>> not backing down. president trump stands by his claims that barack obama wiretapped trump tower during the presidential race. but the senate intelligence committee found no evidence. i'm robert costa. and we'll talk surveillance, health care, and the skinny budget, tonight on sew show. show -- on "washington week." >> we don't have any evidence that that took place. i don't think there was an actual tap of trump tower. >> but the white house continues to defend the president's unsubstantiated allegations, claiming the obama administration spied on trump tower. insisting that the intelligence committees and the media are getting it all wrong. >> hold on. hold on. i am trying to answer your question, jonathan, if you can calm down. he stands by it. but, again, you're mischaracterizing what happened ttoday.

>> on capitol hill, mounting oppose to the g.o.p.'s health care plan. but the president thinks there's room for negotiation. >> we're doing it a different way, a complex way. it's fine. the end result is when you have phase one, phase two, phase three. it's gonna be great. >> and the trump administration's "america first" budget prompts a backlash from democrats. >> i can't see how this budget can survive the light of day. >> and some republicans were reluctant to get behind a proposal that boosts military spending by slashing billions from government agencies and social service programs, many that support children and the elderly. >> meals on wheels sounds great. again, that's a state division to fund that. to take the federal money and give it to the states, and say, look, we want to give you money for programs that don't work, i can't defend that anymore. >> meals on wheels is a wonderful program, one i would never vote to cut even $1. >> we cover it all, with dan balz of the washington post, carol lee of the wall street

journal, peter baker of the new york times, and ylan mui of cnbc. >> celebrating 50 years, this is "washington week." funding is provided by... ♪[music] >> additional funding is provided by newman's own foundation. donating all profits from newman's own products to charity and nourishing the common good. the yuen foundation.

committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you! >> once again, from washington, robert costa of the washington post. >> good evening. meeting new people isn't always easy. and that was apparent at the white house where president trump hosted german chancellor angela merkel for the first time. it began with a traditional photo op with reporters, with the two leaders notably did not shake hands. later, during a joint press conference in the east room, a reporter asked the president about remarks made by the white house press secretary, who suggested british intelligence helped the obama administration wiretap trump tower. >> as far as wiretapping, i guess, by, you know, this past administration, at least we have something in common perhaps.

we said nothing. all we did was quote a certain very talented legal mind, who was the one responsible for saying that on television. i didn't make an opinion on it. that was a statement made by a very talented lawyer, on fox, and so you shouldn't be talking to me. you should be talking to fox. >> we could spend the whole show talking about body language perhaps. but peter, you've been on the front page today. you'll likely be on the front page of the times tomorrow. this is becoming an international incident. >> well, it is. i mean, and what a bizarre one it is too, when the united states accuses in effect or at least airs the accusation that its closest ally somehow authorized spying on a presidential candidate. it would be one thing if there was something behind i, but there doesn't seem to be anything behind it. not only did britain deny it today, even fox disavowed it. they said there's nothing they could find that would justify

what their commentator said on their air. so you're left in this position with the president refusing to back down on an allegation that seems to have zero material behind it. and in the process, a relationship that has been cultivated for hundreds of years is a little frayed today. >> and also, if you go back and remember when theresa may, the british prime minister, visited with president trump, afterwards she took a lot of heat when she went home. they issued the first travel ban. there was a lot of protests. she's kind of stuck her neck out a little bit for him, and he's just not returning the favor in any way, shape or form. and it was remarkable for him to do that. and for that reason, and then also here you have another very close american ally, germany, and you could tell angela merkel wanted nothing to do with what she was saying. and she was really uncomfortable with it. so it was just a very strange moment. >> what does the white house have to gain? when i talk to my sources inside of the west wing, they would prefer the president to move away from this topic, yet he

keeps making these allegations. >> you know, we're at the point where the question, it seems to me, is what is the level of evidence that he would accept to say he was wrong about this? i mean, everything we've heard since he tweeted that two weeks ago has been contradict dare. there's been no evidence put forward. he keeps doubling down. you would think, based on what they did yesterday about the brits, that they would have cut their losses on that. they had to kind of go, you know, nicely and say to the brits, we didn't really mean to mess you up on this. they denied that they apologized to the brits, but nonetheless, they were contrite in some way or another. you would think they would have just moved away from that today and in fact he re-raised it. i mean, that was an extraordinary moment at that press conference. >> contrition is not part of his game. >> no apologizes. >> but this is what we've seen time and again, these

