due to your first accident. liberty mutual insurance. >> jon: been quite an hour. thanks for joining us. >> jenna: "america's news hq" starts right now. >> melissa: we are awaiting the white house press briefing set to start any minute. hello, everyone, i'm melissa francis. topping the agenda will likely be new allegations against former national security adviser michael flynn. with evidence he may have illegally accepted money from russia and turkey. another hot topic for the white house today. rising tensions with north korea. the entire senate has been invited to the white house for a rare briefing by top officials on the situation. for more on this let's bring in corey gardner. thank you very much for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> melissa: what do you expect from this meeting? >> i think we have to have a

conversation about what clearly is the most unstable point on the korean peninsula since the armistice was signed. i expect tomorrow to hear a plan to be laid out under the new doctrine of maximum pressure that president trump has put in place. i expect to hear about what actions we can expect in terms of show of force, how we're going to work with south korea, japan, to put pressure on china to change this behavior of the madman in pyongyang. it's important that we have this in-depth discussion about how we are going to lead to a peaceful denuclearization of kim jong-un. >> melissa: do you think they will be sharing information that you haven't had access to before? >> i don't know that they will be sharing new intelligence but they will lay out a plan in terms of their new direction of maximum pressure. we saw vice president pence have a very successful trip to asia, where we talked ab abandoning

patience. i think what you'll see is a more articulated view of how we're going to pressure the north korean regime. china holds the keys to this situation. united states, south korea, japan, are trilateral alliance must work with china to force them to come again to show the world how they plan to address the kim jong-un issue. >> melissa: you used the word maximum pressure. do both sides of the aisle agree that is the direction to go? obviously he has invited the entire senate to come, both side, seemingly to signal everybody's got to come together on a plan. do you think that maximum pressure is what everybody feels is necessary? >> i think so at this point. we'll learn more tomorrow. the strategic patience doctrine was at the enof the obama administration, recognized that it was a failure. we've had great bipartisan success and passage of the north korean sanction enhancement act,

putting sanctions from a cyber stand.as well as a proliferation standpoint. so i think we've had continued support from republicans and democrats as we address this madman. >> melissa: you mentioned before that china is key to all of this. senator graham said something similar. let's listen. >> president trump's relationship with china is the key. china's done more in the last two weeks to push back against north korea, stopping coal shipments, you know, even maybe using the u.n. sanctions to north korea than they've done in the last 25 years. so it's clear to me that this president will not allow north korea to develop an acmb to hit america. >> melissa: there's a lot there, but there are people who think that china and the u.s. don't necessarily have the same interests as we approach this problem. in terms of both economics and what happens afterwards with refugees possibly spilling over into china.

how confident are you in their partnership? >> china has stated their goal is also denuclearization. they need to share with the world their plan to reach that denuclearization goal. that's why the united states and our efforts with our allies to push them in that direction, to go public with that plan is so critical. president xi and president trump have developed a relationship, and i think it's important. while china has taken some steps, we have to make sure they continue to do more. they control 90% of north korea's economy. the levers to north korea's economy run through beijing. they control the petroleum that's being used in north korea. we've seen disruptions of petroleum. we've seen disruption of air traffic and flights. we've seen cessation of imports, exports into china. we have so to see a plan. we know for the first time in recent times china envoy was allowed into north korea. but the bottom line is this is something our trilateral

alliance must pressure china into. >> melissa: senator corey gardner, thank you. new developments in the on going investigation of former trump national security adviser michael flynn. members of the house oversight committee today reviewing classified documents for the first time. today revealing that flynn may have improperly accepted money from russia and turkey. ranking members say if true, action must be taken. >> there's also no evidence that he sought permission to obtain these funds from a foreign source. this is a major problem. >> melissa: so here's a quick timeline in the michael flynn investigation. former three star general was named director of the defense intelligence agency under president obama in july of 2012. the obama white house fired him in april of 2014. in november of 2016, president trump named flynn his national security adviser.

in january of this year, "the washington post" reports that flynn had conversations with the russian ambassador he failed to disclose. a couple weeks later acting attorney general sally yates informed the white house counsel that flynn lied about the nature of those conversations. on february 13th, flynn resigned saying that he inadvertently briefed the vice president elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the russian ambassador. that was a quote. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel joins us live from capitol hill. so, mike, what more do top lawmakers say about the michael flynn matter. >> reporter: good afternoon. lawmakers sound deeply troubled by what they learned about michael flynn's actions. questions about whether flynn could be criminally prosecuted for his interactions with companies close to the russian government and a company close to the turkish government. jason chaffetz suggested that

