arguments in october? >> don't forget it was initially about a temporary action. a temporary ban on these visitors entering the united states, a temporary suspicion of the refugee program. it's very possible that by the time october rolls around the administration will argue, we've done, reviewed our vetting procedures. have everything we need to figure out how to screen these people and protect national security, figure who can enter and who can't, and this could sort of collapse under its own weight. although the president has shown very little appetite for

reconsidering the original action here. i think we'll hear boisterous celebration from the white house, whether or not it's a partial victory, i think the president need add win on this. he's been readedly slapped down by lower courts and will take a big victory lap n. w. >> in some ways hard to call it a defeat. not going far enough as the original travel ban criticizing his own just is department for moving forward even though he, of course, signed the travel ban and allow add compromise to into sbee effect. no near as far as what he initially wanted. they're spin it as victory but the president may not feel that way. >> recently he said he wants to expand the travel ban even as it was struck down in courts and pending the supreme court. will he take a small victory as a green light? >> after several setbacks, a court allowing him to implement

part of the ban and allow them to at least temporarily block people from the six countries, if they can, if those people, individuals can not prove a bona fide, this will become to the hard day-to-day work of the immigration officials, establishing do you or do you not have a bona fide connection? after months of setbacks, exactly right. the president wanted much more. after months of setbacks assume take it least as a down tamt of success? >> absolutely. a president has will take any daylight as a victory. eve an straight loss, try to find a way to spin as a victory and your reporter made a point, pointing out where gores ucgorsh basket. deciding that as the decision comes out it will pay off. >> i'll talk more on that later in the program, preserving to conservatives so far he's one of them. stick to the travel ban a minute. the justices here seem to be siding with the administration

at least their order pap 16-page order. often they issue one page. we'll agree to hear the case in october, the next term. a long 16-page order they say, in its view the fourth circuit, lower court, should not have asked whether -- the executive order -- has a primarily religious purpose. should have upheld it because it re69s of the bona fide justification of protecting national security. agreeing to hear the case they seem to be leaning in to the fact that what was the white house argument. that, yes, the president said muslim ban during the compare. pay attention to the actions of president trump, not president-elect trump and his administration. the court seems to be leaning in that direction although they're hear arguments in october. >> it was rooted in religious animus. incredibly strong language for the court to have used. the point, any national security requirement there might have been for this executive order was out-weighed by the fact this

court felt it went too far in its use of a religious test, based on what he talked about during the campaign, based on tweets we saw prior to him taking office, and what this ruling seems to suggest is that the balance is in the other direction. national security imperative was paramount to the way they roomed and we saw no mention of tweets or campaign speeches in the ruling. that's significant. it was a limited ruling, werther it will go forward or not reviewing the own tire case. no reference gives you the sense that's the way it's going. >> and raises the bar for the states attorneys general and those arguing against it to convince the supreme court. go back to campaign statements or early administration statements? >> still a stay of the main parts of the order. so which is a signal from the courts, anytime there's a stay, that they have concerns. about the substance. >> and of course we'll know in the fall what the issue is. who's going to be in the --

anthony kennedy seat in the fall? will it be anthony kennedy or a conservative justice, who will relace him? that may help the president more if that's the case. >> we'll see. you mentioned dissent. justice gorsuch and alito and thomas. assumed gorsuch was but learning more with every case decided by the court. they say i agree with the court, preliminary junctions should be stayed although i would stay them in full. essentially so in descent, should not allow parts of it to go into effect. wanted to throw it out immediately. the justices there. again, in dissent, three votes. the government made a strong showing it is likely to succeed on merits, that the judgments below, lower courts, will be reversed. the government established failure to stay the injunctions will cause irrepable harm interfering with a compelling need to supply the nation's security. what the supreme court is doing

is in dissent, accepting the case, allowing parts to go forward and in dissent, you get the impression early on, see what happens in arguments in october, the supreme court is essentially kicking back at the lower court saying you did not give enough credence to a president's authority when it coming to national security. >> right. ald and a lot of places for the trump add min stragsz ministrat good. first time in a while they've had good news. on the other hand, this idea of a bona fide relationship, there are going to be some real questions for the government to answer here, and they have three people i think that are solid against this, looks like right now. and we'll see where this ends up in a couple months. >> and the jeffrey toobin joins us and can join the conversation's in reading this, seems as if the court is leaning, a., number one aloud

part to go into effect. a victory for the trump administration. we'll have the arguments in october. what's your biggest takeaway tea leaves the court how it views the decisions, as julie noted, lower courts saying religious animus. the supreme court doesn't seem ready to go there. >> good news for the trump administration. not final, definitive news, but certainly this was an order that leaned in the direction of the trump administration. first of all, you have three votes that are pretty much in the bag for the trump administration. you have justice thomas, justice alito and justice gorsuch essentially saying, we don't see a problem with this order jufrijufr i justifying any sort of interruption of the order. you figure their votes are already locked in in favor of the administration and can they scare up two more votes from the chief justice or from anthony kennedy or even from stephen breyer or elena kagan?

