sides are saying it's still a long way to go, kate. >> to say the very least. all right, fred. thank you so much. i really appreciate it. no holds barred, brutally frank. let's see. thanks so much for joining me. i really appreciate it. "inside politics" with john king starts right now. thank you, kate. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. the president moving quickly through his supreme court interviews, and the senate's top republican predicts the new justice will be on the bench by october 1st. plus, immigration rises as a midterm election issue as liberal anger nudges democrats into more confrontations with the president. and the new world disorder. the trump trade war escalates. new letters lecturing nato allies on defense spending and germany's chancellor keeps her job but only after a big retreat on immigration.

>> i watched him interact with angela merkel on a number of occasions and certainly treats her with respect. >> all the time? really? >> that's where we begin the hour. again, call it the new world disorder. key u.s. allies already on edge because of trade tensions are now getting lectured from president trump because he wants them to spend more on their militaries. among those on the receiving end of a tough letter from the president, the german chancellor angela merkel, who just had to make a major policy retreat on my griegs a migration and refugees to keep her grip on power. the president has repeatedly called her soft on migration issues. "the new york times" obtained the new trump let e complaining the chancellor is hurting, in the president's view, the nato alliance. quote, there's growing frustration in the united states that some allies have not stepped up as promised. continued german underspending on defense undermines the security of the alliance and provides validation for other allies that also do not plan to meet their military spending

commitments because others see you as a role model. canada and norway also among the nato allies getting similar letters from the president. cnn has learned the defense secretary, james mattis, fired off a similar missive to the uk's defense chief, all of this just before a nato summit next week in brussels. then a trump/putin summit. the russian president, we know, likes nothing more than to see the western alliance divided, fighting publicly. let's bring in cnn's jeff zeleny at the white house. america first seems to have become america fighting with just about everybody. >> reporter: john, it certainly does. these are allies we're talking about. the reality here is what is going on is a continuation of what the president has done before every summit he has held with world leaders, before every global meeting. it's essentially chapter two of his fight he had just a month or so ago at the g7 meeting in canada. but a week from today, the president will be flying, as we speak, during the daytime hours, going to brussels for a nato

meeting. he's starting the conversation, if you will, with a fight by calling out each leader individually for not paying enough, contributing enough of their gdp to defense issues. this isn't a new argument. other presidents have done this repeatedly. barack obama did. george w. bush did as well. but in a very different way. if it was only this, that would be one thing, john. but this is really a part of all of the fighting that this president is doing with our allies. he's simply wanting to poke them in the eye. in angela merkel's case, when she's down. she's having a very complex time keeping her own government afloat here. so this is something that president trump certainly is not throwing her a lifeline. anything but that. so next week's meeting in brussels will be talking much about this. so a bit of a preview for what's to come. we know what's on president trump's mind. we do not know how angela merkel will respond. john? >> tensions, tensions everywhere you look throughout the issues

portfolio. jeff zeleny live at the white house. thank you. with me is rachel bate of politico, jonathan martin of "the new york times", retired rear admiral john kerr by, and cnn's katelyn collins. admiral, i want to start with you because you have experience. to jeff's point, angela merkel is in trouble. barack obama, george w. bush, george h.w. bush, bill clinton would try to throw a friend a lifeline at that moment or certainly not pour salt in the wounds. this president seems to relish these fights with people who, on paper historically, are friends. >> yeah, it's really difficult to understand. we need germany. they host 30,000 some troop miss their country alone. germany is a great logistical, medical hub for us. we couldn't have fought in iraq and afghanistan for the last 17 years without the support we get there. secondly, it makes little sense to me if you want germany to ante up more of their defense spending why you would pick on merkel. it's already an unpopular thing to do in germany. trump is exceedingly unpopular there.

i'm not sure how he thinks he's going to get the goal of getting them to spend more money by picking on merkel and making it harder for her to go to the legislature and get that money. >> th >> which raises the question, does the president want the goal, the policy progress, or does he just want the fight? we'll come back to this on trade in a few minutes. but the president has a point. the nato allies have committed to spend more. this goes back several presidencies. under obama, it started to go up. that's the percentage of the gdp of these countries spent on the military. united states is 3.57. all these other countries well blow 2%. their commitment to nato is 2%. the president is trying to get them there. the question is, do you do it quietly, privately, or when he's so unpopular in europe, if you do it publicly, don't you make it harder for merkel, macron, may, and others to go to their legislatures, their parliaments and say, need the money? >> two things on this. the first one is that a lot of the nato allies came together in 2014 to recommit to this 2%.

