look at that fluffy unicorn! he's so fluffy i'm gonna die! your voice is awesome. the x1 voice remote. xfinity. the future of awesome. >> good evening. john mccain compares russia story to a sent i ped. there's always another shoe to drop. one more piece of foot gear goes trump in the night. this breaking news is a surprise and mystery. it's another case of the white house disregarding advice today from the normally friendly "wall street journal" editorial page to disclose everything russia related at once.

instead we got confirmation of a second meeting at the g-20 meeting between vladimir putin and president trump, undisclosed by the white house till now. more from correspondent jim sciutto. what have you learned about this? >> another undisclosed meeting not disclosed out of their good graces but under questioning by journalists and the white house forced to say this happened because there were other witnesses in the room at the g-20 summit at a dinner where i don't know the leaders were present. president trump sat down next to the russian president and without a u.s. translator, only the russian translator, why is that key? there's no other witness to the conversation other than the russian president and his translator. and this of course, follows the previous meeting between putin and trump, the announced meeting between the two of them where you only had the secretary state not only but there were other witnesses to that conversation who could tell us what happened

who didn't have skin in the game. that's the key with these meetings. that's why by policy normally, you have either career state department people or something that give you a record of what happened there. this is what we don't have. >> was it just the three of them or were there other leaders around? >> well, it's a dinner party, right? multiple tables. but as to who was pri have i to the conversation, it was just putin, trump, and the russian translator. this was not an insignificant pull aside as often happens at major events like this. you shake hands, you speak for five minutes. by the white house's own description, it lasted for one hour. >> one hour at that -- so it wasn't just like hey, how do you like the steak. >> so nice to see you. this is an hour which allows time for significant conversation. the white house is explaining it saying this is part of the president's duties and released a statement a short time ago saying that this is not unusual, not merely perfectly normal. it is part of a president's

duties to interact with world leaders. that is true. look at the context, this is a world leader who leads a country that interfered in the election, one. two, this is one in which there is no other record, as i said earlier, of that conversation which is important. three, it was not disclosed previously. and four, i might just note this. yes, there are pull asides at a number of meetings like this, but when you have a pull aside with an adversary, that is sith. think of all the coverage we gave when president obama was thinking about a pull aside with the iranian president rowhani which led eventually to an iranian nuclear deal. when have you countries with so many conflicting interests, when you sit down for an hour without anyone else present, that is a conversation of consequence. and this is something that the white house did not reveal tonight till they were pressured to reveal. >> even though they talked about the other meeting, it would have been very easy for them to say this was another meeting also.

>> thank you. late this evening i spoke with richard blumenthal who sits on the senate judiciary committee. >> senator blumenthal, do you have any understanding why we're just hearing about this other meeting that the president had with vladimir putin? >> there seems to be a pattern of reckless or willful concealment of contacts with the russians involving jared kushner, other members of the trump family, and now the president of the united states. and maybe the president was embarrassed or in some way reluctant to disclose the fact that this meeting occurred with him alone with a russian interpreter and vladimir putin. we still have no idea what was discussed exactly. and this kind of private meeting is virtually unprecedented in the diplomatic world. >> i also don't understand how

the white house wouldn't think that this story would get out at some point and at least just get ahead of it or just explain -- do you think the white house owes the american people at least a readout of the meeting especially if the meeting did last a full hour as is being reported? >> a full hour meeting certainly merits a readout. the question is whether in fact the white house has enough background or material for a readout because the only source for that readout would be the president himself and he may not remember everything that was said, which is why staff always accompanies a meeting president going to a meeting of such importance. and it's kind of breaking one of the first rules of diplomatic contact. >> today, the judiciary committee was given the green light by mueller to have donald trump jr. and paul manafort testify in an open hearing. do you know what the timetable for those testimonies are and what you need answered, what you

want answered? >> my hope is that kushner and trump and man for the will all come before the committee. in fact, every one of those eight people in that meeting should be called to testify both for the committee and i hope it will be soon, probably this month or september. but the sooner the better. it has to be under oath. and full and fair open opportunity for questioning in public. and i think the american public deserves not only an explanation of the latest disclosed meeting between putin and trump, the president, but also a full explanation for everybody being in this room because clearly, the prelude to this meeting indicated criminal intent of a conspiracy to receive information from the russians to collude with the russians in interfering with our elections

