last year. this year they were made on tablets, smart phones, not just on desktops. americans made $1.6 billion in purchases on the phone. it's never happened before. adoeb bepredicts this holiday shopping season is on track to be -- well, $100 billion in on line sales. >> remarkable. that has been -- it's just been the mood, the consumer mood is very, very good. >> i was very busy on amazon. >> nangs for joining us. >> "new day" starts right now. see you tomorrow. >> republican senators scrambling to shore up support for their bill ahead of a crucial committee vote. >> i think the tax bill is doing very well. as the bill currently stands -- >> sausage making is never fun but all senators are looking to get the yes. >> we have a representative in congress that they call her

pocahontas. >> president trump couldn't even make it through a ceremony to honor these men without throwing in a racial slur. >> been a very strong friend of native americans since been in office. >> this was their day. i fu el feel so sorry for those guys. welcome to our viewers arouin the united states and around the world. 6:00 here in new york. time for starting line. president trump heads back to capitol hill just later this morning to rally senate republicans on their tax bill. right now, the bill is in the budget committee. and two of the biggest gop opponents are on that committee. if they don't vote for it, it stalls where it is before even getting to a vote by the entire senate. it's a big day. another big challenge facing the president, negotiating a deal to keep the government going. trump sold democrats on a

short-term fix. now the time is up. can he avoid a shutdown? and president trump under fire for using a racial term to attack a political rival during a white house ceremony, honoring a group of native american veterans. the backdrop for this oval office event is also raising questions about sensitivity and judgment from the president and his staff. and the white house is standing by president trump's original apology for those vulgar comments on that now infamous "access hollywood" tape. "the new york times" has reported that the president told at least three people that he, though, is questioning the authenticity of that tape even after he publicly apologized for it. let's begin with suzanne malveaux on capitol hill. a lot happening there, suzanne. >> reporter: yes. good morning, alisyn. a lot happening here. desperately trying to secure support for their senate tax plan coming before a critical vote this afternoon in the senate budget committee.

at the same time you have president trump meeting with senate republicans during their weekly lunch, eager, trying to push before that vote, trying to get some kind of legislative accomplishment before the end of the year. >> i think the tax bill is doing very well and i think the republicans will be very proud of it. >> reporter: president trump heading to capitol hill today to shore up support for the senate tax plan as senate majority whip jon cornyn says they don't yet have enough votes to pass the bill. they can only afford to lose one vote today in the budget committee but at least two senators are still expressing concern, including ron johnson who said monday he is a no because the bill is unfair to millions much small business owners. if johnson votes against the bill today it will stall in the committee before more changes are made. addressing his concerns could increase the national debt, possibly generating opposition from deficit hawks.

>> when it comes to the republican party cutting taxes the fate of the party is in our hands. >> reporter: the tax plan could go up for a full vote on the senate floor this week where they can only lose the support of two republicans. senator steve danes has also expressed reservations about the impact of the bill on small businesses. three republicans remain a wild card and five others have raised concerns about issues like the bill's repeal of obamacare's original mandate and the impact on the national debt. these deficit hawks are pushing to include an automatic trigger into the bill that would increase taxes, if the legislation fails to generate as much revenue as expected. >> estimates are a .4% increase in the gdp. it's a pretty conservative estimate. my statement is if that doesn't happen, if you don't even get a .4% increase in gdp, how do we create a backstop to protect us on the deficit?

>> reporter: further complicating the effort, the congressional budget office says the latest senate bill would increase the deficit by $1.4 trillion over ten years. the report also shows that the bill will hurt more lower income americans than originally thought while benefiting higher earners. those earning less than 30,000 are predicted to be worse off by 2019, but those making less than $75,000, worse off by 2027. removing obamacare a's original mandate would remove 13 million americans from having coverage over the next decade. another critical meeting with congre congressional members from both parties. they have to come up with a plan by december 8th or face a possible shutdown. >> cutting that deal directly with the democrats, it worked at

