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 with the possible assault that was called in.

justine ruszczyk was set to be married in august. she is an australian native who moved to minneapolis to be with her fiance. >> the death of justine is a loss to everyone who knew her. she touched so many people with her loving and generous heart. >> reporter: as her family mourn the loss of her life, they also press the minneapolis police for more information. >> sadly, her family and i have been provided with almost no additional information from law enforcement regarding what happened after police arrived. we've lost the dearest of people and we're desperate for information. piecing together justine's last moments before the homicide would be a small comfort as we grieve this tragedy. >> reporter: minneapolis's mayor called on police to provide information on the shooting as quickly as possible. >> i am heart sick and deeply disturbed by the fatal

officer-involved shooting. i have a lot of questions about why the body cameras weren't on, questions that i hope and anticipate will be answered in the next few days. >> reporter: in a tweet the minneapolis police chief said she asked for expedited investigation into justine ruszczyk's death in order to provide these answers as quickly as possible. >> ryan young joins us from minneapolis. tell us more about the reaction in the community. >> reporter: the reaction from the community has been quite strong. in fact, we are surrounded by people who decided to come out here. they've been standing around. you can look at the signs and see their outpouring of their emotion. look at the sign right here, why did you shoot and kill our neighbor and our friend. there are candles all over the place. we have seen kids using chalk to write names right in this direction. just think about this. this is the alleyway where the shooting happened so down this direction, maybe four houses down is where she lived. like we said we learned from the medical examiner it was one gunshot wound to the abdomen that ultimately killed her.

we do know the officer's attorney released a statement. i'll read part of it. it says officer muhammad noor extends his condolences to the family and anyone else who has been touched by the event. he takes their loss seriously and keeps them in his daily thoughts and prayers. you can just feel the pain here. people have been talking, they just don't understand why and how she would get shot so close to her home. anderson? >> ryan young, we'll continue to follow it. thanks very much. at the top of the hour breaking news on health care, and it is this. it is made in america week at the white house. the questions keep coming about the trump campaign's eagerness to accept political dirt made in russia there is breaking news on that that still raises more questions. it caps off a day when the administration's answers clash with each other as well as the facts. >> the president made it clear through his tweet and there was nothing that -- as far as we know that would lead anyone to believe that there was anything except for a discussion about adoption and the magnitsky act. >> that was sean spicer today contradicting the president who tweeted earlier

today as if the meeting involving his son, son-in-law and campaign chairman was in fact about opposition research. the president tweeted most politicians would have gone to a meeting like the one don jr. attended in order to get info on an opponent. that's politics. it was the president contradicting his own press secretary. most we have asked say that's not so, most politicians wouldn't have done this. more on that shortly. first, justice correspondent pamela brown with breaking news on who was at that fateful trump tower meeting. you've learned about the eighth person at the meeting. >> that's right. this mystery eighth person. don jr.'s attorney tells me tonight that he has spoken to him over the phone just in the last couple weeks. while he declined to provide his name he said he claimed to be a u.s. citizen over the phone and said that he was not employed by the russian government or working on behalf of the russian government at the time of this meeting. of course because we don't know his name, it's unclear what his history. he also caution he doesn't know more than what he has claimed.

there are question, anderson, about why he was there. the agalarov family nor their attorney has publicly said why as you pointed out in our last discussion, the attorney last week claimed that the agalarovs had nothing to do with the meeting even though they were mentioned in the e-mail exchange that don jr. released. but he says that his impression from speaking with the eighth person if we want to call him that over the phone, that he was initially there to make sure that the attorney, that the female russian attorney got to the meeting. there's still many questions and mystery continues to shroud who this person is. really the only person we know of that hasn't been publicly identified, anderson. >> yeah, you know, we talk about the agalarovs. i guess i just don't understand the attorney for him came for the agalarovs for the father and the son came forward last week. i spoke to him, and he basically said look, the agalarovs had nothing to do with this. the pop star's son knew there

was an acquaintance with this russian attorney and as a favor made the introduction through goldstone to donald trump jr. but if they have a representative of the family at this meeting, that seems to undercut what their own attorney said last week. >> right. and to be fair, i spoke to that attorney this past friday when we were reporting there was a representative of the agalarov family at that meeting. he was trying to figure out who that person is, or so he claimed to me that he was trying to piece it all together and he was learning about it as well. and in the conversation i had with don jr.'s attorney, he says that during his conversation with this person that he corroborated what had already been reported about this meeting, that the first couple of minutes there pleasantries %-pe information she allegedly had about russia donating to the dnc and hillary clinton before moving on to the topic of adoptions. he also says no one he has spoken to, including his client don jr. has any recollection of

