viewers in the united states and around the world. more heads rolling in the trump administration, in any other white house, or workplace, anthony scaramucci would be ousted for his uncensored trashing of his white house colleagues. instead one of his targets, reince priebus is out as chief of staff. replaced by homeland security secretary john kelly. what does this say about president trump's management style. and the president is on a twitter tear, trying to make republicans and the filibuster rule, do they have to listen? or is he starting to lose his sway? it's called the goldwater rule, since 1973, it has prevented psychiatrists from diagnosing or commenting on public figures they haven't examined. but a group of doctors is saying that's infringing on their free speech.

who's right? and this week, the president tweeted that transgender people cannot serve in the armed forces. i'll talk to a former navy surgeon who routinely performs gender confirmation surgery and who herself is transgender. but first, what a week of intrigue and drama behind the scenes at the white house. the latest being the ouster of the chief of staff, reince priebus. who would have thought that one week after sean spicer quit, he would look like a soothesayer. spicer refused to continue to serve as press secretary once president trump named anthony scaramucci as communications director. trump reportedly thought. things got heated pretty fast after politico ran a story revealing the contents of scaramucci's public financial disclosure report. he tweeted wednesday night a blistering attack on leakers, pointing the finger at former white house chief of staff, reince priebus. only there was no leak.

the next morning i interviewed lorraine wooler, who wrote the politico story on my serious xm radio program. when i asked her if priebus had leaked it to her, here's what she said -- >> did reince priebus give you anthony scaramucci's financial disclosure form? >> the xm bank gave me the financial disclosure form. >> because? you requested it? >> because i asked for it. >> okay. so -- >> there was no leak. >> so she said she got scaramucci's data the old-fashioned way. by asking for it. he later deleted that tweet. then ryan lizza of the "new yorker" reported that scaramucci was having dinner with trump and fox news sean hannity. friday night the communications director blasted priebus and steve bannon in language not suitable even for cable television. they printed the exact words in the "new york times," first time

that i had seen some of those in the gray lady. anywhere else in the workplace scaramucci's comments would be an immediate fireable offense. instead they are exhibit a. to exactly how numb we have become to the new normal at the trump white house. president trump ran forrous touting his skills as a businessman. while here's my question. in what business environment would scaramucci's words about co-workers be permitted? and now that priebus has resigned, what about scaramucci's emass cue lags of steve bannon? will he follow spicer and priebus out the west wing door? let's drill down on the president's management style. joining me is robert kawasaki, he co-wrote two books with donald trump "midas touch" and "why we want you to be rich." and vivek wadwa, distinguished

fellow as carnegie university. a syndicated columnist for the "washington post." robert, let me begin with you. by not reacting, by not reprimanding scaramucci, isn't the president owning his words? isn't he embracing what he says about then white house colleagues both reince priebus and steve bannon? >> that's a tough call, because trump is trump, as you know. i've worked with him for about 12 years now. and i'm sometimes shocked at what he does. but -- the reason i still support my friend is because trump is a unique character that what you see is what you get. i you know, it's not politically correct which causes some people to love him and some people to hate him. but what he does with his personnel is, an open book right now. i think some areas that's refreshing. and in other people it's very disappointing. >> is this the way that he ran

the trump organization? and is there some thought process behind pitting personalities who work for you against one another? robert? >> let me just say this again, i worked for him for 12 years and he's always been a perfect gentleman. i know his staff very well. and these are women as well as men and i know his two sons very well, don junior and eric and they're great guys. so you know, a year ago, when he stood on the stage and he started calling jeb bush low energy and all those names, i was as surprised as anybody else. at the same time, that's kind of what he is like in real life. behind closed doors. so that's what he is. >> vivek, is this any way to run a railroad? >> no it isn't. if he run his company this way,

