the others don't. we offer up to 6 hours of 4g wireless network backup. everyone else, no way. we let calls from any of your devices come from your business number. them, not so much. we let you keep an eye on your business from anywhere. the others? nope! get internet on our gig-speed network and add voice and tv for $34.90 more per month. call or go on line today. welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. testing time in north korea. the secretary of state arrives with one giant task, move from a vague promise to a detailed plan. that amid sights kim jong-un has no intention of giving up his nuclear arsenal. plus, the president says

congress needs to pass new immigration laws now. that's the same president who did nothing to help house republicans who were trying to pass a bill just last week. and congressman jim jordan insists he was not aware of sexual abuse during his days as a wrestling coach. some athletes insist he did know. the congressman suggests yet another deep state plot. >> the timing is kind of interesting. it's right after the big hearing with mr. rosenstein. it's right when there's all this talk about a speaker's race. >> back to that story later, but we begin today with the hard work ahead for the secretary of state. right now mike pompeo headed to pyongyang for a meeting with north korean negotiators. his spokesman insisting to reporters last hour the united states is not backing away from full denuclearization. pompeo's job now is to prove it and to take the vague promises of the president's singapore summit and produce something concrete. experts say an inventory, a

timeline, access to the weapons, access for weapons inspectors would all count as clear concessions. but the smart money is on more stalling. intelligence reports just this week indicated a buildup at north korea's nuclear sites and provided visual proof, satellite images president trump's declaration that north korea no longer poses a nuclear threat is, at a minimum, wildly premature. will, set the table for the stakes. >> reporter: well, what secretary pompeo has to do is to basically change the entire way that we view north korea's nuclear program because all we have had to go on for so many years are satellite images. north korea keeps those facilities highly under wraps. it is one of their most secretive programs in one of the most secretive countries on earth. now he's essentially going to sit down and ask for the north koreans to be fully transparent with a nation that up until a couple months ago was their sworn enemy for more than six decades. and even though it does seem --

the good news here, that secretary pompeo and kim jong-un have a good rapport and obviously them meeting in singapore seemed to go well between president trump and kim jong-un. president trump talked about how he trusted them. gosh, that trust is really going to be put to the test now. what the united states wants, no secrets, a full inventory, how many warheads, where are the missiles being manufactured, where are the nuclear materials being enriched. and that is a huge ask for a country that has relied on its nuclear arsenal to get them to this point, arguably, that gives them leverage and that gives them frankly protection to make sure that they keep their government in place. that's how they have always justified this nuclear program. they say above any economic benefits of a better relationship with the united states, they want to make sure that their government and their leader kim jong-un stays in power. to convince them to allow outside inspectors to visit these sites that we've seen on satellite, john, well, to say that it's a large task facing secretary pompeo, that's an understatement. >> an understatement indeed. will ripley for us in beijing. we'll keep in touch.

with me in studio, perry bacon, our cnn analyst retired rear admiral john kirby. admiral, let me start with you. you've been about this business. set the expectations in the sense that, look, everybody's skepticism is real. everybody's skepticism is deserved. history tells us north korea's history is it will stall, it will lie, it will cheat. how does secretary pompeo push but not push too far? >> the expectations i think we need to keep realistic for this meeting. it's possible there could be some breakthroughs. i rather doubt that. i think that the north has been stalling long enough that pompeo felt like he had to go. he was supposed to meet with the indians with mattis tomorrow. that tells you there's a little bit of ad hoc nature to these discussions. the north koreans know that under pompeo, there's not a lot of staffing to support these talks. that suits them just fine. so he has to go try to bring

something home, something tangible. now, i will say, north korean watchers have told me that the north know they need to produce something as a result of this meeting. what it is, we don't know. i agree with will. i think it's going to be exceedingly hard to think that we're going to come away from this with a solid inventory and some sort of verification regime on the back end. i think it's possible for him to come home with something tangible. >> the president has a point when he says things are better. tensions are reduced. certainly when north korea was testing missiles almost on a weekly basis, threatening nuclear holocaust. but the president tweeted this just the other day. many good conversations with north korea. it is going well. in the meantime, no rocket launches or nuclear testing in eight months. again, good news. all of asia is thrilled. only the opposition party, which includes the fake news, is complaining. if not for me, we would now be at war with north korea. again, it is better. tensions are down. north korea is not threatening nuclear war. the president's not saying locked and loaded, fire and fury. but the satellite images suggest