flynn broke the law. >> personally, i see no information or no data to support the notion that general flynn complied with the law, and that is that he was supposed to seek permission and receive permission from both the secretary of state and the secretary of the army prior to traveling to russia to not only accept that payment, but to engage in that activity. >> reporter: chaffetz suggested as a former army officer, flynn was not allowed to accept money from turkish or russian organizations. he said that money should be recovered. melissa? >> melissa: mike emanuel, thank you very much for that. >> -- between the united states and canada. what's provoked the dispute is in canada, the forests are owned by the individual provinces, and each of the provinces sets a charge for the loggers to use when they're taking trees down. in the u.s., it's all open

market. it's alomar ket based prices. so the provinces subsidize the cutting down of lumber, this technical term being stumpage. that lets them charge a subsidized low price when the product hits the u.s. border. we have determined preliminarily that those problems, while they vary from one province to another, in some cases are as high as roughly 25%. and on average are around 20%. so they're quite material items. so what we -- the preliminary decision that was put out yesterday imposes those duties on lumber from canada. those duties will be collected starting today and they will be

collected on a retroactive basis going back 90 days, but a testify 90 days ago that the canadians were put on notice about this being an inappropriate process. what it amounts to is the following. there is roughly $15 billion worth of hard -- soft wood lumber used in houses in this country. about 31.5% of that comes from the canadians. so that's roughly $5 billion a year. 20% tariff on that is essentially $1 billion a year. and the retro speck teufrb 90 day feature adds another $250 million to that on the one time basis. soft wood lender is the fundamentally used in single

family houses. we do not think that the price of lumber will go up by anything like the 20%. but there may be some small increase in the price of lumber for the housing. >> how can prices be increased in the united states due to that access? >> not necessarily. you're talking such a small amount. and the biggest part of most home prices in any event is the land value, not the lumber value. lumber is a pretty small percentage of the total cost of a house. >> what provoked this? as you mentioned, it's been a long running dispute, subject of conversation between the u.s. and can nadia. is this part milk dispute? is this a lever or bargaining chip with the canadian government over that dispute that's going on as well? >> this investigation has been under way before anything came up about milk.

on the statutory basis, the last day we could have released the findings would have been today. so the only thing that we did do was accelerate it one day. >> is this related to the milk dispute? do you see it factoring in the canadian judgment about how to respond or resolve some of these other trade disputes? >> well, everything relates to everything else when you're trying to negotiate. so i can't say there's no impact. but what we have tried to do was to clear the air and get this dispute out of the way before the big master talks went on. that was not possible to achieve. that's why we went ahead and released the findings. >> are you comfortable with how this has worked out, in terms of what it means to the overall relationship between our two countrys? >> well, they are a close ally. they're an important ally.

they're generally a good neighbor. that doesn't mean they don't have to play by the rules. >> what do you mean by generally a good neighbor? >> well, things like this, i don't regard being a good neighbor. dumping lumber. there's a feeling in the dairy industry that they were abrupt in the action that they took the week before. >> canadian government said those are unfair tariffs. it was brought to an international court. canada won its case. what's your answer to this? >> i mad nothing to do with the prior cases. i'm confidence that this case is a good case. >> tariffs on -- >> the problem with dairy isn't that they're dumping dairy products in the u.s. the problem is the reverse. they're prohibiting u.s. dairy producers from selling their products in canada, and as a practical matter. and we're looking into whether

there are measures we can do to correct that. >> have you heard from anybody in the canadian government, or has the prime minister reached out to president trump to try to convince you to change your policy or change the approach or work with you in any way? >> i haven't heard of anybody trying to ask us to change the approach. you've seen the public statements that the canadians put out. as far as i know, that is their position. >> i'm curious whether this lumber dispute or the milk dispute points to the need to revisit, to renegotiate nafta rather than later? >> well, i think it does. think about it. if nafta were functioning properly, you wouldn't be having these kinds of very prickly, very unfortunate developments back to back. so in that sense, it shows that nafta has not worked as well as it should. that's one of the problems.

>> why don't you try do resolve this in a not so public fashion? you're coming into the briefing room. you're obviously trying to flex your muscles of this administration. what would you say to the lehman who says, why is president tssi? >> it's not a question of president trump messing with the canadian. we believe the canadians violated legitimate practice and to the degree we're correct in that, it should be corrected. just like steel dumping from china or any other trade infraction. we make it public all the time. it's just that there has been so much general public interest engendered by the two things, the dairy and the lumber, that we felt it was good to clarify. >> during the presidential campaign people following, then candidate trump thought the singular focus would be on

mexico. now we're hearing all these items related to canada. can you tell us why the focus seems to have shifted north? >> we had little way to know the canadian dairy people would take the actions that they did, nor did we have any way to know that the lumber dispute wouldn't have been resolved by negotiations. we tried. it didn't work. and so we went ahead with the statutory proceeding. [ inaudible ] >> i'm sorry. >> is the administration contemplating additional trade actions against canada? >> as far as i know there's nothing immediate comtemplated. >> substance of what you did is risque. this has been done before, these prior counter balancing duties. they say what was irregular was the way you communicated it. is this something you are doing