he would be bankrupt. this is not the way you can do it. silicon valley, which is a poster child for sexism. look at uber, for example, what happened when travis kalanick did 10% of what scaramucci did, the board got together and fired him. this is what any sensible board would have done. you can't tolerate this. if this happens at any company, the company will literally go bankrupt. ceos, they're paid to motivate, inspire and to get the people working as teams. we don't do that by getting into back-stabbing each other. >> vivek, it has to, you would think, impact recruitment. if i'm looking at this in company terms, who is coming to work for this firm if they realize there's no job stability and that the president won't reprimand someone who publicly trashes you, with whom you work. >> michael, imagine if you were in the white house today. you would be worried about your own job. you would be getting your resuée together and you would be looking for another job. you would be worried about getting stabbed in the back

yourself. because when you see it happening to your peers, you worry about your own job. in any company morale goes down dramatically. people are not only worry about their jobs, they're worried about their representations and they're worried about being fired in the middle of the night. this is the atmosphere you have there. you can't run a business like this. you can't run a government like this. you can't run a country like this. >> is this the way he ran the trump 0s? you wrote two books with him. i'm trying to figure out if what worked in manhattan, in building a global real estate empire, just doesn't translate to the white house. >> it seems to be, michael. i'm not here to defend my friend, you know. but i'm, i'll say it again, i was as surprised as anybody else to see him on that stage when there was nine million candidates. and many ways, the real donald trump comes out. but he is that way in you know,

to his peers. behind closed doors. so some ways it's refreshing, a lot of people love it that he is what you see. he is what you get. he is not politically correct. if you want a politically correct person, he's obviously not your guy. and i agree, if you did this in a public company, you would get hammered. and i've never seen him do that. so i'm not here to defend my friend, i'm just saying what you see is what you get. and it's his style. right now. >> vivek, what advice would you give from a management perspective to general kelly, who has now inherited this situation and has accepted the job of white house chief of staff? >> he will need to sit down with his boss and make it clear that we can't run an organization this way. that we must inspire and motivate our employees, which means giving them a vision for what they're doing and why they're doing it. why should they work so hard? why should they come to work? what can they do for this

nation. and then we must follow the rules, including the president, he must you know work hand in hand with his executives, to build a great country. so you know, kelly really has to lay down the law for his boss and for the subordinates and get professionals back into the white house. that's the only way we're going to have a great nation. >> robert, i'm willing to entertain some political incorrectness, if it yields some effectiveness, where's the effectiveness on the part of your friend in these last six months? i can read the litany of what's gone wrong. but everybody has already heard it. >> i understand, michael i understand. he is not a stupid man, he's a very bright man. i think he's very courageous. there's many people who are gray with him that he needs to drain the swamp and get rid of these people as soon as possible. our other guest is talking about you know people are afraid of losing their jobs. i think that's really important

for people to understand. trump, i don't have to lose a job, trump is not afraid of losing a job because we're business people. i think he hires generals because generals understand that political correctness and personal feelings do not get in the way of what the job needs to be done. the president is going to get the job done by draining the swamp and as you know, there's been a lot of political correctness back-stabbing bs going on that really needs to be shaken up for a while and maybe this is his method of doing it. again, i'll, i don't agree with it, he's not the man i know. but i think he's doing the best job he can do right now. agree with him or not. >> vivek wadhwa, take the final 15 seconds. go it has to be, it takes integrity, trust, teamwork. not bringing in people who are worse than the people who left. we're not draining the swamp here. we're polluting it with, with

you know, more horrible creatures. we need to really be professionals and this is our lives, it affects all of us. let's have ethics and integrity, please. >> viv wadhwa and robert kiyasaki, thanks to both of you. i will read responses to my facebook page during the program. for a guy who boasts about firing people, trump can't seem to fire anyone face to face, so much for leadership. look at the way jeff sessions has been twisting in the point in the wind for the last ten days. the beleaguered attorney general. he wants him to quit rather than have to fire him. give me another one. >> smerkonish, 28 years in hr, 18 as vp in private sector. mooch is fired, no debate. sandbag, i love your name. not only wasn't he fired, but there wasn't even a public

reprimand. no statements on the record from the president saying wow, that was inappropriate. facebook page says what? next white house casualty, bannon or scaramucci. what's the over/under on each, in terms of who lasts longer in their job? i can't believe that bannan, knowing what scaramucci said to ryan lizza, i won't repeat it. but that he wouldn't say to the president, hey, it's one of us or the other. what's a 40-year-old rule named after another presidential candidate have to do with president trump? and a former naval flight surgeon who is herself transgender and specializes in gender confirmation surgery on the president's attack on transmilitary military members? ♪

no, please, please, oh! ♪ (shrieks in terror) (heavy breathing and snorting) no, no. the running of the bulldogs? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money aleia saved by switching to geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. and when youod sugar is a replace one meal... choices. ...or snack a day with glucerna... ...made with carbsteady... ...to help minimize blood sugar spikes... ...you can really feel it. now with 30% less carbs and sugars. glucerna.

