house and senate republicans are working on a bill that would affect virtually everyone in the country and would be the president's first legislative victory. and over haul of the tax system. a vote could come as early as next week. all of a sudden, there are some stumbling blocks. fill mattingly joins us now from capitol with the latest. you've been talking to republican sources, what are they telling you about where this bill stands right now? >> reporter: republican leaders were sent scrambling today. they have two senators with health issues and they have a handful of other senators with problems. marco rubio coming out as a firm no vote on the bill you also have susan collins who hasn't committed one way or the other. bob corker who voted no the first time around, none of his issues have been addressed. senator jeff flake on the fence as well. senate republican leaders announced they had a deal in principle on wednesday. a deal does not make a bill.

that's where they are right now. they're negotiating behind the scenes. leaders have told me they will get there, they feel like the votes are there, as long as they line everything up. as it currently stands as of this moment. they are still working to lock all that in just a few short days before they're expected to take that vote. >> you talk about rubio saying he's a no vote. is that a bluff? is that a negotiation tactic? >> reporter: there's an element of that, but something that's not knew, leaders were surprised by this hardline stance senator rubio has been talking about the refundability piece of this for a long time. his amendment to try to change that, failed. he was told that there could be no increase of the corporate tax rate to try to pay for things. republican leaders have agreed to increase the corporate tax rate to pay for things. that's where this all came from. some behind the scenes frustration they weren't willing to address this. here's what i'm told at this moment, gop leaders are amenable to changes, not going as far as senator rubio wants. that probably costs too much.

according to these leaders. but doing something behind the scenes to address this several senators have made the point that marco rubio, being the tax vote that ends up sinking this overhaul seems very unlikely to them. several senate aides saying the same thing, the idea that he could be a deciding vote, they don't necessarily believe it. there's no question about it, anderson, as of this point, at least throughout the course of the day, senator rubio is not budging from this stance, he's going to get something. will it be enough? >> have you sensed hesitency in general about moving forward on this? the bill has approval ratings in the low 30s and 20s right now? or they want to get it done? >> reporter: to be blunt, no. they want to get it done, this underscores how this entire process has worked. nobody thought this could be done in the time line they're working on right now. there's a reason this hasn't been done in 31 years. there's all sorts of things that make this near impossible, and yet, over the course of two

months, they are on the verge of actually doing this. the reason why, when you talk to all parties involved, political imperative. you talked about the lack of legislative wins, you look at the approval ratings of people around the country they recognize something has to happen. they believe the end game of this policy. perhaps more important than anything else. members know they need to get something, anything done before the end of the year, and that more than anything else is why republican leaders in the house and senate think the votes will be there next week. as i said, there's more work to do they're planning on unveiling this bill tomorrow, work continues tonight. >> a lot to talk about tonight. joining me, tara set mayer, bakari sellers, steven moore and angela rye. >> do you think they're going to get it done? >> i think so. everyone is all in on this. i think this is smart political

strategy by marco rubio. marco rubio has been telegraphing this somewhat in recent days where he tweeted his announce with the fact that they voted down his amendment along with senator mike lee. they've been working on this child credit together. they voted that down during the amendment period because the idea was, you would have to raise the corporate tax rate up 1%, actually .94%. from 20% to 20.94%. that was told, no, that's too much, it's going to hurt growth, and marco rubio tweeted out, wait a minute, trump just said we can possibly raise it to 22% or 21%, and that's okay. when we want to expand the child tax credit, it wasn't. he's kind of let them know, he's going to fight for this. messaging for republicans, they've done a terrible job explaining to middle class americans why this tax bill is good for them. we can debate this, whether it is or it isn't, but the republicans have done a terrible job, and this -- marco rubio can turn back, even if he

loses it, he can go back and say, i fought hard for this middle class, this would help the middle class. >> he thinks rubio will be there for sure? >> i do too. >> your in the airport, and you see the people yelling, get their way. you give way to bad actors, pretty soon a good actor is going to ask for someone. he's got every right to do it. the key point is, it's going to pass. he's going to vote for it. he's going to vote for it, he's going to get a little bit of what he wants. that's good negotiating on his part. he's talking about the child tax credit is going up. that's why this is a middle class tax cut. 70% of the country doesn't itemize because it's too difficult. they use the standard deduction. the standard deduction is going to double. so you have the child tax credit, doubling and the standard deduction doubling. if we said those three things over and over again, we would cut through what you're talking about, this is a middle class tax cut and it creates jobs. when you have corporations coming into the country, they create more jobs, makes us more competitive and helps the middle class as well. >> in my experience, the last people you want to yell at are airport employees and traffic cops. >> i agree. >> bakari?