they agreed they'd have ten years to get to that 2% budget. we're not at that ten years yet. they have been increasing their commitment over time, but you can't all the sudden put in billions of dollars. the other thing is tone. that's what you're asking about. president obama also had concerns about how much allies were putting toward defense for the nato alliance, but he did it in a way that was sort of -- well, way more diplomatic, you could say, and without obviously antagonizing people. that's perhaps not going to help this situation. >> perhaps not going to help the situation. that's one way to put it. the timing always matters. the letters were sent last month. you know they're going to leak out at some point. the president's about to go to brussels for the nato summit. let's go back in time to remind people. at the very first nato summit, the president raised these issues publicly, standing right next to his fellow leaders and lecturing them. >> nato members must finally

contribute their fair share and meet their financial obligations, but 23 of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying and what they're supposed to be paying for their defense. this is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the united states. >> again, on the substance, he has a point. to rachel's point, they've agreed to a process to get there. but that's not the way this president plays. he wants the conversation to be about him, number one, and he wants to be the bludgeon here. >> and he's got this decades' long world view that's largely immune to facts on the ground or changing facts that the u.s. has been played for a sucker, we're being taken advantage of, whether it's on defense spending, our commitments of u.s. troops abroad, or trade deals. if there's a trump doctrine, right, that's it. that somehow we're being taken advantage of. so we shouldn't be surprised

when he keeps perpetuating this notion in office. he doesn't want to hear about, well, mitigating facts like the fact that they had a ten-year window to do this. this is trump. i kind of feel like we keep waiting for him to sort of change or to sort of show some kind of growth because it's not going to happen. >> in part, the ten-year window, think about how he processes a lot of things. he doesn't want the text to say essentially nato allies are making progress toward a commitment made during barack obama's presidency. he wants this to be about trump pushed nato to do what he wants. >> and he could do that, john. 2017 was the first year since 2014 that all nato nations have increased their spending. have they reached 2%? no, of course not. but they've all moved the trajectory in the right direction. the nato secretary general will tell you trump should take credit for that because it was in part the emphasis he put on it. >> he certainly has a point. a lot of them aren't even close to that 2%. maybe they're progressing a little bit, but certainly not at the speed you would if you're

going to get to 2% at the end of those ten years. the president does have a point about that, but it is a lot about the way he handles it. it all goes back to his personal relationships with these leaders. he acts much different towards merkel because he knows that her and obama had a very good relationship. he doesn't like that, and it does change the way that he approaches her and the way he speaks to her and the way he just views her as a leader. >> and the how and the when matter. traditionally -- again, this president is different. he signaled that in the campaign. we should not be surprised. traditionally, you work this out in the club, in the quiet, private meetings. you try to make your progress. the when, he's going to leave brussels and go see vladimir putin, who likes what more than anything? the western alliance at odds publicly fighting. your colleague put it this way. mr. trump's criticism raised the prospect of the another confrontation involving the president and american allies after a blow-up by mr. trump at the group of seven gathering last month in quebec and increased concerns that far from projecting solidarity in the face of threats from russia, the meeting will highlight divisions

within the alliance, such a result could play into the hands of president vladimir putin. fair, isn't it? >> absolutely. nothing putin would like more than for the nato summit to be a failure or for it to be rid within dissent and discord over something like defense spending. what he doesn't want is for the nato summit, for the allied leaders to actually talk about issues that matter on the continent, like ukraine, like russian election meddling. those are the things. >> forgive me for interrupting, but another issue that matters is migration. headlines from german newspapers, union finds a way out of crisis. another one said stuck between unity and mutiny. this is an issue where president trump from the beginning, and he's done this in the united states, saying be tougher on immigration, he's warned these european leaders. you keep letting refugees in, you're going to have a problem. we could have a chicken and egg conversation if you want, but he's right about that. it's increasingly a rising issue in these european democracies, no? >> absolutely it is. this is the worst migration crisis since world war ii. it has definitely caused a lot