for her compassion and care. he spent decades fighting to give families a second chance. but to help others, they first had to protect themselves. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating.

i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®... to help keep me protected. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding.

tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. it's important to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know™. ...studying to be a dentist and she gave me advice. my daughter is... she said dadgo pro with crest pro-health. crest pro-health protects all... ...these areas dentists... ...check most. immediately i felt a... ...difference it did an... ...extremely good job of cleaning 4 out of 5 dentists confirm... ...these crest pro-health... ...products help maintain... ...a professional clean. go pro with crest pro-health my daughter inspired me... ...to make a change. crest pro-health really brought my mouth to the next level. crest healthy beautiful smiles for life. in a surprise move, president trump announced via twitter a ban on transgender people serving in the military. the president tweeted the military cannot be burdened with

the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transfer in the military would entail unquote. dr. christine mcginn is uniquely suited to respond. dr. mcginn is a plastic surgeon whose formal training was tailored specifically to transgender surgery in addition to all aspects of both general and plastic surgery. today she routinely performs gender confirmation surgery. her own transition began in the year 2,000, the same year she was named senior flight surgeon at the willow grove naval air station, the largest reserve base in the country. she was nominated for flight surgeon of the year for the entire u.s. navy. and she joins me now. dr. mcginn, could you have performed your responsibilities as a naval flight surgeon had you completed your transition? >> yes, absolutely. i think there's a lot of misconception about the down time required for transition. it's difficult to talk about because depending if you're what

surgeries you're having or what treatments you're having. some people opt to have no surgeries, but in general, most of my patience are back to work in six weeks. sometimes two weeks. i think that this is getting inflated to make it a little more political. >> the president cited in that tweet both cost issues as well as disruption issues. address each of those briefly, if you would. >> sure. so the estimated costs per year, per the rand study is $2.4 million to $ 8.4 million a year. compared to what is spent on health care for the entire military is $4 billio9 billion. that is about one trip to mar-a-lago and i think it's being twisted and spun to make it seem like it would be more than it is. you know i think the cost is of

getting rid of very well specialized, trained military service people is exponentially larger than just taking care of them. i know when i was in flight surgery school, the cost to put me through school was $1.5 million for one person. and so if you, you think about that as compared to the number given to take care of our trans service members, it doesn't even compare. as far as -- >> if i could just say this, it's hard to nail down exactly how many transgendered members of the service there are today. and you and i both looked at that rand data. but whatever the number might be, your point is, we have invested as a society and a government, heavily in their training and if now they're drummed out of military service, that's a lost cause. >> yeah. i mean look at what's happening in the world today. i feel like we need all hands on

deck. given the news in the last week, even. it would be a mistake to get rid of these people, sometimes serving for 19 years. that's a valuable asset for the military. >> speak to the readiness issue. >> well you know, i think when people hear the story, they assume everyone is going to have surgery. but not everyone will opt for surgery. some people, most of them will either have had surgery already or maybe won't be ready for surgery. like i said the down time can be as little as two weeks to six weeks. so i don't see that as a major readiness issue given my experience as a flight surgeon in the navy, there are many other conditions that other service members may have that may keep them down. even more. if you compare like just in one year, the army has 14% that are not deployable due to medical or legal reasons. what we're talking about here is a 0.1% undeployability if you

talk about transgender folks. >> am i right that to the extent cost is really is driving this, you're prepared to do the gender confirmation surgery for free? >> well, you know if the commander-in-chief won't take care of our veterans, our veterans will. yes. i will do surgery for free on the number of people that i have already lined up for surgery. the government has, the pentagon already has its program in place through the obama administration. and has been working fine for the past year. i just had two people who are scheduled for surgery. very shortly, who are now denied the funding and i'll be more than happy to do surgery for free. and to -- train navy members. >> dr. mcginn, i wonder if it's not about money. i want to put a quote up from tony perkins from the family research council i saw in the

