♪ ♪ (music ends) (drumsticks clattering) well, a big hour after a day that saw the battle to pass a tax plan heat up and a stinging report came out on who will pay the price for it. also, the president chooses to use a ceremony to honor native american war heros as an opportunity to make a racial mark about a native american and a political opponent. and the white house responding to a report in "the new york times" which correspondent maggie haberman just updated that the president on at least three occasions that "the new york times" says they know about has said that he doubts the authenticity of the "access hollywood" tape.

the one in which he brags about being able to sexually assault women. and the one which he has already acknowledged was real and actually apologized for. in a moment, the woman trump and billy bush were meeting just after he uttered those words, arianna zucker. but first, sarah sanders was asked about this, and talk about what she said. sort of open to interpretation. >> it is, anderson. sarah sanders said that the president had already addressed this. she was asked if the president has any doubts about the authenticity of the tape. she says that he has made his position on it clear, dating back to last year when it leaked in october. she was asked if perhaps his position on it had changed and she said no. she said that if anything, what the president questions is the media's reporting around the tape, but we dug deeper, trying to find out specifically what she meant by that and she said that the president questioned

current reports. we followed up with her to find out if she was talking about this "new york times" reporting that the president has suggested, dating back to early this year, to one senator. that this tape may not be authentic. apparently, he repeated that claim recently to an adviser. part of the reason that this tape has come up in the conversation, we should mention, anderson, at least according to "the new york times", is during discussions about the president's response to the allegations to roy moore. so we followed up with sarah sanders again after that to try to find out specifically what she meant when she said that the president questions the reporting, but she has not gotten back to us yet. >> and i talked to maggie haberman in the last hour, and she said just then within the last two hours, so now within the last three hours, she has talked to a third person who said said that the president had questioned the authenticity to that person. but just to be clear, the president did acknowledge it was he who made those comments when the tape first came out. i -- not only did he do it on video, he did it at the debate

that i was co-moderator of. >> yeah, the president literally said, i did it, i apologize. you had a series of surrogates come out and say that this was just locker room talk, including the first lady, melania trump actually told you this was just locker room talk. there's never really been a denial from the white house as to whether or not this tape is authentic, whether or not this is the president's voice on there. one other note that we should mention, billy bush who lost his job and has suffered significantly, his career because of this tape, has never denied that the tape wasn't real so there's really an interesting imbalance between what was said last year and now what the president is suggesting in private or in public. >> joining me now is arianne zucker who was in the tape doing the interview with citizen trump ands also billy bush. so the president questioning the

authenticity of the "access hollywood" tape. you were there. is there any possible way it is not authentic? >> well, wiobviously, i wasn't there during the bus ride. just to reiterate, i had no idea what was going on before they got off the bus. but i do know that i was there working and doing my job. and the whole point was to welcome the "access hollywood" bus and give billy bush and trump a tour and trump was on our show, da"days of our lives, so whatever happened beforehand, i'm assuming, you're miked and it's recording as you're driving in. i don't know how else that could be fake? i mean, unless someone's planting words in your mouth, that's the only other way. so it has puzzling to me. and i was curious. i thought, how do you apologize for something and then renege on

it. and that was just in question. >> yeah, certainly, if there was a time to question the authenticity of the tape, it would have been during the campaign, right after it came out, not necessarily 13 months later after he's already acknowledged what he said and apologized for what he said. >> rate, absolutely. >> this is something you've clearly never asked to be a part of. you were just doing your job and now the president and the white house, for that matter, aren't acknowledging that it was real. i wonder, does that -- how do you -- how do you reconcile that? how does that, at this point, feel? it's been, you know, 13 months since you and i frankly last talked about this. >> i'm the type of person that moves on from things. these are -- you know, with so much going on in the world and so much that goes on in our communities on a daily basis, and especially everything that's gone on in the last 13 months, my whole goal is staying positive and moving forward. so to me, it really hasn't affected my life, because i've

made a choice for it not to affect me in a negative way a and -- but having it come full circle, i feel like, haven't we learned our lesson? haven't we moved on? let's take responsibility for ourselves and our actions. and i really, truly believe that if you're honest with yourself and with the people around you, the repercussions are less, because people go, wow, they appreciate your honesty and they're going to move forward with you rather than against when you're constantly going back and forth. and that's what i feel like now, it's like three steps forward and now we take 15 steps back. >> ratight, this is not somethi we would be reporting on if "the new york times" not now had three sources saying the president is continuing to talk about this and is now denying the authenticity. you said watching it was surreal. talking about it, again, watching it again, does it still feel surreal?