of problems in domestic politics in europe. but what strikes me is he, trump, has done little to nothing to try to end the civil war, which is causing the migration crisis in the first place. he's done -- there's no diplomatic effort to get to an end to that civil war, to deal with assad's grip on power. it's all been about just isis. >> quick break. when wie come back, from major confrontations overseas, to a major issue for the president at home. a group of front runners emerges in the president's hunt to fill the supreme court vacancy. hi, i'm joan lunden with a place for mom,

the nation's largest senior-living referral service. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care. best of all, it's a free service. there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

you know your family, we know senior living. almost $800 when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey! oh, that's my robe. is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance. and still get great coverage for you and your family. call for a free quote today. you could save $782 when liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

welcome back. white house staffers making an aggressive push during a self-imposed deadline. president trump reviewing the top candidates to replace the retiring supreme court justice anthony kennedy. the president tweeting, i interviewed four very impressive people yesterday. on monday, i will be announcing my decision for justice of the united states supreme court. those four judges include amy coney barrett, breatt kavanaugh

and raymond kethledge and amul thapar. the president has two more interviews, as early as today. those trying to nudge the president one way or another, they understand the urgency of getting on the phone. by all accounts, this monday deadline is very, very real. four yesterday, two more likely today, three maybe. the president doesn't have to do this by monday, but he's determined to do so. what are the highlights? what do we know? >> he doesn't have to do it by then. that's why i asked sarah sanders yesterday, why does this process feel so rushed by the white house? by the time he announces his nomination on monday, it'll only have been less than two weeks since anthony kennedy announced he was going to retire. something the white house wasn't expecting beforehand, before anthony kennedy came to the white house. so they're going through this process. he interviewed those four candidates at the white house yesterday morning. two or three more, he says,

going on the rest of this week. but still, this is happening very, very quickly. this is going to be a pivotal decision for them. we know the president has been saying privately he wants someone who's graduated from harvard or yale, but he's not constricted by that. he's not only going to pick someone by that. just the president speaking, he does want someone with a very good pedigree. also, he's increasing he intrigued by this idea of picking a conservative woman and being the president who puts a conservative woman on the supreme court. so we could see that play out as he's meeting with these people. what it comes down to with the president is if he feels that kind of chemistry when he sits down with them one on one. >> so he has a list that he built in conjunction with the federalist society and other conservative allies. the president says i'm going to stick with that list. at least we know the main universe. he says he's down to five or six. you mentioned we do pick up from white house officials that the president is intrigued by the idea, should i put a conservative woman on the court? might that help me with susan collins and lisa murkowski? might that help in the public relations campaign?

one of them is amy barrett, an impressive conservative record. but if traump is ump is weighinn equals and evening, does this help or hurt? >> what would we have in a trump court? who knows? i think we know for sure -- i could say with confidence, i don't know who hillary clinton would appoint, but i can say with confidence the profile or the kind of constitutional approach she would want. trump, i'm not so sure. >> it's an honest answer. that was just before the election. donald trump was a democrat turned independent turned republican. he did say by that point in the campaign he had come up with this list. he said he would pick from it. it's a pretty honest answer to say who knows. we go through this every day on just about everywhere. does the president take that as a slight or honesty? >> it's kind of interesting to hear a federal judge doing pundit punditry on camera there. that's a good find.

i think. tru -- i think trump is probably taken with whoever moves him in the moment and looks the part. the president is so taken with optics and appearances and the perception that is so critical in mihis mind to politics and public relations. i think that's going to trump all. i would note she doesn't have an ivy league degree. i don't think the president is big on liberal arts schools. that could be a strike against her, i think. he is very focused on having those elite credentials. >> despite not having the ivy league degree, you know, she's a woman. obviously she's a conservative. he might pick her because she's shown she really is a fighter when it comes to her beliefs. he's pro life. she's a catholic. she's been clear about how religion plays in her decisions with i think which i think a lot of

