there are not the rules as i told the president to change the rules of the senate. >> as i said, let obamacare explode. >> we will see if we can find a way to stabilize the individual insurance market. >> we've got to get away from this attitude that a senator should be a rubber stamp for everything the president wants. >> the president said he weighed in the way any father would on a statement. >> when you're caught in a lie, it makes it hard to let the

other stuff go. >> the statement that don junior issued is true. this is all discussion, frankly, of no consequence. >> it appears he actually drafted the language in a way to intentionally deceive the american people. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> good morning. welcome to your "new day." up first, a growing number of senate republicans are defying president trump. the president suggested they allow the aca to collapse by withholding needed funding, not only might that violet the law and the constitution, but it put the party in a pickle. instead, republicans are working with democrats to stabilize insurance markets, and congress is charting its own course to focus on tax reform and the debt ceiling. >> this as the white house concedes president trump was involved in crafting his son's misleading initial statement about that meeting with a russian lawyer. that admission contradicts repeated denials from the president's legal team. let's begin our coverage with cnn's joe johns who is live at

the white house. what's the latest, joe? >> reporter: good morning, alisyn. it was the president who tweeted over the weekend that senate republicans look like fools because they won't change the rules. now the president is facing a growing number of united states senators who are republican who are speaking out against him and his legislative priorities, even as his credibility continues to erode due to the ever changing stories about his campaign and russia. president trump's response to the collapse of the health care bill exacerbating growing tensions between senate republicans and the white house. >> we've got to get away from this attitude that you have to agree with the president and the senator should be a rubber stamp for everything the president wants at all times. >> majority leader mitch mcconnell by passing the request to hold another repeal vote and rejecting the president's demand that the senate change the rules to pass bills by a simple

majority. >> there are not the votes in the senate as i said repeatedly to the president and to all of you, to change the rules of the senate rfr it comes as the senate health committee's influential republican chairman also pushes back against the president's threat to let obamacare implode by stopping payments to insurance companies. senator lamar alexander proposing bipartisan legislation that will do exactly the opposite. >> our proposal is by mid september we will see if we can agree on a way to stabilize the individual insurance market. >> reporter: senate republicans also criticizing the administration's shifting story about the president's role in crafting his son's misleading initial statement about the reason for the june 2016 meeting with a russian lawyer. >> when you put out a misleading statement, it's going to be hard to convince people to stop looking at other things. >> reporter: the white house admitting tuesday that the president was involved. >> the president weighed in as

any father would based on the limited information that he had. >> reporter: contradicting repeated denials from the president's legal team. >> the president was not involved in the drafting of the statement. >> i was president involved in the statement drafting at all, nor was the president. >> the president didn't sign off on anything. >> reporter: sarah sanders denying reports that president trump personally dictated the deceptive statement and attempting to shift the narrative. >> everybody wants to make this some story about misleading. the only thing i see misleading are the year's worth of stories fueling the false narrative about russian collusion. >> this administration continues to say, vis-a-vis russia, there's nothing there. yet they don't act that way at all. >> reporter: facing the continued difficulties in the senate, the administration apparently is trying to shore up

the president's base on the right. "the new york times" reporting this morning that the department of justice is considering suing colleges and universities for affirmative action policies they say may discriminate against white students. the administration looking at a trade case against china as well as a skill-based immigration policy. >> let's bring in the panel, cnn politics reporter and editor at large chris cillizza and cnn political analysts david gregory and john avlon. david gregory, the president saying allow the aca to implode, arguably a violation of law, arguably a violation of his constitutional duty. but certainly bad politics as viewed in the eyes of his own policy members. what's the play? >> republicans realize a failure to make good on the pledge to repeal and replace obamacare leaves them vulnerable because so many conservatives around the country don't like obamacare, don't like the federal government's role in the health