>> not so much anymore, because it's been played so much, i've had dinner conversations about it. people stop me in the elevator and ask how i'm doing and ask me about the situation, so it's soaked in and feels like a part of history, which i understand it truly is. but as a mother, as a friend, as a daughter, as a community member, i just really would hope that someone in such a high position could really teach us a few things which would be respect, honor, trust, and not to go back. because at the end of the day, you figure, just a little scenario is, i'm a mom. if i come home and i'm constantly telling different stories to my daughter, how do you think i'm going to raise her? which direction do you think she's going to go? is she going to tell the truth on a daily basis? is she going to go, well, wow, my mom kind of finagles stories here and there, so i can too.

so you're teaching that to people who are younger than you. maybe people that are in the same position you are or beneath you in your colleagues, but it's just very -- it's upsetting. because you want to see a person in a positive position giving -- helping others be respectful and honest and truthful. >> one of the things when i see that tape. and again, i haven't watched it for a while, but, of course, today, i watched it several times again, is that to me, it's sort of so interesting, because it kind of in some ways shows the position a woman may find herself in, where whether you believe it's just locker room, but they're talking about when they're meeting you and have the

n knowledge of what they have been just speaking about, you have no idea of what they have been just been speaking about and that's the position a lot of women find themselves in when they're not in that board room or they're not in the room where, you know, a bunch of guys are having a conversation. you have no idea -- you're not in on what's just occurred. >> right. exactly. and, you know, this is a -- this is a time where it's really important that women in these situations and with all the sexual harassment that's happening now, it's important to move forward. and it's scary. it's scary to sit here and have this conversation with you. i'm a pretty quiet person on a day-to-day basis, so i'm proud of those women that come out. and it's our time. this is a time to set an example, to set an example for our youth, men and women, and to teach our children how to be respectful of each other. and how to communicate with each

other. we're losing that. and i think kmauncommunication such a big part of our society that we've lost through twitter and having conversations online when we should be having conversations in person. >> so what sort of a message then -- if "the new york times" reporting is correct, they have three people saying to them that the president has denied the authenticity of this, what kind of a message do you think that sends to women? >> not a very good one. again, i think the message should be, enough is enough. when do we say when? when do we say -- when does somebody in a position of power take this moment in time and do something amazing with it? and that's where -- that's what you want to see, regardless of a past situation, this is a time to turn your life around and do something better. and i think that's why i feel so passionate about it now,

because, we're not going to get this second chance. and things are going to unravel more and more and more as the news goes on and as these stories come out. but what are we going to do while it's coming out? and the healing process and moving forward? and i think that is a real important aspect that we're all missing. >> so for you, that healing process requires acknowledging the wrong that was done or acknowledging comments that were made? >> yes. and my situation and in so many other corporate jobs or, heck, you can be working -- i just read articles about the restaurant business, about how people in power, whatever position of power you're in, taking advantage. and why is it okay that, you know, someone in this position doesn't get the same kind of discipline as somebody off the street. so somebody else could be in jail, another man could be -- you know, arrested for these sexual acts and how come we protect other people in other

positions or higher positions? and that's where i think this is important, you know, we're standing together as men and women, who believe that we should be respecting each other. need to take a stand. and i think this is a perfect time to do it. and be passionate about it. and find the progress and move forward instead of moving backwards. >> arianne, i want to play something for you the president recently said, but i need to take a quick break and pick up the conversation in a few minutes, if that's okay with you. and we'll get the panel's take as well. and later, that moment that's getting so much attention, a ceremony to honor navajo war heros and the remark about the senator he calls pocahontas. that can trace yor origins to over 150 ethnic regions- and open up a world of possibilities. save 40% at ancestrydna.com. ends monday.