that kim jong-un's verbal prompts or vague declaration in singapore to do something is not happening. how do you move the ball? >> north korea is a problem because of north korea, obviously, not because of accurate news reporting or people with critical minds who want to raise normal and appropriate questions about the president's strategy. but i think secretary pompeo is trying to thread this needle between the president's obvious interest in keeping dialogue open and keeping hostile gesture at bay with actually getting anything out of it. i think even though they're different scenarios, the way the president has handled putin and russia is somewhat instructive in terms of his philosophy that it doesn't make any sense to rattle their cage publicly, that it's better to praise them publicly and have the intel agencies do the work they're doing. what we don't really yet know with russia and i think what we don't yet know with north korea is what's the president really doing behind the scenes? what's he really supporting behind the scenes? at what point with north korea is the president actually

absorbing what the intel community is telling him and saying, oh, that's a problem, we're going to have to get more serious about this. >> a defensible strategy if you get results. you can call kim jong-un honorable. a lot of people can cringe, say look at the human rights record, look at the years of repression. if you get results, say, okay, i guess. but david saying this the other day in the "new york times" about the way the president approaches these things. he's conflating a good meeting with a good outcome. it also reveals that perhaps the most critical national security crisis mr. trump faces, his tendency to conflate a good meeting with a good outcome. it's as if president john f. kennedy meeting with the soviet union the first time in vienna declaring the cold war solved. >> generally speaking, president trump is his own pr factory, saying we might be at war with north korea had it not been for me. it would have been his decision about wlorhether or not to enga in that war. now it's the meetings we've had

that's saved this situation. that's his own selling of what's been transpiring. every north korea expert has said unless you get to the point where you have an itemization of the nuclear resources and plan to let inspectors anded adjudice what's still going on, you don't have anything. building goodwill is an important thing, but the president is trying to play up what he has, which is not what matters at this point. the question of if he can get to what matters really is maybe not dependent only on him. as long as north korea has leverage points and other sponsors that are outside of washington, it's a much more complex, multilayered game. >> congressman mike pompeo was a hawk when it came to north korea. cia director mike pompeo was very skeptical when it came to north korea. or the secretary of state who has to please his boss, who wants this to go well and wants everybody to believe as he has

repeatedly said the threat's gone. >> probably the last one just because the nature of this, the way trump has hyped it. they've got to find some kind of deal somewhere. there is a need for that. i think looking at this moment by moment, the iran deal process took something like three or four years. so i think we are in a long-term process. i'd be curious if trump sort of ratchets this down a little bit. he's raised the level quickly, but in reality, it's probably not going to happen. we're looking to have some kind of multiyear, very complicated agreement here, somewhat like what we had with iran. that's going to be very detailed and complicated and is going to require a lot of meetings. >> requires a process. requires patience. requires the team you spoke up. this is an administration that mocks the iran process. yet, you would argue they need something similar to the iran process. as we do that, some of the president's critics, some go to hyperbole. here's george will writing, the most dangerous moment of the trump presidency will arrive when he who is constantly gnawed

by insecurities and the fear of not seeming what he is not, strong, realizes how weak and childish he seems to all who cast a cool eye on singapore's aftermath. the danger is of his lashing out in wounded vanity. making the argument that if pompeo has to walk away and say, mr. president, they're not serious, that the president will lash out as opposed to saying, look, they're not launching missiles anymore, the rhetoric has been turned down. let's get into a process, explain to the american people it's not happening overnight, but at least a process of talking is better than a process of war. >> absolutely. now, john, is the time for the details. this is where the hard work begins. we'll have a great sense when pompeo comes back about what exactly that deal looks like. i know it's not a perfect model, but the minutia of detail in the iran deal shows you just how hard this is in terms of how do you get control of enriched uranium and eliminate the functionality of centrifuges. this is hard work.