>> the last thing he said, nobody believes, because we have had tax cuts before for corporations, and it hasn't translated to wages growing. we've seen this before time and time again, steve mnuchin had a room full of corporate execs. will they increase wages? none of them will raise a hand. that's not true. let me tell you something, if anybody believes that marco rubio is going to be the one for democrats who's a savior or the one who actually torpedos this tax bill -- i mean, marco rubio has about as much courage as a mammal in oz. which we know is not a lot. my point in saying that is this. this bill -- >> an animal in oz? >> yeah, wasn't it a big cat in oz? who needed a heart in oz? >> it was the tin man. >> you meant courage. >> there we go. >> all right. >> thank you, angela, that's why you're here. >> i get hung up on little details. >> little details, that was like

a sports analogy. anyway, he does not have the courage to save this. with all of that being said, this is close to not passing, if for example they seated doug jones as they should seat doug jones as we did before the affordable care act. then you're at a 49/51 -- >> do you know that's how he would vote? >> i'm pretty certain -- >> he said he wouldn't vote for it? >> you know why i know he would vote for it, he got there on the backs of black women. black women are not going to benefit for the tax bill. so i will tell you, he doesn't want this. >> he doesn't want to have to take this vote. >> it will be 51 to 49. with corker, and we're praying for john mccain, this bill is in the air. >> marco rubio caused a lot of heart palpitations today. with his injection of this debate. you're right, he's going to vote for the bill. he's going to get what he wants. >> like the mammal in oz. >> the thing that worries me a little bit.

the republicans this bill will happen next week. it's a 51 -- they can only lose one. and so that gives power to anyone -- my worry, is that now anyone can say, wait a minute, i want this, i want that, and you get a flood of marco rubios. and that just isn't going to work. i think it will pass, you have to admit, the stock market has been going through the roof investors want it, business es want it. i think we'll get 4% growth the next year with this. >> for republicans, if they didn't do this -- >> it would be devastating. >> politically devastating. >> i think they understand they have to hang together here or they're going to hang separately. look, it's true that the polls show a lot of people are opposed to this, because they don't think that there's anything in this for them. one of the important points trump made in his press conference the other day, is they're going to start the withholding changes in february. that means people are going to start to feel the effects of this -- middle class people are going to start to feel the effects of this.

black women, 60, 70, $80,000, married couples are going to see a 2,000, $3,000 reduction in their taxes. i think it will be popular and get done. i'm worried about john mccain's health, there are rumors that he is -- i love john mccain, i think he's one of the great heroes of america, but we're really worried about his health. >> we wish him well. angela? >> a couple things, i think it's interesting, you started on the messaging, i also think that democrats have not handled the messaging of this very well. >> how so? >> to the point of itemized deductions, if they are too lazy or can't afford someone to itemize deductions for them, then yes they get a benefit, but for folks who do take the time to itemize deductions, the fact that you get your mortgage interest deduction hit. >> 750,000. that's a pretty rich person. >> oh, but this is a rich person's tax bill. which is what -- >> no. no. >> i know that you had your turn, so let me havemin. >> it was only people with over

