another chaotic day at the white house, anthony scaramucci out as white house communications director, we'll get to that in this hour. but the official white house watch, a report about who actually was behind donald trump jr.'s initial misleading statement. "the washington post" is reporting that when the story of the meeting broke, the president's advisors wanted to break the truth about the meeting, in case the truth came out. the president it seemed wanted to go in another direction. the president saying that the meeting was about the adoption of russian children. that turned out to be false because as the emails he had to release because the "new york times" had them. the meeting was an offer to give the trump team damaging

information about hillary clinton as part of the russian effort to help the trump campaign. pretty fascinating, jeff, i mean you were actually on this trip back from europe, where according to "the washington post" this all took place, what more can you tell us? >> i was, anderson, i was on air force one that day as the pool reporter flying back from hamburg, germany where the g-20 summit had just happened. and the president had just had his first face-to-face meeting with vladimir putin, so that was on the top of mind. but we later learned that there was a lot of discussion happening on the flight about this statement, the "new york times" was going to report some details of that meeting that we have all been talking so much more about now, that july 2016 meeting at trump tower. and the reality here is that cnn reported a couple weeks ago that white house aides and others involved in that discussion about cracking that statement may be subjected to legal

jeopardy here because they were discussing in real time what was going on about that russian meeting, but this is the first we're learning from this "washington post" report that the president dictated this, but it has a ring of the president trying potentially to protect some other perhaps members of his family or others. because the -- just the confines of air force one, anderson, it's pretty hard to believe that the president would be dictating this without his son-in-law or his daughter knowing that. as "the washington post" is reporting, who else was involved in that. we landed at andrews about 8:00 in the evening, so interesting now we're learning that the president may have dictated that, anderson, certainly just one more example that everything seems to go back to russia and the investigation. >> jeff, what's interesting

about this is that the president's attorneys have subsequently come out and said the president didn't have anything to do with this, that initial statement which is misleading was crafted by donald trump jr. and his attorneys, donald trump -- or attorneys for donald trump jr. had told our pamela brown that they were ready and wanted to put out a more fullsome same, is their terminolo terminology, but that's not what ended up happen. this is donald trump attorney and sarah huckabee sanders at one of the audio briefings. let's play that. >> so he didn't have anything to do with the statement that don jr. put out that was being worked on with his team? >> no, the statement that don jr. put out, are you talking about yesterday's, chris? >> no that was written by donald trump jr. and i'm sure in consultation with his lawyer.

>> the "new york times" is reporting that president donald trump okayed the statement. >> has president trump had any conversation with his son, donald trump jr. the last several days and was he involved in helping donald trump jr. craft his statement over the weekend on air force one as was reported in the "new york times"? >> i'm not sure about the specific communications and the nature of those conversations, i know they have spoken at at least at some point in the last few days. >> you don't have a response? >> i'm just not sure. >> is that not try? >> i don't know the answer, i'll have to check and let you know. >> jeff toobin, let's start off with you, just legally, does this put the president in some potential -- is this a potential legal issue for the president? >> well, first of all, there is the dispute about the facts.

i mean there is this question of whether the president was involved in drafting the statement, obviously "the washington post" said he did. jay seculo in the earlier interview said he didn't. if in fact he did draft the statement, and if he knew at the time that he drafted the statement, that it was false as the statement turned out to be, that definitely could turn out to be a legal problem for the president, because even though it's not a crime to issue a false statement to the news media, it could be evidence of a pattern of obstruction of justice, along with firing james comey, and that is -- that is at the heart of the mueller investigation. so, you know, obviously the most important thing is to determine what happened here. did the president actually dictate this statement? and did the president know that it was false when he dictated

it. but if he did dictate it and if he knew it was false, you bet it could be part of a legal problem for him. >> the idea that he didn't know it was false would mean that his son had told him something which was false, his son had told him that this was just about adoption. and that doesn't seem to jibe with what attorneys i believe it was for donald trump jr. told pamela brown that they were ready to put out a more robust and fulsome statement. did the president know it was a misleading statement? >> absolutely because it is not a crime or evidence of a crime to make a mistake. you know, a good faith error. if you say something and it turns out to be wrong, that is

certainly not evidence of any sort of criminal intent. what makes it a potential problem is what -- if it's determined by a grand jury or by, you know, other fact finders that the president intentionally put out a false statement, and that's a factual question that mueller will want to interview a lot of witnesses to determine where the truth lies. >> kirsten, does it surprise you that the president would get involved and that his advisors would allow him to get involved in something like this that exposes him? >> that's the first thing that you notice about this is that this is not something usually the president would be involved in. exactly what you said, you would protect the president from being involved in this. and if in fact the president was going to be involved and this is true for anybody in the white house, you would get all of the information, you would have gotten all the information.

