Skip to main content

tv   Wolf  CNN  July 19, 2017 10:00am-11:00am PDT

10:00 am
fe. hi there, i'm breeaianna ker in for wolf blitzer. it's 7:00 p.m. in hamburg, germany and 8:00 p.m. in moscow right now. we're watching major developments on two stories right now. the future of health care reform is on the menu during the luncheon at the white house right now. the president brought 50 senators to the white house after the failure of the gop health care bill. he said that the gop senators must keep their promise to america. and the meeting between president trump and vladimir
10:01 am
putin happened after their scheduled meeting at the g-20 summit. we're going to tell you why the meeting is raising concerns and what the white house is saying about it. and just a brief conversation at the end of dinner, that's how the white house describes this second meeting between president trump and vladimir putin. but officials say the discussion lasted an hour. and the only translator available was russia's translator. and there are new developments about donald trump jr.'s meeting with a russian lawyer. you hear the white house, they're downplaying this second meeting, a substantive conversation with vladimir putin. >> the white house is saying it was simply a social gathering, it's just something that happens
10:02 am
and during the course of a dinner that all world leaders were having, but the meeting i'm told by white house officials was just over an hour, but it happened after the two had their official meeting at the end of the g-20 summit in germany. after the dinner, at some point, the u.s. president got up and walked over to the russian president and just started talking to him. the reason this is raising some concern is that there weren't any other u.s. officials who were there to watch this conversation, take note of this conversation, so it's not exactly clear what was said, something can always be sort of misconstrued and so it was only disclosed last evening by the white house a week and a half after that first meeting, so it's certainly racing some eyebrows, brianna.
10:03 am
>> and raising eyebrows, especially right because there was only a russian translator there, so there wasn't an american translator, right? >> and the reason is this, the president had a translator, but it was someone who was speaking japanese, because that was his original seat at the dinner, he was sitting next to the japanese prime minister shinzo abe. so he was only using the russian translator. so that is what is raising some concerns here that there was not a u.s. official or a state department person on hand overhearing and translating this conversation. so i expect this will be one of the topics of conversation at an offcamera discussion this afternoon. >> i want to get some perspective on all of this with
10:04 am
ranking congressman adam schiff. congressman, you heard about this report of this second meeting, it happened during a dinner where the president walked over to vladimir putin and they spoke during the g-20 summit. the white house is calling this perfectly normal and part of a president's duties, of course there wasn't an american translator there. what is your reaction to this. >> i don't think there's anything normal about the president having an hour-long meeting with vladimir putin outside anyone in the administration to know what the president said, what the president represented. . i would like to know, i think most americans would, did the president raise the issue of the sanctions that the president wants to do away with. did he talk about anywhere willingness to give back these -- so question have no
10:05 am
idea what was said in the conversation, it's hard to imagine a conversation going on that long that involves superficial things, how's the grand kid, how's golf at mar-a-lago, an hour-long conversation inevitably was going to involve substantial matters. but lost you have the prospect here of the most isolated ruler in the g-20, that is putin, and now the second most itsolated leader, the president meeting with the russian president without being witnessed by any of our national officials and that's troubling. >> do you think it was inappropriate for the president to even go over and make -- i mean this was an hour, so we're not talking about small talk, so was it inappropriate for the president to approach vladimir putin, is it the length of the meeting? what's your major concern here? >> i have several concerns here.
10:06 am
obviously what happened in the first meeting, rex tillerson, and whether he broached the subject, how he broached the subject, and in that first conversation that he would ask putin if he was responsible for the hacking of the election, and that says that the president doesn't know, he doesn't believe our own intelligence agencies, he shouldn't have been asking putin, he should have been telling putin, we know what you did. and then he takes a second meeting which he doesn't disclose to anyone. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you, can you stand by for me? i want to listen now to president trump, he's just finished ---or this is a video from a meeting that ended just a short time ago. >> i intend to keep my promise and i know you will too.
10:07 am
since 2013, obamacare premiums have skyrocketed. in alaska, they went up over 200% recently. we know that. in arizona, they have been up 118%. and those states are good compared to some of the numberings that are coming out. despite the promise that premiums would decrease by $2,500 on average, they have actually increased by almost $3,000 and even much more than that in some cases. it's crushing the middle class, and the families of the middle class, it's frankly crushing our country. obamacare was a big lie, you can keep your doctor, lie. you can keep your plan, lie. it was a lie, directly from the president. you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan, 28 times he said it. 28 times. and it was a lie and he knew it was.