off-the-cuff comments from the president end of obscuring the message he's trying to bring. we're talking about this viral moment out of the press conference instead of what the meeting was actually about, which was vocational education, which is something that is very important to the working-class voters who made up his base. we're not talking about trade, right? the president's trade advisory had called germany the enemy, so this had been a time when they could sort of repair those relations. but we don't know if that happened. we're talking about this incident instead. so, you know, we can see the president sort of getting distracted, time and again, from his core economic message, by these conspiracy theories perhaps that keep arising. >> and when are we gonna get some clarity on this issue? the congressional committees, you have house intelligence committee chairman nuñez. he says he hasn't seen any evidence of so-called wiretapping. next week, f.b.i. director james comey is going to come to the

capitol and testify. do you think this can all be cleared up? >> potentially. it's going to be a very interesting moment to hear from comey on monday, because we haven't heard from him on this issue. there's been all of these kind of strange exchanges between white house officials and the f.b.i. and they've asked them to knock down stories and other things. and, you know, this is obviously not something that they're very happy about. but we've heard from now the house intelligence and senate intelligence, republicans and democrats, saying they have seen no evidence of this. so it's hard to imagine then, the f.b.i. coming out and saying, actually, we do. [laughter] >> so, i mean, what happens then? what does the white house do? >> here's the thing. so what's gonna probably come out at some point -- i don't know if it's next week or not -- is that obviously there were wiretaps of somebody somewhere. if nothing else, the f.b.i. obviously and the n.s.a. wiretapped russians, and we might have learned a lot object

wiretapping russians. what they might try to do is take stuff like that and say, well, that's what the president really meant. there's a huge difference between the f.b.i. and the n.s.a. tapping russians and president obama tapping president trump. but they're going to try to say he was vindicated. >> but that's what they've been doing for the last week or so. >> redefining what he means. >> yes. it's this process of, well, he didn't mean what you think the literal words say. and to try to back away. but nonetheless, continuing to say that it was president obama who ordered this. >> and will this president continue this defiant tone? you look at his speech in nashville this week. this was classic campaign donald trump. this is someone who is not backing away from this campaign style, this combative political personality. >> well, but bob, it's what got him to the oval office. it is the style and technique he used as a candidate, which everybody said would not work,

and it worked. and he's the president of the united states at this point. and part of it is he feeds on that. i mean, he needs, like many politicians, he needs kind of the roar of the crowd behind him. he loves to tweak his enemies and then tweak his enemies. and those rallies are sustenance for him to be able to continue to kind of have that bravado of, i'm gonna change washington in a big way. >> i think that point about how this is a president that needs the crowds and he has always -- uses that as his way of -- that he's always proved everybody wrong, drives so much of what he does. and i don't know at what point -- i'd probably have to take him actually doing something and then being proven wrong to change that. but he looks at any critic, any criticism of what he's doing and just sees like, yeah, i'm here and i won and it worked. >> and like sean spicer, the

press secretary, who went out and read from all these news clips that they said proved his point, which they didn't, and he's lost a lot of credibility among a lot of people in washington. but he's out on the trail, and they surround him. and they're like cheering him on. they say, good for you, take on the establishment! don't, you know, let up. and that's what gets both trump and people going. >> the question is, though, can being cheerleader in chief, if you -- actually result in legislative action? can he use that bully pulpit to build support for health care reform, for tax reform, to push through a trillion dollar infrastructure spending package? it remains to be seen. until we see actual concrete things move through capitol hill, you know, his supporters can be wondering, what happened? >> let's get to that. the white house released president trump's "america first" budget. that's what it was called. this week. it boosts spending on defense, homeland security, veterans

affairs and shrinks the budget for the state department and other government agencies. talking about this, ylan, he has to get this agenda through, but a lot of people don't think this budget is actually going to be passed. >> that's right. democrats have laid out three things that could potentially be poison pills. one is funding for the border wall. another is defunding planned parenthood. and the third one is increasing any type of deportation task force. so we know that at least some of those things are in this budget. so democrats have already said that they will not vote for it. they're even sort of holding over the specter of a government shutdown in order to make sure those things don't come to pass. but the way that the white house has characterized this is as a hard budget. this is one of the president's campaign rhetoric, being turned into numbers. and you can really see that, because you, again, see the major increase in defense spending. and you see his values in terms of privatizing education, of deregulating energy. you see that translated into