you would make sure that no statement went out that actually wasn't true. it's true that donald trump was involved in things that he shouldn't have been involved in, this is the only time he's been dictating and his impulse in the story and how he uses this as a political problem and not a legal problem. he thinks he can push back the ways he normally does and it will go away. >> i think kirsten has a point, he's not a lawyer, after all, he's had his own long career, long before this in plenty of episodes where i think he feels the best thing is to go out there and i suspect that -- he views this whole episode as -- to see something like this, i mean, i'm just, i don't know what went on. but surely he does see this as just politics.

#. >> there's a line in this story that the president wanted to cast this june meeting by intelligence operatives hoping to trap donald trump jr. and the presumptive referenpublican nom. >> there was a connection, was there, with the gps? >> you can state that, it's not clear at all, in fact it probably isn't true. but what i'm saying is that they were going to. >> we have to just remember how this meeting came to light

inside, it was all through jared kushner preparing to go testify before the house and senate committees. >> and kushner's attorneys realized early on that it was going to be an issue? >> without a doubt. >> and is there in this story, the way this is reported out, huddling with ivanka, huddling with other aides and jared kushner has his own legal exposure -- there's something i'm missing here, jared kushner is the one that had the meeting, they know there's an email detailing the pretense for the meeting, and somehow the president, somewhere the president's allowed to dictate a completely false statement like that? there's some piece that's missing. >> at that point jared kushner already was aware of the email chain. >> the full story that said --

>> would he have told the president at this meeting that there was this email and the president still said, this is about russian adoptions. and russian adoptions isn't even russian adoptions, it's ending sanctions. >> there's one thing that jeffrey mentioned and we get this a lot when we talk about donald jr. and the president of the united states. i have to go back to this stand card often. jeffrey said he's not a lawyer, he pushes back and sometimes he falls into these legal perils or donald trump jr.'s just a bumbling idiot that we should excuse his behavior. i think that's an unfair bar for the president of the united states, first and foremost. the second thing is, i think we need to look at this as a complete -- this is not happening in a vacuum. this is an end of a tumultuous

week for the president of the united states. i've been a part of all these stories, this is the end of donald trump, this is the worst it can get because we know this isn't the worst it can get. >> ten days. i mean we started with him lambasting attorney general sessions, i think that was last monday, maybe, the week kind of ended with reince priebus being fired, and then scaramucci with this. >> we're not talking about jeff sessions anymore. >> give it a couple of days, we're going to have more, we'll talk to matt lewis about this as well and also one of the "washington post" reporters who broke the story. booking a flight at the last minute doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight

a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go. and while i'm gone i can even check on my baby with this doggie cam. oh jack, you're such a good boy. no, jack, what are you doing? bad dog! and if you need to get back home, like right now, priceline has you covered.

over the course of 9 days sthe walks 26.2 miles,. that's a marathon. because he chooses to walk whenever he can. and he does it with support from dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort to keep him feeling more energized.

so he even has the energy to take the long way home. keep it up, steve! dr. scholl's. born to move.

breaking news tonight, a report in the "washington post" that president trump himself dictated donald trump jr.'s statement about the meeting -- in case the full details came out. but according to the post, the president decided to go the other direction insisting that the meeting was about russian adoption. i spoke with one of the reporters that broke the story, tom hamburger. >> the phrase that was dictated, was one my colleagues, phil rucker and ashley collins had picked up from their sources what we understand is that this was really a decision led by the