to do is put nafta on notice? how should we read your very aggressive at the same time? >> it's not routine, in that $1 billion of counter veiling duties does not happen every single day. >> this happened before. it's not unprecedented. >> we made the release the way that we made the release. >> why did you make it that way? >> it seemed appropriate under the circumstances. >> mr. secretary, thank you very much. india and america both were -- america was a partner of india, trade partner. now we have a new administration -- what did the trade between u.s. and india -- >> well, u.s. does not have a free trade agreement with india

at this point, so the trade relations between u.s. and india are governed by the wto rules. there's nothing in the actions we've taken that changes that. >> following up on what jim said though, housing prices do increase due to this, what do you tell the average consumer in the united states if their prices are going up? they didn't bargain for that? >> i don't know what they bargained for. i'm sure what nobody in the united states bargained for is people dumping product. it's no different than steel, aluminum, cars, lumber or anything else. nobody has -- >> anti-dumping, technically that's two separate things. >> this is koupber veil -- counter veiling duties. >> do you have a timeline when the president will renegotiate nafta and could this complicate his efforts to get a good deal.

>> we put the congress on notice quite a few weeks ago with our intention to renegotiate nafta. what's been stalled is getting the trade promotion authority, the so-called fast track authority approved by the congress. now, with bob lighthouser having been confirmed out of committee today and hopefully coming to the senate through a full vote very shortly, that should cure one of the objections that some of the senators had, namely they were concerned about formerly reopening nafta when the absence of the u.s. trade draft being confirmed. the catch 22 to that was they were also slow walking the confirmation. so it was a little bit of a circular thing. but in any event, that appears to be in the process of being corrected. >> does that complicate your efforts to get a good deal? >> everything affects everything

else. but this trade issue over lumber, as has been pointed out, is not a brand new issue. it's been around for quite a while. >> the meetings, next upcoming meetings of the g-7 is about a month away and the u.s. is in the middle of negotiations or talks with china about how to address north korea. are you comfortable that the north korea calculus has not ham strung your ability to be as direct with china on matters like this? and is the action with canada meant also to signal to our other western economic allies and partners that if they mess with the u.s., they could face something like this? >> as to canada, as you know, the mar a-lago meetings we agreed on a 100 day program. we're going back and forth with the chinese over that 100 day program. so we shall see what comes from that. as to the action with lumber or

for that matter with dairy, with canada, that really has no wearing on the chinese relationship at all. >> it seems to me the object of the 25% tariff on soft lumber coming out of canada is not to raise wood prices, it's to save and create american forestry jobs and loggers who are losing their jobs right now as a result of the dumping. has the administration does a study to know how many jobs are going to be saved by this tariff? >> well, it's quite a lot of board feet of lumbering. lumber sells for about 38 cents per foot. so if you take all these large amounts, there are about 47 million board feet of lumber consumed in the u.s. market in a

given year. part of the reason i don't see that there will be a huge price differential coming in is this only affects 31.5% of that output. competition among the american producers remains the same. so this is not like suddenly house prices are gonna go up 10% or 15%. that's silly. >> how many jobs will be created? >> pardon me? >> how many new jobs will be created or saved as a result of stopping the dumping? >> i don't have an exact total, but i can tell you, it's in quite a few states, along the northern perimeter going all the way down into louisiana. so this affects quite a number of people and quite a number of businesse businesses. >> do you have bipartisan support? i assume there will be bipartisan support on whatever

action you take on behalf of the dairy industry as well. you appear to be laying the ground work here for your notification to congress that you'd like to renegotiate. are we correct in reading it that way? that you're kind of paving the path way here, at least greasing the skids? >> well, the president announced a couple of months ago that he wanted to renegotiate nafta. it's been stalled in the congress. to do it effectively, you really need to use the trade promotion authority. i think you're aware of the benefit that gives, which is when it comes to the floor for a vote, it's an up or down vote. they can't amend the deal. so it makes it much more probable of getting a deal approved. that's the practical significance of it. >> these very public actions you're taking in the briefing, is that paving the way for promoting that authority?

>> well, we hope to get as soon as possible the trade promotion authority granted. only congress can do that. so we've been consulting with the staff i don't know how many times, quite a lot of times, both with ways and means and with the senate finance committee. and we hope with the lighthouser confirmation, that will remove that impediment. i'm sorry, i couldn't hear. [ inaudible ] >> do you have a free trade agreement with india? >> any pending trade events with india? is that the question. >> free trade. >> i don't believe that there have been any serious discussions with india of late on the topic of a free trade agreement.