massive cuts for those agencies. so, you know, it is a very principled document but it is not necessarily one that has political power to move forward. >> is there any consequence, peter, for these sweeping cuts across all the federal agencies? you look at a lot of trump voters i met on the campaign trail, we all met, and there's some people on medicaid from poorer states, and we've seen opposition. talking to senator cotton, he says he wants this whole process to slow down. is this a steve bannon budget, a donald trump budget? what's the consequence for the trump voter? >> well, it is a first-bid negotiation. he's put out his extreme version of what he wants to get and there will be negotiations that will ration it back. you're right. i don't think this is a budget that's going to go through the way he's proposed it. but what is striking, as you say, is how much of the cuts do actually impact the people who seem to be his most natural constituents. the one that strikes me is rural airports. we spend money to help subsidize

rural airports where they wouldn't otherwise have air service. the people who are going to lose their airports are the people who voted for donald trump. and that's a very interesting conundrum. maybe he deserves credit for taking on his own bases' priorities but it is an interesting political decision. >> you had this great piece this week talking about reagan '81 compared to trump 2017. >> well, the reason i put it in that context is reagan's first budget in 1981 had a similar set of priorities, which was to put a massive amount in reagan's case into defense. basically starting a policy of trying to starve the soviets to the bargaining table to cut an arms deal. so massive increase in defense. and a big cut in the domestic side of the budget. this is smaller scale, but the approach is the same. the idea is the same. but, you know, to your point, peter, i think one of the

questions is, are the trump loyalists, people who care more about those specific kinds of programs, or the fact that he's building a border wall and making good on his promise about immigration? and doing something about the defense budget as part of security, and doing things that, in essence, blow up washington, just sort of knock all the pieces off the chess board. so i think that's an unknown question or an unknown answer at this point. and i think it's an important one political obviously for him and very much for the republican party. >> and, well, he needs to get something, particularly on the border wall. that's not -- it's hard to imagine his supporters sticking with him if he can't deliver on that. that was one of the things we heard most during the campaign. but one other point, on the budget, the republican opposition to this is really remarkable. and so it's not just democrats.

it's republicans, republican governors who don't like what he's agreed to do on medicaid. and it's the senators from some of those states. and even, you know, some folks in the house, even the white house is saying that they're winning people over more and more. >> so when i'm watching mulvaney, this former freedom caucus member, he's making the presentation. and i want your take on this too, ylan. what actually passes this republican congress when it comes to the budget? >> well, that remains to be seen. i think they will try to do some of the immigration stuff or the border stuff. and, you know, there's also -- this is a blueprint, right? it's not only a blueprint, it's a blueprint. there will be a more detailed budget in two months and then they'll have a series of budget fights. but mostly these things tend to get done in pieces. it's not necessarily like someone comes in and there's a big sweeping budget that winds up being passed. >> one thing mutua mulvaney mend

is that this budget is deficit neutral. that is really important to a lot of fiscal conservatives, to ensure they're not increasing the national debt. one interesting thing to see will be whether or not that principle holds through, through the negotiation and compromises. you can already see some perhaps loosening of that principle, because the supplemental that's included for 2017, already it's not deficit neutral. so the 2018 budget is deficit neutral, but not the 2018 budget. you can see where there might be some willingness to compromise. >> the budget isn't the big fight yet. and march madness is under way, so it's no surprise president trump has launched his own full court press to win support for the g.o.p.'s health care plan. he met in the oval office today with a dozen members of the republican study committee and said affidavit that -- afterwards that he had converted all of the reluctant lawmakers to vote yes on the bill. but the g.o.p. support for this piece of legislation continues