president and that the statement that was ultimately issued is one that he decided and is often his way as you know, he's not an emailer. he suggested the language, in the statement that was ultimately used and ultimately released to the new york times. and to a certain extent had to be walked back or 56r7ified upon in the coming days. >> it's not clear to me, that the president's attorneys i believed that previously said that it was donald trump jr. and donald trump jr.'s attorneys who had been the one crafting this statement and that the president had nothing to do with it and they denied the "new york times" story that it was discussed among the president's advisors and that the president signed off on it. that's something that runs counter to what the president's own attorneys had said. did you get any responses from the president's attorney about the discrepancy between your

reporting and what your past statements were? >> we sent a long list of questions to jay seculow who is one of the president's attorneys and is perhaps the most outspoken and he did answer our specific questions but did answer one statement sentenced to us, which reads, anderson, the president's attorney said apart from being of no consequence, the characterizations are misinformed, inaccurate and not pertinent. we went back and asked again for specifics but it didn't receive anything, any guidance beyond that statement that i just read. >> we're going to have -- back now with the panel. i don't even know where to go with this. so i'm really interested in who the source is on this story. >> it seems like there's multiple sources. >> so is general kelly, i bet. >> that's one of those things

that donald trump jr. and his new hiring will help solve the leak. but this would have to be somebody at a pretty high level position to be on air force one to know that the president was dictating this. obviously they have a major problem, it's not news to anybody else. but, you know, who's the source. >> but seriously, though, is the major problem the person who tells this? or is the major problem the person who is distorting and misleading the american public and the united states? >> it is interesting, it is an interesting point that also it would suggest that there are people who would try to undermine the president. >> or protect themselves. >> the president and everyone else is supposed to be the paragon of truth.

>> if you're working in a place where lies in common, why would you -- isn't that kind of environment an environment in which you want to protect yourself? there's not a great sense of -- it doesn't seem like there's a great sense of loyalty in that white house. and i'm talking about it goes in all different directions. >> you remember the other night, josh green was here, and he said the morning he was on "new day" talking with chris cuomo and scaramucci was on. and he, josh is getting texts from people inside the white house, dis'ing scaramucci. but my point s it's just the loyalty, you should never do that if you're inside -- >> the loyalty should also come from the top down and the president of the united states, scaramucci sold his company which was very successful, went finally after being hung out to dry for quite a while, finally

got this gig as the communications director who was also saying unflattering things just last week. >> and take out his chief of staff. >> and anthony is being escorted out of the white house. is that loyal? >> scaramucci did do something in that time. >> that something was the president apparently steam seem like or praised him for. >> i think it was something that people didn't like and it was a firing offense. i think it's one way. >> a >> this isn't just a matter of disloyalty, as it is a matter of protection. and it seems to me that you have lawyers here, don jr.'s lawyers tells pamela brown on july 23rd,

we were ready to do a whole statement, -- even in fact to jeffrey's point, if it does involve jeffrey's point, with all these smart people around, knowing exactly what would occur. that it would unravel, as these things always do. why wouldn't somebody say to the president, plot, we really can't do that. >> who on that plane, one, has

the fortitude to say that to the president. >> i mean, what this is, in listening to jeff toobin, this may not be such a big deal here. this strikes me as yet again, as some sort of pattern, if alice in wonderer land appears tomorrow night, if santa claus comes. this seems like one more rabbit hole -- >> oh, jeff toobin. >> is that what you said? >> i appreciate the -- >> translation. >> but i don't think it's quite accurate to what i said.

>> say again. >> what i said was, if it could be established -- >> let him finish. >> let me finish. we know for a fact at this point that the statement that was put out in donald trump jr.'s name was false. that's a pretty big hurdle to come across. so the only issue is who wrote it and whether the person who wrote it knew it was false. now that hasn't been proven yet. but "the washington post" says it was the president who wrote it. presumably, they have some basis for writing that, because "the washington post" is a respectful newspaper with an excellent record, especially on this particular subject. so i'm not, i don't think i view this story, i don't think it's accurate to say i view this story as in any way exculpatory. it calls for more investigation,

it calls for people to be questioned under oath about how this statement was constructed and whether the people who knew that it was false were involved in making this statement. >> it does seem that if you have people willing to leak to "the washington post" the details of what happened, that those same people when talking to a special counsel, will probably tell the truth to the special counsel, in order to protect themselves, i would assume. >> if they haven't already. >> i think it's always difficult to assume the motives or assume who told the truth or assume not. i mean i don't -- >> exactly. >> i mean there were obviously a lot of internal rivalries here, and resentments and speaking of possible sources for the story, one of the people on air force one happened to be reince priebus, who was just fired and disgraced and embarrassed and would not be completely out of the question that he might go to