mopping robotthe from irobot. its precision jet spray and vibrating cleaning head loosen and scrub stains. all while navigating kitchens, bathrooms and those hard to reach places. you and braava jet from irobot. better together. we make sure you're in the loop at every step from the moment you decide to move your money to the instant your new retirement account is funded. because when you know where you stand, things are just clearer. -♪ a little bit o' soul, yeah because when you know where you stand, at t-mobile, when you holiday together, great things come in twos. like t-mobile and netflix. right now when you get an unlimited family plan, netflix is included. ho ho ho! t-mobile covers your netflix subscription... best christmas gift ever! ...so you can binge watch all year long. now you're thinking christmas! and now when you buy any of this season's hot new samsung galaxy phones,

you get a second one free to gift. that's one samsung for you. and one to give. t-mobile. holiday twogether. aleve direct therapy. the only remote controlled tens device that's drug free, wire free for deep penetrating lower back pain relief. and now get aleve direct therapy with $10 off at your local target.

we're talking to arianne zucker who spoke to then citizen trump and billy bush after the now-infamous "access hollywood" tape. i want to something the president said last week when asked what his message is to women in this moment in u.s. history. let's listen. >> women are very special. i think it's a very special time, because a lot of things are coming out and i think that's good for our society. and i think it's very, very gad for women. and i'm very happy a lot of these things are coming out. and i'm very happy -- >> do you believe the accusers -- >> -- that it's being exposed. >> back with arianne. i'm wondering what your reaction to those comments are when now less than a week later, according to "the new york times," over the course of some time, the president has been sewing doubt about the tape that you are on, that "access hollywood" tape, saying that it's not authentic. >> again, it goes back to that -- that see saw effect,

when, you know, you're honest over here and defiant over here, i'm not sure -- you know, you're not sure when you're listening to two different comments. and it's really at some point, when do you throw up your hands and go, i don't know what to believe. so that's why i feel like we, as people, as citizens, as, you know, it's our right to come together and fand a way to -- if he's not going to do it, and we need to act on it and find a way to bring this respect forward and make sure that women are in a position where they're equal. i don't need to be in a place of power. i just want to be equal and i want to make sure that my daughter has a chance and doesn't have to go through any of these harassment issues that so many women have gone through. and what's really sad to me, almost every woman that i know

has been harassed in some way, shape, or form, including myself. and that shouldn't be an issue, to have that problem in this day and age. you know, we have the ability, we have the social networking. we have the therapy. we have so many things that we can do to prevent young men and women from being abused and there's so many facets to this conversation, so it's hard to pick one way, but i feel like it starts from the top. and you know, when you have someone saying one thing and doing another we -- somebody else has to make it happen. and so i hope by coming here, i thought, what am i going to do or what am i going to say, how am i going to help? well, i hope i can help just by saying a voice by saying, let's do something and start today. let's start making assure that we respect each other and start communicating with each other and being real with each other and trusting each other a little

bit more, because it is -- we are in such a difficult time right now. >> arianne zucker, i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i want to pring bring in the. kirsten power, scott jennings, and tara setmayer. now "the new york times," now maggie haberman has a third person who has told her in the last couple of hours that the president is questioning the authenticity of this. and the senator who the president reportably talked to according to "the new york times," according to their reporting, he had actually talked about hairing investigators to kind of investigating the authenticity of the tape. >> yeah, i don't know why he's opening this up again, right? because he had apologized for it, admitted that it happened, and now he's sort of opening it up again as a topic of discussion. and you know, i would be interested to know why he -- why he -- how he thinks this would have worked, right? if he really does believe this. and i don't know if he really

believes this or if he's just decided this is something that he can say and that the people who follow him will believe it. that maybe he can put this out there and say, well, actually, i was set up. you know, but what's the evidence for it? >> because it is interesting, jason, that he's not publicly saying this. i mean, according to -- if "the new york times" reporting is correct, and obviously, maggie and all the other reporters, three reporters who were working on the story, they're deeply sourced and the president has talked to maggie repeatedly, he's not -- i mean, you know, you heard from sarah huckabee sanders today, who clearly didn't want there to be a sentence saying the president is denying this or the president -- you know, the language he used was somewhat convoluted. but if he is sort of semi-publicly going around to a senator and to other people in his orbit, saying this, does it make any sense to you? >> well, keep in mind, if at the time when the tape came out, and of course i was working on the campaign, and the president said he was wrong and he apologized. he said those words don't reflect who he is as a person. and since then, we haven't had