care economy and wanted to see action. well, republicans simply couldn't agree. now the president is trying to strong arm republicans further in a way that will only hurt republicans more. these are definitely supporters of the president who could be further hurt by efforts to undermine obamacare further. so there are real problems in the health care market today under the affordable care act that responsible politicians ought to try to remedy. that includes democrats who can't just stand by and allow these things to get worse. there are some republicans who now want to get to the business of making the markets better. i think this move by the administration to talk it down and to undermine the market is not only horrible policy and a dereliction of duty, but i think it will hurt republicans more because they're responsible for trying to change it, and people know they're responsible for pushing it further into

dangerous territory. >> john avlon, for a long time, for the past six months, at least, we've heard republicans say, i may not be crazy about everything that president trump says or the way he acts or what he does, but he is in the best shot of getting our agenda through and that's what we're laser focused on. now something has shifted and they're saying different things, publicly saying different things. here is jeff flake who has come out with an op ed in politico and now even publicly on camera. >> we've got to get away from this attitude that you have to agree with the president and the senate should be a rubber stamp for everything the president wants at all times. >> yeah. it's a concession to reality. not only the constitutional vision of what the senate was supposed to do and traditionally has, but i think the fact that donald trump went after jeff sessions was a key tipping point. it showed that someone from their club, the senate club, could have early and unbending public loyalty to the president

and still be turned on in a vicious and mum ill eighting way. once that happened, they said we privately don't think this president is tightly wrapped and politically he may be hurting us, too, and personally we can't trust him. that combination of factors is leading them to belatedly grow a backbone. it's a good thing for the country if we can return to semblance of bipartisan governing. >> what's interesting is to see this play, where the republicans, chris cillizza, seem to be with the populous mandate. we work for the american people, we should do what's good for the administration as long as that doesn't in any way, shape or form make it harder for the american people. what are you seeing? it's not just health care and working to shore up the markets which is obviously necessary, the csr payments, the funds from the government are needed. but tax reform, worrying about

the debt ceiling. you can argue the 51 rule, democrats don't like that. but they are moving on things they think will matter to the american people. >> first, i would say, before we get too far down the bipartisanship kumbaya chair, mcconnell did say we're dealing with reconciliation. when we see senate republicans, even house republicans -- mitch mcconnell when he got in control said we have to show we can govern, we have to show that we're not just the opposition party. they continue to act like the opposition party, aided and abetted and encouraged, quite frankly, by donald trump. they are now in control. you get blamed when you control the white house, the senate and the house, particularly in midterm elections. it's going to be very hard to say the democrats did this.

voters don't buy that. you see from mcconnell, you see from paul ryan, the understanding that you can't simply protest -- throw up your hands and say, we let it fail, democrats screwed everything up. neil gorsuch, that will help with conservative base and these midterm elections appear to be base driven. >> i talk to these panels all the time. they see all the executive actions he's signed, rolling back of regulations. they like he got out of paris. they like he's where he is in terms of climate control and not hurting businesses. >> that's the argument for the president's re-election in 2020. it's going to be very hard for dee heller say i helped president trump pull out of the paris accord.

they have to have something they've done. >> go ahead, david. >> i want to make a larger point. what we're talking about is important, but it's still small, still tactical. we're in the middle of covering and analyzing the daily fights of a pugilistic administration that's populist, where there's no ideological center and no real vision for where you take the country domestically or internationally. republicans and democrats have to think beyond the day to day about what's urgent and what's important. i finished reading ben sasse's book, he goes bigger than the partisan divide to talk about the role of technology and how it's going to deal with workforce training, deal with education. just as steve jobs helped define what americans needed through technology before they understood it, the parties need to do that. you take a guy like jeff flake who is a very committed conservative, an excellent senator no matter where you come

from politically, he's thinking about a new conservatism and what it means. part of the backlash against trump is he doesn't have real ideological vision. that's celebrated in certain quarters. both republicans and democrats have to think longer term about how you actually govern, what you stand for, how you move government to meet some of the challenges that trump voters identify that are not going away in this economy, and at the same time, think about how we project power in the rest of the world. that is a changing model as well. it's a very fluid time to be governing. >> something else hanging over their heads. >> chris, i was going to add quickly to that, what you see from trump -- i think the biggest trainer for trump in 2018 and 2020, he basically governs by whack-a-mole. i said this, i did this, i tweeted that. there is no broader vision of what the party can be.