the document that the russian lawyer claimed to leave behind in that meeting. anderson? >> what did trump jr.'s attorney say about the initial conflicting statement? >> i asked him about that. he defended his client as being willing to tell the full story even before that initial "new york times" article. he said don jr. and his counsel were fully prepared and absolutely prepared to publish or make a statement that was a fulsome statement about the nature of the meeting, what led to the meeting, what the conversation was in the meeting. now, clearly that didn't happen, anderson, and when i asked -- >> right, because he knew the initial statement was basically saying, this was about adoptions. >> right. if you look through the timeline, the initial statement this was only about adoptions. the next day another statement came out that said actually, i took this meeting because it was about incriminating information with the russians donating to the dnc. we weren't sure what it was but about but i took the meeting. i asked, why did it play out the way it did few were fully prepared to be up front and transparent from the get-go? he wouldn't comment.

if you read between the lines, what was implied is they were not fully consulted with about that initial misleading statement about adoption, only saying that the focus of the meeting was about adoption. my colleague evan perez and sara murray recently reported that the first statement was crafted aboard air force one and included the president and his white house aides. and there was a big concern initially about protecting jared kushner. it certainly raise as fair amount of questions. >> we should point out the president's own attorney, sekulow, at the end of the week was saying the president did not sign off and i believe it was his -- he was saying in the new york times and the reporting was inaccurate. pam brown, i appreciate that i want to bring in the panel. jeffrey lord, ana navarro. kirsten, does it make sense to you that the president tweets out in the morning, anybody would have done it to get opposition research, sean spicer then in the briefing room in

front of, you know -- not in front much cameras. >> yeah, right. >> but says this was -- there's no evidence this was about anything other than adoption and, you know, the sanctions? >> no, it doesn't make sense also because donald jr. -- i don't remember the exact tweet but he tweeted something along those lines. i'm sure i'm the first person who got -- >> on sean hannity, he said for me this was about opposition research. >> right, and he put out a tweet. i don't know why sean spicer would try to change the story back to something both don jr. and his father have said weren't the case. and if anything were saying what's the big deal, everybody would do this? that's been the argument of most of the surrogates, to say everybody does this even though everybody doesn't do this. >> i mean, it's one thing to lie. it is one thing to lie in a way that's, a, reliant on that y'all are stupid and all the facts that you've been hearing about over the last week, we're just going to pretend this didn't happen. >> to me think it reinforces the notion that the white house press briefing is a waste of time, if it ever -- if it ever really was worth anything it is

now completely pointless. >> you don't think there's a value in hearing people in the white house saying things which are demonstrably false? >> i don't think there's a value in sean spicer who is not inside, who doesn't know what he's talking about. he is either lying to us and spinning us -- which doesn't advance -- doesn't inform the public, or he doesn't know. >> but does anybody know -- >> doesn't he read the newspaper? >> it was in every newspaper. it is not possible he didn't know. >> i totally disagree with matt. there's great value in sean spicer. he has given us great "snl," "saturday night live" skits. >> okay. so. >> so please do not go against sean. look, so sean spicer says there's no evidence it was about anything other than this adoption act. well, there's no evidence it was not about opposition research. what we do have are players in the room who we know have no credibility because they have lied publicly, indignantly, emphatically and constantly for months and months and months. we all know but for the fact

that he got caught that these e-mails were going to be released, he would have kept on -- don jr. -- with his story that this -- that he had never had any contact with russia. so my question is why should we believe anything any of these people are saying when they've got such a track record of lying? >> jeff, you know, it is such a cliche now to talk about the drip, drip of information and, you know, trey gowdy last week said, look, anybody who has ever met, you know, somebody who may be connected, you know, should just talk to the special counsel, but now, you know, pam brown talking to donald trump jr.'s attorney who seems himself to be trying to figure out exactly who was in the room and the purpose of everything, and now you have the eighth person was this representative from this russian family who last week the russian family's lawyer was saying oh, no, no, no, they had nothing to do with it. it was just an acquaintance. and now they're sending a representative. >> get it all out there.

get it all out there. to me don trump jr. is saying, i'll come and talk, i will come and testify, i'm happy to do it. i mean that's the attitude that you should have and get this all out there. that said, anderson, for all of the talk that we're doing at this, there's no there there here. i mean colluded to do what, carry pennsylvania? pennsylvania was carried because pennsylvanians were upset about jobs, trade, health care, else. i would go to these rallies. not a single person mentioned russia to me, not one. >> no, but isn't the there there -- i mean it's -- no one is saying that ballot boxes were messed with. >> well, the implication is -- >> well, no, but to me it is more about the future and figuring out what happened this past time in terms of what did the russians actually do and what is going to happen the next time and what's going to happen in europe and understanding the mo of russian intelligence seems there's value in that. >> there's another implication though. there's an implication -- and we don't know what happened, but there's an implication that someone was helping the russians