"the washington post" and say by the way, you know what went on. it's not, again, i don't know who the source was. >> they seem to have multiple sources, tom hamburger. we have more breaking news anthony scaramucci out of the white house as communications director, his tenure was short but unforgettable. what we know about what happened next. luckily there's powerful, 24-hour, non-drowsy claritin. it provides relief of symptoms that can be triggered by over 200 different allergens. live claritin clear.

it survived 4 food fights,ew but old, home: a one-coat wonder named "grams", and rolled with multiple personalities. number one rated marquee interior. behr's most advanced one-coat hide paint. only at the home depot.

that's why at comcast we're continuing to make4/7. our services more reliable than ever. like technology that can update itself. an advanced fiber-network infrustructure. new, more reliable equipment for your home. and a new culture built around customer service. it all adds up to our most reliable network ever.

one that keeps you connected to what matters most. anthony scaramucci is no longer communications director after 11 days in the white house. we learned the new white house chief of staff general john kelly asked him for his resignation. and sarah huckabee sanders tried to answer questions about how, when, and why, basic questions. here's what she said. >> he does not have a role at this time in the donald trump administration and we put out a statement earlier announcing that, and i don't have much to add. i think anthony wants general kelly to be able to operate, fully, with a clean slate, build his own team.

while at the same time his comments were inappropriate. anthony and general kelley came to the -- he wants to work with general kelly and determine what the best course forward is at this point, i don't think that it's complicated to understand that the president felt the comments were inappropriate. i can't really explain it any further than that. >> back now with the panel. that's not what she said, though, last week, which was essentially that the president thinks healthy competition among apprentices is a good idea. >> it's funny how things change overnight. i think he's clearly in a tough position here, but what happened is that the new sheriff is in town, general, not a sheriff. came into town and said, you know, this is not sustainable and made up his mind and went to the president and i was told that the president talked to some friends, and was asked their advice.

friends, i would say allies, asked their advice, if he should get rid of scaramucci and he said yes, and this is the first indication, and i was told by one source, the days of tolerating b.s. in this white house are over. >> trump has a lot of weird affinities for different things, but his sort of fetish for military generals, he loves obviously generals is maybe the one really good, of all his weird -- >> i would say respect. >> it of al of his quirks, i would say his reverence and respect for military generals may turn out to be our saving grace. >> let's take a look at what sarah huckabee sanders said last week about the scaramucci comments versus what we just heard her say. >> i don't know if he has an opinion on what they should do between the two of them. i think the president as always

enjoys healthy competition and conversation and he sees that as such. >> not so much anymore, i guess. >> bob costa from "the washington post" tweeted out from "the washington post" that he had heard earlier, the people of the family, jared and ivanka, jared and even melania said that his crudeness and the way he was speaking in this interview was a line they felt shouldn't be crossed. i think the president did like it and then he heard from his family this isn't going to fly. >> both jared and ivanka were involved in bringing him in. >> it's fair to say, i am a little cynical about all this horror in washington. i worked there a good long while and i heard. >> you didn't talk like that, jeffrey? >> it's not the cursing, i mean

everybody's an adult, i mean it's more about what it says he was publicly bashing the chief of staff. >> i agree. to me, having worked there, you don't trash your colleagues, period, that's it. >> well, but the president never said anything after he did, by the way. the president never tweeted anything and said, well, scaramucci doesn't represent me, he doesn't speak for me. because the truth of the matter was that he did represent what donald trump wanted, he did want to get rid of reince priebus, he did want to get rid of steve bannon and i can tell you that the women in that family were high profile. >> and scaramucci, did that have an impact on the president, wait a minute, he's rising very fast. >> one of the rules that should always be operative in any white house is that aides should be seen and not heart.