>> the a.d.d. executive is not a winning message. it can't be overstated the fact that senators are starting to speak out. mcconnell saying they're going to do tax by reconciliation. but you're seeing this effort by folks like alexander and murphy trying to solve the problem. you're seeing the coalition in the house trying to get together to solve the problem. if that's the kind of declaration of independence we need to push back on an executive that's clearly out of control and probably out of his depth, that's a good thing for taking more civic responsibility for our country. >> panel, thank you very much for all of your analysis. >> the attrition in his trust level over the russia investigation is also weighing in and emboldening some of these republicans to step forward. the white house is telling the senate to focus on health care, get that done, hold another vote. as we see, the senators are saying mind your business. we'll mind our own, and they're working even with republicans and democrats, working to deal

with health care their own way, to deal with taxes, deal with the budget. we're going to talk to the budget director from the white house who has entered the fray straight ahead. you don't let anything keep you sidelined. 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. dale! oh, hey, rob. what's with the minivan? it's not mine. i don't -- dale, honey, is your tummy still hurting, or are you feeling better to ride in the front seat? oh! is this one of your motorcycling friends? hey, chin up there, dale. lots of bikers also drive cars. in fact, you can save big if you bundle them both with progressive. i'd like that. great. whoo. you've got soft hands. he uses my moisturizer. see you, dale. bye, rob.

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

for years, centurylink has been promising fast internet to small businesses. but for many businesses, it's out of reach. why promise something you can't deliver? comcast business is different. ♪ ♪ we deliver super-fast internet with speeds of 250 megabits per second across our entire network, to more companies, in more locations, than centurylink. we do business where you do business. ♪ ♪

president trump wants senators to hold another vote to dismantle obamacare. some republicans and democrats are working together trying to stabilize the insurance markets that the president has said they should let fail. they're hoping to take a look at the debt ceiling coming at the end of december. republican senator john cornyn went further. he had pointed responses to the budget director at the white hou house, nick mulvaney to deal only with health care. i don't think he's got much experience in the senate, said cornyn, as i recall. he's got a big job. he ought to do that job and let us do our job. let's discuss this with nick mulvaney, the director of the office and budget. good to have you.

>> good to be here. thank you. >> what's going on, enough from the white house, we're going to take care of it our own way and not let the aca implode? >> i appreciate senator cornyn's comments. he's a good friend of mine, but we are trying to follow through on the promises we made as a party which is to repeal and replace. we're not sure how you can run for seven years saying, if you elect us, we'll repeal and replace obamacare and then the voters give us a chance to do that and we don't do it. we've got that working which we know everyone agrees with. the question is why can't the senate deliver on that. at the same time, as to my job, part of my job is to get the american economy back on track, back to what we call this maga economics concept, make american great again concept. part of that is getting rid of obamaca obamacare. we need folks to go back to

work. i appreciate senator cornyn. there's a little tongue-in-cheek in there. always a little institutional infighting between here and capitol hill which is fine. we are doing our job down here. we hope the senate does theirs and continues to work on health care. it doesn't mean they can't work on tax reform at the same time. i know other folks are working on taxes and debt ceiling. that's great. i think our point is this, let's not move on from health care just because you failed by one vote. the president isn't giving up on health care, neither should the senate. >> a lot to unpack here. saying repeal and replace is a lot easier than doing something about it. the aca has been in there for years. a lot of people depend on it. you have manchin meeting, and there's more than one iron in the fire. there's a bigger issue. you can argue it's unconstitutional and in defiance

of statutes that enable the aca, for the president to say let the markets implode. in a minimum it's insensitive. at a maximum, it may be illegal. what's wrong with the senate saying, we're not going to do that, people can get hurt. we have to shore up the markets which includes the payments that the president is dangling over their heads. >> people are getting hurt now. the way to fix that is not by bailing out the insurance companies. these cost sharing reduction payments are payments to the insurance companies in order to get them to support obamacare in the first place. the president's attitude is fairly simple. if people are suffering, and they are, and they will continue to suffer because we have not repealed or replaced obamacare, why shouldn't insurance companies similarly suffer? that's his point. i don't think that's an unfair or unreasonable position for the president of the united states to take. >> why isn't it unreasonable when you know -- the difference between the consumer and insurer is the consumer pays the price, the insurer passes it along through premiums.