$750,000 -- >> okay you're going to keep talking. i think it's important for us to understand it is a rich person's tax bill. that's what the democrats should have been saying instead of the tax scam. there's one scandal after another. tough scam has fallen on deaf ears. it didn't even resonate with me. one in the same, i think we can push back a little bit. >> i think democrats have done a pretty good job of using -- and even senator orrin hatch got tired of that line, you're hurting the middle class to give tax cuts to the wealthy, to the corporations. that's been used against republicans for decades, which is why it's perplexing to me, that republicans didn't anticipate that, and have proper messaging and stay on that to explain how this benefits, yes, it's good for business, but it's also good for the middle class. >> but you can't mess with bad policy, tara. >> there are some problems with it, but there are some good things. the republicans haven't done a good job.

look at the approval ratings, it's terrible. >> we should talk about how the tax bill is pro china. this is a bill that china does not want. >> they're the big loser. >> those around the president know better than to even bring subjects up. we'll talk to david gergen about that. also, now that the former apprentice contestant is no longer working in the white house, what is in the future for african-american outreach in the administration. a u you neek question unique times. we'll talk about it ahead. to find my next vacation. rome, show me something. i'm having breakfast at the pantheon. what an amazing view... of your finger. ♪ ♪ look at this view. your finger! isn't that incredible. your finger! and check this one out! oh it's so amazing! move your finger! three times points on travel and restaurants on every continent. sapphire reserve, from chase.

make more of what's yours. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ it all starts with a wish. the lincoln wish list event is here. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down and a complementary first months payment.

new reporting tonight, "the washington posts" says the president still doesn't accept evidence that russia interfered and supported him in the election. those around him know he gets agitated when he even hears about it. the post spoke with current and former officials who say his daily briefing is often structured to avoid upsetting him with russia-related intel, only in the written brief so as not to upset him. i talked about that with david gergen, who is an adviser to presidents nixon, reagan, and clinton. >> according to "the washington post," the fact that the president doesn't want to hear intelligence about russia's meddling in the election is a stunning thing. his briefers have to figure out a work around. it's really eye opening. >> it's unique as far as i can tell, anderson. it's an alarming report.

the post has talked to 50 people, so it's a solidly built report. the president, because of his personal insecurities not wanting to have his election diminished in some way. if he accepts the conclusion of his intelligence agencies that the russians meddled, he thinks that somehow is going to diminish him, so he pushes it off. >> he's said that publicly time and time again. you assume maybe privately he's -- >> exactly. >> we're able to -- that's just a public facade. it's so deep and ingrained he can't get over it. >> i think that's right. what this story really makes clear, and what people have wondered about is because of his aversion to hearing this, he still does not want reports in his intelligence briefing, they have to dance around it gently so they don't irritate him in the briefings. because of that aversion, the government itself is not taking the kind of aggressive actions you would expect from a government whose voting booths

have been -- or whose voting processes have been manipulated by the russians. under ordinary circumstances, the president would order a crackdown, let's figure out what happened, let's go after it, let's pass laws, let's hold the russians accountable. none of that. so in effect, the elections coming up are much more vulnerable than they would be otherwise. a president whose insecurities are putting a threat -- putting a danger over our own election process going-forward. >> this is something which the >> entire intelligence community has said is concerned about. general michael hayden, former head of the cia says it's the political equivalent of 9/11. >> yes. >> that was an interesting quote i thought. i hadn't seen quite those graphic dramatic terms. if that's the conclusion of someone who's really seeing the intelligence, i think we have to take it seriously. again what it says, the russian threat -- it does not say it tossed the election to

hillary, it does not say there was collusion. what it does say is the meddling itself, constituted the direct threat to american democracy, and we're not cracking down on it as we should. >> for a president who's so obsessed with winning, it allows the russians to win. if the idea of the -- the strategy of the russians was to sew discord, to meddle in the election, not only did they meddle in the election, they've won by not allowing the united states to actually prevent it the next time. >> exactly. and let's see -- the story also points out -- it's not just about the voting, it's about they wanted to increase political polarization, they wanted to increase polarization between the races in this country. and they wanted to diminish america's influence overseas, they've accomplished all three of those without tossing the election necessarily and left us vulnerable. that's a damning report. >> it's incredible, david gergen, thank you.