the time but it was a short timer. now has to to it again. suzanne, thank you. let's bring in john avlon and david gregory. big day no matter how you look at it. david how do you see the challenges ahead for the president? let's start with the tax bill. >> i think they're bill no, question about it. this is a republican party fight this is the fight in donald trump's republican party between conservatives, those who are more moderate, who are concerned about people losing out because of taking away the individual mandate for health care. deficit hawks, you've got a little bit of everything here within the republican party that's facing donald trump. and this is quite a brew of tax cuts that create a lot of questions. failure is not an option, i do come down on the side of lindsey graham. that ultimately will unite

people in the end. the real problem are the wild cards, the john mccains, who have proven impervious. >> we have a graphic we can put up. you mentioned mccain. johnson, daines, collins, corker. who do you see as a big deal? >> johnson is worried about small businesses taxed at an individual rate, sounds like they're dealing with that. susan collins and mccain are big wild cards because of people being hurt by higher premiums. mccain doesn't like the process. he is someone you cannot predict at this point. if he doesn't like the process and they're jamming it through he'll just vote no. we saw that on health care. >> if you sincerely care about the deficit and the data, this bill ain't for you. it's a total contradiction to those principles. that's why senator corker and james lankford are given a

pause. this bill will probably raise taxes on folks who are at the bottom of the income spectrum. those are two fundamental problems that go way beyond gop civil war and go to the heart of philosophy and people's pocketbooks. >> let me quibble about that. he's fundamentally right. middle-class tax cut also expire and then they'll go back up. that's how they try to deal with the deficit issue. upper income taxpayers, wealthy americans get a bigger break because of the phasing out of the estate tax. >> big time. >> which is big. but if you're a wealthier american you probably end up paying more taxes because you lose deductions on real estate in the big blue states and high-tax states. so there is a mix here. there's no question. that's why a couple of senators are saying if you're so confident that this is actually going to increase economic growth, put a stop gap in there

where we dial back some of these tax cuts if you're wrong. >> yeah. if you end up losing state and local, for example, in new york or california -- >> what they're calling the snc s.a.l.t. provision. >> right, state and local tax. the reps in those state also have a real hard time explaining to their constituencies why they're in favor of this bill. >> the economy is booming. every marker that we're seeing this week, the stock market, the holiday sales. the president tweeted housing markets are up. is this the time to be upsetting the apple cart? >> this is catechism. this is tax cut theology as well as a political necessity, as david pointed out. this is not about stimulating the economy. if you look at the bush tax cuts there's not a lot of evidence they stimulate the economy.

what they do do is add to the deficit. >> we're in a bull market that the president talks about a lot. part of what's driving that is an expectation that there will be tax reform. advocates for this would argue whether they're proved right or not that there will be economic growth on the other end of this. and there is some effort to simplify the tax code here that will be beneficial. to john's earlier point, this is worth mentioning again. we saw it yesterday where we were talking about the consumer watchdog agency as well. candidate trump and president trump are different people, okay? let's be very clear about that. this was a guy who brought together all the major elements of the republican party. and that's why this is a tax bill that is going to be primarily helpful to corporate america. that is pulling together all the legs of the stool of the republican party. that's what he's done as president. >> this isn't your typical poetry prose split.

>> no. >> this is more fundamental than that. this is all very edifying. it's going to be confusing for people. even if you were within the republican party it's confusing. the reason you don't have any democrats coming on with this is your point about the economy is booming. the question is for whom is it booming? the stock market is doing well. that's partly a gamble game. a risk/reward game. >> sure. >> the irony is that the president used to say don't look at wall street for a measure of main street. >> right. >> he was right then. he doesn't say it now. the economy is not booming if you -- >> this doesn't help wages. >> that's the problem. it could exacerbate income. >> you will have senators, including ron johnson, who doesn't like that small businesses aren't getting equal treatment to big businesses who will say wrong, wrong, wrong, david gregory. growth will happen. even though the economy is doing okay, it's not doing that well. we want 3.5% growth, not netted up to 3 where it is now.