you know they'll raise premiums, they tell you their will. >> that's a great point that we can talk about on corporate taxes. when republicans say they want to lower corporate tax, democrats say it's a giveaway. it's a wonderful conversation to have on tax reform. >> answer my question. why would you allow insurers to raise premiums in some effort just to cripple obamacare? >> let's make one thing perfectly clear. insurance companies have been raising premiums even with these payments having been made for the last several years. i live in a state that has one provider. my premiums have gone up every year. until this job, i was on one of the obamacare care exchanges. i lost my doctor, my wife lost her doctor. we have been through this in a way many people have not. that was happening even with the csr payments having been made. obamacare is failing, and i think what's happening is a lot of folks are trying to distract

from that -- >> trying to keep you from making it worse. how do you justify making it worse as evidence that it's already bad? >> it gets worse by itself, as we've seen for the last several years. it doesn't need the president's help to make it a bad piece of legislation. the president is looking at it saying, look, i've got people over here suffering, insurance companies over here getting a bailout. >> mick, it's not a bailout in as much as it won't keep premiums from speaking. i don't understand why you're not calling it what it is. the reason you're getting pushback from your own party is you're going to hurt people if you don't allow these csr payments which, by the way, your own party put in their own bills. obviously they saw the need for them. >> i think it was the republicans in the house who filed the lawsuit to stop the payments in the first place. i would disagree with that entirely. >> true, but they were also included in this bill. i don't view the senate and the house with a disconnect there,

even though the house still provided for some of these payments going forward to a certain year stoppage. >> if they want to provide for the payments as part of a larger bill, that's fine. we welcome that. we supported the house bill. it's not that we dislike these payments as part of a system to repeal obamacare, but right now you don't have that. it comes back to the point i just made. why are you giving the insurance companies a better deal than the people on obamacare? >> because the people will get a worse deal if you don't give these payments, isn't it as simple as that? >> the people have a bad deal the way it is. the simple way to fix this, is to get rid of it, not continue to throw bad money over good. >> but you don't have the votes. >> what we're saying is don't give up. yes, you can continue to work on tax reform. we want you to. we're down on the hill, mr. m.

we hope that address that before they leave for the august recess. that doesn't mean you can't continue to talk about health care reform. i was encouraged to hear lindsey graham has been talking with his colleagues and the white house about ideas he has on new ways to replace obamacare. it's not that we just wanted to work on that by itself. we just don't want them to give up. we haven't given up on trying to repeal and replace. we don't think they should either. >> do you think the president will enable, to the extent he controls the csr payments to the markets so they stay stabilized. >> we said from the very beginning that we would look at that on a month by month basis. that has not changed. >> aren't you encouraging insurers to raise premiums because of the uncertainty? >> chris, we're having the exact same conversation we had 30 seconds ago. >> if you're holding them

hostage. >> chris, stop for a second. these payments have been there for years. the markets are not stable. you are making the assumption that, if we make the payments -- stop for a second. you asked me a question. let me finish the answer. >> all markets are not unstable. >> you asked me the question. let me finish the answer. you are assuming with the csr payments the markets will stay stable. >> more stable. >> that's a false sulgs. >> more stable than otherwise. >> more stable is replacing this with something that actually works. that is more stable. >> the cbo says every one of your suggestions made it worse, every single one, the cbo said. your reaction to that was to try to dismantle the cbo. >> what the cbo said was that, if you are on medicaid expansion and the house bill gets rid of the federal mandate that you have health insurance, that you would voluntarily give up medicaid. let's put that in perspective.