and possibly other kinds of cyber hacking and criminal activity. >> also today, we're learning the identity of the eighth person who attended the meeting between donald trump jr. and his lawyer claims he attended only to be as an interpreter. do you buy that? because there was an actual interpreter there. and i'm wondering how his attendance factors into your thinking about this meeting. > one of the questions here is why that are eighth person was at the meeting when he knew apparently that there would be an interpreter there. maybe only an hour beforehand. but the mystery of this meeting is in fact, why there was such concealment of every one of the individuals, why continuing concealment, willful or reckless, a pattern of obfuscation and even obstruction in connection with the meeting and what other meetings there were. those kinds of questions are at the core of what needs to be

disclosed at the judiciary committee hearing. and i hope it will be soon but this eighth individual who represented a family with potential financial or other ties to the russians is part of this pattern of concealment. beginning in june, but going through even the period before and after the election and the inauguration. >> what's so strange, i talked to the attorney for these two russians for the father and son early last week. and he was claiming at that time that the russian attorney was just an aquaptence of the pop star's son and that it was sort of that he was acting as a go between to help set up this meeting to make the introduction but that they had no real relationship. now not only does it seem like that's not the case but somebody who actually represents that family was in the meeting. so certainly a lot of questions still to be answered. >> there are more questions than answers right now. and they need to be answered by

the special counsel, bob mueller and he is now aware of this meeting and investigating it. that's how we learned in fact, of the identity of this eighth person because his lawyer came forward and said, we've been dealing with mr. mueller. >> richard blumenthal, thanks for your time. >> pamela brown, david gergen, former russia analyst, ralph larson and defense secretary michael carpenter. michael, you made what i believe to be the first public mention of this other meeting on the program last night. it was the first we had heard about it. what's your understanding of what occurred in. >> well, i mean, there's only three people that know what was said in that meeting and those are presidents trump, putin and the russian interpreter. this was a one-hour meeting. during my career, each seen plenty of five-minute one-on-ones. to have a meeting of this length and not to be transparent about it, that is of concern. and then obvious, this provides

a golden opportunity for president putin to try to press president trump on his agenda and to spin things in his way. so we know during the bilateral meeting they talked about a cyber unit which at first president trump said it was a great idea and apparently it wasn't such a great idea later. we don't know what was said. there could have been all kinds of things proposed by the russian side that would have been deleterious to our interests. but that the president may not have been briefed up on. this is a big deal actually. >> the white house is saying it's not merely perfectly normal but part of the president's duties to the interact with world leaders adding just a brief conversation at the end of a dinner. if it was an hour long, that doesn't seem like a brief conversation and there's no official government record and that they wouldn't even mention it. >> is the president's duty to the circulate and meet foreign leaders in an informal way as jim called it. but it's entirely inappropriate for a president to sit down in a

way donald trump did with putin. if the president had brought his own interpreter so there were two people there, one an american, one a russian, you had a record on the american side and if the white house disclosed it, we would be saluting the president for having yet another hour with putin. but the way in which he did it, leaving the russian interpreter, i can't remember a time when a new american president first meeting has allowed the interpreter from the other side from the russian side to be the only person in the room. there have been times in the past when american vernon walters for example, earned the trust of both sides and it was a rare thing that the russians allowed to have vernon walters interpret for both sides in presidential meetings. but it just does not happen. it is abnormal and it is not pript for his duty and not to disclose an rouses further suspicions what the hell is donald trump's obsession with vladimir putin and why won't he

be straightforward about it. >> david, is it normal not to have readout of it for the american people? >> it's abnormal. anderson, if think want to have a very private conversation with interpreters there with the appropriate people in the room, that is regularly done. you don't have to have a readout of everything. sometimes diplomat sit is best conducted behind doors but you protect yourself as president by having other people with you who are from the american side and are looking after our interests and not letting the russians take advantage of a new president. >> just from an intelligence standpoint, does it concern you that there's an hour long conversation with again with just this russian interpreter? >> i would be concerned, anderson, in normal times but we're living in anything but normal times. for the first time in my lifetime, we're enduring i would say a counter intelligence investigation launched by former fbi director about the president and his own people.