tax cuts will create stimulus. there's an economic theatrical discussion you'll have there and historical markers are not that generous to the president's position. it's still a fundamental argument as to what kind of economy you want. they have a great proposition. who do you want to have more money in their pocket, government or you? that is a great sell. the problem is, they're not defining the you. the people who will get morme money in their pocket are not the people who trump promised. >> the middle class, main street who has been left behind at a time when the wealthier keep getting wealthy. >> wages aren't going up. >> that's right. >> they're holding more capital. >> they're not even promising to increase wages. >> not their job. >> there's not a mechanism to require that. >> should there be in a capitalist society? >> of course not. taf it's about helping the middle class, sign me up.

if they're putting the political necessity on passing something on overall policy considerations, that will exacerbate the problems that, frankly, led to trump being elected. >> stay more focused in leaving all the stuff that he loves to tweet about alone. he has huge divisions in his own party. the people who will you win over with the marginal tax rates are going to piss off the deficit hawks. if you make them happy you won't get this growth argument. he has a lot to finess. one called out for the man who calls himself the best deal maker ever. we will see. three loaded words will come home to roost on this one. join us tonight. all this complexity will get laid out in good, old-fashioned, point, counterpoint debate on tax reform. jake tapper, dana bash moderating.

senators bernie sanders on one side, ted cruz on the other, tim scott, maria cantwell. good teams. 9:00 p.m. eastern tonight. was this another cringe-worthy moment at the white house? president trump called senator elizabeth warren pocahontas at a ceremony honoring native americans. that wasn't the only offense at the ceremony. [ click ] [ keyboard clacking ] [ clacking continues ] good questions lead to good answers. our advisors can help you find both. talk to one today and see why we're bullish on the future. yours. we're on a mission to show drip coffee drinkers, it's time to wake up to keurig. wakey! wakey! rise and shine!

oh my gosh! how are you? well watch this. i pop that in there. press brew. that's it. so rich. i love it. that's why you should be a keurig man! full-bodied. are you sure you're describing the coffee and not me? when i met my team at ctca,

they put together a comprehensive plan, that gave me an opportunity to accomplish my goals, and my dreams. learn more at cancercenter.com

alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you. president trump with yet another unforced error, stepping on his all-important tax reform message because he distracted with something ugly, reviving a racial slur, attacking a democratic senator during a ceremony that was honoring native american war heroes. not the time to throw out an indian slur. joe johns is at the white house. joe? >> reporter: good morning,

chris. a blatant insult on top of an insult at an event with the president of the united states at the white house to honor navajo code talkers, native americans from world war ii, who played a critical intelligence role by transmitting messages the enemy could not translate. the president, at this event, once again repeating the name he has used for senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts. that would be pocahontas. what was different about this was the setting. the president did it in front of a picture of andrew jackson, the president who in 1830, signed the indian removal act, which essentially led to the trail of tears, basically a death march across the united states to the west for thousands of native americans seeking indian territories. let's listen to what the president said. >> 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. but, you know what? i like you because you are specia special. >> reporter: now the president has used the pocahontas term in the past to describe senator warren and whether she can claim american native heritage. she has gone after the president for using the term in the first place and has done so again. >> i really couldn't believe it. 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. >> reporter: now the white house press secretary unable to quell this controversy, essentially tried to argue that the term pocahontas is not a racial slur. chris and alisyn? >> joe, thank you for setting that up for us. let's bring back john avlon and david gregory. the andrew jackson portrait, obviously no hero to the native american population and the pocahontas term, is this insensitive, oblivious or deliberate? >> i'm going to go with b, oblivious. >> john's going to jump in. >> the andrew jackson portrait hangs in the oval. this president, under the administration with steve bannon, no one did the math about the trail of tears and code talkers. that's about historical

illiteracy. >> so the tone deafness is just oblivious? >> certainly about the optics of andrew jackson being in the background. the president also couldn't resist making an insult. the whole thing reads like another chapter in a weird excerpt from a chris buckley political satire. >> andrew jackson is either insensitivity, lack of history of historical touch or they just missed it. they forgot where they were holding it and how it would be projected. that's fine. that's a very different thing than the pocahontas jab. it's not oblivious because the president doesn't care about the people who are sensitive to this. he literally turned to the navajo hero and said i like you, though, because you're special. listen, this is who he is. i don't understand why people have to keep explaining the reality of who the man is.