what the cbo said was, you would choose to be uninsured instead of receiving a free government program. does that sound like it makes sense? it doesn't make sense. >> that's one aspect of the underlying assumptions. the bigger assumption was that the states won't have the money no matter how much choice you give them to keep those people enrolled so you have tens of millions who lose coverage. >> one of the things you haven't talked about, the methodology the cbo uses to score every bill and amendment is the same methodology they used to score obamacare in the first place. this is a methodology designed by the guy who famously said we have to lie to the american public. >> they're using the years you asked them to use. >> it's the methodologies we're talking about. the cbo has the numbers. come back to what they say, x number of people will not receive coverage. they're comparing that to an ideal obamacare that works. obamacare doesn't work. people are going to lose

coverage yesterday, last week. i live in a state, i used to be on obamacare that only has one provider. our premiums have gone through the roof. all of those promises made about obamacare -- >> did your state accept the medicaid expansion money? >> we did not. >> you see what i'm saying? you don't think that factors into why the market became destabilized? >> not at all. >> why not? >> the market became destabilized because the system is broken and they couldn't figure out a way to bring market forces to bear in the insurance business. >> what does that mean? when has that ever worked in the insurance world? when have we ever seen that this free enterprise notion makes things cheaper for people when it comes to health insurance, people crippled by the cost before the aca. you know that. >> i'd love to have a long conversation about what was broken with health insurance before obamacare and what continues to be broken with insurance with obamacare. it's one of the few things you buy that you really don't care

what the cost is. when you go to the doctor for an x ray or cat scan, you don't care what the cost of that is. you care what your out-of-pocket expense is. that's the only product or service we buy like that. it's a tremendous distortion of the market. that's probably a longer conversation. >> nobody spends the time on this like we do. that's why you're always welcome here. let's talk about taxes. your time in congress, you were a deficit hawk, you were a movement politician. you put out a statement after the initial budget proposal where you said i'm not really interested in how tax reform handles the deficit. that was seen as a huge reversal of course, if not a hypocritical statement from someone who is all about deficit control. why the change? >> what i said was, look, there's different kinds of deficit. what i'm trying to do, chris, is us back to a healthy american

growth, sustained 3% economic growth. >> the president says four or five. >> you accused my budget of being overly optimistic. >> not me. >> the 2.6 we got this month is less than we projected in our budget. we've got that going for us. come back to what we're trying to accomplish with taxes, trying to get to sustained economic growth. my comment about deficits was this. there's one kind of deficit that comes from government spending and an entirely different kind of deficit that comes from allowing people to keep their own money. it has to do with the allocation of capital. i'm willing and this administration is willing to sustain short-term deficits if there's sustained economic growth, the benefit to the country in five, ten, 15 years of having that growth again as we've had for more than two centuries is huge and we're willing to incur short-term deficits. >> the higher the growth rate is, the smaller the problems are, with all the entitlements

and a lot of other burdens on fiscal restraint. mick mulvaney, i'm not joking when i say we know people are divided, a lot of time arguing from each perspective. you're always invited to come on "new day." >> thanks forgiving me the time. appreciate it. >> alisyn. another interesting story, is the justice department trying to get rid of affirmative action at colleges and universities? a new report on the issue next. 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. i have news. i've used most of our cellular data. come on, susan lucci! ♪ we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10 to 25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given

if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait. it's your glass of willpower that helps keep cravings... ...far, far away. feel less hungry with the natural fiber in clinically... ...proven meta appetite control. from metamucil.