conservatives would really like. >> murkowski and collins though. if the idea that's going to help with them, i think it would have the opposite effect. she's outspoken and is somebody who's uncomfortable with abortion rights. >> the key is making sure there's no paper trail. they say they're pro choice. they don't want roe overturned. supreme court nominees have done this over the last several decades. they sit up there, say this is a precedent of the court, i respect it. that means nothing. supreme court justices get on the court, overturn precedents all the time. they have the right to do it. that question is going to get asked. >> and three democrats in the senate have voted for her before for lower judicial positions. the president, the white house will definitely use that. they'll absolutely use that. >> remember, the president has really pleased the conservative

base on this issue. he's got 21 circuit court nominees in, which is a record. he's going to get likely two supreme court justices. there are many legal conservatives in the 2016 election who doubted, kind of like amy barrett did, whether he would make good on this promise. he's gone above and beyond. >> he has, working off this list. another person on the list is brett kavanaugh. i first came across that name when he worked for ken starr. he then came in and worked for the bush administration. now he's a federal judge. he's highly regarded as a rising star? does this hurt him, donald trump dislikes all things bush? there he is getting sworn in next to george w. bush, laura bush, the big hug from karl rove. is that enough to get the president to say, all things being roughly equal -- >> if it's someone with the same profile, two people with the same profile and one is splashed on the cover of "the washington

post" and the other isn't, yeah, i'm going with the other one. >> kavanaugh also privately criticized and said something really nasty about hillary clinton in private. >> he called her an expletive. >> i would think the president would like that. >> someone said they were digging that up in opposition research. i think that would give him a mark up with the president. >> i think the establishment wing of the party would love kavanaugh. i heard that name floated about a month ago when i was talking to one person close to mcconnell who said our ideal would be that we get kennedy to sit down this summer and get kavanaugh appointed. this is who the establishment would love. >> also, kavanaugh was one of those people added to the list when the white house updated and added five new names in november. that list they seemingly published out of nowhere. he was a clerk for justice anthony kennedy. >> it was definitely part of the kennedy keep thinking about retirement. see all these people we like. we'll continue the conversation. up next, a new poll says the top issue in the coming midterm elections is immigration.

that's a new thing. is it good for the president and his party?

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network.

a book that you're ready to share with the world? get published now, call for your free publisher kit today! welcome back today. two big numbers that deserve your attention. the first, 27. that's the percentage of americans in the latest quinnipiac survey who say immigration is the issue that matters most to them heading into the midterm elections. the president's morning immigration tweets are evidence he views this issue, immigration, as a big bull horn for the republican base. some shifts in the so-called generic congressional ballot suggest the immigration focus might possibly backfire. the other big number to watch right now, well, we can't share it with you because it's a giant question mark. the administration will no longer tell us, tell you, how many children separated from their parents at the southern border are still in government custody. listen here to sometimes presidential phone-a-friend anthony scaramucci say, mr.

president, you can't spin this one. >> i don't think that there are evil people inside the administration, though, that want to split families from each other. i think what they're really trying to do is come up with a policy that would strengthen the border. i think this one over their skis, so to speak. >> they admitted they were trying to use it as a deterrent, which, you know, i think you would agree is a mean-spirited -- i know you don't want to say evil, but a mean-spirited place to start. >> let's come back to that 27. anthony scaramucci saying the administration didn't get family separations right. all the data suggests that's right. what's the top issue in the midterm elections? 27% say immigration. 23%, the economy. 22%, health care. 13% say gun policy. you don't see taxes there. only 9% say that, even though that's what house republicans wanted to be the top issue. the economy flows into that, so

you can connect some of that there. but that's a new leader in terms of the top issue. a lot of republicans having asking the question, what's the data going to show? 27%, a new number out just this hour. is it -- separating kids at the border, is that a human rights violation? 60% of americans say yes, it is. 36% say no. among democrats, 95% say it is. among independents, 60 say it is. only 21% of the republicans say it is. >> oh, my gosh. >> you have the partisan split, which is on every question. but in the rearview mirror, if immigration were the top issue in the election environment, you would say advantage republicans. but in the windshield, is that fair? or did democrats finally, because of the family separation issue, maybe have an advantage? >> it really depends on two things at this point. the poll you cited also found by a 58% to 39% margin, voters disapprove of president trump's immigration policy. having said that, republican voters are more energized by the