he will go at you any way he thinks he can that will hurt you. and warren gave him a little bit of room when she couldn't prove her cherokee roots to the satisfaction of those who were asking. once he had that little bit of space, that's his dog whistle. she's a liar. the democrats are liars. they're all fake. he will do it as ugly as he can, david gregory, because that's who he is. that's how he fights. where is the mystery in this? i don't mean to erupt but i don't see where the mystery is in this. he doesn't care if those guys are offended. he doesn't care s. >> no. i was driving my 15-year-old and and he burst out with this incredulous laugh. he doesn't follow politics a lot but understands president trump, the crudeness of his era to the presidency that will be one of his hallmarks. i don't think there's a whole lot of analysis beyond what you said, chris.

it's the crudeness that he will go after you no matter when, no matter what, no matter how. he will do it ugly. he doesn't care. he's not worried about the trappings of the office, how he will be looked at, how he will be scrutinized. whether it's charlottesville and saying all sides on that had good people, even in a neo-nazi march or whether it's throwing around slurs like pocahontas at a native american event, he just doesn't care. there's a crudeness to him that we've almost become numb to and that supporters of his, the best they can do is say stop paying attention to these daily eruptions. >> a couple more threads we need to talk about, the now infamous "access hollywood" tape. this was so noticeable on so many levels. you could hear donald trump, then candidate, in his own words saying these shockingly vulgar

things. then he apologized. so out of character. so unusual, on facebook. he apologized and said i said it and i apologize. now "the new york times," as you know, was reporting that he has begun saying to now three people, maggie haberman, one of the reporters of "the new york times", has said he said to three people he's not sure of the authenticity of that tape. ultimate revisionist history, forcing "access hollywood" yesterday to come forward and say -- natalie morales said let me make this perfectly clear, the tape is very real. john, where does that leave us? >> it leaves us forced to confront yet again that the president has a fundamental truth-telling problem and will impose his own reality distortion field on anything, even something he has said that is publicly available, that's unkrontrovtable and puts anyone who has reality attached has to face that fundamental cracks,

even if you work in the white house. and the question is, does the president really believe it or does he think he's simply spinning people in the senate and maybe that will cause some doubt? it's just divorce from reality. >> this winds up being a test. it's obviously a lie. there's no reason to go into it. it's a lie any way you look at it. >> unless it's what john is saying, he adivorced from reality. >> he is tapped well into the reality that if you tell people things enough times they may believe it. he knows that's what he's doing. he hopes it works. needs to be condemned and condemned again. let's just remind people what he said. or not. let the silence stand. >> i never said i'm a perfect person nor pretended to be someone i'm not. i've said and done things i regret and the words released today on this more than a decade-old video are one of t m them. anyone who knows me knows these words don't reflect who i am.

i said it. i was wrong and i apologize. >> all right. that was him. here is sanders yesterday in the white house. >> the president addressed this. this was litigated and certainly answered during the election by the overwhelming support for the president and the fact that he's sitting here in the oval office today. he said what he didn't like and what he found troubling were the accounts that are being reported now. >> one of the lieus of politics t how they react to a falsehood and sanders winds up being exposed. >> what was her point? >> that what they don't like is what the "new york times" is now reporting, that he's saying it wasn't authentic. that's the part that they're quibbling with. >> who knows what she's saying. >> i can now at this point -- >> it's a clumsy cover. that's the problem with a lie. now she has to cover nor him.