i remember seeing jim baker in situations when the president, when i was in the campaign, not yet in the white house staff. jim baker hung out with staff members. he wasn't elbow to elbow with the president. >> just briefly, i read that costa tweet or report as well. and i just -- i mean the level of hypocrisy that the donald trump administration and the trump family get away with has to be a little disconcerting as well. because throughout the campaign trail, the legal of vulgarity by which the president of the united states spoke, out of his own mouth, whether or not it was a tape reporting on a bus or whatnot. >> the 16 most foul mouthed

politicians and number one was barack obama. >> while we're on this topic, i think that the only time that we have seen donald trump, and this is -- but the only time that donald trump actually had a message and actually had a messaging strategy was when j jason miller was his campaign secretary. he was the only one that had some actually knowledge about how to manage a campaign stop. >> i don't think that miller was at the white house. >> everybody has to agree on what the message is, and that's the problem, they don't agree on the message, they disagree on policy, you have competing power centers. >> even if the message is, whatever the week is, infrastructure week, it's the president who doesn't agree on carrying that out. >> it's american dream week this week. you know that. >> i did not know that. >> general kelly is going to

come in and impose order and there's only one person that order needs to be imposed pong and that's the president. >> all these staff members that are doing all this, that's order. >> what's he going to be doing, being a private eye and turning desks over? we're really ftalking about is that this is a chaotic white house, but the chaos is coming from the president. >> kelly might be able to help, if you narrow that and don't have the open door policy. >> it's people that he wanted to have there. >> the president will be lonely, we'll see if he actually likes that kind of order. americans - 83% try to eat healthy. yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day 50+

a complete multi-vitamin with 100% daily value of more than 15 key nutrients. one a day 50+.

what's going on here? um...i'm babysitting. that'll be $50 bucks. you said $30. yeah, well it was $30 before my fees, like the pizza-ordering fee and the dog-sitting fee... and the rummage through your closet fee. who is she, verizon? are those my heels? yeah! yeah, we're the same size...in shoes. with t-mobile taxes and fees are already included, so you get four lines of unlimited for just $40 bucks each. the price we say is the price you pay. so, your new prescription does have oh, like what?ects. ♪ you're gonna have dizziness, nausea, and sweaty eyelids. ♪ ♪ and in certain cases chronic flatulence. ♪ no ♪ sooooo gassy girl. so gassy. if you're boyz ii men, you make anything sound good.

it's what you do. if you want to save 15% percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. next! ♪ next! i am a first responder tor and i'emergencies 24 hours a day, everyday of the year. my children and my family are on my mind when i'm working all the time. my neighbors are here, my friends and family live here, so it's important for me to respond as quickly as possible and get the power back on. it's an amazing feeling turning those lights back on. be informed about outages in your area. sign up for outage alerts at pge.com/outagealerts. together, we're building a better california.

> take a look. >> when you see these towns and you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon,

you see them just thrown in. rough. i said please don't be so nice. >> today sarah huckabee sanders was asked about that, here's what he had to say. >> was the president joking when he said this, or did he check this out with the international association of police chiefs or maybe the attorney general? >> i believe he was making a joke at the time. >> back now with the panel. i mean a lot of police organizations have come out and said, we're not -- we don't rough up suspects and it's not a good idea. >> i have to say, he's a new yorker, standing in front of new yorkers on long island. my whole family's from there and that's the ways they talk. that's the new york sense of humor. >> he was choked to death by an illegal chokehold. police brutality is not funny.

can you draw a line anywhere with donald trump? >> we need to loose on up a little bit here. >> why? >> because we are becoming a humorless society. >> totally, i agree with that, and i think there's too much political correctness, but i don't think this is something that you joke about. >> he didn't mean it in a serious fashion. you heard him, you heard the tone of his voice. >> but there's been so much controversy about this. >> the president of the united states should be a moral authority, and he could be signaling to police officers, he literally said, don't be too -- it's not the law of law enforcement to punish. you know, we have judges who decide what a punishment's going to be. that's not the job of law enforcement. >> even when the president's saying, the person just murdered someone, there's been no trial. what is he talking about? if he was joking, which i'm not convinced that he was. but if he was joking, it's just not funny.