but there's no inherent negative attitude on our part regarding that. >> are you going to have an announcement, something similar with aluminum that you did with steel last week, in terms of initiating investigations into potential aluminum dumping into the country. could you talk a little bit about that? >> i think the right time to talk about executive orders is once they've been issued. >> mr. secretary, on the -- this is high profile action even if there's a precedent for similar action in the past. is there a risk that this could provoke retaliation on the part of the canadians and we could see a trade war? >> i know that would be a stim la toeur thing for your readership, but we don't think that's going to happen. >> you've isolated this as dairy and soft wood. >> we think so. we said we hope so. we look forward to constructive

discussions with the canadians as we get into nafta. >> you don't anticipate any retaliation on the part of canada? >> it's totally canada's decision what they'll do. i'm not aware of anything that we've violated, so i don't know what it is that they could do that would be a legitimate action. >> what about the border adjustment tax? what about part of the tax reform package? >> as i understand it, there will be some word on the tax reform package from the people who are working on it, so it would be better to address that question to them. >> while we have you here, mr. secretary -- 3% gdp growth, is that a fair assessment? is that something realistic, do you believe? >> well, i would hope the growth could, over time, get to be better than that. president obama's the only president in many, many, many that didn't have at least one year of 3% growth. and with all the initiatives that we're doing, the regulatory reform, the trade reform, the

tax reform, hopefully, and unleashing energy, there's no reason we shouldn't be able to at least hit that, if not beat it. >> mr. secretary, who is stopping -- >> i just used that as a figure of speech. >> who is dumping cars to the united states? >> i said it was a figure of speech. >> secretary, what happened between the press conference with president trudeau and the president saying he would only be tweaking the relationship? what changed? >> well, first of all, this was not a presidential decision to do the soft wood lumber. this was a decision that arose from a trade case that was under way. so it was a normal decision. so i don't think it has anything to do with the personal relationship between mr. trudeau and the president. >> if you or the president have

any interest -- >> wto is a whole different subject matter. we do have some questions and concerns about it. there will be a wto meeting coming up in the next several weeks. what will come out of that will come out of that. >> mr. secretary, thank you. in your view, should the u.s. stay in the agreement or withdraw from it? >> well, now you're really getting outside here. [ laughter ] >> you're a participant in those discussions. >> it's really outside my area. i'm having enough difficulty dealing with the trade issues rather than poaching on other people's territory. yes, ma'am. >> are you concerned about the negotiations with south korea? >> well, the fifth anniversary

of the south korean arrangement, the so called koras comes up i believe on may 4th, something like that. so that would be a logical time to think through whether there was something to be done or not. >> do you think soft lumber might get michael flynn's name off the front pages? >> is michael flynn now a trade issue? i wasn't aware of that. [ laughter ] >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> one more way out of the box for you. >> well, thank you. >> next president elected in france who is not at all for the continuing the eu. how would that affect the relationship with france and the eu? >> that's such a hypothetical question that find it very difficult to answer. well, i think let's wait for the french runoff election. let's see who's elected.

let's see what actions they take. and then we'll be in a position to make a reasonable response to the question. >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. >> they said come back any time. >> you're always welcome. >> he is always welcome. >> pleasure. >> pleasure. >> now secretary is exhausted, you all. so, up on the screen, i know we had discussion about this yesterday. this is the landing page for the content of the website that we hraufrpbled late last night on the president's busy first 100 days. i know that many of you have noticed the robust pace that the president's kept during his first 100 days. it's just a glimpse of some of the action he's taken, some of the key priorities he made to the american people. despite the historic obstruction by senate democrats he's worked

to pass more legislation since any president since truman. he signed a historic 13 congressional review acts to clear unnecessary regulations and keep government out of the way of the american people. he's extended the veterans choice program, giving our nations heros the peace of mind they deserve while this administration continues to work with congress to enact comprehensive reform and modernization at the va. he's refocused nasa and promoted programs dedicated to promoting women to pursue careers in stem field. he signed 28 piece of legislation. it's not just through legislation that the president has made serious progress. the president promised to enforce our nation's border. his attorney general, home land security and their staff have been working around the clock to fulfill that promise. he has directed a halt of federal funding to jurisdictions that do not comply with federal immigration laws. he has ordered the hiring of

10,000 immigration and customs enforcement officers and agents, and 5,000 custom and border patrol agents. and it's working. illegal alien border crossings plummeted 61% since january of this year. the world is responding to the leadership that the president is bringing to washington. in all, during his first 100 day, the president made 68 calls with 38 different world leaders and hosted a total of 16bilateral meetings. the president has rebuilt america's standing in the world. these meetings and calls have led to real action. nato secretary-general was here a few weeks ago and he directly credited the president for his tough talk that was fair but tough as a candidate and now as a president for helping put pressure on the countries that are not contributing their fair share to the alliance. just last week the president personally addressed her situation with president asisi. china continues to take positive

steps, both at the u.n. and other arenas to help combat the threat posed by authority korea. the president also turned his words into action here at home. for too many years the hard working men and women of this country were poorly served and with a government wasn't working for them, but itself and special interest. as the president said during his inaugural speech, those forgotten men, women are not going to be forgotten by a trump administration. from the moment he took office, the presi action and putting america back to work by putting the people back into the government. unleashing the american economy by slashing unnecessary federal regulation, welcoming union representatives, top business leaders and small business owners into the white house to personally hear directly from them about the policies that prevent them from kre kwraeugt and maintaining well paying jobs. he's reinvigorating our domestic energy sector, reviving infrastructure that helps us become more energy inpen tkepblt.