10:08 am
now it's hurting this countrier repairably. 365 million americans chose to pay a fine to the irs, instead of buying insurance, the famous mandate. we will pay not to take the insurance. people don't understand that. they don't even understand what it is or what it represents. if obamacare is not repealed in 2018 over 1,300 counties in the united states will have only one insurer. 40 counties will have absolutely no coverage in the exchange. and that number will grow rapidly. and i think those numbers are extremely conservative. i think they're very low. i've been here just six months. i'm ready to act. i have pen in hand, believe me, i'm sitting in that office, i have pen in hand. you never had that before.
10:09 am
you know for seven years, you had an easy route, we'll repeal, we'll replace, and he's never going to sign it, but i'm signing it. so it's a little bit different. but i'm ready to act, for seversevere severe -- seven years you promised that you would repeal obamacare. people are hurting, inaction is not an option, and frankly i don't think we should leave town unless we have a health insurance plan, unless we can give our people great health care. because we're close, we're very close, the other night i was surprised when i heard a couple of my friends, my friends, they really were and are. they might not be very much longer, but that's okay. i think i have to get them back. that's right. no, you didn't go out there. this was the one we were worried about, you weren't there. you're going to be.
10:10 am
he wants to remain a senator, doesn't he? okay, and i think the people of your state, which i know very well, i think they're going to appreciate whenever you do. any senator who votes against starting debate is really telling america that you're fine with obamacare. but being fine with obamacare isn't an option for another reason, because it's gone, it's failed, it's not going to be around. we pay hundreds of millions of dollars a month in subsidy, that the courts don't even want us to pay. and when those payments stop, it stops immediately. it doesn't take two years, three years, one year, its stops immediately. on the other hand and i have to say this, a yes vote will let senators debate the future of health care and suggest different ways to improve the bill. and we're going to do that today. that's what we're going to do at lunch. we are so close, the way i looked at it, we have no
10:11 am
democrat help, they're obstructionists. that's all they're good at is obstruction. they have no ideas, they've gone so far left, they're looking for single payer, that's what they want. but single payer will bankrupt our country, because it's more than we take in for just health care. so single payer is never going to work, and they have no idea what the consequence will be, and it will be horrible, horrible health care, you'll wait in line for weeks to see a doctor. we're going to expand the health savings accounts, the hsas, toss help pay for health coverage. we're going to give funding and control back to the states, stabilizing the exchanges so those preexisting conditions are protected. you listen to schumer, and he didn't see it, most of the
10:12 am
people in this room never saw it. and he was saying, death, death, everyone's going to die. this isn't just a good plan, this is a great plan, this is better than obamacare, and more generous than obamacare. a health care plan that's really on an unsustainable path and let the states spend the dollars freely. and as a smaller entity, the states will be able to take better care of a person with a bad back, with a bad prognosis, with a problem. i would like the federal government to focus on the middle east, to focus on north korea, to focus on things where we have very big problems. the states can do a better job than the federal government when it comes to health care. and that's what we're letting you do. and we're committing $45 billion
10:13 am
to help combat the opiod epidemic, and some states in particular like that. my message today is very simple. we have to stay here, we shouldn't leave town, we have to hammer this out and not leave town. the repeal was fine. but we ought to get more than -- i think the people of this country need more than a repeal. they need a repeal and a replace. and we were very, very close. and then little things happened, but now we're very close again. we have to get it there. now with john cornyn the other night, we had a couple of things i put down on paper, i'm just going to read them really fast, but these are some of the things that are done, the democrats are always selling their plan, but they don't do that anymore. they don't talk about obamacare
10:14 am
anymore because it's failed and they know it. so they're selling their plan and we never sell our plan. if we're weak on anything it's letting people know how good it was. so we wrote down these few things. repeals the individual mandate. how big is that? where people are paying not to have insurance. nobody ever talking about that, repeals job killing employer mandate. how big is that? will substantially lower premiums, and remember this, cross country lines, cross state lines. where you have -- where it's almost impossible for insurance companies to compete in different states, we can't because of unfortunately the 60 votes put that here, but it's going to come very soon, we're putting it in a popular bill and it will come. that will come and your premiums
10:15 am
will be down 60% to 7 0%, nobody talks about that, we're going to cross state lines, and you'll have insurance companies bidding, you'll have forms of insurance that you don't even know about right now, because that's the way it works. there's going to be tremendous competition. so your premiums will be substantially lower. repeals burdensome taxes, big, we'll restore choices. the bill also provides for expanded coverage option. so you can have a tremendously expanded coverage and options. we'll stabilize insurance markets. the markets by the way right now are gone, they're a mess. depending on what happens here, the next couple of weeks, the insurance companies are all three i fleeing. we'll protect preexisting condition coverage.