>> a lot of them laughed. >> the whole audience did laugh. in fact some police officers appla applauded, which raises all sorts of questions. a number of police officers just stood there not applauding in the background. >> it's a major issue in the country right now that people are in the streets protesting about. the fact that people are afraid of police officers and he's joking about it. >> i don't give him credit for that at all. friends of families of survivors, they may have committed a crime, but the penalty for that crime was not a death penalty by any stretch. but let's talk about something else, being presidential. if in fact he was making a joke that was in bad taste? you know what would be presidential is if his came out and apologized.

he tweets about everything else. just tweet that my remarks were in bad taste. i apologize, period. >> this is how he hasn't changed from being a candidate to being president of the united states. there is the kind of thing he might have done on the campaign trail. >> this isn't just how he hasn't changed from being a candidate, this is the donald trump who took out the op-ed piece against the central park five. this is not anything knew. >> the other problem i would say to this, though, is, i think this makes it harder on all of us, white, black, police officers even. >> if insulting a police officer, the vast majority of whom are working hard to do a good job. >> and a trained to avoid exactly that kind of situation. >> i go into these communities with law enforcement officers. i was just in ferguson friday in st. louis, talking about how we rebuild our communities and their trust for law enforcement.

telling young black kids it's okay to grow up and want to be in law enforcement so we have people in our communities that look like us. and comments like that, regardless of whether or not it's joking or not, it just makes that job so much more difficult. >> it's contributing to the polarization and the distrust from all sides of the different communities. >> i just out in the country side, i just don't think people see it that way, he told a joke and move on. >> the police departments didn't really see it that way. i mean the suffolk county police department, said as a department, we do not and will not tolerate roughing up prisoners. but did it make you feel good that police officers are standing there applauding the idea of slamming a person's head into the car? and they were just carried away, or nervous or something else.

>> how much judgment do you have if you think that's a joke, it's not good judgment at the very least, jeffrey. >> we're talking about a system that's inherent lly broken and e reason people are in the truth, because when you're trying to change the system, and you see the leader of the free world -- >> opponents democrats and republicans alike are asking what comes next. to help reduce my risk of progression, including preservision areds 2. my doctor said preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula the national eye institute recommends to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd after 15 years of clinical studies. preservision areds 2. because my eyes are everything.

their leadership is instinctive. they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team. (hard exhalation) honey? can we do this tomorrow? (grunts of effort) can we do this tomorrow? if you have heart failure symptoms, your risk of hospitalization could increase,

making tomorrow uncertain. but entresto is a medicine that was proven, in the largest heart failure study ever, to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ when can we do this again, grandpa? well, how about tomorrow? ask your doctor about entresto and help make tomorrow possible. well, given all that's gone on, republicans say they're not

giving up, they'll most likely need to work across the aisle with democrats. earlier i spoke with republican phil cassidy about that happening. senator, you have another health care bill that you were working on with secretary graham. did anyone say today that you would have support of the white house on it? >> i think you're referring to the meeting we had today. and it was a listen session with governors. and what would it take for a governor to be able to implement a successful program in their keat. the number one driver of people enrolled in the obamacare system was governors, how does washington meet the needs of the governor to help the governor meet the needs of people in their states. >> what are you looking at, block grants to the states, to

>> flexible block grants, if you will, based upon the flexible program temporary assistance to needy families that reformed welfare that really did a lot to both modernize the program but to improve the situation of families in the program. if states are given this flexible block grant, the senate can approve of it, then i think we can get there. >> there is a group of about 40 democrats and house republicans that is they have a plan to fix parts of obamacare and hope it's going to get support. their plan hasn't been released yet. in theory, could you support something like that if repeal and replace just isn't possible? >> i just haven't looked at their plan in detail yet so it's hard for me to comment. if it's something to move the ball forward, i'll be for that. i do think there are internal contradictions within the affordable care act that makes it hard to sustain long term. >> if this is something that can't get through congress, as we've seen so far and the

president is saying let obamacare fail, is letting the president's system fail something that would be acceptable to you in any way? >> so simple answer is no, but let's just say that he's speaking specifically of the individual market which is only 4% of those who are insured. it doesn't involve medicare, right now it wouldn't involve medicaid. employer-sponsored insurance, all that far is of that is off . only the individual market would be affected. i'm just as concerned about that as the affordable health care act. i would not not any of it to fail. >> donald trump said, unless the republican senators are total kwir qu quitters, repeal and replace is not dead. demand another vote to repeal and replace. >> we need a fresh perspective, there needs to be fresh