he's setting up a task force that will produce a 180 day review of the regulations, policy and legislation that unnecessarily hinders economic growth in the agricultural sector. that tax force will be led by our newly sworn in secretary of agriculture sonny purdue. secretary purdue who was worn in this morning along with many other cabinet members, will be traveling outside washington this entire week to share these tremendous achievements with the american people. small business administrator linda mcman is in orlando for multiple events including a round table with hispanic small business owners. tomorrow secretary carson will be in columbus, ohio, for the fourth stop of his listening tour where he'll meet with local leaders and residents of public housing developments. secretary purdue is getting right to work traveling to kansas city, missouri, thur day and friday to visit agricultural facilities and meet with the governor there. the president and his extraordinary qualified cabinet have made incredible progress in just these first 100 days.

but this is just the beginning. we look forward to even more prosperity as consumer and ceo confidence continues to rise in the wake of these pro growth policies. even safer world from destroying isis and other forms of radical islamic terrorism that threaten our entire globe to keeping our smallest communities safe for american families. and a government that serves the people not the special interests or political personal political alliances. finally, before i take your questions, i just want to proudly announce that on may 4th the president will speak aboard the uss intrepd in new york city to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the battle of coral sea, a major naval battle during world war ii in which the united states joined with australia to halt the advance of enemy forces. that same day at the museum the president will hold a bilateral meeting with australia's prime minister. the president looks forward to meeting the prime minister.

and with that, let's go. john roberts. >> does the white house believe lieutenant general michael flynn broke any laws in filling out his standard form disclosure? and furthermore, why is the white house apparently stone walling the committee on oversight government reform on its request for some of the documents that should be in the white house possession on mr. flynn? >> i will correct you on that. the committee sent a form letter to several agencies including the white house asking to find those documents. the documents in question, the department of defense possessed and sent over to them. the documents that occurred before he worked there would be up to him to turn over. my understanding is the committee has the documents. >> i know it was referred to the dia. they were referred to the dia. apparently they have gained access to that document. but there are other documents that should be in the white house's possession that mark

short in a letter to the committee said the white house can't provide because it was a sensitive nature. but there were no documents available prior to the 20th. i also ask the question, does the white house believe that lieutenant general flynn might have broken the law when he filled out sf86? >> that would be a question for him and a law enforcement agency. i don't know what he filled out and what he did or did not do. he filled that form prior to coming here, so it would be up to the committee an other authorities to look at that. with respect to the letter they asked for three things the sf86 which was in the possession of the dia. my understanding is they have obtained that. they asked for documents prior to january 20th. as you know through constitution, we didn't assume the white house until january 20th at noon so we don't have the documents prior to assuming the white house. and then the third would be they listed for every call and contact that he made, which is

an extraordinary number, that's a very unrealistic request. >> was it the sheer volume of it? >> to say we want the national security adviser whose job it is to talk with foreign counter parts to document every call that he may or may not have made is not exactly a request that will be filled. but every document they asked for my understanding is that they've gotten. >> is it your position that during the transition, the trump transition has no custodial possession of any of thaese documents? that flynn filled out as part of the process to become the president's national security adviser. this is an arm's length relationship. >> there's two issues. he had an sf86 which is the security clearance form filled out during the obama administration. he had a reinvestigation in 2016. that was done under the last

administration. those are not documents that the white house would ever possession on any employee. they come from the requesting authority. >> okay. >> so in that case -- remember, they sent out a form letter to i think five or six agencies requesting the same document. the place for the documents that they requested did fulfill that request. >> i'm just trying to find out, from your perspective, is there no obligation from the transition or the white house to do anything more than you have done or has been done in this matter? >> everything that the white house has been asked to do we -- the only documents that were made available to them that they asked for were the ones that the department of defense had. >> how ab these calls made when he was working during the transition on behalf of a future president trump? aren't those things that you should have some, either responsibility or obligation to provide, if you can? >> i think, again, if you can. when you ask for every call -- no, but that's a pretty -- to ask for every call or contact

that a national security adviser made is pretty outlandish, if you will. to say we want to have a list of everythin everything. >> those calls were made on behalf of the trump transition, were they not? >> when? >> when he was in -- >> look, major. we started this administration january 20th. all the information that they are talking about occurred prior to him being at the white house. >> working for the transition. >> not the white house. everything that is being questioned occurred prior to january 20th. >> you're asking if you had no responsibility of your own transition? >> no, no. i guess the question is that what -- >> he was not making calls as a private citizen. >> i understand that. right now to ask the white house to produce documents that were not in the possession of the white house is ridiculous.