10:16 am
the democrats say you're giving it up. but we'll allow the use of pretax dollars to pay premiums, we'll expand the hsas, we'll provide better coverage for low income more thaneamericans. l low -- better coverage for low income americans, we're going to spend more money to make sure that everybody is protected. we'll provide better coverage for low income americans. we'll improve medical outcomes for low income americans. puts medicaid on a sustainable path which it's not on right now, levels the playing field when it comes to federal dollars, reforms major entitlements, now a principal driver of the trillion dollar debt that we have and we'll
10:17 am
redistrict authority from washington, d.c. to the state where is i have already said where they can innovate with best practices and they'll be able to take care of people better. we can repeal, but we should repeal and replace and we shouldn't leave town until this is complete, until this bill is on my desk and until we all go over to the oval office, i'll sign it and we can celebrate for the american people, thank you very much, thank you. [ applause ] >> all right, that -- those were some pretty extraordinary comments from president trump, some rather long remarks and it was quite the scolding for
10:18 am
senate republicans after the health care bill collapsed in the senate. he said you have had an easy route for seven years, vote to repeal and replace and the president would veto it. and he also said they can't just repeal, they need to repeal and replace, which is sort of back and forth that we have heard from them. i want to bring adam schiff back to talk about this. he said democrats have been obstructionists. do you see any point for democrats or even an opportunity here for democrats who have not seen an avenue and i don't think politically have wanted to work with donald trump on this to perhaps do something, should there be a plan for an overture from your party? >> we have made overtures all
10:19 am
along. what we have said we want to dismantle the health care plan, but we're not willing to throw 20 million to 30 million people off their health insurance and what the president proposes is to do exactly that, to cut medicare and to cut medicaid, when he says we want to get rid of the requirement that people buy health insurance, he's saying that we're not going to effectively cover people who have preexisting conditions, because if you don't have to buy health insurance when you're healthy, you're only going to buy it when you're sick. that's why the republicans have had -- we're willing to work with the president, we have always been willing to work with him to improve the system, not to jettison tens of millions of
10:20 am
people from their health care. >> it is difficult, as you hear him making all those big promises about what this plan will do and we know that the plan does not do those things, but what has been the genuine overture from the democrats to do something that is within your realm of acceptability, not jettisoning the individual mandate, but what things do you want to see that would improve obamacare. >> there's lots of ways we can explore introducing more competition into the exchanges. >> but what's the overture to president trump to do something? >> the overture is if you want to fix some of the problems in the affordable care act, we acknowledge there are problems there, there are not enough plans in the exchanges, we're willing to help change that, but we're not willing to be
10:21 am
complicit in booting millions of people off their health care. all of us acknowledge that a bill that was written six years ago affecting -- you can't say we have passed health care reform now we're done, but because we have had this endless fight to repeal, we have not had the opportunity to make the fixes we should. so our offer to him before now and in the future is, when you're ready to improve the existing health care system, we are ready, we are eager, but we won't be part of kicking people off their health care so that you can give rich people a tax cut. >> congressman, i do want to get back to russia, that's what we were originally talk about here, and we're learning more about this eighth person who was in this meeting with donald trump jr. and paul manafort, they met with a russian lawyer, a senior
10:22 am
vice president at a company that was 00 by the russian businessman who initiated scheduling this meeting. what is your reaction to this news? >> look, i think it's very significant who was at the meeting and how it was set up. and you see now all these contradictory statements of the person that he sent to the meeting, and who set up the meeting and why. plainly i think the oligarch wanted his person there, wanted him present because they were going to deliver some damaging information about hillary clinton and the oligarch wanted credit for setting up the meeting and delivering the goods and we have also had contradictions now by the russian lobbyist who says in effect effect -- here we have one
10:23 am
person, who has a history of opening bank accounts that the gao has expected of -- russian hackers to steal emails and addition credit a rival company, and then you have a lawyer with a history of working to repeal u.s. sanctions against russia for human rights abuses. that's who's in this meeting where the promise is to deliver dirt. so to me, it's very significant who was sitting around that table. >> you and natasha who you just mentioned, she is willing to appear before russian state media. and we should mention this has a translation on screen.