>> thank you. >> back now with the panel. joining the conversation also is former congressman jack kingston. >> does this concern you? i mean the idea that -- one reading of "the washington post" report is that the president's own -- i don't know if it's insecurity or belief that people are trying to diminish him or his totally legitimate election result is preventing him and the u.s. government from addressing a serious national security problem. >> it's worth noting, he's publically said he trusts his intelligence agencies and he believes there was meddling. >> he did say that only after controversy -- >> he did. this is a report of what's -- people trying to characterize his briefings. the russians interfered in our elections. it's being investigated on capitol hill, the president should take a stronger stance in pushing back on this, i also think we go a little too far. david gergen just said, they interfered with our processes. there's no evidence of that, there's evidence they tried to influence the election by buying facebook ads and those sorts of things.

as someone who does that, i can tell you, what we've seen so far, at a very, very minimal level. there's no evidence they influenced the election. there's no evidence they divided people, the way that david gergen discussed. what frustrates the president i believe, is that this turns into a partisan issue, it and becomes a political football. i don't think he should react to that. but he does have a good point that this becomes a very -- we're getting ready to hear it. it becomes a partisan issue. >> there's never been a cabinet level meeting to discuss future cyber efforts to prevent russian sberns interference? >> no, and i agree with that. i consider russia the state, the enemy of the people. when they do something this, in some countries it might be considered an act of war. we have to take this incredibly seriously. i'm agreeing that the president should take it more seriously. however, the tone of this goes into a partisan place that is also not appropriate.

there's no evidence the russians actually changed the outcome of anything in the election. >> having worked for the committee on homeland security before i worked for the cbc, where i was very proud of the many things we did on a bipartisan basis, being able to take an offensive look and approach toward a strategic approach toward cyber security was one of those spaces. and to me, it's maddening that we can't have a conversation about not only what russia could do, but any country could do. because it's one of our most vulnerable spaces. we do so much online, not just the ways in which precincts were vulnerable, and were attacked, and there's proof of that. there's not just facebook ads, there are multiple spaces in which this was a problem. >> voting machines, have you seen any evidence? >> that's not what happened, but that's not -- but you're also minimalizing. and that's dishonest. >> no, i'm trying to give context, as opposed to becoming a partisan -- >> i didn't make it partisan.

>> there have been a number of secretaries of states and states where their voter rolls were hacked. and voter information was taken. >> 21. >> 21 to be specific. so that's more than just buying facebook ads. we know that individuals impersonated black lives matter activists to sow discord. that's more than just buying facebook ads, we know that john podesta's e-mails were hacked and leaked by a russian agent. that's more than just buying facebook ads. what i'm saying is, we can man ma liez this all you want, can you say it's just as trivial as you want, but that's not the facts. and the president of the united states, democrat or republican, if someone in -- this is not a partisan issue, what you've seen on the hill is, you've seen democrats and republicans alike. you've seen tom telis, the united states senator from north carolina, and mark warner work diligently in a nonpartisan fashion to make this happen. so do not minimalize the

antibiot attacks on our democracy. >> i don't think anyone's minimalizing it. >> the president is. >> i don't think he is. part of his criticism of the obama administration, is that they always told our enemies what we were about to do. we're going to withdraw from the middle east at a certain time i think part of his strategy is to do things quietly. >> no one knows but him. >> the cia, the homeland security. mattis, mcmaster, do you think they're sitting back and -- >> can i tell you -- >> i don't think mark -- pompeo would be doing that. >> let me tell you how quiet it's been. it's been so quiet, that right now in syria, russia has now built and has an agreement to put two more air force bases. >> that's a great point. >> who was it that bombed the russian assets in syria by the way? >> series of great points. >> here we go. >> he bombed an air force base, and what did they do the next day. >> they sent planes for -- >> hold on. tara, where are you on this? >> i worked for a member who also was on the foreign affairs committee, and so we saw a lot of cyber security issues