so i say that's what makes this definitely a news worthy item and worth asking those questions that you've been posing to this panel. >> i want to bringing in pam brown. in terms of the meeting between trump junior and the russians at trump tower, the eighth person in the room has now been identified. what's the latest on that. >> he's been identified as ike kavl kaveladze. he goes back to 199 he worked for agalarov's company. aras a business associate of donald trump. and so in fact, anderson, he appeared in a video exclusively obtained by cnn standing there in the background right next to the donald trump as well as the aglar roves from 2013. this is in las vegas, 2013. and then fast forward three years from that moment and he's been thrust into the spotlight as an attendee of that meeting at trump tower with don junior

and paul manafort and jared kushner as well as rob gold stoerngs the publicist representing emin aglavrov who promised incriminating information on hillary clinton. kavelad kaveladze's attorney says his client attended that meeting as a representative of the aglavrov family and 245u9d he would be needed as a translator. he says he has never had involvement with the russian government. >> this guy was caught up in a money laundering case, is that right? >> he was. back in 2000, his actions as the head of a delaware company called international business creations caught the attention of congressional investigators looking at how people were able to launder large amounts of money through u.s. banks. a government accountability report was canned by congress kong included it was easy for these foreigners to use shell companies to open u.s. bank accounts and route hidden money through the american financial system. kaveladze was one of the people

looked at as part of the investigation. he wasn't charged and his attorney says there is no indication his client did anything wrong here. >> you've talked about the drip drip of this and it's at this point become a cliche. you say it's important to understand the context of each drip. the fact here we have another person who, would for for this russian family who last week we were told by the attorney for that will family they weren't involved in this at all, that this russian lawyer was just an acquaintance of the younger son. now it seems like they wanted a representative in that actual meeting. >> that's right, anderson. i think the ninth person in the room you might say has been reported today actually is the mueller investigation in terms of looking at all of this body of information and developing the context which for me boils down to three critical questions. why wasn't this meeting reported and the full scope of the meeting with all the participants reported at the

time. and then after it was leaked originally, why is haven't all the people been named so we can get to the bottom of it, particularly if there's nothing to this an serred by the trump team. second question is what happened to this information that was purportedly provided at the meeting? has that been turned over to the fbi? i'm referring to the reported information that was passed on alleged clinton donors, why would be the that have been turned over. the third question is who really back stopped this meeting? in other words, in russia itself, can we determine the identity of the person presumably in the kremlin that sent veselnitskaya to this meeting. who provided the cover and back stopping and the information for this meeting. these will be the kind of questions that the mueller investigation has to come to terms with as they look into this meeting. > a lot still not known. a lot more ahead including bernie sanders joins us on the

implosion of senate gop efforts to repeal and replace obamacare and the president's efforts to shift the blame. later, ever wonder what steve bannon is like behind closed doors? hear from the author from an up-close look of the president's chief strategist. ... spendy weekenders. the tranquility awaits. hanging with our mates weekenders and the it's been quite a day... ...so glad we got away weekenders. whatever kind of weekender you are, there's a hilton for you. book your weekend break direct at hilton.com and join the weekenders. there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your vacation is very important.

that's why booking.com makes finding the right hotel for the right price easy. visit booking.com now to find out why we're booking.yeah! 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 yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's complete with key nutrients we may need. plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets. a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home... ...with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection, which could lead to hospitalizations. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo,

neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day, so you can stay home. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro.

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.

it's a busy night. more breaking news. mitch mcconnell saying he will schedule a vote early next week on repealing but not replacing what's known as the affordable care act, obamacare. right now it lacks support within the gop and follows last night's defeat on legislation to repeal and replace. the defeat which led the president of the united states to say this today. >> we're not going to own it. i'm not going to own it. the republicans are not going to own it. we'll let obamacare fail and then the democrats are going to come to us. >> not exactly harry true man's the buck stops here nor president kennedy's that said victory is a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan. you fed up, you trusted us. instead, just this. >> we're not going to own it.