10:24 am
>> okay, so she says certainly with conditions, she wants to guarantee her safety, she would testify before the senate, this is the attorney who met with donald trump jr. in the hopes of getting information on hillary clinton. does the house committee have any desire to meet with her? >> we expect any that are willing to cooperate, particularly any of the russians who would have to come to this country, we would welcome their
10:25 am
cooperation. but i think a key part of this interview also is she claims not to know who set up this meeting or why. we know from the emails why this meeting was set up. and to suggest as she does that she doesn't know these other perts, we're to imagine that somehow she flies to moscow to this meeting with without any idea who set it up or for what purpose. there's probably an effort on the russian end as we speak to get their stories straight. but you heard from the russian oligarch who said that -- a lot of contradictions that our committee will want wanting to work through with these witnesses. >> you called for the russian-american lobyist at this meeting, the man you just mentioned with sort of
10:26 am
questionable tactics in his job as a lobbyist, you want him to testify before the senate committee. >> he'll be invited to testify as well and we'll want to seek any documents he has. he has said publicly, that the russian lawyer gave a plastic folder of information to donald jr. or the other participants there. i think of even greater significance is, what happened before this meeting, what are they referring to when they say russian efforts to help president trump. that sounds like preexisting work, we'll also want to know what happened after this meeting as follow-up.
10:27 am
and the suggestion by donald jr. that the end of the summer would be the ideal time to release the dirt. and that coincides with the dnc hacking. >> you think there would be coordination with -- later in summer meaning closer to the election, you actually think that it goes as far as to be tied to the release of emails, is that something that makes sense or is that something you have evidence of in your capaci capacity -- >> i think you have heard this from the former cia agents that you have had on the program, is russian trade craft would employ this kind of means to see if a campaign is receptive to a relationship that they get something of value, and that is
10:28 am
dirt on their opponent, in exchange for something they want which is repeal of the minisky act. a and that may be contained in those emails that were dumped. but it delivers on the offer of help that was implicit in these emails. >> adam schiff, thank you for talking to us, and up next, more on the president's comments on health care and his message to republican senators, stay with us. ♪ that's why there's trintellix, a prescription medication for depression. trintellix may help you take a step forward in improving your depression. tell your healthcare professional right away if your depression worsens, or you have unusual changes in mood, behavior or thoughts of suicide. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens and young adults. do not take with maois.
10:29 am
tell your healthcare professional about your medications, including migraine, psychiatric and depression medications, to avoid a potentially life-threatening condition. increased risk of bleeding or bruising may occur, especially if taken with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin or blood thinners. manic episodes or vision problems may occur in some people. may cause low sodium levels. the most common side effects were nausea, constipation and vomiting. trintellix had no significant impact on weight in clinical trials. ask your healthcare professional about trintellix.
10:30 am
10:31 am
dad: flash drives? yup. that's dad taking care of business. laptop setup? yup. but who takes care of dad? office depot, office max. this week, all hp ink, buy one get one 30% off.