i've always thought that this -- executive order, especially the second version had a much better case in the. see supreme court than the lower courts and certainly not this unusually long order, 16 pages, that -- that persuades me otherwise. >> jeffrey, ask you to stand by. a quick break. ahead, the gop's difficult hunt for 50 appeal votes and more on the final day. action on two big gay rights cases and the a lot of buzz about a potential retirement. (dance music) (large boat honking) ♪ i'm living that yacht life life life life ♪ top speed fifty knots life ♪ on the caribbean seas ♪ it's a champagne and models potpourri ♪ on my yacht made of cuban mahogany

♪ gany, gany, gany ♪ watch this when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites.

the roles you play in life are parlet's dance grandma! you. and you're not going to let anything keep you sidelined. come on! that's why you drink ensure. with nutritious calories 9 grams of protein, and 26 vitamins and minerals. that was the best one ever! giving you the strength and energy, to get back to doing what you love. and finish! from the number one doctor recommended brand... ensure, always be you.

welcome back. i want to continue our conversation of the big supreme court rulings today including the travel ban. the president issue as statement. read it to you. today's supreme court decision is a clear victory for our national security allowing travel suspension for the six terror countries to become largely effective. as president i cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm. i want people who can love the united states, all of its citizens and be productive. the number one responsibility as commander in chief is keep the american people safe. move on to other spirit court decisions in a minute. dwell on this. call it is a travel suspension. said it's a ban. they don't want me to say ban but saying it's a ban in this tweets. the president calling it a suspension. the point we made before we got this as we expected a bit of a

celebration by the white house and this is it. >> far from the twitter celebration we usually see. more what we're used to in past presidents, an official statement. not something abbreviated with weird punctuation, misspellings on twitter and this is the, you mentioned, the more -- more sort of subtle protective language. >> beal careful in his language here. there are arguments in october. starts using ban between now and october that could complicate the final arguments. keep that's in mind. more big headlines, the justices agreed to hear a major case putting gay rights on a collision course with religious liberties. a colorado bank are lost a discrimination case after refusing to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple. they won. his refusal is justified because of his personal religious beliefs. and jeff toobin, how conver

controversial is this case? >> an interesting case. a case very similar to what happened in indiana when mike pence was governor, when he and the indiana legislature pass add law that essentially gave immunity to bakers and wedding photographers and people who did not want to participate in any sort of business relationship with same-sex marriages. there was a tremendous backlash to that, and the law was changed, but the issue emaremai. there was another supreme court decision today. a 6-3 decision overturning an arkansas -- was it arkansas? i think it was arkansas. was it arkansas? i'm blanking all of a sudden. yes, arkansas law that said same-sex couple kocould not hav both their names on their children's birth certificates. they overturned it and said you

have to treat same-sex couples essentially identically to opposite sex couples. the question of whether individual conscience allows you to not participate in same-sex unions in a way that you can't have individual conscious to say i will not participate in racial intermarriage i will not participate in religious intermarriage. that's the question that really is before the court, and it's a tough one. >> and, jeff, for all the court did say today, there was something not said. a lot of people wondering, a lot of buzz in washington, a lot of talk among conservatives that anthony kennedy was hinting to friends and colleagues he might call it quits and retire, but nothing. dop we read into that? >> well, yeah. i mean, it's a very big deal. his departure would be enormous. i do put in the caution that there is no law that says supreme court justices have to retire on the last day of the term. sandra day o'connor announced

retirement two days after the last day of the term in 2005. but you know, anthony kennedy is someone way great reverence for the court. i think he saw that the court had a tumultuous year with the long vacancy followed by the arrival of his former law clerk neil gorsuch. i would have bet he was going to stay this year, but leave next year. he's about to turn 81. most people who are 81 decide to retire, but it's a good deal to be anthony kennedy these days, given the amount of power he wields and i think he enjoys it. >> absolutely. jeff toobin, thank you. back it room here. justice kennedy if nothing else has a sense of humor. said he had a big announcement and then said, the bar remains open even after the end of the