the difference is north korea actually has a nuclear program. iran didn't. so it's even harder now. as will rightly pointed out, there was no incentive for them to get rid of it. this is where the work begins. it's important, as you rightly say, or george will has, for the president to calm down a little bit and be patient. >> well, we wish the secretary of state, regardless of political party, the best of luck. we'll keep on top of this. up next, the interviews are done. the attack ads are on the air. the president closing in on a giant decision. (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything

so we know how to cover almost anything. even a "cactus calamity". (man 1) i read that the saguaro can live to be two hundred years old. (woman) how old do you think that one is? (man 1) my guess would be, about... (man 2) i'd say about two hundred. (man 1) yeah... (burke) gives houseplant a whole new meaning. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

welcome back. an official telling cnn the president has wrapped up his scheduled interviews for the supreme court vacancy after talking with at least seven contenders. he's believed to have narrowed the list down to two or three candidates. he's expected to finalize his decision today or friday, the announcement planned monday. the top three contenders, at this hour, amy coney barrett,

brett kavanaugh, and raymond kethledge. judges kavanaugh and kethledge have far more experience on the bench. we're told the president loves the idea of ivy league education. jackie kucinich joins our panel now. all right, judge jackie. >> oh. >> i like that. got a good ring. look, you see the competition now. you hear about phone calls to the white house staff, senators trying to get through to the president, the attack ads out there. these three finalists, the establishment pick would be brett kavanaugh. this president likes to thrive himself on being anti-establishment. why would it be brett kavanaugh? >> he's a safe pick. his view of executive power, i think, is the biggest check mark in his category because he was

involved in the ken starr investigation early in his career. after the fact, he wrote an opinion about how presidents shouldn't be subject to criminal or civil lawsuits when they're in office. now, trump might be looking down the field and saying, hey, i'd like a guy, if, in fact, something happens where the supreme court would be handling that, he might like a guy in there who has that kind of view of executive power. >> that's a recusal in the making, perhaps. one interesting thing is the ads already. we don't even know the pick yet. liberal groups going after republicans. conservative groups going after democrats. let's listen to this ad here. this is called demand justice. it's a group founded by liberals. this is targeting susan collins of maine, lisa murkowski of alaska, the two moderate republican senators the democrats hope will stand up and say no to the president. >> senator susan collins could be the deciding vote on trump's

pick for justice. she claims to support a woman's right to have an abortion, so why won't she rule out voting for trump's anti-choice picks? call senator collins and tell her to keep her word. >> this always fascinates me, even though it happens repeatedly now in today's politics. why not save the money until you know the pick? are you trying to sway senator collins, or are you trying to tell your base we're in the fight, even if you're not succeeding? >> i would argue this makes a lot of sense. the goal of the liberals should be, and i think is to get collins to say don't pick anyone from the list. anyone on the list is going to have similar conservative views. the goal would have been to get collins to say i don't want someone on the list. she's not willing to do that. it's not clear to me collins can go on the floor in a 49-49 vote and so no because the primary campaign against her will start the next day. >> all right. and the flipside, let's listen to judicial crisis network, a conservative group, that got

involved in the gorsuch fight and others, in this case in favor of the president here, going after especially those senate democrats who are in states trump won big who happen to be up for re-election come november. >> like they did before, extremists will lie and attack the nominee. but don't be fooled. president trump's list includes the best of the best, and with your help, america will get another star on the supreme court. >> yeah, look, whoever he picks cannot be gorsuch part two, but the easier it will be for him to win this argument going through the senate. the democratic groups have to come out because the second there's a nominee, they'll be able to point to kavanaugh's resume or the fact they're from ivy league schools or amy barrett is a woman. the stage is pretty much set for that argument. this is their one shot to pre-empt that. >> and they need to get their base involved here. usually democratic bases

traditionally aren't involved in -- they're not as passionate about it as their conservative counterparts. this is also looking down the field has to do with the midterms. >> a lot to do with the midterms. >> i think you have maybe less than a handful of republican senators who either because they believe in abortion rights or because they're not running for re-election and what the heck, have the potential to be like, you know, a stick in the wheel and slow this whole thing down past the elections. it will be such a tremendously volatile political statement to do that, that i'm not sure any of those people we have in mind have ever taken a step like that. so if you are a strong supporter of abortion rights who's concerned anyone on that list of 25 probably leans the other direction, what you're looking for is a pick who has enough sort of respect or instinctive support for previous rulings, not to overturn previous rulings. that would be what might