how she does it is how she's going to be measured. >> the president, we're always kind of joining the president in a conversation that's already under way. you know, kind of the transcript of the presidency creates so many question marks and so many moments when you want to kind of just do this. you know, it's part of it. he doesn't really care. the pitfall is actually talking about it too much. this is a settled question, as we know. >> seth meyers said when i inadvertent inadvertent lly slapped my head that this would be our new pledge of allegiance. >> now he will go to capitol hill, try to cut a couple of different deals that matter. when people are sitting across from him and saying i promise you. >> take my word for it. >> this stuff all matters. i grew up in that business. they will look at him and say i know one thing about you. you're a liar. i have to take that into -- lucky for him, he's dealing with a lot of liars on the other side

of the table as well. it's somewhat of a state of play. this was an obvious one and needs to be called out. we'll talk about the white house response to these controversies with former white house communications director anthony scaramucci. >> straight shooting mooch. what will he say about this one? a group that may have been trying to discredit the newspaper in an undercover sting operation. brian stelter with the inside story next. no matter how the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain... but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

♪ ♪ give a little bit ♪ ♪ give a little bit... -hello. ♪ give a little bit... ♪ ... of your love to me oh, haha. ♪ there's so much that we need to share ♪ ♪ so send a smile and show that you care ♪ ♪ i'll give a little bit of my love to you ♪

they appear out of nowhere. my secret visitors. appearing next to me in plain sight. hallucinations and delusions. these are the unknown parts of living with parkinson's disease. what stories they tell. but for my ears only. what plots they unfold. but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's will experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. and these can worsen over time, making things even more challenging. but there are advances that have led to treatment options that can help. if someone you love has parkinson's and is experiencing hallucinations or delusions, talk to your parkinson's specialist. because there's more to parkinson's. my visitors should be the ones i want to see. learn more at moretoparkinsons.com

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. the conservative group expose for the record trying to trap "the new york post." claiming alabama senate candidate roy moore impregnated

her as a teenager. caught at its own game. >> yes, indeed. conservative procateurs. sometimes called a prankster. this latest attempt is much darker. here is what happened and here is how "the post" tricked him. "the washington post" says this woman, jamie phillips, approached the paper about three weeks ago, falsely claiming that senate gop candidate roy moore impregnated her as a teenager, leading to an abortion. several inconsistencies from the story, a woman with the same name that said she accept aid job working for conservative media outlet to combat the mainstream media. they pressed phillips about that post and explained she was being video recorded. >> do you still have an interest in working in the conservative media movement to combat the

lies and deceit of the liberal msm? is that still your interest? >> no, not really. not at that point. >> no? >> she claimed the job was with the daily caller. "the post" says none of us has interview aid woman by the name of jamie phillips, pressing reporters to give their opinions on the effects her claim koss have on moore's candidacy. raising eyebrows. she insisted she was not working with anyone that targets journalists. >> are you in contact with other people? are you in contact with the roy moore campaign? >> no, no. >> steve bannon. >> no. >> or breitbart. >> no, not at all. >> reporters for "the post" saw phillips entering project veritos. there's jamie phillips work for veritos? did you send her asto pose as a

victim of roy moore's? >> i have to run but will get in touch with you. >> reporter: james o' klseefe refusing to answer questions. >> did you send her to "the post" as a victim of roy moore's? >> stinging the supposed sting artist, deciding to publish off-the-record details, saying this so-called off the record conversation was in essence to scheme and embarrass us. we weren't fooled and can't honor an off the record agreement. a fake sexual assault allegation to discredit the real women who have come forward to hurt "the washington post" and help roy moore. even some of james o'keefe's past supporters say this hurts

him. we've seen in great detail here how this trap was set and how "the washington post" figured it out and trapped him instead. >> brian, appreciate it. thank you very much. >> the tables have turned. brian, thank you very much. the president called senator elizabeth warren pocahontas during a native american event. what does the head of the navajo nation think of that? he was at this ceremony and joins us live next. know where your data lives down to the very country, city, building and server. the ibm cloud. the cloud for business. yours.

president trump taking a shot at senator elizabeth warren calling her pocahontas at a ceremony honoring navajo americans. that's not the first time. >> pocahontas.