any additional tapes or anything like that pop up again. but i think one of the things to keep in mind here is that it's not as though the president is going out on the campaign trail or going out to the oval office and bringing this issue up. i mean, some of these conversations were as far back as 11 months and we don't know if the people brought it up to him or if it's something he just happened to be chatting about. but i think it's the difference between, he's not out there bringing this up. >> but the president even saying in private conversations, i mean he's -- >> but he hasn't backtracked on the apology. and he hasn't backtracked on saying that he was wrong when he made those comments in the first place. >> but he's saying, apparently -- i mean, he essentially is if he's saying in private conversations, i'm going to hire investigators -- >> he could have raised an issue with the way it was edited or who leaked it or funded it or how this whole thing came about. but again, unless the president is out there saying he's taking back his apology or backtracking on what he said previously, i

don't see where this is that big of a deal. >> well, it is a big deal. because there's now clear evidence from deep reporting that the president is questioning the authenticity of this tape, when there's been no evidence no indicate it's anything but real. and he has, in the past, by apologizing, accepting it is his voice. now, that tape and what he said was much discussed. but one thing i think we can all accept is that if you were the women who raised allegations against donald trump, it was an incredibly painful time. and if you were a person who is a survivor of sexual assault, that was an incredibly painful time to have that kind of a conversation relevant to a man who was running and would be president of the united states. so i have to tell you, to me, this is like donald trump enjoying pouring salt in the wounds of americans who have suffered sexual assault or sexual harassment. and i can't figure out any reason hays doing it, except he has disdain for those women who accused him of sexually

inappropriate behavior, doesn't really believe any of the women out there, and now he's just bringing it all back up and stirring it up in a painful way. >> david axelrod and david gerg en in the last hour were raising the idea that the president may actually believe or has now convinced himself in some way that it's not authentic. >> this is a pattern of his perpetual victimization, because he can never take responsibility for anything. i was on air on this network the day that that tape broke and watched him give that video apology. and i even said, he lacked like it was in a hostage video. you clearly, you could see how it was eating him alive to have to say those words, as opposed to showing authentic contrition. and i think that there is a certain amount of empathy that he actually shows in this case, usually he's not empathetic, but i think there's an empathy with roy moore, which is some kind of very twisted thing here, where he feels a kinship with him. and that roy moore is being

victimized here. and so this is a way of him connecting to that and convincing hums thconvince i ing himself that, well, that could not have possibly me, because that means i was wrong and i was publicly humiliated the way roy moore is. this is why he won't comment on roy moore, because it illuminates what he did. he can't sit there and condemn roy moore when it's what he did. >> and maybe he regrets the apology. >> i think he does. >> i think to say he feels a kinship with roy moore over this means that he also by definition must feel a kinship with al franken or conyers or anybody else. i'm not sure that's the issue here. i think, two things, number one, jason's right. he hasn't changed his position publicly and i suspect the people leaking around the president are probably trying to keep him from changing his position publicly. >> well, that's an odd rash tt e rationale. >> if i were the white house press secretary, i would not hesitate to go back to his words, i said it, i was wrong, i

apologi apologize, i was embarrassed, i apologize to my family and the american people. the hostage video was not great at the time, but he actually in the debate with you was much better in trying to clean it up at the time. >> but she didn't -- >> we've got to take a break. up next, the white house ceremony for navajo world war ii hero heros, where the president chose to go after a political opponent he calls pocahontas. your hair down? switch to new pantene light as air foam conditioner, full of rich pro-v nutrients. for 100% conditioning, 0% weight new pantene foam conditioner. (vo) purchase $999 or more coat helzberg diamondsx. and get an xbox one s, with 3 months of xbox game pass and xbox live gold. at helzberg diamonds. while supplies last.

no matter what it brings. every day. or where he is. and pain doesn't hold him back. thanks to dr. scholl's running insoles. the only ones proven to relieve and prevent pain from runner's knee, shin splints and plantar fasciitis. dr. scholl's. born to move.

we that's why at xfinityic. we've been working hard to simplify your experiences with us. now with instant text and email updates you'll always be up to date. you can easily add premium channels so you don't miss your favorite show. and with just a single word, find all the answers you're looking for. because getting what you need should be simple, fast, and easy. download the xfinity my account app or go online today.