outweigh whatever their personal beliefs are. >> and to your point about the wisdom of the ads targeting the republicans. if you're chuck schumer and you're trying to get joe donnelly up for re-election in indiana, you know, joe manchin in west virginia, heidi heitkamp in north dakota, we could go on, john tester in montana. if you're trying to get them to say no, it's going to be hard anyway. but if a susan collins or lisa murkowski says no, then it's easier. >> yes, if collins and murkowski are against -- those senate moderates really do matter. they come out for, which i think manchin particularly might do, then collins' vote becomes easier, one, and her vote doesn't matter, two. i think you're going to see a lot of ads in those states by democrats targeting their conservative members at some point too. >> i bet you're going to see a lot of democrats waiting. going to try to get the republicans out there first and make their decision. all right. a lot of that ahead for the next weeks and months. next, as the president heads to montana, a democratic senator looking to hold on to a seat does something unpopular with

progressives. he says thank you to the president.

with tripadvisor, finding your perfect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all the hotels for your stay! tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to show you the lowest prices... so you can get the best deal on the right hotel for you. dates, deals, done! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com

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.

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. welcome back. 36.5, a number to keep in mind as the president heads this hour to a big political rally in montana. 36.5% is how often montana democratic senator john tester votes in line with president trump. that's according to an analysis by 538. tester is up for re-election in a state president trump carried by 20 points. so he has to worry a bit when the president comes to attack him. so tester's running this full-page ad in 14 newspapers across montana, thanking the president for signing legislation pushed by the senator. it's a cooperative theme tester also stresses in his campaign ads. >> washington's a mess, but john tester's had so many bills signed into law by president

trump that only an auction near can tell you about them in one radio ad. >> first bill now bipartisan legislation, reduce government waste, fraud, and abuse. and sold. >> and sold. it's clever. >> pretty good. >> it's clever and smart. again, tester won his last race by five points in the presidential year of 2012. this is, most people would argue, probably a better year for democrats. however, the president carried your state by 20 points. when he's coming to talk about your o poentpponent, you've got a little nervous. >> don't forget john tester is the most public face of the senators who actively sought to block ronnie jackson as head of the va. president trump is still mad about it, really mad. >> still mad about it. just because you mentioned that, here's the president back in april. remember, ronnie jackson, the white house doctor, wanted him to lead the va. john tester called him candy man, saying he was too loose giving out prescription drugs. the president took note. >> he took a gentleman who is a

truly high-quality human being, and what they said about him, tester started throwing out things he's heard. well, i know things about tester that i could say too. and if i said them, he'd never be elected again. >> the trademark, i would say irresponsible, innuendo by the president at the end there. but to your point, he got under the president's skin, which if you're tester's opponent, you like because that means the president will come a couple two, three times between now and the election. >> it also means if you're a voter in montana who on balance likes the president, you're going to see tester in particular as, you know, someone to vote against to protect the president. president trump is there trying to whip that sort of thing up. i think it's also safe to say that after running that ad, john tester now cannot seek the democratic nomination for

president in 2020. >> these people who are in states opposite their politics, like susan collins in maine. she's a good politician, whatever you think of her ideology. john tester has won twice in a state like this. he's a very talented politician. the ad was very good. i think he's going to be able to figure out a way to hug donald trump in some ways and also distance himself in other ways. i think he's -- he has been preparing for this for a long time. i think peele he'll be fine. >> he's also not unique. joe manchin has been doing the same thing. i'd be hard pressed to think about something negative joe manchin has said about president trump. heidi heitkamp as well. there's a few more examples, but she's also someone the president reportedly likes. so we're going see this in a couple different places, i think, where you have a democrat snuggling up a little bit to the president, particularly -- and i would not be surprised if they end up voting for the president's supreme court nominee. they would have two. several of them. >> i think it's also important

to note the nuances tester was not saying in any of those ads that i like the president. he was saying the president likes me and what i do. that's undercutting the message of the president. unless they're very, very dedicated to president trump, no one is going to remember ronnie jax w jackson when they go to the polls in number. too much has happened in the meantime. aligning himself to the president but putting it all on the president. >> and to the point when you have this national dynamic that works against you, you try to focus on local stuff. his opponent, matt rosendale, was a real estate developer from maryland. there's a group out there making fun of his accent. it's a yamaryland accent, not a montana accent. >> one of the worst accents. >> ouch. >> from a maryland resident. >> he asked if he'd be watching the president's speech. he said, hell no, adding after