event. and these types of questions the court will face. proven he can swing conservatives and moderates back and forth, and at least on this day, on this day, a lot of talk among trump supporters the president would get a second one early on, on this day that seems, again, jeff merricks an important poian -- merricks an important point. wait a day or two, three. >> it can happen at any minute, but i think for democrats and liberals they're very nervous because the president has said he would nominate justices from the judicial list he revealed during the campaign. roughly 20 or so, that have very staunchly conservative credentials, people supported by people in the federal society and other conservative legal groups, and almost certainly you could assume the president is going to nominate the conservative to tilt the court further to the right and now that there's no filibuster rules in which 60 senators can block, you need 60 senators to overcome

a filibuster changing the rules to allow justice gorsuch, a new justice almost certainly as well. republicans in strong position to appoint, confirm, whoever trump nominates. >> circle back to the gorsuch conversation. conservatives always watch, worry about the next david suitsui souter. and to that case, jeff mentioned overturning an arkansas state, they wanted biological parents, not same-sex couples, biological on the birth certificate. gorsuch dissented saying it's a state decision. call it a culture war case, if you want, another on the travel ban, executive power. here for states authority. if you're a conservative and had doubts about gorsuch or questions about gorsuch you're feel going at the end of his first term. right? >> absolutely. look who he dissentsed with.

couldn't be better news with conservatives. didn't go with his mentor, anthony kennedy. he's always described as a former law clerk to anthony kennedy as if they're in sync lil lilttle legally. he's more in sync with justice alito and justice thomas. >> and you know, gore such turned out to be everything that trump and his supporters wanted but without trying to get too much in kennedy's head, he may resent a little feeling like he's, you know, being pushed or prodded and perhaps feels like sticking around a little while longer. >> maybe that's why the bar will remain open after the end of the formal program? sit tight. wanting to pass obamacare replacement plan this week, but as we speak, they are well short in the hunt for votes.

manait's a series of is nsmart choices. and when you replace one meal or snack a day with glucerna made with carbsteady to help minimize blood sugar spikes you can really feel it. glucerna. everyday progress.

i just saved a bunch of money on my car insurhuh. with geico.

i should take a closer look at geico... geico can help with way more than car insurance. boats, homes, motorcycles... even umbrella coverage. this guy's gonna wish he brought his umbrella. fire at will! how'd you know the guy's name is will? yeah? it's an expression, ya know? fire at will? you never heard of that? oh, there goes will! bye, will! that's not his name! take a closer look at geico. great savings. and a whole lot more.

the future isn't silver suits anit's right now.s, think about it. we can push buttons and make cars appear out of thin air. find love anywhere. he's cute. and buy things from, well, everywhere. how? because our phones have evolved. so isn't it time our networks did too? introducing america's largest, most reliable 4g lte combined with the most wifi hotspots. it's a new kind of network. xfinity mobile. welcome back to the other big developinger to here in washington now. the senate republican leadership wants to pass its plan to replace obamacare this week but you don't need to be a math whiz

to know the votes aren't there as the workweek begins. susan saulens of maine, dean heller of nevada two moderate republicans beginning the week as no votes. on the conservative side, ron johnson of wisconsin in a "new york times" essay says this of the current plan. like obamacare, tells you enough there. like obamacare relies too heavily on government spending and ignores the role the private sector can and should play. one conservative. another, rand paul of kentucky isn't ruling out a compromise later in the week saying the current version flunks a big test. >> i think there's a bill that all 52 republicans agree on if they keep narrowing the focus. they've promised too much. say they're going to fix health care and premiums will go down? no way the republican bill brings down premiums. >> if there's no way the republican bill brings down

premiums -- can the republicans pass a bill? i mean, we're waiting for the cbo score. the congressional budget office, forgive me america. the congressional budget office will do an analysis of the plan and lay out what it projects, how much it costs, which groups, low income, editorially, helped and hurt the most. but when you have a republican senator, he's not the only one, saying this plan will not reduce premiums then why are they doing it? >> it's a huge problem. it's not just that, also the cbo numbers will probably show significant loss of coverage because of repeal of the individual mandate that's in the bill. the numbers are going to, can be more costly as well than the house bill. you're going to cause concerns from the right. the cuts to medicaid will make senators who come from expansion states like ohio, portman, has not voiced opposition yet.