figure out how to target certain districts with certain fake news. >> right. we had a former intelligence guy on last night -- or tonight. >> so the idea that nobody mentioned kushner -- >> and jared kushner was in charge of the data. >> so it is pretty far fetched to think that the russians would know in this district african american voters are thinking this and if you tell them this fake news, this is going to get through to them. the assumption is someone in the united states was helping. the question is was it someone on the trump campaign or someone associated with the trump campaign. so nobody is going to say russia because they're not going to know where it is coming from. all they know is they read a news story they think is true. >> to me it doesn't look good if the people involved aren't coming forward and saying, yeah, this happened, there was this meeting, eight people were there. it is like every day late in the day, it is like, oh, my gosh, here's another piece of information that seems to contradict was everyone else has been saying. >> right. frankly, anderson, this is why all of these new people who keep emerging like russian nesting

dolls in this meeting are going to become important, because what happened in that meeting is going to be critical to giving context for everything that came after. i think it is important to not make this as a mutually exclusive thing between dirt on hillary and adoptions. remember that adoptions is a euphemism -- >> right, it is not adoptions, it is sanctions. >> exactly. this is sanctions, this was a foreign policy discussion. >> it is a quid pro quo. >> thank you. >> it is like i give you this stuff, is there going to be movement on sanctions. >> it is a foreign policy discussion by people associated with the campaign mixed in with information that might be helpful to that campaign, and how did those two things come together in that meeting? now there are, you know, several people who can be questioned about that and who can give an account of that meeting even if don jr. doesn't come clean. >> could be under oath. >> yeah, much more to talk about ahead including calls for jared kushner's security clearance to be revoked in light of all of

this. also shortly despite efforts by the white house and senate leadership, we're learning that the gop senate obamacare replacement bill may be all but dead. we have late details on that. there's a meeting at the white house with senators on "360" ahead. who was there for you when you had amnesia? you know i can't remember that. stop this madness. if it's appreciation you want you should both get snapshot from progressive. it rewards good drivers with big discounts on car insurance. i have news. i've used most of our cellular data. come on, susan lucci! ♪ i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor.

we now instantly compare prices from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. whuuuuuat?rtgage offer from the bank today. you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free! free? yeah. could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no.

go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars. go to lendingtree.com right now. what are all these different topped & loaded meals? it's an american favorite on top of an american favorite, alice. it's like rodeos on top of rollercoasters. get your favorites on top of your favorites. only at applebee's. get your favorites on top of your favorites. people would ask me that we traveled,ntries what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm from all nations. it puts a hunger in your heart to want to know more. we're back talking about the trump campaign and the trump administration, questions of ties to russia in the wake of all of the revelations about that meeting last year, legislative calls to revoke jared kushner's security clearance are growing louder. earlier i spoke with oregon

democratic senator ron wyden. >> as you get more and more information about this you really are just stunned at how reckless, almost cavalier this white house is with respect to security clearances. and as more information rolls in from jared kushner's activities you just cannot make a logical case that he should keep his security clearance. >> back now with the panel. kirsten, i mean, you know, easy for democrats to complain about it. unless the president decides -- first of all, he doesn't have a final security clearance yet and we understand some staffers in the white house are concerned he may not get the final security clearance, but if he does it is up to the president to take it away. >> yes, it is up to the president. i can't imagine that the president would ever not -- would ever pull his security clearance once he gets it. i think it is true that if he was just any other staffer and any other administration, he would have that security clearance put on hold.

that would be the responsible thing to do but i don't expect that's what is going to happen here. >> used to work as an fbi special agent, what is your take on security clearance? would it be possible he wouldn't be granted a security clearance? he's high level? >> if he were a normal intel agency employee or someone who works in one of the agencies, his clearance would be on hold as they examined the update, made sure the contacts were vetted not to raise concern. when i was an fbi agent i had to report every single contact i had on an ongoing basis. my clearance wasn't pulled because i did that reporting. but had i not, i probably would have been pulled out, by polygraphed, been asked about why i didn't report it. he probably will get it as kirsten said, but he would not be treated like every other employee who gets one of these clearances. >> there's a republican congressman from texas who said

it would be in the president's best interest if he removed all of his kids from the white house. he said, i'm going out on a limb but i would say it would be in the president's best interest if he removed all of his children from the white house, not only ivanka, but donald jr. and jared kushner. what do you think of that? >> presidents have been employing their children and other relatives since john adams who made use of his son, john quincy, all the way through to the kennedys and clintons, et cetera. you can say good, bad or indifferent, but the fact of the matter is presidents are human. >> what children of the clintons? >> wife, hillary in charge of health care. >> she was the first lady and that was her agenda. >> yes, but also children -- >> what children did the bushes employ, what children did the obama's employ. >> andrew jackson, martin van buren. >> okay.