10:32 am
♪ taking care of business and welcome back. moments ago we just heard from president donald trump, it was pretty extraordinary, the comments he expressed before the cameras and senate republicans about the health care plan that has collapsed. >> for seven years you promised the american people that you would repeal obamacare. people are hurting, inaction is not an option and frankly i don't think we should leave town unless we have a health
10:33 am
insurance plan, unless we can give our people great health care. because we're close. we're very close. >> i want to discuss this lunch at the white house at length here. i'm joined by david gergen. cnn political analyst and former advisors to presidents reagan and nixon. this was by my count around 13 minutes. these were comments at length and these were strident, i think you can say. >> the only thing i can think listening is where has this guy been in where has he been? this guy meaning the person who is the occupant of the white house, who ran on and won in large part repealing and replacing obamacare, who hasn't been this guy, using the bully
10:34 am
pulpit, in the way that the bully pulpit is supposed to be used by the president of the united states. why the subject is good for their constituents and americans and a little bit of arm twigs i twisting and some thinly veiled political threat. i think the tact that he took was, we all promisesed to do this, and if you vote even against proceeding to this bill, you're going to go back on your promise. that's certainly the message that you're hearing in the halls of congress. but the other message is where is the leadership, the leadership in the senate, saying thing like the president just did and the oval office. so today, somebody got to him. >> so there was this tone of
10:35 am
leadership, but i want to know what you think gloria, he was talking about just repealing, and then we heard him there say you need to repeal and replace. so he's been all over the map on this. so that's n ee's not been consi. >> he went from repeal and replace, to repeal, to just let the thing fail, now he's back to repeal and replace. i agree with dana. somebody got to him and said, look, you have to lay out how this bill helps the american people, number one, who's been able to do that? nobody for the republican party, they have not had a message. >> it almost seems like no one has tried. >> the president hasn't tried. the president should be out there selling his health care bill. he read from a sheet of paper how this will be better for medicaid, how this will be better if you're older or if you
10:36 am
have preexisting conditions. he went down this list he did what a president normally does. and we're like whe whoa. he did this, so somebody told him you have to do this, and then somebody said to him don't leave town. this has to get done. so this is going to upset the apple cart a little bit. because right now, the reality is they don't have the votes. >> because, david gergen, if you leave town without getting the vote, and that has been our expectation, congress is going to go for its summer recess, this is dead in the water. but if republican senators go home against the demands of their republican president, what does that mean for them? >> well, they may go home against the wishes of a republican president. but at the same time, 20% of the
10:37 am
american people support this bill, i mean most people don't. so they go home against the wishes of their constituents. they're caught in the middle. the notion of the president cajoling, even bullying, we have seen this before, in fact this seemed like linden johnson than any president we have seen in a long time. but he's late in the game. the leadership he has shown on this issue so far has been palfrey, it simply has not measured up to the standards of presidents who have big things to do, they go to the -- they work with the doctors, the hospitals and others and think haven't done any of that from the white house. now they have to whip the senators in line. it may be too late. it may be too difficult for the people who have come out against
10:38 am
repeal and replace to dial it back. >> is it too late? >> it could now because as david said, the politics of this, the republicans who are against the substance of what he just discussed from susan collins to dean heller to others are now out on a limb saying they're opposed to it and them capitulating might not be the best thing for them politically. the president did go out on a limb politically, by putting the squeeze on these guys, and the open question is a president with the all-time low approval rating has the juice. >> we have some breaking ne ini out of the supreme court. cnn justice reporter has the details for us. >> reporter: in a partial loss for president trump's embattled travel ban, the supreme court just moments ago has decided to leave in place a lower court
10:39 am
decision that exempted grandparents and others cousins, aunts, uncles as close family members from the travel ban. the court also ruled that the ninth circuit court of appeals should continue to review whether refugees who are being assisted by volunteer resettlement agencies should be allowed into the country. so the fight is not over, so for now, grand parents, the big category that had been at issue for the last several weeks, can come in the country. >> grandparents, and refugees who are under consideration you said by organizations who are in charge of, sort of, identifying and processing them. so where do they stand? >> reporter: it is one of those issues that was rather vague coming out of the supreme court d decision. and the supreme court said that refugee resettlement
10:40 am
organizations can't reach out to refugees in order to -- this lower court judge just last week said wait a minute, if they have a close connection to a volunteer agency, that's sufficient to count as the type of close relationship no the supreme court was envisioning. so they should be allowed to come in, now the supreme court is saying we should take a moment to look at that and then it can come to us. >> thank you for clarifying that decision on the travel ban coming out of the supreme court. >> and now we're going to talk about the meeting between jared kushner, paul manafort and the russian lawyer. mmmm.
10:41 am
10:42 am
mmmm. mmmm... ugh. nothing spoils a moment like heartburn. try new alka-seltzer ultra strength heartburn relief chews. it's fast, powerful relief with no chalky taste. [ sings high note ] ultra strength, new from alka-seltzer. enjoy the relief.
10:43 am
10:44 am
hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote.