i'm not going to own it. >> the president clearly want people to believe this is not his problem, not even a republican problem. the problem is no democrats came on board. it's if the president has forgotten one of his frequently repeated promises throughout the election. >> real change begins immediately with the repeal and replacing of the disaster known as obamacare. >> repeal it and replace. >> repeal and replace. >> repeal and replace obamacare. we're going to repeal it and replace it and get something done. repeal it, replace it, get something great. >> we're going to kill it. let it die. let it die. 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's going to be so easy. >> now though, the president says he favors repealing obamacare without a replacement

which i just mentioned the senate will vote on next week. a big change from the campaign. back then he reassured those who might depend on the provisions they would not be left out in the cold, no repeal without a replacement, something better. >> do it simultaneously. it will be just fine. we're not going to have a two-day period and not going to have a two-year period where there's nothing. it will be repealed and replaced. we'll know. and it will be great health care for much less money. >> candidate trump had good reason to promise not to try for straight repeal. he knew about the congressional budget office's grim assessment of the repeal bill republicans had passed the year before which president obama vetoed. the cb o's estimated that 32 million people would lose coverage under that. you can agree or disagree with the assessment as many republicans have and say it's only 3.2 million or 320,000 people losing coverage. now that he's president, trump is responsible for what happens to each and every one which he seemed to recognize when he was

trying to win their votes. seems less concerned now. when the house version passed this spring, the president was eager to own that one. he threw a big victory celebration in the rose garden and makes a big production out of signing ceremonies and presidential proclamations. he's not going to own it now he says but four years ago as a citizen, he said something very different indeed. in a tweet in 2013, donald trump gave this piece of leadership wisdom. whatever happens, you're responsible. if it doesn't happen, you're responsible. what a difference four years can make. joining you now from the place where the buck is supposed to stop, cnn's sara murray. what is the mood in the white house tonight about the health care fumble? >> this is a defeat that took them by surprise. the president was having dinner here last night about health care. there are some in the white house who feel dejected by this but overall, their backs have been up today insisting this is not on them, that this is on the senate, this is their failure.

president seems content to sit by and watch obamacare collapse. >> is there any sense that the going forward, the president will be more engaged than he has been in the repeal and replace process. >> i think one of the things to keep in mind about the process is the has wide latitude to sell this bill. he did not make the case to the american public this was a good bill for them this was a good deal for them, this was a good deal for their health insurance. he didn't do all that much arm twisting behind the scenes. sara huckabee sanders off camera suggested they might be willing to have some kind of bipartisan fix. but we can have not seen that kind of outreach from the white house. as you are pointing out, this raises the question of how the president sees his role in all of this. it's one thing if you are a candidate to say we will stand by and watch this collapse. but the reality is, he is the president now. people who voted for him are dealing with increasing premiums

under former president obama's health care bill. they're dealing with insurers pulling out of the markets because of issues with former president obama's health care bill and the reason they voted for president trump, the reason they elected him was to solve this problem. not to point his finger at the democrats and so far, from this white house, we don't have a good sense of where this goes next. what the president would do next to fulfill his promise to voers. >> cnn's ryan nobles on capitol hill where republicans are scrambling to figure out what comes next. what do you know about this vote mcconnell is now promising? >> anderson, it's scheduled to happen sometime next week. leader in can consequently said that on the floor of the senate late this afternoon. and earlier in the day, he promised that even though they are facing another setback, he is committed to finding a way forward on health care. take a listen. >> i believe we must continue to push forward now. i regret that the effort to

repeal and immediately replace the failures of obamacare will not be successful. that doesn't mean we should give up. we will now try a different way to bring the american people relief from obamacare. i think we owe them at least that much. >> but the problem that mcconnell has right now is that the votes simply aren't there. there are now at least four republican senators who say they will not vote for a straight repeal. even though, mcconnell seems very content to put this bill on the floor for an up or down vote at least to start the debate process. if that happens, unless something changes between now and the beginning of next week, it will likely fail. >> what about support to make this a bipartisan effort? does there seem much appetite for that from either side of the aisle? >> everybody talks about it but nobody seems to be having any kind of conversations leading in that direction. today, chuck schumer said at that time door is open.

he's the senate minority leader. he wants to deal with republicans, but there's a fundamental problem here. republicans want to repeal obamacare and democrats do not. if they can't get past that impasse, there is no way that democrats are going to work with republicans and right now, it seeps as though both sides are unwilling to give on that central and important point. >> ryan, thanks very much. up next, i'll speaking to senator bernie sanders for his reaction to the republican attempts to repeal obamacare without an immediate replacement. the senator is next. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. this july visit your local volvo dealer to receive sommar savings of up to $4,500. thi(pole clangs)your local volvo dealer