can we maybe go -- >> you are talking about ye olde children? is that what we're going for? >> you guys, you guys, look. this has been done. all i'm saying is that presidents -- >> you're telling me if chelsea clinton sat in on the president in the g20 next to the president in china and reporters would not be like what is chelsea clinton -- >> that's my point, is that presidents trust whom they trust. the rest of us can agree or disagree. if they've got in this case with jared kushner, you know, a real trust in somebody, there is lots of precedent for this and they're going to keep doing it. >> that's part of the problem. part of the problem is that he trusts, that it skews your judgment that you would trust -- and you're not going to fire -- that was one of the big problems -- by the way, i think you're totally right about the historical precedent but i don't think it is a good thing, this nepotism. bill clinton couldn't fire hillary clinton. and if you were a staffer in the white house and you had an issue

with her and disagreed with her on something -- >> woe betide. >> exactly. >> how do you have a fight with jared kushner? >> exactly. nobody who is a ceo or running for something, should hire no one they can fire. donald trump will have a very hard time firing his favorite daughter's husband. and his favorite daughter's husband has had to amend his security clearance forms three times. unless you prove to me that the he has early onset dementia, i do not understand how he was able to forget 100 contacts with foreigners. i mean this kid is -- >> oh, anna. >> i'm guessing that his attorney by -- by round three just made him put down everything. so i mean not to say that that excuses it, but it is possible that the 100 people are over inclusive, but that should have been there the first time around. >> you realize you're not talking about ten? i mean 100 is a lot. >> exactly. my point is it should have been -- >> it is not like 30,000 missing e-mail also though. >> oh, for the love of god.

can we stop talking about -- what it's not. listen, she is in the woods of chappaqua picking up mushrooms. this man is in the white house. in the oval office as commander in chief. can we focus on the ball? >> i want the same standard for everybody. >> sure, let's have the same standard. if chelsea clinton sat at the g20 you would have been screaming bloody murder. >> jeff, you have no problem with ivanka trump sitting with at the g20 with her father? >> no, if the president wants anybody, his daughter, anybody else to do it, that's the president's choice. we hold the president responsible for -- for his decisions. >> okay. hand on your heart, would you have had a problem with chelsea clinton sitting there? >> no. >> nobody watching believes you. >> wait. if hillary clinton wanted her daughter there and is making her daughter like ivanka is, that's hillary clinton's choice. would i disagree with it? probably. her right to do it is undisputed.

>> by the way, her daughter has a ph.d on foreign relations. >> i used to think that this -- i used to think they were a good influence on him, and we can go back and pull tape from six months ago or so. >> a lot of people said that, that they were a moderate influence. >> look, they're more liberal than i care for and they don't have any experience, but they're sane. and compared to some of the trump whisperers, they're going to keep him in line. i've actually changed my mind about that. i actually think now it is pretty clear that they should go. >> what made you change your mind? >> part of it is this three -- you know, not being honest about disclosure forms, the fact they're not embroiled in the don jr. e-mail. i mean, again, if these were normal staffers you could dispatch them. they may not make these mistakes because they would probably be -- if you were at that level of a white house, you would have the experience presumably, the wisdom to not make some of these mistakes. >> also with jared kushner, there's so many blurry lines when it comes to the private sector, to his businesses, to his real estate business and

how, you know, he's been able to use the government platform to in some way influence loans and other different activities in his private sector. i mean they're like piggish, they keep eating at the trough. >> sorry, that's a visual i'm not going to be able to get out of my head. we have breaking news coming up on the gop senate health care bill. the president has been lobbying just tonight with senators, late ward coming out which senators have turned against it. ♪

anyone who calls it a hobby doesn't understand. we know that a person's passion is what drives them. [ clapping ] and that's why every memorial we create is a true reflection of the individual. only a dignity memorial professional can celebrate a life like no other. find out how at sanfranciscodignity.com.