momentum. i think a better perspective than washington, d.c. looking across the country deciding what to do next is to ask the governors of our states what they would do next. >> senator castro, i appreciate your time. garvin, is the idea of repeal and replace dead for republicans? >> well, if you listen to this senator, no. i think he is trying, along with lindsey graham, to try to revive something and start fresh. i think it's -- the differences remain. the smart thing, i think, that he was really saying is get the governors on board first -- >> which governor kasich has been talking about all along. >> exactly. puck get the governors on board, their senators might be with you because the governors are the one that really have to deal with medicaid and understand the importance of it to their constituents in their state. they're going to try and give it another shot, but i can't

predict at all what would happen. >> as appalled as i was at senator mccain, i will say i think i heard him talk a lot about what his governor in arizona was saying about this. and so i do think that's probably the key. one of the things i think trump folks that like him, like, a lot is that he's relentless. he never takes no for an answer. he just keeps going back and back and back. if ever there is an issue that needs to have that attitude, it's this one. >> you mean donald trump goes back and back and back? >> yeah. >> unfortunately for him, he does not control the calendar on the floor, and it does not sound like mitch mcconnell thinks there is reason to bring this and to try this one more time. but i do think, yes, of course it makes sense to bring in the governors first. it would make sense to work with the health insurance companies and work with the doctors' groups. to me this reflects just how little the white house did and how little president trump did

in getting all the stakeholders to try and actually move forward. >> if i may make a suggestion as well, we talked about working with governors and the stakeholder groups, you might also try working with democrats. democrats want to fix the affordable care act as well. nobody was on board with repeal and replace, but when you're talking about having a menu of services, because apparently the health care field is the only one you can go in and you have no idea what you're purchasing or prescription drug prices are stabilizing. democrats are on board with trying to fix the affordable care act, so why not start there, and they have ideas on how to do it? >> but you have the president threatening to shut down the subsidies of insurance companies and that would hurt a lot of people. whether that's what he thinks would drive people back to the table, it won't. >> you had more insurance filling out the market in these counties where you only had one

provider or no providers. what you're saying is the affordable care act is not going to die. contrary to the popular opinion of the sec, it's not going to help their respect actiive stat. >> but you don't want everyone on medicaid, right? >> no, but we want to have an affordable health care. >> this problem exists because obamacare changed the health care system. so to the extent that it is collapsing, and it is collaps g collapsing, there is no question. the head of aetna and absolutely correct. >> you said just got us to this place with this problem. >> we have this problem because own observe ca obamacare exists. >> but what is the problem? >> obamacare is collapsing. it's the law's fault.

>> it's not actually collapsing. there are areas where it needs to be improved -- >> but why? if the law was perfect, why? >> nobody said the law was perfect. >> yes, they did. >> you're fighting against something that never happened. nobody ever said the law was perfect and i think people realize there are areas that need to be tweaked which is a totally normal thing. >> we have to take a break. we'll be right back. she makes from that airline. what'd you earn double miles on, please? ugh. that's unfortunate. there's a better option. the capital one venture card. with venture, you earn unlimited double miles on every purchase, everywhere, every day. not just airline purchases. seems like a no-brainer. what's in your wallet? will people know it means they'll get the lowest price guaranteed on our rooms by booking direct on choicehotels.com? hey! badda book. badda boom! mr. badda book. badda boom!

book now at choicehotels.com 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. we're drowning in information. where, in all of this, is the stuff that matters?

the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500, and, can deliver insight person to person, on what matters to you. morgan stanley.

who knew that phones would starentertaining us,ng? getting us back on track and finding us dates. phones really have changed. so why hasn't the way we pay for them? introducing xfinity mobile. you only pay for data and can easily switch between pay per gig and unlimited. no one else lets you do that. 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.

that's all the time we have for tonight. thank you very much for watching 360. i'll see you again tomorrow night at 8:00. a special edition of "the lead" with jake tapper starts now. have a good night. so how did the first day of the white house's american dream week go? "the lead" starts right now. president trump says there is no chaos in his white house right before more chaos erupts. anthony scaramucci is out before he even started officially, the white house communications director. what in the blank blank happened? a bombshell was the initial leading response to the russians. white house officials pumped by an e-mail prankster. do the e-mails expose a much bigger security risk that could