- ow! - oh! are you okay? what are you so busy looking at? - my credit score. it dropped 50 points and no one told me. - oh, well that's why i use wallethub. it updates daily and lets me know when my score changes. - and wallethub's free? - 100% free. plus it finds me better deals and helps save me money. - [announcer] sign up for wallethub now for free credit scores and 24/7 credit monitoring. - that's gonna leave a mark.

that the essence of integrity is a promise kept. ♪ if you've got the time welcome to the high life. ♪ we've got the beer ♪ miller beer about to see progressive's new home quote explorer. where you can compare multiple quote options online and choose what's right for you. woah. flo and jamie here to see hqx. flo and jamie request entry. slovakia. triceratops. tapioca. racquetball. staccato. me llamo jamie. pumpernickel. pudding. employee: hey, guys! home quote explorer. it's home insurance made easy. password was "hey guys."

before the break, cnn's sara murray and ryan nobles laid out how the health care bill died today and how mitch mcconnell is hoping a bill to repeal the law might pass early next week. i spoke with a critic of some aspects of obamacare. vermont senator and former presidential candidate bernie sanders. senator sanders, president trump is saying his plan is to let obamacare fail in his words and that the democrats will then come back to him. what do you think of that? >> well, i think it's really

beyond belief that we have a president of the united states who is working overtime to sabotage the health care that millions of americans receive. anderson, the reason that this republican bill failed is because it is something that was a disaster that the american people overwhelmedingly did not want. you don't for throw 22 million people off of health insurance, raise premiums for older workerser, defund fund planned parenthood, cut medicaid by 800 billion and give large tax breaks to huge corporations or wealthy plan. that's the republican plan. instead of working to figure out how we can lower the cost of health care in america and provide care to all people, take on the pharmaceutical industry and lower the cost of prescription drugs, you've got a president who says okay, let me do nothing and sabotage the current system and so what if millions of people suffer.

that is really awful. >> will obamacare fail if congress don't take steps to fix it. >> no, i don't think it will fail. millions will be impacted with higher premiums and this is not me telling you this. this is what the insurance companies are say. if we don't put money into the cost sharing program, if you don't enforce the individual mandate, substantial sums of money will not come into the system which will make it a lot harder for insurance companies. that's what the insurance companies are saying. > at this point, do you think you, the democrats as lawmakers have a responsibility to try to work with republicans to fix the current system. >> the answer is absolutely. that is why there are many of us who are talking about ways that we can significantly improve the affordable care act. i don't think you're going to hear anybody here say that the affordable care act is perfect and doesn't need improvements. deductibles are too high. copayments are too high. premiums are too high. prescription drug prices are off

the wall. we need to at least three things. number one, i happen to believe we need a public option in every state in this country. if people don't get the private insurance conch that they like or that they need, we should have a public option available. number two, i believe that we should lower medicare eligibility from 65 to 55 and number three, i think we should substantially lower the cost of prescription drugs by allowing pharmacists and distributors to import lower cost drugs from canada and other countries and also to have medicare negotiate prices with the pharmaceutical industry. those are three ways that we can improve the affordable care act. longer term and i'm going to introduce legislation to do this, we have got to join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health care to all people as a right through a much more cost effective and simple system that i call medicare for all. >> you know in order to do

anything, you need republican support. i want to play you what chuck schumer said today about working with republicans. >> if republicans abandon cuts to medicaid, abandon tax breaks for the wealthy, and agree to go through the regular order, the door to bipartisanship is open right now. republicans only need to walk through it. >> a lot of republicans are saying that doesn't sound like bipartisanship. that sounds like setting conditions in order to get something done. >> anderson, the last poll that i saw on the republican proposal had the support of 12% of the american people. the american people do not agree about throwing millions off of medicaid in order to give tax breaks to the wealthy. i think all that senator shum ser saying hey, stop talking about tax breaks for the rich. stop talking about massive cuts to medicaid. let's see how we can improve the

affordable care act, not destroy it. i think that that is a reasonable starting point for any serious discussion. >> i mean, the other thing the president said today was he's not going to own it, the republicans are not going to own it. democrats have also engaged in their fair share of the blame game. shouldn't people's health caretaker precedent over scoring political points? >> i think it should. but let us remember the political reality of today. last i heard, the president was a republican. the republicans had majorities in the house and the senate. they control the united states government. >> do they own this. >> those are just silly words. you're right. we should not be worried who is owning it. there's enough blame to go around on both sides. >> senator sanders, appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you very much. when we come back, more on the collapse of the gop health care plan and who the president says is to blame. and later, steve bannon's role in the white house.