very difficult for mitch mcconnell to get 50 votes in the senate and get it through this week. the ultimate question is going to be, does he put his members through a rigorous round of amendment votes, difficult votes on thursday or decide, punt, negotiate further. deal with it before the august recess? >> on the punt question, his number two, january coohn corny yesterday, august 1st is actually the drop deadline. people took that as evidence maybe john cornyn, for mitch mcconnell, his deputy trying to back slide? cornyn tweeted i am closing the door. we need to do it this week before double-digit premiums increases are announced for next year. obviously, they can change their mind, but if senators don't think they're going to have to vote, think they can delay tough decisions they will delay tough decisions. >> this is a senate process not a white house process. i can tell you inside the white house they are not looking at

this as a closed door. the president and his team views this as not an eight-year debate within the republican party. but talked about this a little in interviews over the weekend. he views this as a fine line timeline. hillary clinton got years to do this. barack obama talked about it for years. why do i freed to do it in five months? >> don't forget, these senators are under pressures of their own. you see john cornyn and mitch mcconnell, as difficult as the math is trying to push towards this vote end of the week if they lose momentum for this now this will get harder and harder. philosophical questions how much shot government be involved? how much do you let medicaid grow? as an open-ended entitlement or cut it back? these are not going away and republicans and democrats, everyone's up for re-election in 2018 and need to make progress and the president did say he wanted action on this quickly. >> as your intro showed, the president today had, what?

six tweets about democrats being obstruction ichts sichtists onl and named and had video from six republicans. democrats were never in this game and never dealt into this hand. the craziness of his tweets that are depicting them as the obstructionists as opposed to his own party. >> no question, democrats aren't working with the republicans, just like the republicans didn't work with obamacare. making it a republican-only repeal and replace and critics say it doesn't even repeal let alone replace. >> and preb tremember the democ mad at the obama plan. >> and the president says he'll make phone calls this week. word from mcconnell land, prefer largely to do this on their other than and not have the president involved. one reason, remember, the house passed its bill. president had a giant ceremony in the rose garden, and went on to call the republican house bill mean.

a lot of people ob capitol hin saying the president didn't mean it. and president obama criticized the senate bill and the president confirming he called the house bill mean. >> he actually used my term, mean. that was my term, because i want to see -- i want to see -- and i speak from the heart. that's what i want to see. i want to see a bill with heart. >> that's what he says now. but he celebrated the house bill in the rose garden with a huge ceremony as if it was the greatest thick since sliced bread. if you are a republican senator, part, not all, worried about medica medicare, premium medicaid, worried about premiums and the substance of the bill. if it's 50/50, aren't you worried a month from now, polling bad's the president of the united states will criticize the very bill he just asked you to vote for? >> absolutely. you want political cover from your president. in 2009, democrats taking a difficult vote from obamacare,

asking for cover, the president get out there, barnstorm. didn't work well. lost the house in 2010. but if you believe in a lot of these things, ideological about these things and the president is making promises, how do you know he'll keep the promises or really gets the nuts and bolts of are the policy? >> and we'll continue this conversation in a minute, because next, medicaid is a big fight within the obamacare repeal fight. put some of the republican claims to the fact check test. there's nothing more important to me than my vacation. so when i need to book a hotel, i want someone who makes it easy.

booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. get up to 40% off now on booking.com. booking.yeah! juswho own them,ople every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be help starting your business, vendor contracts or employment agreements. legalzoom's network of attorneys

can help you every step of the way so you can focus on what you do. we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here.

beneful grain free is so healthy... oh! farm-raised chicken! that's good chicken. hm!? here come the accents. blueberries and pumpkin. wow. and spinach! that was my favorite bite so far. (avo) new beneful grain free. out with the grain, in with the farm-raised chicken. healthful. flavorful. beneful.

welcome back. the trump white house is trying to help accept the republican health care plan and as they do using only washington math and this bold promise, if you like your medicaid, you can keep your medicaid. >> not cuts to medicaid, george. this slows the rate for the future and allows governors more flexibility with medicaid dollars because they're closest to the people in need. if you are currently in medicaid, if you became a medicaid recipient through the obamacare expansion, you are

grandfathered in. we're talking about in the future. >> now does that pass the fact check? cnn "money's" separating the sfr spin from the substance. is there such an ironclad clause? >> the real issue federal funding for medicaid. the house bill continues paying states more for although income adults on medicaid expansion at that time. it's likely many could stay enrolled at least a few years. the senate bill does not do that. what people don't realize is both the senate and house would greatly reduce federal support for the overall medicaid program, which covers more than 70 million people. and states will have to decide how to handle this drop in funding. >> so walk us through the numbers, then, or slower growth as kellyanne conway says. all about giving flexibility to the states does do. does has work?