"new york times," where he said grant repentance to president trump and secretary mattis, for even considering to keep this wicked policy in place. grant them understanding, courage and willpower to stand up to the forces of darkness that gave birth to it. and wholly to repeal it. react to that. >> well i think, i think that this sounds a lot like when we had people of color who wanted to serve, women, or gays and list beians who wanted to serve. it's obvious discrimination. i think any fifth grader could see that. >> dr. christine mcginn, thanks for your service. thank you. let's see what you're saying on my twitter and facebook pages. why would we reject anyone who wants to serve? we need people for the troops and there's not exactly a rush on sign-ups. hashtag #everypersoncounts. rachel, i agree with you and obviously dr. mcginn agrees with you, especially in the climate in which we're living and i mean

relative to radical islam and the nation being under siege it seems like the wrong time to tell anybody, no, you're not fit to serve. the president has no problem tweeting that certain of his enemies are quote-unquote crazy. but when it comes to diagnosing public figures, psychiatrists are limited by a 40-year-old rule and some of them are fighting this. plus, does president trump hold sway over his party? he's been threatening gop lawmakers, but are they learning they don't have to fear it? >> this was the one we were worried about. you weren't there, but you're going to be, you're going to be. look, he wants to remain a senator, doesn't he? okay. we check our phones 85 times a day.

so it only made sense to create a network that keeps up.

introducing xfinity mobile. it combines america's largest, most reliable 4g lte with the most wifi hotspots nationwide. saving you money wherever you check your phone. yeah, even there. see how much you can save when you choose by the gig or unlimited. call, or go to xfinitymobile.com. xfinity mobile. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money.

a new debate erupted this week over whether mental health professionals can weigh in about the president's mental stake it started with a story on the website, stat, headlined psychiatry group tells members they can ignore the goldwater rule and comment on trump's mental health. some history. the goldwater rule was named after arizona senator and 1964 presidential candidate barry goldwater. back then a magazine sent out a survey to 100 psychiatrists, who labeled goldwater psych atically unfit for office. after losing the election badly, barry goldwater successfully sued the publisher and then the rule was instituted, prohibiting psychiatrists from commenting on public figure these had not personally evaluated. a new email members are free to

comment about political figures as individuals. the group which represents a broad range of mental health experts later clarified, saying that doctors can comment, but still not diagnose. to keep things clear the american psychiatric association sent us a email sent us a group saying the group stands firmly behind the goldwater rule, our position has not changed. a upcoming book "the dangerous case of donald trump" 27 psychiatrists and mental health experts assess a president. joining me now is one of those sigh psychiatrists and dr. gorg, what purpose is served by the goldwater rule? >> well, thanks for having me here. the purpose of the goldwater rule, which i have personally always supported, for the 35 years of my practice, until the

march reinterpretation, interpretation by the american psychiatric, the person is to articulate a professional standard that says don't go out of your field of expertise. don't say things you can't really know for sure. as a professional. every profession has that. so as we understood the goldwater rule for 35 years, that meant don't diagnose a public figure and don't talk about his or her internal state of mind, because we don't have x-ray vision, we don't know what it is. >> and you continue to believe in the value of the goldwater rule, am i right? >> i do. as i understood it, and advocated for it, for my whole career. don't diagnose a public figure. and don't talk about things you really can't know.

however, the american psychiatric association issued a statement in march that i don't agree with. because they added don't comment on the behavior of public figures. as a psychiatrist. and i really disagree with that i think if the only thing you have to say is a diagnosis, don't say it. but i think that if you have something useful to say, to help the public understand, observed behavior, observed fen no ed phf public figures and the people they affect, that's important to do. >> dr. gardner, i know you disagree. let me tell you why i'm uneasy about this among other reasons. i've never met either of you, and to do other than the goldwater rule would allow you to say, we watch this guy on cnn every week, we think we've got a good measure of the man so let me tell you, according to the dsm, what ails him. am i wrong? >> yes, you are.