more breaking news tonight in a potential big setback for the president who spent the evening lobbying republican senators on their health care bill, a bill which late tonight looks to be all by legislatively dead. ryan nobles has the latest. how did things come unraveled tonight? >> anderson, essentially what you had here were two republican senators right out of the gate, susan collins of maine and rand paul of kentucky who said that they were opposed to this bill. one more senate vote was enough to topple the bill. there's been a sense around here for the last several weeks there were basically a bunch of senators that were unhappy with the progress of this bill, but no one wanted to be that next

vote, essentially the 49th vote to prevent this bill from moving forward. so that's where you are tonight, jerry moran of kansas and mike lee of utah together released a statement at exactly the same time announcing they could not support the bill, meaning two senators were pulling back and essentially killing the bill at this point. even though for a long time it seemed as though mitch mcconnell was kind of holding the ship together and put them into position where they would at least be able to get the bill to the floor, there's been some sense there was actually a much greater number of senators that were uncomfortable with it. that was revealed here tonight as two more senators have said that they cannot support the bill and it essentially makes the situation for mitch mcconnell untenable, there's no path forward if he wants to see at least this version of health care reform passed. >> the two senators that came for tonight, what was their oppositions? the two senators that came forward, because obviously you have the other two in terms of republicans, kind of rand paul

very different from susan collins? >> in many ways, jerry moran and mike lee are on different ends of the spectrum. mike lee is maybe in the rand paul camp, maybe not as far as rand paul, but he is certainly conservative. he did not like the language in the new cruz amendment which he was initially a co-author of. at one point senator cruz stepped away from mike lee and was directly negotiating with mitch mcconnell and the latest version is something senator lee was not happy with, and he says it specifically in his statement. and i can actually read a portion of that for you. he said, "after conferring with trusted experts regarding the latest version of the consumer freedom amendment" -- and that was the amendment he was co-authoring with ted cruz, "i decided i cannot support the current version of the better reconciliation act.

in addition to not repealing all of the owe bake awe care taxes it doesn't go far enough in lowering premiums for middle class nor does it create enough free space." he is somebody that we've been watching closely and his displeasure with the bill has not been necessarily that vocal but he was against the bill when it was the first version of the health care reform bill, but he said he was open to working and negotiating on the second bill but he never fully embraced it. he was very concerned with the way medicaid would pay out in this version of health care reform. he was somebody that was never really comfortable with it and today he made it official that he can't support it. >> is there a plan b or plan c? >> that's a good question. we have contacts in to senator mcconnell's office to see what their next plan is. at this point mcconnell's office has been reluctant to say let's go back to the drawing board and start from scratch. keep in mind, anderson, it will be a much more difficult process if they decide to do that because they're attempting to pass this bill through reconciliation, which would only allow them to do it with the 50 votes. if they create a whole new bill,

then that reconciliation option isn't back on the table and, of course, you have to get the house back involved. so at this point, no, there isn't a plan b or a plan c. >> wow. >> you know, there were seven republican leadership members over at the white house tonight. perhaps this is something that they were talking about, but there's certainly a long road ahead if they hope to pass any form of health care reform. >> ryan nobles, thanks very much. back with the panel. amazing after so long, republicans running on this, the idea of not actually -- >> yes. >> the damage of not having something versus -- >> correct. >> -- doing something that people don't like. >> correct. they should have been ready the day after the inauguration with this, and they weren't. >> i mean they passed how many, you know, bills -- >> right, countless, countless. my point is if they don't get this done, when we get to 2018 -- off year elections are hard for presidents anyway, but what you could have here is the curious phenomenon of the base of the republican party turning

on their own members of congress for not doing what they said and saying, "look, why vote for you if you're not going to do what you told us you were going to do?" >> they did not -- i wrote a column in january for "the daily beast" saying republicans should punt on this. i started off trying to write a column that would be "this is how republicans are going to fix health care." every conservative, center right leaning health care expert i talked to -- and i talked to them over and over -- there was no solution. the fundamental problem of this is that americans after obamacare basically came to the conclusion that it is the government's responsibility to take care of your health insurance. >> that set the precedent. >> once that becomes a political reality, now there's really no free market solution, right? so if you're a conservative who wants competition, who wants the free market solution, you're not going to have it. so then if you actually want -- if you can't -- if you are a conservative, you can't out spend liberals. the more generous plan, you can't compete with obamacare,

but you're not going to have the conservative plan. it is a debacle. i think this is donald trump's vietnam. it is basically a boondoggle. they thought they could do it quickly. they thought they could go in surgically. this is not trump's war. he didn't want this. >> you think it is donald trump's vietnam? >> i think it is. >> that might have been an overstatement. . >> easy to get in to, hard to get out of? >> exactly. we're in june and how do you do tax reform, there's no infrastructure -- >> kirsten, what does happen now? if you believe republicans who say obamacare is dying -- and certainly they're not doing anything to help it not die. and yet if there's not something passed what -- >> well, i never thought it was going to pass, so i will be surprised if it does pass. sort of for the reasons you were saying, i have a slightly -- the idea they want a free market solution, i mean, a free market solution is what we had before. >> no, that is not true.