john? >> thanks, sean. when general flynn's attorney wrote to senate intelligence committee suggesting some sort of immunity deal for general flynn, i asked you a question about whether the white house would be invoking executive privilege. your response at that time was no, we have no problem with general flynn testifying. he's tree to do so. we hope he does. is that also apply to any documents that the white house may have relating to general flynn? the short service as the national security adviser to the president an the time in which he served in the transition period as an adviser to the president elect? >> i think when you ask -- i know that when chaffetz was asked whether or not what he is looking into had anything to do with the white house, my understanding is he was very clear that it was time prior to that.

talking about what his role is at the white house seems not jermaine to any of the questions being asked. >> prior to service at the white house? >> again, it would have to go to general flynn. there is nothing being asked with respect to his service at the white house. the documents major was referring to rest within the department of defense. >> what about privilege -- >> i'm not at this time answering that question. i don't know the answer. there's nothing that i'm responding to on that particular matter. >> generally speaking, within a trump administration, how important is it to the president that everyone working for this administration is honest on their security clearance forms? >> very. if they don't, then they're going to be investigated. you assume -- look. everybody fills out forms all the time. all of us. we sign our name and swear under oath on everything that's in there. each and every one of us in

different ways signs our names and agrees to abide by the information we provide. >> do you know if the president is aware of the comments that were made by the house overnight chairman today? does he agree with the assertation that general flynn was not in compliance with the law? >> that would be a matter for them to look into, not for us. caitlin? >> does the white house consider mike flynn's payment from russia to be a payment from a foreign government? >> i don't know. all of that occurred prior to his service -- >> does this white house consider a payment from russia to be a payment from a foreign government? >> i understand. everything that he did was prior to coming to this white house. for us to determine someone else's thing -- >> would you consider that to be a payment from a foreign government. if someone took money from russia today -- >> if they were an employee of the white house, absolutely. again, i don't know the exact circumstances. everything that is being discussed occurred prior to his

employment at the white house. occurred as a consultant. so whatever he did, as long as he did it in compliance of the law, as every one of us as a citizen has the right to do, that's up to a citizen to do and comply with the law. >> why wasn't he closely vetted during the transition period? >> again, you fill out forms. >> i feel like the white house should have known about this before they were having him come to the white house. >> you fill out the forms. you do an investigation, a background check. every employee gets that background check done. they have a security clearance. that's how everyone operates under the same guise. >> i want to follow up on that. are you saying it's a problem with the vetting process? >> i'm not saying it's a problem with vetting. every single person who comes to work here at a certain level is required to fill out sf-86. that background check is adjudicated. you rely on that person when they sign their name.

in the case of people who had a prior clearance that between the time they filled it out and had it adjudicated they could have engaged in something. whether or not they updated that is always the onus is on the individual. >> i do want to ask you about the wall. yesterday president trump reportedly said that he's going to delay pushing the wall through. can you clarify what the status of it is? >> thank you. the president made it very clear. he tweeted about this earlier. there will be a wall built. it is important to prevent human trafficking, the flow of illegal drugs, illegal immigration. there's a national economic safety issue by having a wall that ensures our country's safety. there's plenty of planning that can be done in fy17. our priorities are clear going into fy-17, remainder budgeting for that. we'll continue to ask for more in fy18? >> no one said delayed.

no, no. no, no. there's two budget processes. right now we're going to end fy-17 this week. we hope to get funding in that. as the president laid out for both border security, homeland security and national defense, as we've always maintained. when we come to fy-18 it starts at the beginning of october, end of september, in that next budget we'll go for the next group of money. >> you will accept partial funding? >> we've made our priorities very clear as we continue to negotiate. i think nothing has changed on the president's priorities. >> president trying to with hold cost sharing paeupls from insurance companies. is that still the case? >> i think we've made it very clear that we want to repeal and replace obamacare. i think we continue to see there's a prop up right now and that's why we need to act as soon as possible to get an insurance plan in place, a new system in place that will protect people's insurance and not have these sky rocketing

costs. we have an artificially propped up insurance system right now because of these payments. i think that we've got to make sure that we do everything we can to put a system in place that would solve that. jonathan? >> to follow up on the wall and flynn. on the wall, just want to be clear. so is the president no longer insisting that there is money for the wall in this current appropriations bill? >> the president's priorities are clear for fy-17. there are a lot of things that we can do in the remaining months, up until the end of september for planning and making sure that we get everything that we need, funding that we need for that. then as we go into fy-18, we'll continue to ask for more. >> the president is not insisting that he has money for actual construction of the wall? >> we are still in discussions with the house and senate leadership. i think the president's been very clear that he wants a wall. he wants it done as soon as we can do it.