this afternoon at a white house event to honor native american war heros, president trump touched off firestorm in front of a portrait of andrews jackson, who signed the indian removal act of 1830. the legislation that set into motion the bloody trail of tears. here's what president trump said today. >> and i just want to thank you, because you're very, very special people. you were here long before any of us were here. although we have a representative in congress who they say was here a long time ago. they call her pocahontas. >> well, he was talking about massachusetts democratic senator, elizabeth warren. that is his nickname for her. we spoke if the last hour. here's some of what she had to say. >> i really couldn't believe it, that there he was at a ceremony to honor native americans, men who have really put it all on

the line to save american lives, to save lives of people, our allies, during world war ii. really amazing people. and president trump couldn't even make it through a ceremony to honor these men without throwing in a racial slur. you know, he thinks that somehow he's going to shut me up with that. and it's just not going to happen. it didn't work in the past, it's not going to work in the future. i'm going to keep fighting for all the issues i'm fighting for. >> and back now with the panel. tara? >> look, you can't buy class. i don't care how much money trump claims he has. class is certainly not quantifiable for him in this. it's a completely inappropriate. you just don't do this. and for all of the people dismiss that it's offensive to some. and i am not, you know, someone that's overly sensitive to those kinds of things.

i think that sometimes political correctness can run amok. but that's not the case here. it's been clear that he's using this as a pejorative. and anytime you're using any kind of cultural reference as a pejorative, it's offensive to people. and you could tell those poor navajo code talkers, they were stuck there. like, what are they going to say? meanwhile, the president of the united states made a horrible joke. it was completely out of place. and for anyone to sit here and defend it and dismiss it as if it weren't that is just being disingenuous. you know it's completely inappropriate. i call him the archie bunker in chief, that's exactly what he is, because he seems to think that's funny in his own mind. >> and he takes an event, to add on that, that should be -- you know what the full statement should have been, thank you. thank you for doing everything you did to save this country and being so brilliant in the way you did it. you know, against folks who were not necessarily welcoming you to do it. thank you. and it's what he said, and i agree with everything that tara

said, but it's that he feels the need to take events that are actually above politics, and not just make them political, but drag them down into the dregs of political battle, in this case, in an offensive way against liz warren. it's just as if he misses, and maybe because he never served and did everything he could to avoid ever having to serve our country, he just can't show the respect and gratitude that these men deserved. >> scott? >> i was watching this video today and i sort of got this weird feeling when i was watching it and i was like, when have i had this feeling before? and it's when i watched my favorite show, "the office." this was straight out of the michael scott cringe-worthy playbook. this kind of crack is better left for a sitcom than a white house event. all the national polling that's come out lately has shown a vast majority of americans currently don't think he's fit the hold the office, which is a problem wheny thinking about how it's going to play in a re-election campaign. this kind of a gaffe today at an event that would really help

drag that number back to where you want it to be, doesn't help. i do think that it's unfortunate. these code talkers are amazing people. we used them in world war i and world war ii. we're spending all of our time talking about this gaffe. so let's say a word about the code talkers. a lot of folks are familiar with the raising of the flag at iwo jima. everyone's seen this statue. if it weren't for the code talkers that were there, we would not have taken' woe g eiw. they deserve our -- >> i think this is totally political correctness run amok here. i've got to disagree with what you're saying. >> of course you do. >> the whole reason we're having this conversation is because elizabeth warren made up the fact that she was saying that she was native american. not just made it up in passing, but did it to try to get ahead, to where he was saying she was part of the cherokee and delaware tribes. and said, even folks in my

family have high cheekbones. this is the level she went to. so if the president is going to bust the chops of a political opponent. >> was this the place to do it? >> the problem is where he's doing it, though. this is not the place that you do it. it's just basically decency. it has nothing to do with political correctness. it has to do with showing basic respect for people. why would you say that in front of people who are heros. you may not think it's offensive, but we've had native american people and native american groups and say that they think it's offensive. and that is all that matters. and i want to address what you just said about elizabeth warren, because she actually does not say what you're saying is true. she says this is what she was told by her family. there's no evidence whatsoever that she used it to get ahead sm she just said that in an interview with anderson. you repeat these talking points, but that's not actually what happened. and even if it did happen, it wouldn't -- >> she had her name in that

native american law directory -- >> she already had a job! >> she did not run into the event today and said, i'm so happy to be here as a native american. >> she looks for any opportunity to fight with president trump -- >> but jason, there was an event -- >> one at a time. one at a time. >> there was an event today called by the president of the united states os tense apptensi thank the very brave navajo code talkers for their service. elizabeth warren was not there. she did not issue some statement endorsing the event based on her native american history. she had nothing to do with it. and he brought her and that offensive slur into the debate. she had nothing -- if she had put out a statement beforehand -- >> so it's okay for her to pretend that she's native american? >> first of all, she does not contend she pretended. and i believe her, but that's a red herring. it's a distraction. the president of the united states at an event where he simply should have said, thanks for your service, brought her up. >> he did honor them. he's been a very strong friend of native americans since he's been in office.