10:45 am
>> she says she's ro ee's ready. the key committee on the senate side, the senate intelligence committee, to hear from her as well. yesterday senator richard burr, the republican chairman of the committee, told me he did want to speak to the people involved in the meeting, perhaps in a public session, and today, senator mark warner said he too would like to know more about this meeting, and hear too about
10:46 am
this russian lawyer. here's what he said. >> i would like to talk with her. and i also find, just curious is how both the size and content of this meeting seems to change on a 24-hour basis. but it bothers me. >> brianna, some republicans are also raise -- in detail and up front, exactly all the meetings that did occur between donald trump associates and white house officials and russians, there are a number of republicans that are just frankly frustrated, and continuing to put them on the defensive. marco rubio, the republican that sits on the senate intelligence committee, told us today that it makes sense for the white house to come clean and detail every
10:47 am
contact that took place between trump officials and russian associates. >> they should just put it out once and for all. >> the question is why isn't the white house doing this, they will be able to disclose more of these meetings, we know that a number of these requests had been made asking for more meetings from jared kushner and see if they result in any subpoenas going forward. >> and cnn has identified the eighth person in a secret meeting last summer, including donald trump jr. and a russian lawyer, his name is ike pavalaze. you can see him back before he was president trump in 2014. he's a long time u.s. citizen. and he works for a russian
10:48 am
billionaire who has ties to both vladimir putin who has ties to president trump. with me, cnn chief political correspondent dana bash and also with us, we have cnn national security analyst and former assistant secretary, he's a former federal prosecutor who has worked closely with special counsel robert mueller. okay, so, gloria, a man who has been looking into his past. >> carl lavin, a democrat was looking into the subject of money laundering, and what they discovered was this businessman was somebody who laundered money, who set up accounts on behalf of the russians, and about $1.4 billion was moved to
10:49 am
those accounts into this country. it was something congress was looking at because they then established a policy that banks need to know the true owners of these accounts when you open them. so when his name came out, everybody started looking at this 2000 investigation. and started connecting the dots and i'm sure they would like to hear from him. >> how many accounts? >> 2,000. >> we're not talking about the year 2,000, we're talking about 2,000 accounts. >> this guy's attorney says that the special counsel attorneys are seeking investigations from his clients. you have worked closely with mueller, what does this tell you about where the investigation is? >> well, i thought from the beginning of this investigation, this was going to turn in various points into a money
10:50 am
laundering investigation. you've got this fellow here who set up these corporations in delaware who were legal to be established, but who provided a conduit to get about we know that manafort is under inquiry for the way that he purchased real estate in new york, cash purchases in a way that finsen is worried about. we know that treasury has sent all sorts of data from the financial intelligence unit of treasury over to mueller and to the investigative committees on possibility of money laundering, so all of this tells me is that -- and you look at the staff of people that mueller has hired, all of whom have money laundering and corruption inquiry experience, this is a money laundering investigation in large measure. it may not be exactly what the donald trump jr. meeting is all
10:51 am
about but on a broad basis, i think this is what robert mueller is looking at. >> you've got a russian lawyer with ties to the kremlin, russian-american lobbyist and ex-soviet army officer, ike kaveladze, a translator, a british music publicist. is it possible that this promise of damaging info on hillary clinton was just a ruse but then the main objective was to lobby against u.s. sanctions against russia? >> so, i don't buy the theory that donald trump jr. is unsophisticated or just a kid or that even this entire investigation can be explained away if, you know, because the trumps were new to politics. i mean, just look at the subject heading of the e-mail regarding, you know, clinton, that donald trump jr. was a willing recipient of this, right? so that -- >> but could that have been -- i guess my point is, it does seem, yes, he was, but is it possible that he thought he was getting something and really it was, on the end, coming from whether
10:52 am
it's russians or folks in that meeting who had ties to russians, that they were thinking, we're going to sort of worm our way in, dangling this idea of information about hillary clinton, but really, we're here to talk about sanctions. >> well, i would buy -- i understand that argument. i guess it would seem more convincing if there wasn't a whole bunch of other evidence of these, you know, strange meetings, of russian influence in the election, of all of our intelligence agencies say that this this was, in fact, russia's involvement with the election. in other words, this meeting did not appear in isolation. it appeared at a certain time with certain people. and so, that's the one piece. the other ask the failure to disclose. so we've gone through months and months of failure to disclose this information. the russians know that the trumps are not disclosing it. donald trump jr. and jared kushner. they, therefore, can use that against donald trump jr. and jared kushner. so we have just this -- all this activity. so while i agree with senator marco rubio, that it would be great to just get all the facts