there are things we need to do to protect our country like human trafficking, flow of illegal drugs and gangs that will make sure that while we've achieved a significant drop in illegal alien border crossing, down to 61% this january, this is something that's in our country's long term national security interest. >> the national construction will wait until the fall. >> there's not a question of wait until the fall. >> when will you start doing construction? >> you have to start doing planning. we will take the first steps and will continue to seek funding through the fy-18 and further budget to make sure it is completed. >> on michael flynn, does the president feel that he was misled by general flynn? >> i think the president made a decision a while ago because general flynn was not straight with the vice president at the time and let him go. i think he stands by that decision. it's up to others to review all the information that's coming out. >> >> lot of facts are still coming out, jonathan. the president made a decision

couple months ago. it was the right decision and we've moved on and we continue to stay focused. >> you made that decision, you made president was a victim of a media witch hunt, said he was a good man. do you still believe that? >> i think all the facts are still coming out on that. he made a decision. he stands by that decision. >> thanks, sean. two questions. last night the president said and some have reported some pretty sensational charges about the iran treaty. we know he's called it the worst agreement in history and the worst he ever saw himself. but he also said that at the time of the treaty, the government in iran was on the verge of collapsing. that is something i don't believe that has ever been reported before he also said assets are not used to fund terrorists but they were in swiss bank accounts. is this based on intelligence

reports he's received or other information? >> i'm not going to get into what the president knows. there's a reason that we are under going an interagency process to look at the deal. yeah, jessica? >> i had a second question. >> sure. >> okay. on general flynn, anyone who is at his level and some levels below under goes an investigation by the fbi with a final report. was the president ever given a final security report by the fbi on general flynn? >> i don't know -- he was the department of defense intelligence agency. he had an existing clearance. jessica? >> on north korea, sean, can you talk a little bit more ab the overall efforts of the administration. we know the united nations meetings yesterday. now you've got an up and coming meeting with congress. are you trying to get a coalition together to build a stronger diplomatic case around

actions against pyongyang? >> well, i think you saw ambassador haley yesterday and the discussion that the other am bass tors who visited the white house engaged in a very robust discussion with respect to north korea. both as a group and then with the president. so obviously the more that we can solve this diplomatically and continue to apply pressure on china and other countries to use the political and economic tools that they have to achieve a goal and ization stablization in the region,that is something we all share. >> how would you characterize the administration overall strategy? >> it's on i think we've seen ve signs with respect to a nation like china. i think the relationship the president built with president xi down in mar a-lago is paying dividends. this president's relationships that he's building with heads of government is clearly re-establishing america's place in the world and getting

results. kayla? >> when you the meeting with the senators, will you be able to articulate that strategy? >> just to be clear, that meeting is a senate meeting led by leader mcconnell just utilizing our space. that is their meeting. so we are not there to talk strategy. they are going to be briefed -- can i answer your question? major -- do you want to come on up? i understand -- hold on. >> would you characterize it as you presenting your strategy? >> there are four briefers that are coming up to talk about the situation in north korea. they will be briefed by -- this is a senate-led meeting. they are getting those four briefers will share with them the current situation in north korea. kayla? >> will the strategy be articulateed? >> i'm sure they'll talk about our posture. chairman dunford will lay out

some of the military actions and the way that they see the lay of the land. they're going to answer questions, as they routinely do, on a situation like this. kayla? >> how long will you reasonably expect the government to take these essential personnel to draft, negotiate and implement complicated policies like tax reform and put forward something that's a little bit more meaty than just broad principle? >> well, i think we're going to have something to share with you tomorrow. and then we're going to continue to work with allies and individuals who want to be part of this process. that conversation has really kicked off in ernest with members of the house ways and means committee and senate finance committee, the leadership. and so we will continue to engage in that discussion and outside stake holders to try to get a plan really put together and details laid out in the next several weeks once we make the announcement tomorrow. >> how far have agencies been able to make in carrying out the

executive orders that the president has put forward? today is the deadline for the regulatory reform officers to be in place. how many of those are there? >> i don't have a number on that. i can talk to our personnel office and get back to you. i think we have been able to work with, in many case, and i think i went over this early on in the process. but we installed beach head teams during the transition process. we put 400 plus individuals into these departments that, in most cases, transform into schedule c employees. so we have been able to be up and running on almost every one of these in a very very early process, when you look at the totality of how we handled the transition of government. >> on taxes for a minute, the president said he's going to present his plan tomorrow. can you give us a sense of what we're going to see and when we're going to see it? >> no. we'll wait until tomorrow. we'll have plenty of time to talk about that tomorrow. adam? >> just a bit of color. the president on friday when he announced that it was going to happen on wednesday, aides at the white house and treasury