concerning china initially, years ago, asymmetric warfare. is what she they used to call the cyber warfare attacks coming from china. it would be naive to think russia wouldn't be involved in a similar strategy to attack the united states. russia has been involved, part of a 40 year strategy on russia's part of reflexive control theory, which is basically perception management. what they do, and they've done this in the ukraine, in europe, and now they have employed this tactic in the united states. they manipulate, they have disinformation campaigns, they manipulate information to try to convince people of a predetermined outcome that the russians want. if this is not a textbook example of this theory, i don't know what is. and for the president of the united states to be in denial about this, because it hurts his little feelings. >> that is disrespectful to say that. >> he has never criticized vladimir putin. mike shields just had a stronger

attack on putin than the president of the united states ever had. after what the russians have tried to do with this country. there's a problem with that. >> the anti-trumpers always want to make this personal. can we all agree -- >> one at a time. >> the president makes everything personal, that's why we have to talk about it in this context. he goes -- his ego is so fragile. >> look, when it comes -- here's where this -- this is exactly what i'm talking about. it goes from an investigation to now we're talking about the president's policies toward russian. they're getting tied in together, right? he's brokered a peace in syria against putin -- >> hold those thoughts. we have to take a break. president trump was raging mad over the russian sanctions bill. we'll talk about that and more ahead. life of unpredictable symptoms. crohn's, you've tried to own us. but now it's our turn to take control with stelara®

stelara® works differently for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion, and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. we're fed up with your unpredictability. remission can start with stelara®. talk to your doctor today. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for stelara®. are made with smarttrack®igners material to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com

i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.

wifiso if you can't live without it...t it. why aren't you using this guy? it makes your wifi awesomely fast. no... still nope.

now we're talking! it gets you wifi here, here, and here. it even lets you take a time out. no! no! yes! yes, indeed. amazing speed, coverage and control. all with an xfi gateway. find your awesome, and change the way you wifi. back now with the panel. we're talking about "the washington post" reporting that continues to show president trump rejects russian interfered in the 2016 election, supported his run for the white house.

the briefings are structuretured as to not upset him according to the post. >> i think it's important for us to focus on rhetoric versus actual policies. to listen to democrats, the president is in the white house to do putin's bidding. he brings some of that on himself, because he needs to do some of these things. so i understand that. but if you look at some of the policies he's enacted, they've been not what president putin would want. he brokered a peace in syria directly against the advice of russia. he took a look at the agreement, but said we will protect you, directly against what vladimir putin wants. he's gun giving aid to ukraine. after joe biden said to ukraine, stand down and let the russians invade crimea. he's started sending aid to ukraine. i think it's worth context to put what his actual policies toward russia are. versus things partisans try to add on to this. as a part of the debate. >> he was yakking it up in the oval office with russians after he fired comey. bragging about, now that russian thing is off my back.

he gave away intelligence concerning our intelligence against israel. that really upset the israelis, and rightfully so. he was not happy with the sanctions bill that was passed in congress, passed bipartisan. he's thinking about now reinstating some of the sanctions that the obama administration -- >> let me say this -- >> in response to the intelligence about the russians interfering in our election. the obama administration did something, and the president of the united states wants to reverse some of those things, so let's be fair about what he's done also. and also, he's never ever criticized putin. he's criticized nfl players, gold star mothers, and wives, but he has never uttered a bad word about putin, because i guess putin like mes and he thinks i'm a good guy. >> of the people interviewed, they said, if you say russian interference to the president. he views it as an attempt to

delegitimize him. is that scary he's so wrapped up in it personally? it seems -- the indication is, it affects his national security decisions. >> if that was true, and i'm not necessarily saying that it is -- but i don't think that's really the case. i think any leader has to separate himself from the issue to the degree he or she can look at it objectively. >> you would hope. >> yes. i do want to point out on israel, that bothered me, but israel's never had a better friend in the white house. i think you get that from israel. >> it's a double edged sword. >> i think in terms of what the president is doing, the things that michael has outlined, they're substantive, and maybe he hasn't said something about putin publicly, i don't remember barack obama doing it, i do remember obama opposing the sanctions, and let me say this, it's not a partisan statement. he absolutely did, i was in there. i was there when we were looking at it. but let me say this, all