"the new york times" is reporting this morning that the justice department plans to take on affirmative action in college admissions. according to a document obtained by "the times" the plan is to protect white applicants. matt slap is current chairman for the american conservative union and van jones, cnn political commentator and former special adviser to president obama. matt schlapp, what is wrong with affirmative action? >> nothing is wrong with it.

i think it was well intended. when you have populations that faced serious discrimination, the government steps in to make sure people are not doing things that break the law and discriminate against people. >> so why now try to change it? >> the whole concept is eventually you want these programs to go away, eventually you want to realize dr. king's dream of a color blind society. >> have we gotten here? do you think it's outlived its usefulness? >> at the american conservative union we have the family prosperity index. what you're seeing in politics and in culture, there's tremendous hardship that is wreaking havoc on rural white america, opioid addiction, duh sides going through the roof. at some point in these programs, especially in college admissions, you're saying we'll give you the leg up, give you the slot. inevitably you're actually taking slots away as well. as a country we have to ask ourselves at what point do we

have the right standards in these programs. >> van, your response? >> i think we're seeing a pretty disturbing pattern with jeff sessions and the department of justice. we should be trying to -- we'll get to the white community which needs a lot of help as well, especially rural. but you've got communities where you need to open doors of opportunity and close prison doors. sessions seems to be going in the opposite direction. he seems to be wanting to double down on the failed drug war which is to have more young urban youth going to prison and ratchet back on the scholarships to get them to college. you put that together and you have a justice department that seems to have a very negative and disturbing view of the future for young frarks, young latinos and others. the other thing is, when you look at the total approach, you also want more people voting and you want better policing. he seems to be wanting to take a step back on the policing standards and yet not be helping

on the voting standards. i don't view a pattern that's negative. >> you're looking at the big picture and the pattern. on affirmative action specifically, what about matt's point that poor whites are struggling, also, and if in college admissions you always favor black or latino applicants, that the goal of a level playing field isn't working. >> the numbers don't bear out the concern yet. you have to admit, at some point you can get to a point where you're overcompensating. the numbers don't bear that out. matt is 100% correct, when you're talking about rural poverty, what's going on in small town america, democrats and republicans have not done enough to respond to those crises. i think it's a mistake, rather than turning on each other, we need to turn to each other. poverty is not the same as racial discrimination. you've got to be able to deal

with both. >> can i do something very dangerous? can i also agree with van, that i also think our prison system and our incarceration system should be focused on violent criminals. i do fear we have this lock-them-up mentality. we put people in prison who we don't like instead of who we fear. i want to focus on violent criminals. i think van has a good point there. i think that when it comes to all these questions, we have to have a fair understanding that when you hurt one american to help another american and do it for all these reasons in employment or specifically at colleges, we have to see what the implications are for the person who is left behind. i think in 21st century america with all our problems and our problems are on our television sets all day long, but at some point don't we have to say don't we have a fair shake, haven't we done a good job for half a century to change our laws to make sure we're color blind?

>> it depends on the you think we're done with that work, that it's a level playing field? >> i don't think we ever get to perfection or nirvana in this world. i think it gets better and i think your standards need to lower. >> i disagree with a couple things. >> i'll quickly summarize. there are legal standards on whether or not you can have these programs and when these programs have done what they've needed to do. i actually think the scrutiny standards need raised so that you only have these programs when you can see real -- you're not having racial discrimination at harvard, yale, princeton and berkeley. it's absurd. >> van? >> well, on this point i see it differently. first of all, the supreme court has already ratcheted the standards up pretty phi. they visited this issue a little while ago. basically what you've got to be able to show is a whole number of things. you've got to be able to show there's a pattern of discrimination, not just at that institution, but that's

important. it also turns out, our supreme court says that colleges do have an interest in making sure the student body is diverse. it can't be overdone, but that is a problem. if you could come up with a situation where if you have the prong set of standards, the entire student body -- >> sure. but bottom line, are you comfortable that the justice department is going to look into whether it's time to rework affirmative action? >> no. we just went through this with the supreme court. if the justice department wants to deal with discrimination, you have states in this country blocking people from voting, according to the supreme court, you still have police departments that are discriminating. they're backing away from that and focusing on this is a complete miss allocation of resources. >> we have to leave it there. >> i'll come back for the last word. >> thank you very much. routine traffic stop turns into an incredibly dangerous

situation. are you watching your screen? how did this officer get himself to safety? ♪ hey, is this our turn? honey...our turn? yeah, we go left right here. (woman vo) great adventures are still out there. we'll find them in our subaru outback. (avo) love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. get 0% apr financing for 63 months on all new 2017 subaru outback models. now through august 31.