>> let me read to what you it said about the senate bill today. no amount of administrative or regulatory flexibility can compensate for the federal spending relukzs thductions tha occur as a result of are this bill. yes, states get more flexibility but a lot less money. an $834 billion cut over the next ten years compared with current law. that's a 24% decrease. we're waiting for the cbo score of the senate bill later today. look, many of these states are cash strapped as it is and will likely have to tighten up, reduce benefits or cut payments to doctors and hospitals just to deal with the cuts from d.c. >> so as you look ahead to that possibility, what's the scope of the universal of people we're talking about? how many people get health care through medicaid and obamacare's medicaid expansion? >> the children. 35 million. two in every five kids in

america and also 27 million adults adults, 11 million part of the medicaid expansion program. and there are nearly 19 million disabled or elderly. moment of the money is spent on the disabled or elderly. more than 60% of all medicaid dlarps go to care for these two groups. >> checking the numbers and running the facts. context, that's critical as we know for a number of republican senators especially from states that didn't used medicaid expansion to add people to health care rolls. look at the numbers. is inevitable. have a philosophical argument and part of it is about the role of government in health care but inevitable if you scale that back that the numbers, the access to health care goes down. >> i would add one more number to your list here. that is, that two out of three residents of nursing homes are medicaid beneficiaries and we have a population that is aging as baby boomers get older. this goes to the point that refuting kellyanne conway what

she said, we're only cutting growth. the same argument was made in the newt gingrich revolution 22 years ago when they took over congress and it didn't work then. what happened -- medicaid is growing, because costs of health care and the population are growing. and if you -- if you, the growth is based on projections of what that population growth and medical prices is going to be. if you reduce that growth, somebody is not going to get care for some service at all. so it's just -- a cut is a cut is a cut. >> you've heard republican governors from those states. john kasich in ohio, brian sandoval in nevada making that point. look at it again. republicans can only lose two votes in the united states senate to pass this bill. nevada, 203 people, 203,000 people, excuse me, almost 204,000 people alded through medicaid expansion. ohio more than 631,000 people. west virginia, nearly 200,000 people.

you look at republican senators from those states and there are others, that's just three there, coming back to washington after being home this weekend and you're asking them to take a tough vote if you don't change that. >> absolutely. you saw dean heller saying he can't support the bill. john kasich, "state of the union" told dana bash he could not support the bill. a senator putting pressure on rob portman, senator. and from west virginia, non-committal on this bill. and john, i'm also told that the new version of this bill they're actually going to release a new version sometime today but it's not going to have major changes. going to have minor changes. it will impact the issue of so-called continuous coverage for people not enrolled in coverage show they can get on in six months's wait like a six-month period. i believe, the way it's going to be structured, but overall a lot of the changes particularly on the medicaid front may not go far enough for a lot of these senators from expansion states. >> a "new york times" headlines

about nursing homes. trying to sell it in a difficult political environment. force retirees out of nursing homes is a tough sell. another tough circumstance tthi president is in touch with conservatives pushing towards a compromise. and what about after candidate trump said this -- >> save medicare, medicaid and social security without cuts. have to do it. get rid of the fraud. get rid of the wafste and abuse but save it. >> she wants to knock the hell out of your social security, knock the hell out of your medicaid/medicaid and i'm going to save them. okay? >> now, if you look add ted at dates, day one of are the trump announcement and from beginning to end of the campaign candidate

trump was kicconsistent. i won't cut these things. >> and his advisors making the distinction, he won't cut. actually his budget cut for the disability -- and you have to wonder even in the negotiation with republicans, even if he can get them to pioint they have support, his own budget, slowing the growth raid of medicaid. clearly something he wants to accomplish, even though he campaigned on the opposite. something he has to live with and members of congress who support the bill have to live with that as well. >> that's one broken promise. this health care bill, health and senate, break three major promises of president obama when a candidate. one, the idea he would have tax cuts only for the middle class as his treasury secretary continues to say, this is a tax cut solely for the richest 1% of the country. the fact that medicaid would be

protected, it's not, obviously. 834 billion, and even worse in the second ten years. and the third is, that there would be universal coverage virtually. anybody who needed care would get it. we often don't go back audio of his. his said his beautiful health care plan would cover everyone. >> he did say that. a big week. up next, russia's man in washington is heading back to moscow.