and massachusetts is represent bid pocahontas. what an insult by pocahontas. and pocahontas is not happy. elizabeth warren, one of the worst senators. who, pocahontas? >> joining us now, navajo national president. i want to start with you. you were in the room yesterday when president trump used the term pocahontas with the code talkers. what was your response? >> this was a day when the code talkers were being honored, war heroes that helped put an end to the war. we are enjoying freedom today as it is because of their work, because of what they did, their sacrifices. some of them did not return. some of those that were there with us in the oval office

yesterday, they were injured there on the islands when they were there in the campaign. this was a day to honor them and to insert something like that, the word pocahontas as a jab to a senator, that belongs on the campaign trail not in the room when our war heroes are being honored. that was a good gesture by the president, by the white house, to be able to bring our code talkers into the oval office and has not happened before. but then to insert that, i thought it was uncalled for. we need to honor these war heroes, our american war heroes in a respectful way, in any situation, in any circumstance, in any environment. and this was a good environment for americans to say thank you, code talkers. >> yeah. >> navajos. you use your language, you've done this, built this nation to what it is. you were part of the successful war during those years.

we honor you, we thank you for what you've done. >> you thought it was unnecessary? >> unnecessary. >> do you see it as an ethnic slur? >> i feel that the way it was used, yes, it was, because -- now pocahontas is a real person. it's not a caricature, something that's made up. this was a young lady, native american woman that played a critical role. >> absolutely. >> in the life of this nation. >> was a hero. >> exactly. and to use that person in that way is unnecessary and is being culturally insensitive. >> sonny, what did you think when you heard about it? >> i agree, first of all, with mr. begaye and good morning, sir. >> good morning. >> i thought the whole thing was staged, the fact that andrew jackson appeared in the back of the room. >> what about that? sonny, i wanted to ask you about

that. that portrait of andrew jackson that hung in the back, did you see that as a deliberate slight? >> i definitely do. and i think every other native person that knows who andrew jackson was believes the same thing. mr. trump has been in television enough and he knows the staging. he knows how and what people are going to see. and i think it was a c condescending racial slur that he delivered, unfortunately, at an inopportune time when these heroes were being honored. >> you think he does know the history of andrew jacks sben the trail of tears? >> pardon me? >> you think that president trump does know the history of andrew jacks snen. >> of course he knows andrew jackson. i think andrew jackson is one of his heroes. he acts like him. he talks like him. he wants to be him in modern

day. but, again, it was totally uncalled for in regards to mentioning pocahontas in this setting, especially in the fact that it had nothing to do with this gathering. this was all about honoring the code talkers, and rightly so. >> sonny, one more question. >> please zblie read that you want americans to know the proud history of native americans and their service to this country. and you say that the native people of america have voluntarily served with honor by per capita in larger numbers than any other race in america, in every conflict in defense of this country, we did not stoop to claim spurs in our feet. can you expound on that? >> yes and i stand by that statement. we've served honorably in just about every conflict the united states has had, including the code talkers. the navajo code talkers were not the only code talkers.

other nations were represented by code talkers. again, to slur the history of the code talkers or any service person is totally uncalled for. and he knew exactly what he was doing. >> mr. begaye in our remaining seconds, what do you want from the president? do you want an apology? >> i would like for the president to first continue honoring the code talkers, our veterans. and he needs to stand by the armed forces, by our veterans, especially war heroes that really made a contribution to this country, to the freedom that we enjoy and he needs to put it in his mind and in his head that these are american war heroes. and when you're in the midst of great heroes, you need to respect them and leave everything else aside and just honor them and thank them. and this is what we -- that is who we are as americans.

we thank each other, especially in defense of freedom of this great nation and for native americans, this is our land. every inch of it, every mountain, every stream, every water that is out there, it is ours. it's native american country. that's why we will defend it all the way, because we have no other place to go. america is indian country. and so every nonindian out there is a guest of native americans in this country. and that's how they should act. if you're a guest in this nation, that's how you should act, especially in the middle of and in the midst of these war heroes. i ask the president to respect our people, to respect our heritage, to respect who we are as native americans, especially war heroes. >> president russell begaye, president of navajo notion and sonny skyhawk, thank you. >> thank you for your service, sir. a new alliance between the

u.s. and britain. prince harry engaged to an american actress, meghan markle, now a household name. how does harry think his mother would have reacted? he gave a very interesting answer.