seemed surprised to find out that this was coming as early as wednesday. can you tell us who inside the white house and treasury the president told he was going to announce this on wednesday before he made the announcement? >> i think tomorrow we'll have a great plan for you to see. adam? >> said the goal for tax reform was spur growth of 3% or more. already people are worried about deficits. is it the same as saying growth is hog wash, growth is the magic pixie dust to make them appear fiscally sound when they are not. what would you say to republicans on capitol hill who are worried about this being a tax reform that would blow a hole in the deficit? >> wait until tomorrow, you can see the plan. i think obviously we've got to do everything we can to get economic growth going. the president's made tremendous head way on the regulatory front. he's going to do everything he can on the tax front. we talked about this before. if you look at the corporate side in particular, we have become largely uncompetitive because of our rates. the more we can do to make our

country, our businesses, our manufacturers more competitive, that's good for american workers. it's good for our economy. good for economic growth. i think the president, as i noted, when you look at the regulatory side of what he has done, it is really helped a lot of industries start to see light. an that's why i think you see the confidence levels so strong because he's achieved real results already. i will see you guys tomorrow. we'll talk about the tax plan. thanks. >> melissa: and that was sean spicer you see there leaving the podium. the white house press secretary taking a lot of questions, so many of them about michael flynn, which was not the planned topic for today. we had commerce secretary wilbur ross come out at the very top talking about the dispute going on between canada and the u.s. on logging. also related to milk. lot of topics there. let's bring in our panel. simon rosenberg, former campaign

adviser. katie pavlich is the editor at townhall.com and a fox news contributor. katie, the hot topic, michael flynn, and they seem to press on no matter how many times mr. spicer said hey, look, that was a long time ago, these papers happened before he came to the white house, basically we don't know anything. >> i think it's becoming increasingly clear that michael flynn should have never been hired by the administration. he was very dishonest in a number of ways. when he filled out his background check forms which is alarming considering the closeness he had with president trump. he served as a distraction for the administration for months. you saw the commerce secretary was there today and the goal was to talk about this tariff on lumber from canada. to talk about putting america first, in the sense of harvesting lumber in the u.s. that's not the headline. the headline, again, is michael flynn. so he's become a distraction. it's very clear that he really should have not been put in that

position and more vetting should have been done. >> melissa: simon, given all those things. say all of that is absolutely true. it was a while ago. it kind of feels like old news to the american public, who's wondering about their taxes, they're wondering about the budget, healthcare. it feels old. >> i think what chairman chaffetz said today was that michael flynn committed crimes and that he's a felon. that's news. that was the new thing that came out today in the press conference this morning. it means in all likelihood he will be prosecuted. then the question comes, does he turn? does he start telling -- for the prosecutors, start turning in other people in the administration who may have done other thing. jared kushner has reportedly done exactly what flynn did. he lied on his security forms about meetings he had with russian officials. i think the problem, as katie said earlier, the problem for this administration is this russia thing is not going away. they are not taking enough steps to make it go away.

the president i think has done a very bad job getting out in front of this and managing it. it's continuing to eat into the rest of his agenda. >> melissa: katie, to make that leap then back to the idea that the russia thing hasn't gotten away. i think what we've learned since we last talked about this is that president putin and president trump are not exactly buddies. >> i think there needs to be a clear distinction between jared kushner having meetings just like the hillary clinton campaign did and what michael flynn did. michael flynn did not disclose payments from foreign governments. that is the issue here. he didn't disclose payments from russian television, he didn't disclose payments from the turkish government. that is a completely separate issue than jared kushner simply meeting with members of the russian government official diplomats. they're separate. i don't think it will necessarily open up a can of worms in terms of the administration. but let's not forget that the white house said that michael flynn was fired for lying to

mike pence, for misleading the vice president. they also said at the time he was fired for other discrepan discrepancies. they didn't expand on that. now we maybe have some other answers on some of the other reason he was fired. >> melissa: that's exactly what i was thinking when they were going into this. we knew at the time when he was fired it felt like there was more to the story. that the trump team knew that we hadn't necessarily heard. what do you think? >> i think that's what chairman chaffetz said today. he took payments from foreign governments. he obviously lied about it. we've had other problems with cabinet officials lying under oath. all i'll say about this russia stuff, the thing that worries me the most as a patriot is that i want to believe that president trump hasn't been turned in some way by his relationship with vladamir putin. all these things around the world, no statements from the president.

so i -- owe >> melissa: he just bombed syria. i think the tomahawk missiles were quite a statement. >> i don't think that's sufficient. >> melissa: okay. we got to go. we hear you. thanks to both of you. i'm melissa francis. here's >> shepard: it's noon on the west coast, 3:00 in d.c. where the president lost a round on his border wall. last year the cry was fund it now. today it will wait. we'll explain the reality of what happened and what is yet to come. booed in berlin. ivanka trump handling tough questions about her role in the white house and what she thinks of her father's attitude toward women. that brought scattered hisses and boos but she stood strong and poised. and michael flynn, the president's now fired national security adviser may have committed a crime. republican and democratic