issue of immigration than democrats are. so it all depends on what the electorate looks like. if young voters and hispanic voters who are signaling low interest in the midterm elections get motivated to show up, then advantage democrats. >> i think it depends on what race you're talking about. all these numbers are fascinating. we're so polarized now along party lines and along views of trump. i just think when you're talking about it in terms of the midterms, you have to know what race. is this the north dakota senate race, or is this the house re-elect of barbara comstock? if it's the latter, i think it's problematic for the republicans. if it's the former, i think it's a better issue for them. i think it totally breaks along partisan lines. real fast, i would say we have a real live experiment in this. last year in virginia, ed gillaspie tried to run saying his opponent was soft on ms-13.

sound familiar? guess what, it didn't work. he got thrashed in large part because of turnout among college educated women voters. they rejected that approach. again, that tells us something about a heavily suburban state. i think that's where it draws the line. >> it's a great point. again, we're talking about national numbers in midterm elections. look at the electoral college, don't necessarily invest everything in national numbers, but they do tell you about trends. quinnipiac asked, who are you going to vote for? which party would you prefer run the congress? 49% say -- the democratic advantage has gone up from a month ago. republicans are watching to see would this focus on immigration and family separations, the dominant issue in the news cycle? at least in the short-term t appears to have helped the democrats. >> absolutely it's going to help the democrats right now. as you showed in the numbers -- well, the majority of americans do not support the idea of taking kids away from their parents, even if they're coming here illegally. it is early though.

at one point, democrats did have double-digit leads over republicans. then it dropped considerably. now it's going back up again. we have a long way until the midterm elections. i think it's interesting the polls you showed earlier showing that a majority -- or 27%, the most -- the biggest issue americans care about is immigration. if you ask republicans on the hill, a lot of them think the tariffs are going to be their biggest problem. we're going to talk about in a future segment, but immigration is really problematic for republicans because if they want to take a hard line on this, they're going to hurt their swing state republicans who need a solution for daca, who have hispanic populations that they're trying to say i'm trying to make a more measured immigration approach, even when the party is trying to go farther to the right. so it >> both parties have the state-by-state issue. >> exactly. that's essentially a gift they have given republicans by calling to abolish i.c.e. it does depend on where, but

overall, the president and republicans are going to be able to use this. if they're calling to get rid of i.c.e., they're eventually going to call to get rid of all law enforcement. they're going to be able to take advantage, seize on that language, and use that to help them on this immigration discussion. >> the timing of that is interesting. we'll watch it going forward. before we go to break, more of a solemn moment. across the country right now, flags flying at half staff to honor the victims of last week's shooting at "the capital gazette" newspaper in annapolis, maryland. president trump ordered them lowered this morning. you're looking at the one flying over the white house right now. we'll be right back. your paycheck.

your family depends on it. but if something happened to you... you need life insurance! and chances are selectquote can get it for you for under a dollar a day! selectquote found michael, 38, a $500,000 policy for under $23 a month.

selectquote found anna, 37, a $750,000 policy for under $22 a month. selectquote's secret? they comparison shop select group of great companies like these for your best rate. give your family the security they need... at a price you can afford. since 1985, selectquote has saved over a million families millions of dollars on life insurance. call the number on your screen. or go to selectquote.com. discover what over a million families know. we shop. you save.

topping our political radar today, the trump administration plans to roll back a set of obama-era policies that encourage colleges to use race as a factor in school admissions. this comes as the justice department investigates whether harvard is illegally discriminating against asian-americans by holding them to a higher standard on applications. obama officials dismissed complaints along those lines during their tenure. republicans are holding a summit in russia with counterparts. quote, we're competitors, but where don't necessarily need to be adversaries. senator john kennedy says the discussions were frank and he, quote, asked our friends in russia not to interfere in our elections. walmart taking heat for peddling impeached trump administration online. various items bearing that