details not publicly known until now. sweet those who prefer heat. sfx - a breath of air and those who just love meat. oscar mayer deli fresh. sweet! ♪ it's happening, it's happening! in the modern world, you can control just about anything with an app. your son is turning on all the lights again! you can do the same with your car insurance with the esurance mobile app. esurance. click or call.

made daily life a guessing game. will i have pain and bloating today? my doctor recommended ibgard to manage my ibs. take control. ask your doctor about nonprescription ibgard. before the break, you heard senator sanders thoughts on the health care quandary republicans find themselves in and the president's thoughts where

responsibility lies as well as senator mitch mcconnell's plan to bring his latest plan to a vote next week. right now that is expected to fail because they don't have the support. a bad day for the white house. david gergen, kim cuccinelli, maggie haberman, matt lewis and kirsten powers. david, this notion of repeal without replacement, is this realistic are or republicans seen to be trying to do all they can do before letting this go? >> it's more an act of symbolism. they don't have the votes. of the four senators who opposed this replace and repeal and delay, three of them are women. they stood up firmly on this. i just want to say, earlier in the program, the white house was instructing us on the duties of a president especially overseas. it's really time this white house faced up to the duties of the president here at home. and that is to be president of all the people. not just your base. that is to put the interests of the country first and not your

own politics. and that is to stand up like a man and admit when you've come short and go back and try again. from my perspective on this health care issue, when the president says he's going to let obamacare fail, what that means is he's going to let a lot of americans suffer from increased premiums in the months ahead if the federal government doesn't try to fix some of the flaws in obamacare. and that ought to be a bipartisan effort. if he fails to do that, it will be a dereliction of duty. >> you actually believe dereliction of duty. it's as far as from true man saying the buck stops here as you can get? >> absolutely. absolutely. i can't emphasize enough, when the election is over, you become president of all the people. yes, you won with your base but you become president of all the team. your first responsibility, your moral responsibility is to look after the welfare of people, not to use their suffering as a political lever. and that's what i think is a dereliction of duty. he's responsible to all the people. and the flaws in obamacare do

need to be fixed. they need to be fixed on a bipartisan basis. the premiums are going up to today to a significant degree because the federal government is not paying subsidies to protect american who's can't afford health care. and that's what needs to be fixed, fixed now. he cannot just afford to go through this and say let people suffer. and it will help our politics later on. that's what i consider a dereliction of duty. >> maggie, i spoke to governor kasich earlier today. we'll play that in the next hour. told me things the president doesn't really mean he would let it fail. that if congress were able to give him something to stabilize the markets, bring down costs whatever form it took, he would sign it. >> i think john kasich observed a lot about president trump when he ran against him. that is true. you're not dealing with a president who has a fixed clear ideology. he was raised in new york city where big government has generally been the rule of the day. i think he absorbed a lot of

that. you have heard donald trump say various things about health care in this country. but he has at several points suggested that the government has an obligation to take care of people. so there is a discordant note listening say we're going to let it fail. these are real people who are still on obamacare or covered under obamacare. this is why when you implement an entitlement program, it's hard to then remove it and he is discovering that. >> ken, you're the president of the senate conservatives fund a group vowing to recruit challengers to run against republican senators who oppose repeal. to republican senators shelley moore capito who sadie not come to washington to hurt people talking about why he's as opposed to repealingsing, to her you say what. >> the way the president is describing his view of this, i think is consistent with the way he talks. it's consistent with a long-term benefit for america.

you heard bernie sanders admit that the amounts of americans have to pay under obamacare is too high. the deductibles are too high. what people are failing to do including on this show is point to the culprit. obamacare. you don't start putting band-aids, this is the washington problem. you don't fix a failure. you get rid of a failure for the benefit of the most americans possible. and that's the path we're on with repeal. it doesn't have to be immediate repeal. it can be repeal by a date certain and put the pressure on. it will get suddenly very bipartisan about what other alternatives might take place. once this complete failure of american health care we call obamacare has been stripped aside. and a lot of these republicans have already voted to do this in 2015, including some of the people you're hearing say no, we're not going to do this now. you're lying then instead of lying now. last point, this is a real mitch mcconnell failure.