♪ ♪ give a little bit ♪ ♪ give a little bit... -hello. ♪ give a little bit... ♪ ... of your love to me oh, haha. ♪ there's so much that we need to share ♪

♪ so send a smile and show that you care ♪ ♪ i'll give a little bit of my love to you ♪

very natural. he got on one knee. >> was it an instant yes? >> yes, he barely got through proposing. >> i was like can i give you the ring now? >> prince harry's engagement to a biracial american divorcee.

does it signal a shift in royalty. sal sally, great to have you here. >> in london. >> i timed my trip. i was over in thanksgiving and thought i would stay a next week. >> if meghan markle was surprised how could you know? >> it was my best guest, given the anniversary last week and christmas coming up, i thought it was the perfect moment. >> you have a future as a psychic, number one. number two, given -- look, meghan markle is extremely beautiful. she is accomplished in her own right. she does good works. however, given the history, which is nontraditional, doesn't this signal a sea change for the

royal family? >> well, i think it's more of -- yes, in some respects, it is, because she is american and the first american to marry someone in direct line to the throne. harry is fifth and soon will be sixth. the last american who did that was wallace warfield simpson who 80 years ago was universally rejected by the royal family. i don't think you could find anybody who was more diametrically oppose d to wallae simpson than meghan markle. a woman of high intelligence, poised, knowledgeable. she's warm. she is sensitive. she has a history of philanthropic involvement. every single category, she is different from the last american who married an this case a

british monarch. i think you could see in that clip a few moments ago what struck me is how, you know, their body language, what a deep connection they have. they obviously adore each other. they're the sort of couple who can complete each other's sentences. >> we did see that. it's hard to imagine a better introduction of them as a couple than that interview. you really got a flavor for their romance and how deeply connected they are and excited they are. but one more thing. i just want to play, obviously, princess diana came up. harry spoke of his mom. >> yes. >> i want to play this for you and for everyone. listen to this. >> as thick as thieves, without question. i think she would be over the moon, jumping up and down, so excited for me but then probably would have been best friends with meghan. it is days like today when i

really miss having her around and miss being able to share the happy news. but with the rain and everything else going on. >> she's with us. >> i'm sure she's with us, jumping up and down somewhere else. >> what did you think? >> i thought it was so sweet. obviously, william said the same sort of thing when he and kate had their engagement interview. and i think in harry's case, princess diana really loved the united states. she visited a lot. and so i think she would probably really approve of the fact that he's marrying an american. also i think meghan's causes -- we have to remember she's not, you know, a jane come lately to this. she has been engaged, in serious issues and edgy issues for a long time. and i think diana would have appreciated that, the kinds of causes that she advocates. and i think she will slip

beautifully into the royal trio of kate and william and harry and become a royal quartet. and they will really be a powerful force for the array of philanthropic causes that they advocate. >> it certainly seemed like it. there were a lot of high hopes yesterday as you hear their interview. it really was a touching moment and inspirational. sally bedell smith, thank you so much. thanks for being in london for us. >> thank you. my pleasure. big movements in washington today. republican senators are looking to clear a major hurdle for their tax plan. president trump is going to capitol hill. he is trying to sell on the tax bill. what can he offer? where will it lead? next. well, like most of you, i just bought a house. -oh! -very nice. now i'm turning into my dad. i text in full sentences. i refer to every child as chief. this hat was free. what am i supposed to do, not wear it?

next thing you know, i'm telling strangers defense wins championships. -well, it does. -right? why is the door open? are we trying to air condition the whole neighborhood? at least i bundled home and auto on an internet website, progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto. i mean, why would i replace this? it's not broken.

it's going to be a tremendous tax cut. we're really interested in getting it passed. >> giving it to the rich on the backs of the middle class. >> republicans right now are scrambling. they call her pocahontas. >> it's better left for a sitcom. >> what most people find offensive is senator warren lying about her heritage. >> the native american community has spoken clearly and loudly that they were offended. >> the president addressed this. this was litigated and certainly answered during the election. >> he was looking into