presidents poeoppose sanctions, because it takes away a diplomatic tool from them. that's the -- >> first of all -- the sanctions for iran, for example, obama administration was against it, not because of philosophy, but because they wanted to make the decision. >> i'm just trying to -- >> you guys can't ever have a conversation about what's happening right now. i don't understand. >> that's also not true. because what we do know is that, we know russia's economy was crippling. >> the stock market now? >> we know russia's economy was crippling -- >> then there was the reset from hillary clinton. >> we're talking about just recently. anyone who knows anything that's going on in russia. they'll tell you they were just basically a gas station in the arctic. their economy is crippling. when we talk about the public stance that donald trump takes, he will not. so you can say all that you want to say, but donald trump has been more critical of jamil hill than vladimir putin.

>> up next, what omarosa manigault is saying about her time in the west wing. it sounds like she's shopping a book. we'll get the panel's take ahead. you are going to be a big surprise. (whining) aww, i see a big puppy. i see a b-i-i-g pu-u-ppy. hey greg! that's ford, america's best-selling brand. now get exclusive holiday offers, with 0% financing for 72 months across a full line up. for a limited time, get an additional $1,000 cash back on top of 0% financing for 72 months. get these exclusive offers during the ford year end sales event. get these exclusive offers this is not a cloud. this is a tomato tracked from farm to table on a blockchain, helping keep shoppers safe. this is a financial transaction secure from hacks and threats others can't see. this is a skyscraper whose elevators use iot data and ai to help thousands get to work safely and efficiently. this is not the cloud you know. this is the ibm cloud.

the ibm cloud is the cloud for business. yours. ♪ ♪ if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you,

ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

we should televise the commercial breaks, i tell you. the morning after omarosa manigault knewman's resignation from the white house was announced, she was on "good morning america" teasing a

tell-all book. take a look. >> when i have a chance to tell my story, michael, as the only african-american woman in this white house, as a senior staff and assistant to the president, i have seen things that have made me uncomfortable, that have upset me, affected me deeply and emotionally, that has affected my community and my people. when i can tell my story, it's a profound story that i know the world will want the hear. >> we're back now with the panel. angela, i mean, i -- i'm big on loyalty, and i think you leave your job under whatever -- you have had the opportunity of a lifetime in the white house to serve the american people, and the next thing you do is go on a morning television show and you're suddenly raising questions about the people you've just been serving with to pitch a book? to not even answer those questions? to just dangle them out there to whet the appetite of a publisher? it just seems -- >> i'm reminded of a song of loyalty that i shall not say on air. the only thing i will say to you, there should be no surprises here. omarosa was fired not once, not

twice, but this was the third time. we should understand that omarosa and donald trump are cut from the same cloth. and it's about her first. it's about self-preservation, saving face. you clearly can't save face any more, everyone knows what was going on. she talked about her political acue accumin and why she was ready for this job. and i'm still trying to understand what her job was and what she was doing. she talked about my community and my people. i'm hard pressed to understand who her community is and who her people are, because she went so far as to support the president's position on charlottesville. i never heard her say anything -- >> we talked about this in the lasts hour. more african-americans may have more of an opportunity in the white house with her actually not there. i don't want to mischaracterize -- >> i'll defer to the republican next, but i think that's -- it may be true, i would be frustrated with the black folks that would opt to go in there.

i don't see any policies that are designed for us, that are good for us. maybe they'll say they'll go in there to make it better. >> as someone who worked within the confines of minority outreach for many years with the republican party, very frustrated about the way things went or didn't go, so i kind of backed away from that for a little while, let the new generation come in and take that cross to bear. but i still have a lot of friends that are in that space, and i can tell you that the presence of omarosa was disruptive, frustrating, there are a lot of very qualified black republicans that would have been able to serve in different capacities in this white house that would have at least tried to do something good. i have a friend now that's in one of the economic councils trying to do good, and it's not easy. but they're trying. however omarosa was constantly an impediment to anyone qualified to come in there and do their jobs.