the diagnostic criteria we use in our field are based on observable behavior. not intrapsychic processes. we can't go through a news cycle without observing abnormal behavior by donald trump. the fact that he's an unstable, paranoid grandiose liar cut from the same cloth as every megama nye cal dictator. cut from the cloth on whether we should or should not comment on the president. i have yet to meet a mental health professional that believes that donald trump is competent to be president. you're about as likely to find one of those as an earth scientist who believes there's no global warming. >> none of whom probably have met the man, much less evaluated him. hence my example, you could be saying the same thing about me or anybody else who is on television and the worry that i have is when words like the diagnoses you just offered start getting tossed around freely, individuals who are dealing with

their own mental health issues, i think get stigmatized. >> well actually what i'm talking about are behaviors that we can observe. i haven't offered a diagnosis on our meeting today. although i have diagnosed him as a malignant narcissist. there's mental illness and there's mental illness. what donald trump is a psychiatric equivalent of stage iv malignant brain cancer. it would be possible to put together a more dangerous set of traits in a leader than we find in donald trump. because of this gag rule, our silence has enabled his rise. >> dr. gourgachon respond to what dr. gardner just said. i'm completely unsettled by it. but you've got the floor, i want to give you the credentials. >> i don't agree with his tactics. i understand the passion, i think everyone in the country is upset about our current political situation. for every person who thinks

donald trump is crazy, there's some who think he's a hero. and i think we have to use our expertise to help people understand what's going on. i have focused in some of my public writing, on issues of competence and ability to carry out the duties of office. that has nothing to do with a mental health diagnosis. there have been many political leaders who have, who could be described as having a mental health diagnosis. i don't think it adds to the conversation. i think we should focus on behavior, both of mr. trump, his staff, the republican party, and try to understand why people are doing what they're doing. i don't think -- >> i would say to both of you, be careful what you wish for, because to cast aside the goldwater rule on this president's watch, is to mean

that that rule doesn't exist on the next president's watch. i'm sitting here and i'm reminding myself of when secretary clinton took a stumble on a september 11th anniversary during the course of the campaign and there were individuals wishing to weigh in on what ailed her. i thought that was wholly inappropriate. so i don't distinguish between physical and mental health issues. i just think we would set a terrible precedent if all of a sudden people were coming on television and saying -- here's what i see in him. here's what i see in her, when they haven't evaluated the person. dr. gardner, the floor is yours. >> well what do we want to talk about as dr. gourguechon has done actually in a very brilliant way, in her article whether we want to look at diagnosis or psychological capacity. the public is defending on us to validate what most of them can see with their own eyes that there is something dangerously abnormal about this man. but we have basically abdicated

our responsibility to validate their rehalt testing and to help them understand and explain the genuine danger that we are in because of this gag order. >> if you wanted to put forth the rule that said, a requirement, i'm going give you the final record, dr. gourguechon, if you wanted to say as a matter of public policy, we're going to demand that individuals running for the highest office of the land undergoing a physical and mental health examination and make it impersonal to any person, that's a conversation that i think is reasonable. but to say i'm on my barcalounger and here's what i think i see in this person that i've never met, i think is really afoul. doctor, take the final word. >> i think we should speak up about things that we can help the public understand. i don't want to get rid of the goldwater rule, i never have. but i do think that if i have something useful to say about public behavior, i should try to

say it. and it's not going to do any damage. even if somebody disagrees with me. i'd like to speak to moderate republicans and help them understand their president. and what they need to do about it. >> i'm a trial lawyer and neither of your testimony would be permitted in any court of law in the united states. based on someone you've never evaluated. and to open the floodgates on television, i apologize with respect -- i think that's dangerous. but i appreciate each of you being here. dr. gourguechon and dr. gardner, thank you very much. what's happening in the social media world? what do you think they just diagnosed me as? probably a pain in the ass. i always wondered why we don't see psychiatrists commenting on tv on trump's mental state. now i see, thank you,

smerkonish. trump's tirades against members of his own party. should they be worried about voters back home? surprising numbers they should be studying. nkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. ykeep you sidelined.ng that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you.