he's been caught lying to members of his own caucus about not really shrinking medicaid. let's call it what it is. it's welfare. welfare exploded under obamacare. and that is a central point that republicans for a long time have agreed to contain and shrink. >> matt, does the president have a role in this? is it a presidential failure? ken is saying it's a mcconnell failure. >> success has many fathers. failure has a lot of fathers here, too. look, obviously, it's hard once an entitlement is granted rolling it back is difficult. i don't really blame donald trump in the sense that a lot of people are saying he should have been out there selling it more. look, yeah, it might have been nice, clearly though i think the problem is, it's not that he should have been out there lobbying people more. it's that fundamentally, this was not an after thought. they thought they could do this quick. this was never a priority for donald trump or republicans.

>> he talked about it a lot on the campaign trail. >> but it wasn't -- he outsourced this. this is not -- none of these plans, the house, senate plan none of them were trumpian about taking care of everybody. they weren't pop uist. this was paul ryan and mitch mcconnell. i think he basically outsourced it. it never came from him. and i think that's the fundamental send. >> kirsten, should he have run making promises we're going to repeal and replace and it's going to be an immediate switchover? >> he should have known what was going on. i think he was probably mislead by some people around him like reince priebus should have known better, tom price. there are people who probably should have told him that actually this can't be done in a week, it can't be done right when you come into office. we don't have a plan that we have consensus around. there are too many different ideas within the republican

caucus. it's a highly dysfunctional caucus. it's not -- you have people who are absolutely not wanting to compromise. when you have the democrats who had a lot of disagreements but nancy pelosi was able to bring people around on their disagreements, you know, people would give and take. on the republican side, this doesn't happen. you have rand paul saying either you do it my way or i'm not going to support you. how do you get anything done with a caucus like that. >> conservatives had seven years to come up with a coherent policy that would work. an alternative to replace obamacare. they did not do the work. and donald trump did outsource it to them. they weren't ready. he just ran for president a year or two earlier. they had all this time. >> ken? >> anderson, look, let's, we're talking about promises. i'm hearing about promises. i agree with maggie if a bill hit the president's desk on this subject, i would be shocked if he didn't sign it. whether i liked or not, he would

sign it. that's what he promised to do by and large. republicans in congress for seven years have pounded the podium, have tossed the red meat and made a promise to the american people not just their base, to the american people that they would repeal obamacare. that was what they stood for in these elections in 2010 when they took over the house in 2014 when he took over the senate. and you heard donald trump saying it in 2016 as he won the presidency. this is a promise made and it needs to be a promise kept. >> i want to thank everybody. up next, the inside story of the powerful partnership of president trump and steve bannon, the focus of a really interesting new book. joshua green shares incredible details from the campaign trail involving steve bannon's philosophy and how the idea of a wall on the border was born.

plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets. i'm leaving you, wesley. but why? you haven't noticed me in two years. i was in a coma. well, i still deserve appreciation. 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. it's a miracle. i can walk again. go back to your room, susan lucci.

it's a miracle. i can walk again. (splashing) - ugh, that's old. - the milk? - no, my credit score's a month out of date. - yeah, your credit score can change by 100 points in one week. that's why you need wallethub. it updates daily. - [narrator] join wallethub now for free.

tonight we're learning new details on the chief's strategist steve bannon who holds a lot of influence over the white house agenda. ban on has his own share of critics. no one disputes this. the president's former campaign manager did help him get victory. overseeing one of the political upsets ever, bannon's own path to the white house is incredible. the focus of a new book reveals a lot of interesting details from the campaign trail, even on election night. the book is devil's bargain.

storming the presidency by joshua green. i spoke to him earlier. so, the narrative that surrounds bannon, i think he's on the cover of time he was called the great manipulator, he's running the show there. how does that jibe with reality? >> bannon had a lot of influence. i don't think he was ever the puppet master that he was portrayed as being. what he really was was trump's ideologue and pit bull. the portrayal enraged trump because eventually it cost bannon a seat on the national security council. he got put in the dog house. didn't get let out until a month ago. >> that was because of the public perception? >> everybody -- yeah, trump does not want tomorrow anyone co-starring alongside him in his presidency, particularly not somebody who is seen as pulling trump's puppet strings. >> right. like when he said to comey in that meeting, you're more famous than me. that sort of seems like --