>> the native american community has spoken clearly and loudly that they were offended. he had no reason to do it and you are trying to change the focus and blame senator warren -- >> i got to follow up on this. in what way has he been -- i'm -- for my own -- >> he's been a big advocate of native americans being able to do what they want with their land. >> but when he was wanting a casino on their land in 1993 -- that's well documented. >> he's been a strong ally -- >> can't they both be wrong? elizabeth warren was completely in the wrong when she did this before. and i'm not sure this was the right event withdrew to bring it up today, although he's brought it up many times in other political venues and it's been fodder. >> let's take a break and a breath. when we come back, we turn to a truly bizarre power struggle at the consumer financial protection bureau, two democrats each saying they're in charge. [ sneeze ]

shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels. ♪ tired of sore throat lozenges that only last a short time? try new alka-seltzer plus sore throat relief. the melts dissolve quickly. plus, the powerful pain reliever provides long-lasting relief for up to six hours. try new alka-seltzer plus.

we are the driven... the dedicated... the overachievers. we know our best investment is in ourselves. we don't take no for an answer.

we fight for what we want. even for the things that were once a given. going to college... buying a home... and not being in debt for it for the rest of our lives. but we're only as strong as our community. who inspires and pushes us to go further than we could ever go alone. sofi. get there sooner. in another truly bizarre story tonight, the dual for the top job at the consumer financial protection bureau or the cfpb, in a remarkable power struggle, the white house' pick for acting director, current budget director, mick mulvaney, says he's in charge, while the agency's former director's

choice, leandra english, says she is in power. both sent all staff welcome e-mails today, each signed off acting director, while serving in coke, mulvaney voted in favor of killing the agency entirely and has since worked with president trump to roll back some of the agency's rules, bring back in the panel, also joining us is jim schultz, a former white house ethics lawyer for the trump administration, also cnn chief legal analyst, jeffrey toobin. so, jeff, the dodd/frank act states the deputy director shall serve as acting director in the absence or unavailability of the director. so why shouldn't the president be able to point a director? >> because there's a different law that says that -- that deals with all vacancies, which says that the president gets to fill the vacancies. it's actually -- and there's a question about whether the law publishing the consumer bureau is actually constitutional at all. so it's a very complicated legal

situation. i've, you know, followed the arguments. i think there are actually very good arguments on both sides. but it's important to remember, as we talk about this, what's really going to happen here is donald trump is going to get to put someone in, eventually. he's going to put someone in who will be confirmed my the senate. this bizarre controversy will end. and then this bur ro is basically going to die. this idea, it was elizabeth warren's idea, to have a consumer bureau, is basically going to be killed by this administration. and that, to me, is a much bigger story than who's the acting director for the next month or two. >> let me ask you, according to do dodd frank, will serve in absence or unavailability of the director. why isn't it the same thing as absence or unavailability? >> this is the president's power. i think it's a pretty simple legal question. the vacancy act is just that. it references vacancy. when you say unavailability or absence, that's no difference

than a long-term sickness or some kind of extended vacation. someone is there to mind the store. this is really just the democrats and elizabeth warren trying to circumvent the law, circumvent executive powers and circumvent an election. >> but aren't there real legal questions about whether, given the timing of the vacancy act and the timing of the creation, this, whether the vacancy act would actually cover vacanciy i in this bureau. that, i don't believe, is legally clear at all, it's certainly not crystal clear, which is part of why we have this confusion right now. but jeff's point is the more important one. where is this going? and why doesn't the president, whoever the head is, want to affirm and sustain an entity that brought $12 billion into the -- >> but the republicans say, look, there are other agencies, the fcc, the fdic, which pre-existed this, which have oversight and this is an unnecessary, another, you know, federal government -- >> but i think -- and what a