to waiver, with more deflections by hard line conservatives. we're talking about the budget. but right now, speaker ryan is thinking about bringing up the bill next week in the house. a lot of my sources say they probably have the votes, but they're a little on edge. >> and we had this -- that it would result in people having less insurance. it would cut the deficit. but it's a big consequence. and it's big things being done in a very fast way, and a lot of people are uncomfortable, on the left and right. making it through the house, but it's really hard to see how it goes to the senate anywhere like what it is right now. >> carol? >> one interesting thing, we're talking about the budget and health care, after the obama administration in 2009-10 passed some very large pieces of legislation, republicans were, you know, very much saying no more big comprehensive bills. that's just not something we can do. and here we are talking about these big comprehensive things

that are moving extremely fast, and in some ways we've kind of seen this movie before. it aired in 2009. and there was a president who was out there trying to sell health care. what is a little bit different is this president is willing to individually press the flesh in a way that we did not see with president obama at all. so he's actually really working for it in that sense, even if he's not super detailed on the policy. >> but it's not typical president trump. he's doing a lot of these behind-the-scenes meetings, dan. he barely mentioned it in some of his public speeches this week. >> but that may be the only way he can do what they need to do. there's no logical way you see this getting passed at this point, just because of the opposition from a variety of directions and the c.b.o. numbers that the congressional budget office numbers, talking about the number of people who would lose coverage. there are all these dead weights around this bill. and yet, on the other hand, the republican party and the president can't afford not to get this done in some way or

another. and so you have this sense that they're going to end up passing something. they may not know exactly how it's going to work. you know, going back to the reagan budgets, howard baker, the senator from tennessee, described that as a riverboat gamble. that may be kind of where the republicans and trump will be on this health care bill when they finally get to the moment of truth. >> i want to bring up another number that you highlighted, which is that 337 billion dollars in deficit reduction. i think that's really important, because the fear amongst conservatives have been that both it would be really expensive and it would reduce coverage. so at least they won in one part, right? that it's not really expensive. it actually reduces the deficit and premiums would come down over time, though depending on who you are, it would be more or less. you do see movement toward that compromise from the president. you know, answering state's concerns and some congressmen's concerns around block grants,

funding for medicaid versus per capita. you see them also backing the requirement for some medicaid beneficiaries to have to work. so, again, that's answering some concerns that conservatives have had. and that's how you start to build support for a bill. >> that's key, that point about mekdz. i talked to a -- that point about medicaid, one person said trump is willing to deal on medicaid, how it goes to the states, if it's per capita. so you think, if it goes to the senate, say, passes the house, could trump negotiate there? >> certainly, i think so. but the problem is, you heard him say on your clip here ask that it's a -- is that it's a three-stage process. the problem is they're asking people to take votes on the first stage. go ahead and vote for this, which is going to have a lot of possible down sides for you politically. and we'll fix it later with other legislation that's not at all guaranteed to pass. so it is a river boat gamble. >> and phase three is a series of bills. so they've got to do all of

that. >> speaker ryan's power point slides -- >> amazing. >> phase one, phase two, phase tthree, what's the sale of this? can this actually be sold to the country, carol? >> that is going to be the big challenge, because what you saw was the president -- you know, when he's engaging in the country, he's doing it in front of big supportive crowds. the other issue is that, you know, even if they do pass something, and the way it's phased in, there will be hiccups. there's going to be -- after that, there's going to be political blowback. so that's all kind of set up to happen in a very tight space of time in which thi this president will probably be running for re-election and these members will certainly be running for their re-election. so i don't know. >> thank you, everybody. appreciate it. the senate confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee neil gorsuch begin monday. the pbs newshour will be streaming those hearings. you can find that at pbs.org

slash news hour. we will talk about the latest legal challenges to the trump administration's travel ban. will the white house take their case to the supreme court? you can find it at pbs.org/washingtonweek later tonight and all week long. i'm robert costa. have a great weekend! >> funding for "washington week" is provided by... boeing. newman's own foundation. donating all profits from newman's own products to charity and nourishing the common good. the yuen foundation.

committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you!

♪ ♪ i've never known a girl ♪ that makes me feel the way that you do ♪ ♪ you're alright... announcer: get ready for the return of "motown 25," here on your public television station. ♪ now it's the same old song ♪ but with a different meaning since you've been gone ♪ ♪ now there's some sad things known to man ♪ ♪ but ain't too much sadder than ♪ ♪ the tears of a clown ♪ when there's no one around ♪ baby, everything is alright ♪ uptight, outta sight that's mary wilson.