when you're close to the people you love, does psoriasis ever get in the way of a touching moment? if you have moderate to severe psoriasis, you can embrace the chance of completely clear skin with taltz. taltz is proven to give you a chance at completely clear skin. with taltz, up to 90% of patients had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. in fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. do not use if you are allergic to taltz. before starting you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you are being treated for an infection or have symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz. including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. now's your chance at completely clear skin.

just ask your doctor about taltz. for the first six months of his administration, president trump demanded loyalty from his party and didn't get much push-back. in recent days he's replaced his chief of staff and press secretary and has been relentlessly criticizing his attorney general, jeff sessions, one of his earliest backers. and venting against members of congress who voted against him, claiming it's very sad that republicans, even some that were carried over the line on my back do very little to protect their president. his base seems to be holding. the latest gallup poll shows his approval support among republicans is still as strong, 86%. independents at 31%. 8% of democrats approving. if his poll numbers among republicans are strong, should the senators that he is threatening get in line?

joining me now to discuss, cnn political analyst john avlon and cnn political commentator, margaret hoover. john, time for a little reality check. must those republicans in the senate be afraid of countermanneding the president because he's so strong with the base? >> don't be afraid, senators, stand up for what you think is right and here's why. conventional wisdom in washington is almost always wrong. these folks feel like trump's got enormous power and their conservative base will turn on them if they stand up. but here's the deal. let's look at the actual data. because everyone is entitled to their own opinion, not their own facts in 2016, 17 senators in red states outpaced the president, and here's why that's weird. normally republican presidential candidates and democratic presidential nominees have coattails, they carry the party with them. not true with donald trump. particularly in a couple of key states that won him the election. let's take a look, senator grassley in iowa. trump did well, grassley did

eight points better. ohio, always critical in an election, rob portman, six points better. rob johnson, given up for dead in wisconsin, rob johnson pulled it out. and south carolina, senator tim scott won over five points, mccain, rubio. we could go on and on. the point is these folks don't need to live in fear of doing what they think is right. they shouldn't live in stockholm syndrome when it comes to the president or the conservative populist base. >> margaret, what's your response? >> i -- like most americans, we disagree. but we try, we tend to get there in a way that we disagree a lot, but we're able to get there, i think and agree on something. >> dinner conversations. >> what i disagree with here is the characterization that republicans are stockholm syndrome. that suggests that any republican who is elected in congress has no agency, they haven't made their own decisions. truth is most republicans, if

you look at crosstabs on any of those polls that show how much they still support the president, something that is an offensive fact to my husband, the truth is, they don't approve of his behavior in the oval office. they don't think his tweeting is necessarily presidential. they don't necessarily think that his behavior in the oval office is fitting and proper. you can see 45% approve of his tweeting. 44% disapprove. those are republicans, okay? this is not a full-throated support for his behavior as a president. but what they do and have decided is that the policies that they hope to get past and that they have promised the american people and that they deeply believe in, will only happen through a republican president. and so the truth is -- >> they're willing to accept the unacceptable. >> it's not that they're willing to accept the unacceptable. it's harder for them to continue to support him. they're doing it for their own principles. it's actually a principled stand. >> let me give you something

tangible that i think will allow each of you to make your points. it's a tweet from this morning, president trump saying republican senate must get rid of 60-vote now. it is killing the republican party, allows eight democrats to control country. 200 bills sit in senate, a joke. so john avalon, if i'm a republican senator, must i now toe the line because he's tweeted in that fashion? >> no. first of all, governing by tweet is not necessarily the best practice. and president trump sort of saturday morning tweet storms should not set policy for the party. particularly in a time when i think we all recognize those of us who are independents, the checks and balances and separation of powers are more important than ever before. clearly president trump wants a win and they're going to be folks who embrace the situational ethics who say let's disguard the filibuster standard when we're in power. people on both sides do it they would be fools to listen to the president's latest tweetstorm.