wonderful job those other agencies did in 2008 when these financial institutions wrecked not the united states economy, but the world economy, because they were so brilliantly regulated. i mean, this exists so that people like the customers of wells fargo, who were ripped off to the tune of millions of dollars, millions of customers, no one did anything about it. this bureau did something about it, but it's going to die. >> so we're missing the broader political point here, which is the fact that this is playing right into president trump's hands. when you talk about draining the swamp and the deep state, we have an unelected bureaucrat, who's trying to essentially hold this administration host skpaag bureau into this position, which as jeffrey said, the president is going to get his way. this is going back and trying to throw -- overthrow the results of the election. and i think people are going to see right through it. >> this is just an opportunity

to continue usade for a little longer. that's all the democrats are trying to do here, hold on for a little while longer, because they don't like who won the election. >> i actually agree that what's happening is politics here, and trump is probably going to get his way with this. and i think that his -- the federal vacancies act of 19 189 will supercreed dodd frank, which is what created this whole agency in the first place. the problem that republicans have with this, and i happen to agree, is the fact that the way this agency was created and what it does. it doesn't answer to anyone. it's outside the normal scope of -- >> democrats say it's exactly the whole point. >> and we don't like that, okay? you don't want unelected bureaucrats making these kinds of decisions. . and the issue here is that they don't even have an inspector general. there's no oversight capacity. and that is a problem -- you can laugh all you want, jeffrey, but the federal bureaucracy is a problem. >> what i want -- we haven't heard from kerstin.

>> the other thing is, you're saying this is a win for president trump, but wasn't one of the things he was running for to sort of protect the common person and the average person? and that's what this does. and the reason that it's separate and you're calling it unaccountable is because it's intentionally so, so that it can be free of any kind of political pressure or influence and hold people accountable in the way they weren't held accountable. >> it's not holding accountable -- >> cordray -- >> -- has said that this is a joke. that he wants to destroy the agency. he doesn't think that it should even exist. so why would he do that? >> -- freeze to do a review to see what's actually going on there -- >> but he's said that he thinks it's a joke, that the agency is a joke. republicans don't want the agency to exist. >> it's a classic -- >> he feels that there's way too much overreach with the organization previously. >> jim? >> the only rule-making that was engaged in by cordray was to hand the trial lawyers more class action opportunities, so the trial lawyers could line  their pockets. that money isn't going back.

through class actions, the only folks that went if that are the trial lawyers. the people don't win. he did away with the arbitration provisions n s for that purpose. he's running for governor and wants the support of the trial lawyer. >> christine, you laook like you've gone to your special place. >> because we've forgotten about the american workers and retirees who got completely devastated, as did others in others part of the world, when what happened in 2008 and 2009. and whatever you think about the structure or how it was created, there are 12 billion americans who have $29 million more in their pockets, who have been protected. retirees who worked their whole life for the american dream of having a little time to spend with their family. that's what matters here. and jeff is right. the president is hellbent to get rid of this entity, to get rid of the bureau that's protecting and bringing money to those americans. and the shame of this -- the

shame of this will be when that happens. >> -- if that money is really making its way back to those consumers or going back to the agency itself. >> it absolutely is going into the pockets of those americans and that's the issue we should be concerned about. what's going to happen? who's going to protect those americans -- >> okay, i want to thank e everybody on the panel. the gop tax plan may be in trouble after the cbo undermined some of its central selling points. we'll get into that with republican congressman james ra langford when we come back. the lowest price of the year. for just $59- it's the only dna test that can trace your origins to over 150 ethnic regions- and open up a world of possibilities. save 40% at ancestrydna.com. ends monday.

we make sure you're in the loop at every step from the moment you decide to move your money to the instant your new retirement account is funded. because when you know where you stand, things are just clearer. -♪ a little bit o' soul, yeah

with advil's fast relief, you'll ask, "what pulled muscle?" "what headache?" nothing works faster to make pain a distant memory. advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. what pain?

or a little internet machine? advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. [ phone rings ] it makes you wonder. shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. choose by the gig or unlimited. and ask how to get a $200 prepaid card when you buy any new samsung device with xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. click, call or visit today.