participating in the round table thursdays, he'd probably be busy on his tractor. and he's a montanans for tester ad from last month saying john tester is from montana, he's a rancher. rosendale is not. >> meet maryland matt rosendale, a millionaire real estate developer from maryland, where he made a lot of money turning farmland into developments. now he's in montana to develop real estate here too. defend montana from maryland matt. >> maryland is okay with me, just to be clear. but in that ad, maryland is not okay. >> again, it is smart politics. and republicans are worried. republicans are worried he's not the best candidate. they say they're grateful for the president because of his anger at tester. if you're tester, you can't run against president trump. so you try to say this guy is not one of us. >> no one likes a carpet baegge, especially in a state like

montana, north dakota, south dakota. maybe that'll stick. >> and tester is polling well. the republicans i talked to are very focused on indiana and missouri. they sort of know tester will be hard to beat. >> that's key. if the president has noted had a good track record of stumping for people who have lost. he doesn't want to do that again because everybody is running in november. if it's not going so well for maryland matt or however people want to see him, maybe there won't be as many visits. >> i bet you're right about that. the president follows the numbers. i'm told he's agreed to go back two or three times total. but you're right. that might change if the numbers don't move. up next, a congressman accused of turning his back to sexual abuse, suggesting those accusations are part of some deep-state conspiracy. 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, this just into cnn. two democratic congressmen now calling on the epa inspector general to investigate scott pruitt's so-called secret calendar. this comes days after it was revealed more than two dozen meetin meetings were omitted from the calendar. they want to know if pruitt's routine calendar scrubbing constitutes a federal crime. drew griffin has been investigating the story for us. tell us what you're learning. >> the inspector general's office is confirming it's in receipt of that request and evaluating to see if they're going to go ahead with this. this stems from our report detailing a federal whistleblower, a former deputy

chief of staff for pruitt, told us in an interview this past week that he was involved with a group, a small group of close confidants with pruitt in his office. they would scrub, alter, delete, decide which things would be put on the administrator's public calendar and which would be omitted. we back this up with comparing internal e-mails we got from a foya request to that official calendar and found two dozen or so such meetings we couldn't determine were part of that official calendar. so these congressmen are asking whether or not that constitutes a violation of the federal records act. i want to report in their letter, they say willful concealment or destruction of such records is federal crime, carrying penalties raging from fines to imprisonment. this, of course, john, adds to the, i think, 14 different probes, investigations centering around this very troubled but still loyal to the president epa

administrator. >> serious questions being raised by these congressman, in part thanks to good cnn reporting. drew, appreciate the reporting. we'll keep an eye on this one. also on our radar today, one on one, a senior administration official telling reporters the helsinki summit will start with president trump meeting with president pugh ttin alone befor aides come in for a larger meeting. they insist arms control, ukraine, and election meddling are all on the president's agenda. today, the u.s. capitol police now involved in a back and forth between congressman jim jordan and a former ohio state wrestler. the congressman's office says capitol police are now reviewing e-mails sent to jordan. jordan coached him at ohio state, where he says the republican senator witnessed and did nothing about sexual abuse. >> when you look at the definition of sexual abuse and sexual assault, and jim jordan just went on record saying he knew about the facilities.

he took showers with us. he saw dr. strauss and others perform these kind of acts in front of us. >> congressman jordan again denying those claims this morning. in that denial, listen here, suggesting the timing of these accusations is suspicious and even part of a conspiracy. you might remember jordan's star in conservative circles is rising, fueled by a bitter public feud with the justice department over access to documents in the russia meddling investigation. listen to jordan suggest the two just might be connected. >> the timing is kind of interesting. it's right after the big hearing with mr. rosenstein. it's right when there's all this talk about the speaker's race. they sent the correspondence to an e-mail address that doesn't exist. think about this. the same law firm that kid used

with the russian dossier can't find an e-mail address? >> what to make of this? it's a difficult one. these are men coming forward, alleging abuse years ago. they allege the congressman knew about it. he says if the law firm reached out to me to ask me questions, i didn't get it. can we get through that process first before we allege it's a deep-state conspiracy? or am i asking too much in today's world? >> at this juncture, possibly asking too much. there's been many connections drawn. look, jordan is at the epicenter right now of all of this focus on rosenstein and what's been going on with the dossier. it's not that surprising, i suppose, that he would draw these connections. although, the question is does anybody else? the house speaker has said these are serious allegations. >> sometimes when a politician is on the rise and they're prominent and more on the air waves and more in your living room, these things do surface. just because the public profile becomes so high. that's just fact of the matter.