mikboth served in the navy.s, i do outrank my husband, not just being in the military, but at home.

she thinks she's the boss. she only had me by one grade. we bought our first home together in 2010. his family had used another insurance product but i was like well i've had usaa for a while, why don't we call and check the rates? it was an instant savings and i should've changed a long time ago. there's no point in looking elsewhere really. we're the tenneys and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today.

finding the best hotel price is whoooo. now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches... ...over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the... ...hotelock it in. tripadvisor. new this morning, the u.s. is testing an intercontinental ballistic missile. the unarmed missile was launched from california and traveled more than 4,000 miles. officials say this is not in response to north korea's missile test, but instead to make sure america's missile

program is safe and secure. christopher wray confirmed as the new director of the fbi. during his confirmation hearings he said he would never pledge loyalty to the president. that's not a criticism. the loyalty is to the constitution. he said if he were ever pressured to drop an investigation, he would resist and resign. five democrats opposed his confirmation. a ft. worth police officer in a routine traffic stop, it turns into a fight for his life. he was at the driver's side window handing out a ticket when an out dch of-control car crashed right into him. wait a second. look what happens next? he summons the strength to lift himself up somehow and get out of the line of traffic. he is, we're happy to say, recovering from minor injuries. the out-of-control driver is

facing charges. in other words, the officer got up and i believe issued a citation to the man who just plowed into him. >> this is one of those situations on your screen that you have to file under one category, there but for the grace of god go i, because the difference between surviving and not surviving that is literally a fraction. >> this is which police officers tell us all the time there is no such thing as a routine traffic stop. it's never routine. >> good luck to him and his family in dealing with his injuries. i hope he gets back soon. weather news for you. slow moving line of storms set to soak some major cities. parts of florida, take a look at this, severe flooding from all this wind and rain that come with this tropical depression named emily. this woman getting around miami beach by kayak. cnn meteorologist chad myers has your forecast, and for every kind of cool scene like that of someone taking advantage, boy,

there's a lot of hardship. >> there is. elevators are flooded, and people can't get to where they want to be in the high-rises, it is a mess down there in parts of south florida. this weather is brought to you by xyzal for continuous 24-hour allergy relief. we'll see storms in the northeast today. pennsylvania, new jersey, connecticut, new york city, boston could see storms, especially around 4:00. if you were on a flight to any of these airports, you may get delayed as the storms move by later this afternoon. the rest of the country in good shape. a couple of showers across the gulf coast. i think the major story is it's going to be cool in the east, high today in chicago, 86. that's relatively cool, compared to portland, 106. two-thirds of the people even in seattle don't have air conditioning. 106 in portland is hot. >> oh, my gosh, that's extremely hot. it is august. >> chad, thank you very much. president trump's family is at the center of some

controversy. how are ivanka, jared, don junior and erica accepting their father's administration? our panel weighs in next.

for years, centurylink has been promising fast internet to small businesses. but for many businesses, it's out of reach. why promise something you can't deliver? comcast business is different. ♪ ♪ we deliver super-fast internet with speeds of 250 megabits per second across our entire network, to more companies, in more locations, than centurylink. we do business where you do business. ♪ ♪

. the statement that don jr. issued is tree. there's no inaccuracy in the statement. the president weighed in as any father would, based on the limited information that he had. >> sanders straight faced looking down and look the at her notes and giving a misleading answer to a very basic question. what did the president have to do with his son's statement about his meeting with russians? the story keeps changing. why? a lot of reasons but it's certainly points us in the direction of this controversy surrounding the influence. parent of the children of the president and his son-in-law. what is the role.