phrase are available, including trk shirts, coffee mugs, and refrigerator magnets. one conservative commentator incredulous that walmart would sell a baby onesie with an impeach 45 on the front is calling for a boycott asking walmart, quote, what kind of message are you trying to send? but, welcome to america and the first amendment. you can also buy make america great hats on walmart's website. an epa whistleblower says scott pruitt and his aides kept secret call dars and schedules to cover up meetings or other contacts that might prove controversial. the former employee says staffers met routinely in pruitt's office to scrub certain things from his official calendar that might look bad. uh-huh. no reaction yet from the epa on this latest allegation against pruitt, who got chewed out yesterday by a woman sitting nearby at a washington restaurant. >> we deserve to have somebody at the epa who actually does protect our environment, somebody who believes in climate change and takes it seriously for the benefit of all of us,

including our children. so i would urge you to resign before your scandals push you out. >> somebody help me. somebody help me. this is a public servant getting paid with taxpayer money. they're having meetings in his office -- oh, can't let anyone know about this. scrub that from the official schedule. there's 14 federal investigations of this cabinet secretary, and he still has his job. somebody help me. >> kayla, what do you think? trumpologist. >> you just have to throw your hands up. the president still likes him. he doesn't like the optics of these stories. he's not, you know, completely on board, obviously. >> the straw, camel's back thing? >> it doesn't seem there's any straw that's going to break the camel's back. and he's fired other people for much lesser offenses. so it's just stunning to people that every single story can come out about him. i mean, we're not even stunned by these stories anymore. he's tried to get his biefwife b through a staffer. he's having young staffers put

things on their credit card and not paying them back. all these things that just keep piling up. the pens he bought. there are so many ideas or so many things he's done and so many discretions you think it would be enough, but it doesn't ever seem to be enough for this white house to get rid of him. aides inside the white house don't know what to say. no one is defending him inside the west wing to the president. it's not that there's one senior staffer making this appeal for the president to keep him around. >> how about republicans in congress saying this is our party too? this is our brand too. you know, hello. >> he's setting new standards for the kind of swampy behavior you can get away with and not get fired. to your point about republicans in congress, some of them have spoken out. joni ernst of iowa has said he's as swampy as you can get. >> well, she doesn't like his stance on ethanol. it's easier for her to flash a blade. but look, it's a fascinating moment. i really think if our news environment was different right now, if this president wasn't

creating a half dozen extraordinary stories every day that we all scramble to cover, if this was a more typical washington, a summer in d.c. type news cycle, and there were these kinds of stories, i think it would be a much different context. i think trump himself so swallows the news cycle that it plays a role in diminishing the scale of what pruitt is doing. if that makes any sense. >> it ain't draining the swamp. expanding, building, deepening. i don't know the right word. >> gators everywhere. snakes! >> there you go. up next, canada hits the united states over retaliatory tariffs. the eu promises a trade fight, but the president says don't sweat it. ys pay your insurance on time. tap one little bumper and up go your rates. what good is your insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty mutual insurance.

♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (vwith miracle-ear, because ains miracle-ear hearing aid can help keep you more connected to your loved ones and the world around you. a simple call to the number below for your free hearing evaluation... and our generous 30 day risk free trial can help you eliminate background noise, and transform your favorite busy restaurant into a clear conversation. with more than 1,400 locations, you can always find a local miracle-ear center. and professional, highly-trained hearing care specialists are there for you to determine the results of your hearing test. and, whether you need a hearing aid or not, they'll take the time to really get to know you so that all of your questions are answered. if it turns out you do need a personalized hearing aid, they'll make sure it always keeps you connected to your loved ones and all the things you care about. a simple call to the number below is all it takes to get your free hearing evaluation at a miracle-ear center near you,

as well as our generous 30 day risk free trial. as an industry leader, miracle-ear is known for having 70 years of experience innovating hearing aids and helping people hear more clearly. and we're now introducing our latest advancement: our exclusive genius 3.0 technology. this is the most-advanced technology available in any of our hearing aids, as it seamlessly connects your hearing aids to all of the latest smartphones and tvs, making for clearer phone conversations and better enjoyment of music and entertainment. it also interprets and processes all of the sounds around you, and delivers our most natural-sounding hearing experience ever. our hearing aids are discreet, too, you won't even notice them... and neither will anyone else. we know that staying connected to the people who matter most is important to you. so, when you call now, you can be one of the first in your area to take advantage of our free hearing evaluation, and our generous 30 day risk-free trial.