we did not have a free market solution. >> you would have even more -- just not providing anything then is what you mean, right? >> no, no, look. the problem is that america's health care starting world war ii because of wage and price control made it so you were tied to your employer. so it was a third party. i never neglected -- >> i understand how it works, but that's not the solution. my point is that they never -- republicans have never had a solution to this problem because it is not a problem they want to solve. >> well, look, think this shows you the enormous spectrum right now within the republican party. you've got moderates like susan collins. you have libertarians like rand paul. you've got conservative ideologues like mike lee. the spectrum is so big right now in the republican party that it's very hard to come up with a product that passes muster with everybody and you can get the votes, particularly when all you have is a two-vote margin in the senate. >> do they try to work with the democrats to do something with obamacare? >> the big threat from mitch

mcconnell was if we can't get this passed, lo and behold, get yourselves ready, please, we may have to go and work with democrats. god forbid, we may see a bipartisan compromise if republicans cannot get something done unilaterally. >> we're going to take a quick break. a lot more on collapse of the gop senate health care bill in a moment. we will be right back.. what are all these different topped & loaded meals? it's an american favorite on top of an american favorite, alice. it's like labor day weekend on top of the fourth of july. hotdogs. get your favorites on top of your favorites. only at applebee's. when you switch to progressive. as easy as saving $600 get your favorites on top of your favorites. winds stirring. too treacherous for a selfie. [ camera shutter clicks ] sure, i've taken discounts to new heights with safe driver and paperless billing. but the prize at the top is worth every last breath. here we go. [ grunts ] got 'em. ahh. wait a minute. whole wheat waffles?

[ crying ] why! (woman vo) to refinance? time (man vo) yes! mortgage rates just plummeted. the time to refinance your home is right now. get started at lendingtree dot com. the only place you can compare up to five real offers side by side, for free. our average customer saves $20,000. quick. beat the fed's 2017 rate hike. do not miss this window. are you sure you have the best rate? it only takes 3 minutes

to find out. go to lendingtree dot com right now. i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.

before the break matt lewis

called it donald trump's vietnam which could make this 1975 complete with choppers on the baggies roof, the collapse of the republican health care bill, the seeming collapse and what it all means. the president befosomething thed before would be easy. >> real change begins immediately with the repealing and replacing of the disaster known as obamacare. >> get rid of obamacare. it's going to be gone. it's going to be terminated. >> obamacare is a disaster. >> repeal it and replace it. >> repeal and replace. >> repeal and replace. >> obamacare, we're going to repeal it, we're going to replace it, we're going to get something done. repeal it, replace it, get something great! >> we're going to repeal and replace the horror that's known as obamacare. it is a horror. >> i will repeal and replace obamacare, which is a catastrophe. >> we're going to kill it, let it die. let it die. >> and we're going to come up with something much, much better. >> you're going to have such

great health care at a tiny fraction of the cost, and it is going to be so easy. >> back now with the panel. obviously not so easy. i mean you were talking about it during the break, kirsten, just the, you know, different size. you have susan collins, you have rand paul. >> you have susan collins opposing it, pretty dug in. you have rand paul, pretty dug in. you're not looking at a problem if you're the president of going okay, i have susan collins and say it was two moderates. you could say okay, i have a problem with moderates. but you have a problem with a conservative and a moderate. there's no way to fix it so it pleases both of those people. >> but if markets -- we know there are states where there are few choices for people. so what happens? >> it will keep collapsing on its own. there is no question about it. >> at some point isn't there an obligation to try to do something to keep it from collapsing? >> yes, there is. i think they're going to have -- the figure six opens in my head here in terms of the possible

gains for republicans next year in the senate that's been mentioned. if they do not get this done, i really do think the bails of the republican party, they're not going to blame the president. they're going to blame member also of the house and senate who didn't get this done, who had seven years to -- >> they might blame them if they do get it done, too. you know, this is -- damned if you do, damned if you don't. >> you have a president who six months into the administration there's massive numbers of investigations going on and the signature piece of legislation which he campaigned on as being easy and something you can do in the first week or first day, if it fails, that's -- he's not in a good spot. >> yeah. >> you don't think it hurts the president, that people won't blame the president? >> i think some people will, but i think his base -- remember his famous comment about he could go out on fifth avenue and shoot somebody? i talked to a lot of these folks. they're sticking. they really think he is up against the denizens of the

swamp and they're more inclined to go after the republican members of congress. >> the truth is i think if it was just donald trump negotiating the way he wanted to negotiate, he could probably get a deal and deal with democrats and probably would do something that's a lot more liberal than what the republicans are willing to do. so i think to a certain extent it is kind of the fault of the republican congress because they're the ones not willing -- they're not willing to -- >> do you think the president then tries to reach out to chuck schumer. >> frankly, he should. >> look, he has got a unique opportunity. he's let the congressional leadership lead on this policy issue, and they're not getting anywhere. they're not making nil progress. he is the art of the deal guy. this is time for him to show it. go out and reach out to democrats and try to do some bipartisanship. it might mean some of his base don't like it, but it might also mean he expands his base. right now one of his biggest problems is not only has he not