10:53 am
out, i'm also of the mind that maybe it's too late. that actually, that what we're seeing is a conspiracy sort of unwinding because of mueller's investigation. and you're not going to get clarity until we're in a court of law. >> dana, when you look at republicans on capitol hill, how are they reacting to what -- it's almost like a clown car, right? it's like all these people were in this meeting and we're learning who they are. what is their reaction? >> incredibly frustrated. incredibly frustrated that it is one day after the next after the next of the drip, drip, drip, and in fact, that's a term and a phrase that some of the republican senators who are even on the intelligence committee have used. beyond frustrated. not just because on the substance of it, as those who are investigating, you know, kind of feel like they can't get a handle on it, but obviously also politically, because they have a harder time defending the
10:54 am
president, and most importantly, they're having a harder time getting things done that they promised that they would do, that they hoped that they would do. the health care issue is case in point. you know, the president has been quite distracted, focusing a lot on his tweets and elsewhere on health care and today was the first time we saw him do that and not focus a lot on russia. >> he sure has. dana, gloria, juliet and michael, thank you so much to all of you. just ahead, o.j. simpson ready to make his case for parole. we're going to preview what to expect and his chances at an expect and his chances at an early release next. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com
10:55 am
10:56 am
in less than 24 hours, o.j. simpson is facing a nevada parole board and trying to convince them to let him out of prison. the 70-year-old simpson has been
10:57 am
locked away for nearly nine years for taking part in an armed robbery and kidnapping, and ashley banfield, the host of "primetime justice" on hln is live in carson city, nevada. what are the chances that this parole board says, okay, you can go free? >> reporter: they're great. i know a lot of people probably don't want to hear that, but the truth of the matter is, o.j. simpson has been a model inmate. he's had no write-ups. he's gotten no trouble with those guards or those other inmates. he's had perfect behavior. then on top of that, he's done everything else an inmate is supposed to do. he's taken programs, he's done the education, he's got a good case and also he already got parole from the same four people who are going to be in this building behind me tomorrow. five of the 12 charges he was paroled on several years ago, the 7 that are left, i think it's a real lock that he's going to be able to walk. not tomorrow, though.
10:58 am
if they say yes tomorrow, it means october 1. what's fascinating, though, is the reason we know a lot about his behavior is because there have been people inside talking, and one of them is a guard. jeffery felix, who said he befriended o.j., guarded him for seven years, walked the track with him every day, had heart to hearts and said he's the one that o.j. may have come closest to confessing what actually happened with ron goldman and nicole brown-simpson. here's what he said. >> he said something to you about wishing he had done it all over again, and you asked him what, meaning, done what all over again, and he answered you, quote, you know what. you know what. what was he referring to when he said, you know what? >> well, he was referring to the murders. i think the way he was saying it, he might have been copping to the murders. i think that's the closest anyone's ever been to o.j. confessing to the murder, and that's the closest he'll ever be
10:59 am
to confessing. >> reporter: should say that o.j.'s attorney says that everything he says is rubbish. look, it matches with a lot of other inside reports. real quickly before i let you go here, i do want to tell you that tonight on my hln show at 8:00, we're going to have fred goldman's attorney on and what's so critical about that $33 million judgment that, you know, that financial settlement that o.j. still owes, this is going to impact, if he walks out of love lock prison and starts life all over again, the goldmans are coming after him. he's going to have a financial prison afterwards and there's so many things that we're going let you know about tonight that the goldmans have and have their eyes on. we'll let you know about it tonight. >> yeah, it's really been their mission now for years since they lost their son. we're looking forward to hearing about that, ashleigh banfield, thank you. do not miss this special coverage of the parole hearing. it all begins at 1:00 p.m.
11:00 am
tomorrow on cnn. that's it for me. i'll be back with you at 5:00 p.m. eastern on "the situation room." for our international viewers, amanpour is next. for our north american viewers, "newsroom" with brooke baldwin "newsroom" with brooke baldwin starts right now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com thank you so much. good to be with you all. i'm brooke baldwin. you're watching cnn. let's get to the breaking news, shall we? 24 hours after their health care bill collapsed, president trump hosting a lot of frustrated republicans at the white house and demanding they delay vacation until a new plan is in place. only problem is, it's not entirely clear whatsoever what that plan actually is. first, here's the president as he walked into the lunch. >> we're close. i think we're a lot closer than people understand. and we have to pull it through. so important. but we're in