update you on the story we led the program with. the supreme court allowing parts of the trump travel ban to go into effect while in tauct will hear the broader constitutionality of it. now issuing a statement as well saying that this decision

restores to the executive branch crucial and long-held constitutionality to the restore our border. the department will provide additional dames on implementation after consultations with the departments of justice and state and promises that implementation will be done professionally with clear public notice particularly as it affects travelers. now that. has this power, the trump administration says they'll have conversations and implement it. shifting to another story, kislyak is going home. the special counsel and congress are looking into the russian ambassador's 2016 meetings and conversations with at least three members of the president inner circle. president's son-in-law jared kushner and jeff sessions.

the president wanted to keep this meeting privates. you can see, the russians released images of a smiling president trump in the oval office with the foreign minister sergey lavrov and ambassador kislyak. washington making note of this because of his central role and wasn't going to be a witness, wasn't going to tell anybody what actually happened. i suspect all along said he's a ambassador. vladimir putin said he's the ambassador, supposed to have meetings. that's what he did. is this of note or just good theater? >> this is all the ambassador that no member of the trump inner circle can remember meeting with, and it got to an almost comical point. people denying they met and why they were meeting. he is the ambassador map is the job. you meet with american officials if you're the ambassador in the united states but it gotten to the point all of these meetings were so loaded you have to imagine it crimped his ability to be able to be effective going forward and talk of him going to the united nations and seems like instead he's just going to

get out of the country. >> and also a view within the intelligence community in the u.s. that he's a spy for the russians. >> right. >> and that is one reason why that these meetings prompted suspicion. of course, trump says, the team says there's nothing to it. while they probably are not going to speak to him, investigators on capitol hill or the bob mueller staff, there's an interest particularly on the hill to interview some of these russian whose have either have connections to the trump team. that is proving to be difficult to do. >> good luck with that. the president, meanwhile, is focusing a lot of attention on the "washington post" story over the weekend detailing in riveting detail how the obama administration came to learn of the russian election hacking. how it came, the cia analysis direct from vladimir putin and inaction, indecision the sort of debate back and forth within the obama administration that he didn't do all that much. and the president is tweeting about that today. the real story that prdesident obama did nothing. and goes on to say, trump

saying, zero tape s t people colluding that means trump people. i should be given an apology. the president, sorry, need to read these. the reason obama did nothing amp being notified he expected clinton would win and did not want to rock the boat. he didn't choke, colluded or obstructed and it did the dems and crooked hillary no good. historically the president finally is conceding that russia did hack into the system. one of the mysteries to many republicans why won't the president come out and condemn the russians for doing this. >> a lot to unpack. i'm not shuure what tapes he's referring to or obama being more public back in 2016 would have possibly helped him, and meanwhile, there is a lengthy list, at least, you know,

politically damaging here, potentially for trump, of obstructionism. right? you can go through eight to ten different instances of either administration officials, white house officials, trying to you know, compromising members -- officials in the administration or in the house and the senate to try to -- to block stories on this topic. >> trying to explain the president's tweets. good for you. thanks for joining us on "inside politics." see you back here tomorrow. wolf blitzer in the chair, after a quick break. when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites. on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident.

switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. so when i need to book a hotel to me tharoom,vacation. i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it, with great summer deals up to 40% off. visit booking.com. booking.yeah!

the only bed smart enough to change sleep as we know it. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides to keep you comfortable. and snoring ? ... does your bed do that? right now save on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed.

the energy conscious whopeople among usle? say small actions can add up to something... humongous. a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing.

hello. i'm wolf blitzer. it's 1:00. here in washington. wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us. we begin with breaking news -- from the united states supreme court. president trump gets a partial victory in a legal ballots over e his travel ban. the high court will hear arguments in october on the ban affecting six muslim majority countries. meantime, the court will allow parts of the ban to go into effect. in a statement just a little while ago, the president said, i'm quoting, today's unanimous supreme court decision is a clear vict industry for our national