the stories are numerous. and she was so revealed by so many people, she was completely unqualified, she's been doing nothing but stealing the taxpayer's money the entire time. because no one knows what the hell she was doing. >> tell us how you feel. >> the way she used the white house as a backdrop for her wedding and thinking she was going to bring 39 people into the white house to do a photo shoot without giving anybody a heads up. those things you don't do. she was notorious for that. not only that, she was a terrible ambassador. she's an embarrassment at every single event that she went, representing the minority outreach. she was near booed off the stage at nabj, where she got nasty with ed gordon -- >> can i defend omarosa for one

moment? >> what's there to defend? >> no, i just wanted to speak for a second. >> what's the last thing? >> one last thing. when she went on the view and told people they were going to bow down to donald trump. >> she said -- >> you have got to be kidding me, this is who is a senior adviser in the white house, representing the black community, minority outreach, no wonder there's no other african-american adviser there's. >> i think we need a voice if we needed a voice anywhere. omarosa wasn't it. >> i was the chief of staff of the rnc when we had the growth and opportunity report. i believe the republican party has a great message for african-american, latinos -- >> not any more. >> yes, they do. right now, we have a 20 year low in black unemployment in this country. a 17-year low in the gap between white and black unemployment. an historic all time low in hispanic unemployment. there are -- the obama white house was much more diverse. trump's white house should be more diverse.

obama's white house oversaw the worst recovery in the black economy in history. that is something to be talked about, someone in the white house needs to be putting the message out that's better than this. >> i have to get a break in. >> former british prime minister david cameron says president trump's fake news jabs are dangerous for democracy worldwide. we'll get the real consequences next. we know life can be hectic.

that's why at xfinity 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. on this program we try not to talk about the president's fake news jabs any more than necessary. they're clearly designed to undermine the reporting of this outlet and others. that the president simply doesn't like, no matter how many sources or facts are included. shouts of fake news are not just an annoying distraction or political dog whistle, they're actually dangerous, at least that's what former u.k. prime minister david cameron is saying, he's blasting the president's rhetoric. >> let me say this, when donald

trump uses the term fake news to describe cnn or bbc, that is not just a question able political tactic, it's actually dangerous. of course, broadcasters make mistakes, but they correct them. what if the attempt is an attempt to question the whole legitimacy of organizations that do have an important role in our democracies. >> the facts support what he's saying there. according to to the "new york times," leaders of venezuela, myanmar and russia have used the term fake news to deal with information they don't want to deal with. that includes an amnesty international report about a syrian. and claims the rohingas muslims being raped and killed is simply fake news. >> press freedoms annual report shows record number of journalists imprisoned in 2017, including 21 on fake news charges.

the president must understand his harmful rhetoric only empowers regimes to oppress those who tell the truth. early i spoke to cnn's chief correspondent and a former u.s. ambassador to six middle eastern countries. >> we're in this extraordinary situation where dictators can dismiss free press as fake news. and are basically given permission to do so by the leader of the free world. >> anderson, you know from my vantage point here overseas. i've been following this and tracking this ever since the word fake news came out of the president's mouth, before he was even inaugurated. we have seen an exponential increase in the harassment, the imprisonment, the assaults of journalists all over the world. you have to look at the statistics. it really is a problem, whether it's in russia with vladimir putin, in turkey with president

erdogan. and many other countries. of course, when they see the president of the united states -- first of all, it gives them a carte branch. but worse, they figure if it comes from the president of the united states, at least he must know what he's talking about. there must be a grain of truth. it's not like they're saying, he's giving us cover. they think maybe he's speaking the truth against us. and that's what's very dangerous. >> philippines, turkey, myanmar, to name just a few, are countries whose leaders have invoked fake news to dismiss news stories. you've dealt with regimes? >> that's correct. it's their golden opportunity if the president of the united states says it, they can say it too. the climate has gotten a lot dicier out there around the world because of fake news. it's also gotten dicey with the media as the enemy of the american people.