>> right. it's like a warning. >> he said it once to jared kushner, but jared kushner seems to have survived so far. >> he's married in the family. a little harder to get rid of >> the political pairing of these two, you go into it a lot in the book. they're from such kind of different backgrounds. >> they are, and yet they have a lot of similarities. bannon was a wall street deal guy. he was a hollywood movie maker. he understood how to talk too big shot moguls. if you're a women studies major at wellesley, steve bannon is not going to be your cup of tea. but if you are a big shot developer like trump is, then steve bannon speaks your language, and he had experience around people like ted turner and michael ovit. so, he knew how to talk to trump when he met him back in 2011, 2012, in a way that other people around trump in the political world didn't. >> unlike trump he has a very firm political philosophy. he has a view of the world, and you write also just in terms of his views, he focuses on

narrative truth rather than factual truth. >> there is a great quote from one of bannon's ex-employees, guy named ben shapiro. had a falling out with him and left. he really put his finger on it. he said bannon's allegiance is to narrative truth not to actual truth. >> the actual facts. >> exactly. >> as long as you get the narrative. >> the narrative, the attitude. that's really what bannon and breitbart were all about. i think that's true of trump also. and i think trump saw in bannon a guy who had a clear and coherent set of politics that meshed with trump's own impulses. and a lot of times i think bannon may be the only guy in the white house who has a true north star. trump doesn't always follow his lead. doesn't do it nearly as much now as he did in the campaign. bannon has an idea where he wants to steer trump. >> you have some fascinating details. election night in trump tower, when the president found out that he had won. >> trump was so superstitious that he had not written a

victory speech or a concession speech, which is traditionally what a president will do, staff will have it written ahead of time. bannon, stephen miller, the guys in charge -- just had never brought it up. bannon didn't even think he was going to walk out on stage and concede formally if he lost. but in the event that didn't come into play and so they went upstairs to trump's penthouse and sat there, and on election night at about 11:00 p.m., hashed out a draft of the speech that trump walked out a few hours later and gave, accepting the presidency of the united states. >> there was also a moment with chris christie that night. >> there was. a lot of people have wondered how is it that chris christie, a guy who is really first major figure to endorse trump -- >> it's easy to forget how close they were during the campaign. >> exactly. and what an earthquake it was when christie came out and delivered the surprise endorsement of trump in dallas. it really shifted the politics of the republican primary. but christie had been irking a lot of people in trump's inner

circle. trump advisors told me that christie was smothering the president and on election night christie had somehow arranged with obama's people that if trump won, obama was supposed to call christie's cell phone and he would hand it to trump, and trump didn't like the fact, a, that christie was inserting himself in this pivotal moment, and b, he's a germ-o-phobe. he lashed out at him in words we can't use on cnn. that was in many ways the end of chris christie. >> pretty quickly. >> that moment and the days that followed, yeah, he wound oup going from being in charge of the transition and maybe ticketed for a job like attorney general, some high-level job in the trump administration to being completely on the outs, sent back to new jersey. >> also, the wall which, you know, is such a huge part of the trump campaign, you have fascinating details about the origin of the idea. >> the story of the wall is such a great story because it really gives insight into how trump

operates as a politician. the idea for the wall didn't come from donald trump, it came from sam lundqvist berg and roger stone two long-time advisors to trump who back in 2013, 2014 wanted to keep trump focused on the issue of immigration because they thought it was a powerful one. but they knew that trump's attention always wandered. and so they came up with this idea of the wall just as a device to keep trump focused on the issue of immigration. >> to remind him to speak of that. >> to remind him to speak. if you can plant that seed in his mind he can riff on it. at first trump didn't seem excited. he wound up going to iowa giving a speech. he tried it out, got a great response from the crowd, and did what trump does best. he started riffing on it. said, i'm going to build a wall and nobody builds like trump. i'm going to build a wall in mexico is going to pay foyer for it. >> that was a riff. >> that was what trump does so well. he senses what it is that works with his audience and he develops it further and further and further. by the end of the campaign, it