>> whae what we see is that the republicans in the senate and republicans in congress are starting to differentiate themselves from the president because they don't think they need him in order to pass their policies. there is the chief of staff, the former chief of staff of mitch mcconnell who tweeted back at the president and said something to the effect of why are you encouraging people? instead of searching for the leaker, search forr ethe idiot o keeps putting the president on irrelevant and counterproductive crusades, with health care going down and the differentiation on lgbt health funding and frankly activity in the military, i think you're starting to see real cracks in the pillars for the support for the president, among republicans. >> one final thought, won't it be safe to jump noolt waters as a republican and be critical of the president when the conservative media tells you it's safe? >> well you're catching at the

core of this is that there's also stockholm syndrome with conservative media which keeps amplifyinging conservative voices and ripping the backbones out of senators who know better. my bride and i disagree a lot when it comes to the role of partisanship. but john mccain and others need to more consistently put country over party, and here's a really radical idea, rather than gutting rules about filibuster, let's try to form bipartisan coalitions again. it's i know it sounds crazy, people, but that's how we governed pretty effectively for decades, not centuries. >> i hate it when he's right. but when you look at the real challenges that are facing americans right now, especially with health care that is going to collapse, the only way forward may end up being republicans and democrats coming together to help americans in the face of a real failure? >> reality check. >> john avalon, margaret hoover, we appreciate you being here. >> thanks, mike. still to come, your best and worst tweets and facebook comments.

you know if you miss any of the program you can catch us any time on cnngo, online pd and through your connected devices and apps. thank you for following me on twitter and facebook. here's more of what you thought during the course of the program. smerkonish, what you see is what you get is unacceptable over past two weeks. i was a staunch supporter, but trump is losing credibility. well, sutton m. gates iii, the base has been holding firm thus far and i made that observation to john avalon and margaret hoover a moment ago, when i said i think you'll see real cracks in the armor of the base is when the conservative media, the minim men with microphones the keyboard commandos start to turn on him. i'm convinced it's not the republican leadership that holds sway over the electorate, it's

the conservative media. and that's developed over the span of the last 30 years. hit me with another one. no one will state the obvious, scaramucci drunk dialed @ryanlizza. there. >> i'm momentarily speechless, i cannot fathom calling a reporter and using the kind -- i'm not holier than thou. you should hear me during commercial breaks. but to call a reporter, one that the right would be quick to tell you is associated with a liberal new york publication, and to use the kind of language with that individual, without some clear understanding that it's off the record about your co-workers? i just think that the bigger story from the whole scaramucci situation is the fact that there was no public reprimanding of scaramucci. and the guy, one of the two guys he hammered with the expletives

is gone. and the second guy, bannon, is still in the white house. i mean if i'm steve bannon, aren't i saying -- hey, mr. president, it's me or it's him. one of us has got to go you cannot speak of me in that fashion. if you're scaramucci. and then expect that i'm going to work a couple of doors down the hall. what else. this is the fun part. smerkonish, you asked in what business would scaramucci's language be allowed? you guessed it, the trump organization. carol, i don't know. the president was immensely successful in business. i'm wondering if the management style that he's showing us today, because don't forget, part of the epeel was we're going to elect a businessman president. is this the way that he ran his business? i don't, i don't know where loyalty comes from. if a guy like jeff sessions, who is your first senate supporter, is getting thrown under the bus. like has happened in the last week to ten days. what motivation do i have if i'm already in the white house.

to be loyal to the president as sessions has been? all of this, i don't think makes for for getting things done. thanks for watching, we appreciate it. this was fun to do this for three weeks and the folks in new york and in atlanta put a lot of work into it and i am appreciative. see you next week. e. bye. another referral. our customers love us. (nail gun firing) (glass egg shattering) when the unexpected strikes... don't worry we've got you covered. the hartford strikes back.

of your back pain?trol new icyhot lidocaine patch. desensitizes aggravated nerves with the max strength lidocaine available. new icyhot lidocaine patch. welcome to the cnn news room, it's 11:00 on the ebit, i'm fredricka witfield. the president replaces his right-hand man, the second major staff shake-up in two weeks. white house chief of staff, reince priebus, announced he is stepping down. 24 hours after a new communications director, aptny scaramucci called him a paranoid schizophrenic. skuch also accused priebus of being