a lot of other autocrats too happy to pick that up and substitute the nationality of choice for the american people. so what happens in washington doesn't stay in >> the press secretary sarah huckabee sanders was given an opportunity to speak out on the importance of press freedom and freedom of the press around the world. and i want to play you what she said when she was asked about this. >> is the white house concerned at all about authoritarian regimes adopting this phrase, fake news, to try to delegitimize the press? and does president trump bear any responsibility for the popularization of this phrase among some world leaders? >> i think the white house is concerned about false and inaccurate information being pushed out and to mislead the american people. our concern is making sure that the information that the people receive in this country is fair and accurate.

and when it isn't that it's corrected and corrected in the same fashion in which it was first presented when it was wrong, which is very rarely the case. >> i mean, that's it. >> listen, this is really a moment that needs to be crystallized and run with because what she's saying is, there are things we don't like, what you say about us, therefore, we say fake news. you know, i know, everybody knows that when legitimate news organizations make mistakes like ours, like the "new york times," whatever it might be, we correct it, we take accountability measures and we do not let false or mistakes stand. so it is unfair and incorrect to accuse legitimate news organizations of deliberately peddling fake news. this is really serious. and it just has to stop. because it is undermining not just our safety but the credibility of democracy and the fight against corruption and the

legitimacy of our order, our world order. >> ambassador crocker, there are thousands of journalists who have paid with their lives at the -- there's the wall of the fallen journalist, fallen reporters who have tried to expose corruption or bear witness to war at the newseum in washington, d.c. 2,305 names and counting including americans like jim foley, murray colvin is on there who christiane certainly knew. do you think the president realizes what is at stake or cares at all? >> i don't think he realizes it. over the years, some of my best friends have been international correspondents, they get the story right, that's the mission. often getting the story right means putting your own life in danger, i think of your ben wedeman. arwa damon who had a very close call. anthony shadeed who died in syria. alissa rubin, also with the "new

york times," who came within an ice of dying in that helicopter crash when isis rolled through. dictated a story from her hospital bed and took a full year to recover. so, you know, to bring you news that is anything but fake, some of the best journalists in the world put their life at risk. >> ambassador crocker, i appreciate your time. christiane amanpour, thanks very much. up next we remember the 26 victims of the sandy hook elementary school shooting five years later.

we have a question about your brokerage fees. fees? what did you have in mind? i don't know. $4.95 per trade? uhhh and i was wondering if your brokerage offers some sort of guarantee? guarantee? where we can get our fees and commissions back if we're not happy. so can you offer me what schwab is offering? what's with all the questions? ask your broker if they're offering $4.95 online equity trades and a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab.

tonight we remember the victims of the sandy hook elementary school shooting. we remember the 20 young lives cut short in their classrooms, and we remember the six school staffers including teachers and the principal who were also killed. 26 lives taken in all, five

years ago today, in one school in newtown, connecticut. five years on, the heartbreak continues, the loss still profound. it always will be. but tonight on this solemn anniversary we want to take a minute to remember and honor those lives that have been lost. most of the victims were just 6 and 7 years old. dancers, painters, budding readers, little sisters and big brothers. they should have celebrated their 11th or 12th birthdays this year. they should have been in sixth grade. you may recall a month after the shooting country music star kenny chesney performed "amazing grace" on this program in tribute to all those lives taken at sandy hook school. here's that performance and once again, we remember. ♪ ♪ amazing grace how sweet the

sound ♪ ♪ that saved a wretch like me ♪ i once was lost but now i'm found ♪ ♪ was blind but now i see ♪ 'twas grace that taught my heart to fear ♪ ♪ and grace my fears relieved

♪ how precious did that grace appear ♪ ♪ the hour i first believed ♪ amazing grace how sweet the sound ♪ ♪ that saved a wretch like me ♪ i once was lost ♪ but now i'm found ♪ was blind but now i see

♪ i was blind but now i see >> our thoughts and our prayers are with amazing grace mcdonald and all the others who lost their lives at sandy hook and their families tonight. thanks for watching time to hand things over to don lemon, "cnn tonight" starts now. this is cnn tonight, i'm don lemon. thanks for joining us. another day, another departure from the trump white house. and this one shines a light on what could be a big problem for team trump with a key voting bloc. after all, as we learned in alabama this week, no candidate can afford to take black voters, especially women, for granted. so the departure of