emily jane fox. and cnn contributor and author of the "truth about trump." what do we see so far in the term the of the role and reality of estrong the children? >> i think there's a lot of discussion on the influence they have in the white house in the west wing in particular. to me it's over personal decisions. the they may not have had a -- we know that jarrod kushner supported ousting former fbi director james comey. we know they wanted to get reince priebus out of the white house which is why a source told me they're supportive of bringing in anthony scaramucci who also had the same goal. it, wouldrked. they didn't care for him after last week.

their real influence has been over hiring and firing people. >> what's the early word on competence? h are people impressed with what ivanka and jarrod bring to the table. he's getting a lot of scrutiny for some awkward comments he made to interns and his apparent ignorance. >> i think its depends on who you ask. if you look at "the wall street journal's" transcript, the president referred to jarrod kushner as a good boy which is not necessarily a vote of confidence for his maturity when you come to look at all the things he's responsible for in the west whipping. but they're growth given broad slates and huge responsibility. in some ways that's a vote of confidence and in some ways a way to sherk any real responsibilities when you have so many things you're in charge

of you tend to be not in erj charge of anything. >> this is is tough job. none of them has are done anything like this before. so say they're not over their head would be impossible. so, michael, what does that take us to? that takes us to this controversy surrounding john do. he made bad choices. the e-mail chain makes that very clear. what do you make of this inability to get a straight answer out of the white house about the role? h the attorneys came out and said the president had no role. then find out from the "new york times" he was involved. then "the washington post" says he dictated language in the statement. now the white house as you see in the form of sarah huckabee sanders reading her notes. saying well he weighed in as any father would do. his son's not 13. he's almost 40. >> es he's not 13. he's almost 40. i think you had experience with a father who was in politics,

and your father would haven about very careful not to advise you to do anything that was de-septemb deceptive or reflecting. if he would have been involved in a conversation like this would have had the law and interest of the american people foremost in mind. that's where family has to be set aside. it makes this whole picture very confusing, because on the one hand, as emily said, these kids, but they're not kids -- get a lot of responsibilities, but on the other, they're so defused that they're not really responsible for anything. and we have to really assume that there's constant contact between. >> sure. >> not only the children and the president, but also all these cronies who are around him. no one really disappears from donald trump's orbit. that's why lieu -- i would

imagine that scaramucci is going to be calling the president at some point and the president will take his call. >> i mean look. there's always this talk around trump. about the difference between being an intimate and an ins strew -- you're a child of the president. yes, they're all adults. i don't mean it as a pejorative to call them the kids. they are, but all adults. of course they're going to have an intimacy with their father that can't be ruled away by hierarchy but ivanka has a foot in both levels. she's the daughter. she puts out this tweet if we can put it up there. how you see it is really a function of with are you're coming from. the looking forward to serving alongside john kelly. okay? that was all a lot of critics heard. le one, why didn't she call him

general, two, what do you mean working alongside. >> it's unreal lice tick to think they're not going to speak to their father. this is someone they've worked alongside. but, i also think that they are -- i know from one white house official they're incredibly happy to have a sense of professionalism to return to the west wing. i think she's happy to work under him as long as it serves her purpose. >> the problem isn't the connection. it's the confidence. that's why you have to listen to the comments yourselves. it's the competence, not the cooperation, not the intimacy. michael. emily jane thank so much. there is a lot of news this morning. an explosive lawsuit that goes to the heart of fake news. what do you say? let's get after it.

i think what's hurting the legislative agenda is congress's inability to get things passed. >> a rift is growing between president trump and senate republicans. >> i'm not going to vote to change the rules of the senate. having a minority voice is probably good for the country. >> the american people need a president that puts their interests first. >> the president weighed in as any father would, based on the limited information that he had. >> the president didn't sign off on anything. the president wasn't involved. >> it is hard for me to keep track of this ever widening web of lies coming from this administration. >> it poep-- >> >> good morning, everyone welcome to your new day. trustee wednesd senator republicans revolting against