expanded his base, he's cut into anybody other than a base that might have at some point thought of supporting him because of the failures, because of the investigations, because of the tweets, because of the -- you know, because of being such an infantile human being. >> friday is six months for this administration. >> you're kidding me. it's only been six months? >> it feels like only five years. the amazing thing is that republicans have a president, senate, house, state houses, governorships, more attorneys general. you go down the list. >> right. >> they have everything and they haven't been able to pass a single big piece of legislation, anything that would, you know, be significant. i don't know if there's any, like, light at the end of the tunnel. when would that happen? >> it was interesting because i think it was today or yesterday that the president was saying yet again he signed more bills into law than any president -- >> which is not true. >> i mean if you look at the actual bills, some are like renaming things.

>> the countervailing pressure for democrats which i don't think we should lose sight is if this continues to implode, then there will be pressure on democrats to do something. >> democrats can't do anything. they're not in control of anything. >> what? >> democrats are not in control of anything. >> they're in control of negotiating with the president. >> right now we own this building. >> here is the thing -- >> i understand. >> -- we're pregnant with this baby, we own this baby. they owned it for eight years. right now it's ours to figure out. >> i understand. but if it goes down the tubes and they're not negotiating with republicans -- >> nobody has reached out to them to negotiate. >> the reconciliation thing is a problem in terms of making that argument. you know, the republicans tried -- they wanted to do health care and tax reform through reconciliation, and maybe that now looks like the -- >> kerstin, do you think the president could reach out to democrats? >> the democrats will not repeal obamacare. that's not going to happen. what they would do is take obamacare and improve it and

make it better in areas, and there are problems with obamacare. there are absolutely legitimate problems with it, and work on that. the problem with the president is that he promised to repeal obamacare. so i don't know how he -- >> he also promised to build a wall, he promised to renegotiate nafta. he promised a bunch of things. so, you know -- >> he talked about the base with undying support for the president. coming up, what new polling has to say about that and the president's surprising take on that. john king has the numbers and a fact check. they offer paperless billing and automatic payments. which saves paper. which saves money. they offer home and auto coverage, so you can bundle your policies. which saves hassle. which saves money. and they offer a single deductible. which means you only pay once when something like this happens. which saves money. esurance was born online and built to save. and when they save, you save. that's home and auto insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. pcountries thatk mewe traveled,t

what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm everything. i'm from all nations. i would look at forms now and wonder what do i mark? because i'm everything. and i marked other. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.

president trump is defiant has his job approval sinks to a new low in a poll that suggests just 36% of americans approve the job he is doing so far that is the worst rating since modern polling began 70 years ago. the president doesn't see it that way, responding to a tweet, the abc/"washington post" poll even though almost 40% is not bad at this time is just about the most inaccurate poll around election time.

cnn national correspondent john king joins us tonight. is that true? >> if you fact check that 40% isn't all that bad six months in, that the poll was way off in its tracking the 2016 election, you would come to the conclusion wrong and wrong. let's take a look at the numbers. this is the poll the president was refersing when he made the tweet on top here. the new "washington post"/abc poll. 36% of the american people approve of his job handling as he approach the six month mark. a bloomberg poll out at the same time has essentially the same numbers. roughly four in ten americans approve of how the president is doing right now. nearly six months in. 55, 56, nearly six in ten americans disapprove of how he is doing. now the president might think that's okay or not bad to use his words. but let's take a look at history. history suggests that is the historically low, historically unpopular president. donald trump at 36% approval, these are the

abc/washington post numbers, gerald ford was at 36 after six months. tough times for this young president. bill clinton was at 45%. 10 point, 11 points from donald trump. he won in 1992 with 43% of the vote. >> well, reagan 62, these other presidents at the six-month mark higher in their approval rating up around 60% than donald trump. at six months donald trump is among the most unpopular presidents in the history of polling. what about that other poll the president made, the abc "the washington post" was terrible. here's the final tracking, by the abc "the washington post" poll, 47, 43. that was before election. here's what happened on election day, 48.5 for hillary clinton.