call or visit us online today!

itthat's why i lovel the daily fiber wfiber choice,ood alone. with the fiber found in many fruits and vegetables. fiber choice. the number one ge recommended chewable prebiotic fiber. the trump trade war getting more acrimonious by the day, but the president insists not to worry. retaliatory tariffs from canada kicked in this week. china says it's ready to penalize more u.s. imports. and the european union warns if

the president doesn't back down, it will slap tariffs on nearly $300 billion of american car exports. the warnings from republicans in big u.s. companies are getting louder, but the president sees it differently, tweeting this today. the economy is doing perhaps better than ever before, and that's prior to fixing some of the worst and most unfair trade deals ever made by any country. in any event, the president said, they are coming along very well. most countries agree they must be changed but nobody ever asked. for the record, they are not coming along at all. at least not yet. the president keeps talking and tweeting for 17 months now about negotiating new and better trade deals. not one major agreement has been signed during the trump administration. not one. but, but he keeps saying we're going to do this, and he thinks he's right. he thinks this needs to be done, especially china. you need to stand up. picking the fight with the european union. he thinks in a year or two all will be fine. >> i was saying earlier on the show, if there's a trump

doctrine, like the one thing, it's that the country has been getting, pardon my french, screwed for years when it comes to our relationship with other countries in the world, especially on trade. he's determined to push this through no matter the impact on the economy or the market. i think for the first year of his presidency, he had governors in the administration who were stopping his impulses. namely gary cohn. i think it's different now, and there's less of a restraint on him to pursue these tariffs and trade deals. but you're right. where's the beef? he's not actually negotiated one of these trade deals yet. >> which would be the way around tariffs. temporary impose tariffs, use it as leverage to negotiate a deal. >> have something to show for it. >> he's doing what he campaigned on, but where is the light at the end of the tunnel? where's he going to get to the place where he's delivering something better for american workers. he may think one or two years down the road he's going to get there, but there's an election in four months.

states like missouri and indiana and north korea, there are a lot of farmers there. they're going to get hit with these countertariffs from china. there are republicans like kevin cramer in north dakota who are tied to the president. >> i love this. this is pat roberts, republican senator from kansas, in politico. individual senators have met with the president, including me. the egg committee met with him. the finance committee met with him. there's nobody for this, said senator pat roberts of kansas, the agriculture committee chairman. trump is, quote, a protectionist who has his policy wrapped around the rear axle of a pickup and it's hard to get out. >> there's a lot of news in that story too. it's not just republicans verbally pushing back on this. just a couple weeks ago, bob corker put out an amendment, saying he wants to try to tie the president's hands on trade. his own party said, stop, quiet down, this is not the way to do it. now they're taking the reverse approach. senator orin hatch is actually

se circulating language to try to reign in the president, trying to redefine that. there's also some language circulating that would basically allow congress to give an up or down vote to any of his new tariffs. so they're talking about actual legislative action now where just a couple weeks ago -- >> i'll still believe it when i see it. >> fair enough. >> or taking it from the senate over to the house. >> exactly, yeah. you can put out as many strongly worded statements as you want, but until there's actual action, i don't think people will take them seriously on capitol hill about that. but the question s how long do the president's voters have to be patient with him on this? as the white house was arguing yesterday, you're saying two years. the white house was asked yesterday, you're saying in the long-term this is going to pay off. but these are companies that do not have two years. they have 60 days before they have to start laying people off these steel plants. a lot o have said the effects of these retaliatory tariffs have so much of an effect on them it completely nullifies any benefit they got from the president's tax reform bill. so all of that is coming into

this. i think once the president's voters start to turn on him, that's when it's going to become a real problem. but the way he's messaging this, you see him this morning going after harley-davidson, saying their sales are down. but the decision they made is because their bikes are going to cost $2200 more if they continue to produce them here. so they had no choice but to move them because of those tariffs that were in retaliation for the tariffs the president imposed. that's a direct effect of the president's policies, even though he's painting it as a decision harley-davidson made on their own. >> i'm reminded, i think the president says there's an agreement in principle with south korea. i don't think we've seen the details yet. up next, a tale of two senate leaders in two very different positions heading into a bruising supreme court fight. ♪

a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia.

parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp.

remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long. welcome back. the coming supreme court confirmation battle is a tale of two very different leaders. republican majority leader mitch mcconnell says things are about

to get feisty in the nation's capital, but telling voters he's confident the president will make a solid choice and will then get the senate behind a second supreme court nominee in as many years. >> there's no presidential election this year. we had a special situation in 2016 when you had a justice pass away right in the middle of a presidential election. no presidential election this year. three members of the supreme court were also confirmed in even numbered years when there was a congressional election. we'll move ahead with it. hopefully have the new justice on the court by october 1. >> by october 1, mcconnell says. chuck schumer's fortunes not quite as rosy. liberals want schumer to block any court pick, but he can't promise that. he can't even promise he won't lose a few democratic votes in the court fight. so schumer instead trying to get progressives to take a longer view and focus on the november ballot box. >> these risks, i think, are the greatest risks america has ever faced. so we got to stay focused, determined, and strong and stand up for the rights we believe in.

we have to do everything, everything in our power to oppose any attempt by donald trump to roll them back. and if we don't win senate elections in november, senate and house, i really worry he will roll back our democracy in ways we have never seen. >> well, let's start with mcconnell. it's a fascinating difference between these two guys. mcconnell's confidence, is it justified? to his credit, whether you like him or not, he's disciplined, ruthless when necessary, and he has worked this. is his confidence he can get this done based on fact or hope? >> it's justified if the white house sends a nominee who's not going to be, you know, a political bomb. someone like neil gorsuch without the paper trail to alienate someone like susan collins and lisa murkowski. someone who's going to win over democratic senators like heitkamp, manchin, and donnelly, who voted for gorsuch. it all depends on the nominee.

i think mcconnell is in a good place. >> he's also in constant contact with don mcgahn, the white house counsel involved in this process. >> they effectively only have 50 votes. if you lose murkowski or collins that, gets you to 49. the mcconnell assumption is that at least the three who voted for gorsuch, plus mccaskill, who's been very quiet, will probably save their bacon. >> on the other side is chuck schumer, who understands he might lose two or three or maybe four, and he can't get them -- he needs them to survive. so he gets it, even if he doesn't like their vote. but he has this liberal base. look at the senator's tweet feed this morning. tweeting out a chain of objections. first to the court pick in general, saying mr. president, don't pick off your list. give us senate democrats a call. then a whole bunch of attacks on brett kavanaugh, one of the choices. chuck schumer understands he has

to at least show the progressive base that he's throwing everything he can in front of the train. >> i think they think it's more effective to go after the individuals that the president might nominate instead of arguing to stall the decision until after the midterms. i think they realize if this fight drags out, it's going to be an effective messaging strategy for the republicans km t -- come the midterms. mitch mcconnell is saying just because, you know, it's not a presidential election year, that's why we're going to move forward, i do think even if it was a presidential election year that they still would be going forward, trying to put someone on the supreme court. so i don't know what kind of message it sends to tell voters their opinion on the matters in a presidential election and not in the midterms, but it is important to know that is what he's arguing there. >> schumer is feeling the heat. that was a conference call-in to a rally of progressives in brooklyn where he couldn't show up because of travel. they were on fire about this. they want him to lay down on the tracks and stop this by any means possible from going forward. he obviously can't do that

procedurally. >> he can't promise. >> he's got to fight without inflating expectations. liberals think he can stop this and he can't, then he's going to have hell to pay through little fault of his own. >> thanks for joining us. fascinating months ahead. stay with us. jim sciutto is in for wolf today, and he starts right now. have a great day. hello. i'm jim sciutto in today for wolf blitzer. 1:00 p.m. here in washington, 8:00 p.m. in moscow, 12:00 a.m. wednesday morning in thailand. wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks so much for joining us. a new threat, a new stand-off with u.s. allies. the president warning nato to pay more or else. is the world's greatest military alliance now at risk? plus, the president says that all is well with north korea, that the u.s. would be at war right now if it weren't for his own efforts with kim jong-un. this despite u.s. intelligence saying otherwise. and a new report suggests that o