lawmakers are back in town after the holiday weekend. this morning, the president tweeted about it, writing the tax bill is coming along very well, great support with a few changes. some mathematical, the middle class. job producers can get even more. the problem is, that is not completely the case, the nonpartisan congressional budget office, released its score of the bill today. they say the plan would increase the deficit over the next 10 years. and the average health insurance premium would increase 10% over the next decade. earlier i spoke to senator james langford about the bill. >> republicans have been selling

this bill as tax reform that will benefit the middle class, i wonder how you square that with what the cbo is saying, americans who earn $30,000 or less a year would be worse off than most people earning 75,000 a year would be worse off by 2027. 2027, because of losing subsidies, tax credits and premiums would rise. >> if you take the cbo score or you lay it next to the jct score. both of them are supposed to be nonpartisan, those are the two entities we count on in congress jct would be able to show a dramatic decrease in taxes. cbo looks at it and says, well, if these individuals are not forced to be able to take health care, then they may or may not take. if they don't chose to be able to take it, they don't count those subsidies it it's not a

matter of their taxes going up, they didn't take in the subsidies, they count that in a strange way as removing taxes. it doesn't make sense to anyone except for people in washington, d.c.. if you look at the actual score and actually what people pay in taxes or don't pay in taxes. the actual amount they don't pay in taxes at this point would go down. those individuals would pay less. >> if premiums are rising for health care, people under 30,000 or any number fry to get health care, won't they end up paying more for it? >> those premiums are subsidized the same way. you remove the individual mandate, it doesn't remove the subsidies that are there. we're not removing the subsidies we're removing the mandate. >> the tax bill would add $1.4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, you've traditionally been concerned about the deficit. blasting inefficient government

spending and the growing national deficit, why is this tax bill worth adding 1.4 trillion to the deficit if you believe it does? >> we go back to the same thing with the washington math. the $1.4 trillion in the deficit assumes there is no change in the economy. people have more money in their pocket, they don't spend it or save it, it just sits there. that's not true in real life, if they have more money in their pockets, businesses have more money, they buy more equipment, hire more workers, they spend more money, save more money, all of those things help the economy. if the economy starts to get health again, it's not healthy. if it starts to get healthy again, you have more people paying taxes and it goes up. the essential thing to look at is, what is the estimate for growth, is it a reasonable growth estimate? it's a .4% increase in the economy. if you have .4%, this is a break even bill. my proposal, and i've been clear about it is, i want to have a back stop built into this bill

that we don't have at this point. in case we don't have a .4% growth, we have some way to be able to protect our deficit. some way to be able to find the revenue to be able to resolve this, we're working through those negotiations right now as a part of this bill, we have to get economic growth again. people lose track, we have 10% growth for a few years. every decade up until the last ten years, we've had 3% of growth or more, except for the last 10. we can't get used to that as an american economy, we should be at 3% growth, we have to be able to nudge this economy to get healthy again. >> a ceremony honoring navajo code talkers, was it appropriate for the president of the united states to say that in that moment? >> it seemed odd and out of place in that moment, i can tell you that, i don't let my children and don't encourage my children to be able to speak that way, there's some good dialogue where you can agree or

disagree without being personal. it seemed out of place at that moment. >> thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back. getting a bad haircut. overcrowded trains. turnstiles that don't turn. and spilling coffee on themselves. but for everyone else, there's directv. for #1 rated customer satisfaction over cable, switch to directv. and for a limited time get a $100 reward card. call 1-800-directv aleve direct therapy. the only remote controlled tens device that's drug free, wire free for deep penetrating lower back pain relief. and now get aleve direct therapy with $10 off at your local target.

each day justin at work... walk. and after work. he does it all with dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort. to keep him feeling more energized. dr. scholl's. born to move. this weekend the president took the following shot on twitter, fox news is much more important in the united states than cnn, outside the u.s., cnn international is a large source of fake news. the outside world does not see the truth from them. tweets will not stop us from telling the truth and putting

facts first at any cost. christiane amanpour tweeted a response, if he knew the facts he would have never sent that tweet. here's my layed camera woman who took a bullet in the face covering the facts in bosnia. time to hand it over to don lemon and "cnn tonight." i'll see you tomorrow. this is cnn tonight, i'm don lemon, hope you had a great thanksgiving, it's good to be back, i have a whole lot to say about this president's increasing erratic behavior over the past eke or so, i'm going to get to all of that over the next two hours here on cnn. i want to start with what happened at the white house here today, i want to lay it all out for you without editorializing, i want you to see it for yourself, facts first. the president of the united states, in the middle of an event honoring american heroes slamming a political opponent using a racist slur.