>> the wrestlers say they were reaching out to jordan because of his public profile for help. he says they're bringing this up and accusing him of something he insists never happened, and he deserves -- you know, let the investigators settle the facts. he says they're bringing this up to smear him. they say they were trying to get his help because of his profile. >> obviously we all have a very limited amount of detail on this, but it could be both ostensibly. you could be seeking somebody's help because you believe they saw something or knew somethin that could be used to help you or to put somebody else in the spotlight or to be investigated. there are -- the freedom caucus has a number of political people inside the republican party who consider them a challenge to getting business done. i'm not sure that has anything to do with the timing of why this is coming out now. >> let's get the investigation done and the facts ahead of conspiracy theories. up next, an update from the hhs. the department of health and

human services on just how the trump administration is reunifying families split at the border and how many are still in government care. are you a christian author with

a book that you're ready to share with the world? get published now, call for your free publisher kit today! breaking news now on the trump administration efforts to reunify migrant children separated from their families at the u.s./mexico border. the department of health and human services just wrapped up a call to update reporters on the reunification process and how many children are still in government custody. cnn's sunlen serfaty was on that call. she joins us at the table. >> we have some new information, by still, short of a full accounting of what's going on with these kids at the border as the agency works to reunify them. the hhs secretary just got off the call with reporters. he says they're currently holding 11,800 minors, that includes 80% of the kids who showed up at the border

unaccompanied without a parent. here's where our important number comes in. they say they're currently holding under 3,000 children in total that have been separated from their families. that was an approximate figure. they would not put an actual number. he said it was under 3,000. that includes 100 children under the age of 5. so little babies here that are being held. also very significant, not only that they wouldn't put an exact number on that, they also would not tell us exactly how many kids had been reunified with their parents since that executive order was signed. the last figure we know was six children. that's just because we were able to do some math. the last time, nine days ago, they said there were 2,047 children. still, we do not have specifics. also a lot of scrutiny going on about how they're making these connections between children and kids. anecdotally in some of these centers, we're hearing they're using dna testing. today the hhs secretary did

confirm that dna testing is being used for the purpose of identification. because they're trying to comply with this court order. that was in large part the context of this call, that they have to hit these very specific deadlines. july 6th, july 10th, july 26th to potentially get everyone reunited. today he said that they will comply with this court deadline. >> he says they will comply but won't give reporters, so the american people, the hard numbers. what is the answer when people say why not? is it because they don't have the numbers, as some democrats suggest? they don't know what they have on their hands? they don't understand how comprehensive the problem is? or do they have some privacy reason where they think it's okay not to tell us? >> they seem to be taking a little cover from the court ruling here and saying, look, their focus is on making these ru unifications and making sure they're connecting kids with families. but that does seem to be a very simple question of how many reunifications have you indeed made here. where are these kids getting back with their families.

we've seen from our crews on the ground these reunifications happening. we have to believe it's more than six, but as of now, they're not naming the exact number. >> it's a giant, legitimate policy question to ask about the numbers. it's a giant policy challenge for the administration. it's become a political problem. this is tom cole, republican member of congress, who understands the nuts and bolts of midterm elections and what happens, who says, a, the president never should have done this, and b, it's turning out badly. >> you just simply don't separate families. i think the president beat a hasty retreat on that because the reaction was so negative in a bipartisan sense across the board. i think he was right to do that. >> the president keeps trying to change the subject. he wants to talk about, you know, some democrats who say they want to abolish i.c.e., other things. on this one, republicans worry, number one, the most important thing is the policy debate and the policy of reunification. republicans also deeply worry about the politics of this and if the administration can't give us numbers, can't be

accountable, i assume that makes the problem even deeper. >> well, yeah. and what cole also went on to say in that interview this morning was that the american people aren't going to stand for something like this and they shouldn't. pretty pointed criticism of the president from the same party as him. so this is the line in the sand that a lot of republicans have drawn. they've gone along with a lot of the things the president has done, but on this one, taking a step back and saying this policy is totally not okay, was never okay, and that all of the assets, all of the leverage of the federal government should be brought to bear on these reunifications. i thought that was some pretty strong words from the congressman. >> only good news i heard is the secretary is leading the process, doing the conference calls and seems involved. i remember when the obamacare website failed, sebelius got deeply involved and showed they cared, which is an important step. they clearly are focused on this and know this is the issue people are watching to see they solve over anything else right now. >> that's an excellent point. secretary is known as a serious guy. maybe they can't answer today.