46.4 for donald trump. a two point gap there, four point gap there. the poll point was off a bit but if you take the margin of error they had the vote total about right. the president's wrong yes, he won the electoral ledge and presidency but if you understand this poll, the president pointing that anderson, again wrong. >> thanks again. that's not great news of how people see the democrats. do you think the democratic party stands for something or stands against the president. 37% say it stands for something, 52% say it only stands against the president. back now with the panel. all the excitement of democrats that little poll numbers for the president. 52% say you don't stand for anything but president that's not good. >> no matter if you're a rené or democrat you have to stand for something. if you don't do that if you make

it all about barack obama or donald trump in the end you're going to her yourself. >> nancy possession low see became speak r for -- >> -- right. >> i don't think. she ran against george w. bush, you do need to be something other than the president. they need a ross pa roe if donald trump cease going to be reelected. >> what was the sample where democrats, rush lim bah was reading this to do and said the sampling offense overdone for democrats. the fact of the matter is -- >> dune why i think the president is at historical lows? >> i don't think and he may be -- >> does that concern you if he is? >> six months in, no. if this was six weeks from november of 2020, yeah but not now. >> so, if he didn't get healthcare what happens to those numbers? you don't think they'll go down.

>> they could sure. but they can also go up. in 1982 ronald ray gap had a terrible year, i can't remember his numbers but it wouldn't good. by 1983 when the economic package finally picked in which had been passed of '91 it turned around. >> when you look at illegal immigration into this country it's down hugely just from the president's threatening. >> stock market's doing well. >> the fight starting and their -- >> it's more than the -- the economic indicators are good, he has achieved some things but it is modern that. i think a lot of more than still care about the office of the presidency of the united states and feel that he is cheapening it. feel that he is tar neshing it. maybe not his base of supporters

who do not budge but most americans,in' republicans do not like his tweeting but he continues doing it. i think it's less about the specific policy issues and the accomplishments or not and i think it's more about the fact that we've got this president who's kind of embarrassing a lot of time. >> i don't think those people liked him anyway. >> yeah but then you like him less. >> it's hard to focus on anything he's done because he himself keeps the russia issue going and going. you know, it's like having a stair master for president it's exhausting. you have to go along with it. it's hard for the democrats i think to actually find space in all of this noise that he himself creates, quite fraengly, to actually take that position. >> but the sflats all they focus on russia stuff and thinking the president somehow is going to pay the price for that and it ends up there is no credible there at all. they pay the bigger price. >> you should always stand for

something and not just against something, i think it's a general rule. but your point about nancy pelosi i agree with that. elections do tend to be on the rough incumbent so you can run against people but it's better if you have something to offer them. >> and jones keep talking about this -- >> yeah, so democrats need to -- and democrats haare having thei on little situations over here. the liberals are trying to figure out which direction they're going to go. i think anna's right because at this point i don't know how many americans expect donald trump to have done anything. he hasn't been there that long. what they're judging him on was the tone. let's remember he did kind of promise to be the guy who gets along with everybody and like everybody and he's going to get everybody together and get them not room and it's going to be different right. >> it's the deals that -- >> and instead he's become this

person pounding on the democrats and the media and doing the things he said he was going to do. >> house w many times -- >> moving before standing against donald trump. the bulk of hillary clinton's campaign is standing against donald trump that he was an object objectionable human being for us and it wouldn't enough -- >> he could be what ever upped him to be in the campaign but now he's president. i agree, if you want to win the white house you have to have an agenda and stand for something. if you want to take back the white house i think beating up donald trump is the pretty good way to go. >> how many times have we had this portion of the examine and he comes back. >> that's true. >> even thanks we'll be right back. for the lowest price on our rooms guaranteed. plus earn free nights and instant rewards at check-in. yeah. like i said. book now at choicehotels.com

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. [man: let's go!] man #2: we're not coming out! man #1: [ sighs ] flo: [ amplified ] i got this. guys, i know being a first-time homeowner is scary, but you don't have to do this. man #2: what if a tree falls on our garage? woman: what if a tornado rips off our roof? flo: you're covered. and you've bundled your home and auto insurance, so you're saving a ton. come on. you don't want to start your new life in a dirty old truck. man #3: hey. man #1: whoa, whoa. flo: sorry. woman: oh. flo: you're safe. you're safe now. woman: i think i'm gonna pass out. can you stop using the bullhorn? flo: i don't make the rules.

yeah, and i can watch thee bgame with directv now.? oh, sorry, most broadcast and sports channels aren't included. and you can only stream on two devices at once. this is fun, we're having fun. yeah, we are. no, you're not jimmy. don't let directv now limit your entertainment. xfinity gives you more to stream to more screens.

that's it for us. time to hand thing over to don lemon and "cnn tonight." >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >> here's breaking news, the senate bill to repeal and replace obamacare, a top republican priority appears to be dead on arrival. this is "cnn tonight" i'm don lemon. president trump marks six months in office this week. and his -- consumed by counsel investigation into possible collusion and his key initiative is apparently dead. republicans control the white house and both houses of congress, but obamacare will we main the law of the land. two more senators on record tonight saying they will not support the healthcare bill and