maybe thursday, friday, saturday, monday. it would be nice to get some numbers. >> up next, the clock is ticking. some trade war implications already in place. some others due, including some at midnight tonight. i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. i bet i'm the first blade maker you've ever met. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making our thinnest longest lasting blades on the market. precision machinery and high-quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. it's about delivering a more comfortable shave every time. invented in boston, made and sold around the world. order now at gilletteondemand.com. gillette. the best a man can get.

wmust have cost a lot. a fancy hotel. actually, i got a great deal. priceline saves you up to 60% on hotels, but that's something the hotels don't really want other guests to know. i saved about 120 dollars a night! did you say you saved 120 dollars a night on a room? 120 a night on a hotel room... that's a lot of savings! i saved even more on my flight. save up to 60% on hotels with priceline.

there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network...

because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row.

duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. welcome back. midnight tonight is another key marker in the escalating trump trade war. the united states set to hit china with tariffs on $34 billion in goods. overnight, mexico doubled its tariffs on pork imports from the united states. showdowns with europe, too, awih farmers and pork producers as the president's trade war threat turns into a reality. christine romans has more. >> reporter: john, it is a nerve-racking week for american farmers and pork producers. this is the week that marks really the beginning of the trade war. it's real and it is here. sunday canada slapped tariffs on $12.6 billion worth of american exports, ketchup to soybeans. overnight, mexico doubled its

tariff on pork imported from the u.s. to 20%. that's a huge market for american pork producers. mexico is the largest importer of american pork. the european union already slapped 20% to 25% taxes on whiskey, blue jeans, and motorcycles, among other things. at midnight tonight comes the showdown with china. the u.s. will hit china on $34 billion of goods, targeting the high-tech industries that china vows to dominate. china vows to retaliate with tariffs on high-value american exports like cars, crude oil, cash krocrops like soybeans. about 100 soybean growers are heading to washington next week. the white house is steadfast here. the strong economy makes the timing right for tough trade policy, they say. the president's most hawkish trade advisers maintain america

can win any trade war. america has less to lose than its trade adversaries here. >> christine romans, appreciate the by the book numbers there. the president does believe the economy is roaring, we can get through this. the question s he hasn't listened to republican members of congress. he hasn't listened to business interests. will he listen to farmers? or is the president's view, check in a year and a half, don't worry about the next several months? >> i wonder if he needs a bad midterm to listen. somewhere like iowa. i'm sure members in iowa -- you have already zbljodi ernst, chu grassley. >> a couple house seats in place. >> and down south where a lot of those car companies are based. i'm sure he'll start hearing from them too. maybe he needs results to see this is maybe a bad call for people. >> the best scenario he can hope for is things end up fairly

neutral. a lot of people are saying, why are you putting us through this in the first place? it ends up okay, that's not really a win unless things end up so much better that these particular farmers end up wealthier for it, which seems like a distant possibility. these segments of the economy that matter so much don't seem like they're going to gain from. >> voted for trump partly because he was confident he would bring back manufacturing jobs. now as his boss has cut back hours, they may have to let 200 more workers go. he said, i support him 100%. in fact, i'd like to shake his hand. he's going a great job. loyalty among the voters, that's now. the question is over two, three months into this, does that stick? >> i think trump has been talking about trade wars and the u.s. being ripped off for 30 years. this is the one issue i would argue i have a hard time seeing him back down for a long time, maybe not until 2020. i think he really wants to try

this. he basically dismissed his economic adviser over this issue. i think this is the one place where i don't see him backing down any time soon. >> it's a fascinating test as we go forward. new deadlines tonight at midnight. thanks for joining us on "inside politics." jim sciutto is in for wolf. he starts right now. have a great day. hello, i'm jim sciutto in for wolf liblitzer. thanks so much for joining us today. where are the children? with hours to go until the deadline, pressure is mounting on the trump administration to reunite immigrant children and their parents as they resort to dna tests to identify who belongs to whom. down to the wire as the president narrows his list of supreme court favorites. a new push by conservatives against some of those on his short list. and he may have just been thinking out loud, but president trump's question about