joe biden being honored with the presidential medal of freedom at t white house. the news the inspector general of the snjustice department looking into james comey and how he handled that investigation. that does it for me. "mtp daily" starts now. if it's thursday, russian hacking is casting new shadows over today's confirmation hearings. tonight, under review, the justice department watch dog says it will investigate fbi director james comey's handling of the clinton e-mail controversy. >> look at the motivations and the decisions and the practices and how these things were carried out. plus, tough talk from donald trump's picks for defense and cia. much tougher than what we've heard from the president-elect. >> but this was an aggressive action taken by the senior leadership inside of russian. has the gop really come

together about what to do on obamacare. >> we're in complete sync. >> really? then where is the plan? this is "mtp daily," and it starts right now. good evening. i am chuck todd in washington washington. we have a special two-hour "mtp daily" that we're packing into one hour. that's how it feels. the office of the presidency will face an instant leadership crisis as dan balls wrote today in the "washington post"s. no president in memory has come with such a smorgasbord of potential problems and unanswered questions. you could argue it got even bigger today. critics given fresh ammo at confirmation hearings to question trump's fitness for office so doubts about the legitimacy of his victory. cloud number one. this afternoon, the department of justice inspector general announced officially a review of

fbi director james comey's handling of certain aspects of the hillary clinton investigation. the review of his letter reviving the investigation days before the election. it will also probe the department of justice actions during that time as well. clinton and her supporters claim comey's actions basically cost them the election. this probe could breathe new life into some of those criticisms. in a statement comey said he welcomes the review. but that's just the tip of the iceberg today, which brings us to dark cloud number two. russia. trump has mocked the u.s. intelligence officers for their assessments on this subject, comparing their motives to tactics used in nazi germany. yesterday the department of national intelligence head told trump that the intel community was not behind those leaks. that was the backdrop for today's hearing on capitol hill featuring trump's pick to run the cia.

congressman mike pompeo. he flatly rejected trump's views on russian hacking. >> it's pretty clear about what took place here. i am very clear-eyed about what that intelligence report says. this was an aggressive action taken by the senior leadership inside of russia, and america has an obligation and the cia has part of that obligation to protect this information. >> he also rejected the trump transition's claims that the intelligence community has been compromised. >> this allegation is that the agency itself has become politicized. do you believe that? >> in my experience i have not seen that. >> marco rubio asked pompeo about the political ness that's been caused by the controversial over the russian hacks including trump's denials about u.s. intelligence assessments. here is some of pompeo's response. >> i have no doubt that the discourse that's been taking place is something vladimir putin would look at and say,

well, that was among the objectives that i had. >> pompeo would not rule out investigating the trump campaign. he said, quote, i will pursue the facts wherever they take us. >> we'll speak with former director jim woolsey who was also on a trump transition advisory team. he has since resigned that post. let me get the latest on the i.g. probe. joined by pete williams. the way usually when inspector generals decide to investigate it's because somebody asked them too. >> right. >> in this case who asked them to? >> he says he got requests from members of congress from both paie chairmen and ranking members key committees,nd what he called other organizations. he can read the papers. he knows there have been a lot of questions asked about this. there are five things he'll look at. the main things are the statements made by the fbi director in july when he talked about we're not going to process

cute hillary clinton but her handling of the e-mails was reckless and then saying we found these e-mails in wiener's laptop and then a week later saying we didn't find any. >> the investigation is to find out what went into the decision making process for each of the two specific events? or more than that? >> that may be part of it. i think the key thing is did the actions by the fbi, and to some extent other officials at the justice department, violate long-standing fbi and doj practices and protocols. if so, what were the motivations behind them. were they entirely legitimate or simply errors in judgment or something more. >> what does the i.g. have the power to do other than issue a scathing report if they decide that's what they're going to do? >> nothing. they're independent but on the other hand have no authority over the departments which they

investigate. he can issue recommendations saying we shouldn't do this again. he can say certain people should be disciplined or whatever. those are his authorities. >> what kind of power does he have to investigate, though? on one hand you are saying it is essentially, here is a document, you do with it what you do. does he have subpoena power? all of these things? explain the authority that the i.g. has. >> in terms of investigating people who are still in the government he has pretty good power. in terms of people who are outside the government, not so much. the main people he wants to look at are current justice and fbi officials. >> you have the pieces of special lakes as to why james comey came out with the letter, had to do with leaks to rudy giuliani. >> yes. >> is that likely part of this? or the idea it may have happened? is this going to cover the new york field office as well as here? >> it may well. they can talk to current people in the new york field office. he can talk to rudy giuliani

too. if rudy giuliani says i don't want to talk to you, he doesn't have to. whereas government employees do. inspectors general are political appointees. >> right. >> they serve, in essence, at the pleasure of the president, but they're different than every other cabinet department head. if a president wants to remove any inspector general, he has to send a letter to congress 30 days in advance giving his reasons, which gives the i.g.s time to tidy things up before they have to move on. >> according to who gets the i.g. posts it's not always fully partisan. >> i think it varies in administrations and agencies. they are, in essence, political appointees to begin with but then become independent. jeff sessions, if he became attorney general, cannot pick up the phone and say enough of this, horowitz, knock it off. he can't do that. >> the i.g. will n change?

or donald trump, t president, could end up decing and the investigation stops? >> not necessarily. some presidents have changed i.g.s. some have not. glen fine served under both democrats and republicans. if a president removes the i.g. that doesn't necessarily stop the investigation. the career folks can continue it. >> how much of this was trying to get it done before the transfer of power? >> i doubt very much of it because there is little time to do much of substance -- >> but getting it started, that it was easier to get started now than it would be waiting for a new i.g.? >> that probably has something to do with it. >> thank you. joined by former fbi director jim woolsey. he said the skepticism towards the intelligence community was not a factor in his decision to leave the trump transition team. good to see you, sir. >> good to see you. >> let me ask you what you made

of congressman pompeo today in front of the intelligence committee, what we saw publicly, the highlights today. does it strike you as somebody who is on the same page as the next expandcommander in chief. >> the important thing is to call it straight. and i think mr. pompeo demonstrated in the hearing that he called it like he saw it. that's what you want from a cia director. you don't want someone who always tells the president what the president already thinks. >> let me ask you about this controversy about this dossier, opposition research that came into the hands of intel committee, director clapper saying, confirming to donald trump, and confirming, really, for the public that, yes, it was included in briefing materials, they had it available. how often do you recall having to deal with uncorroborated things like that that you would share anyway because it could

leak or because it could be used in a negative fashion? >> we were living, i suppose, in a rather quiet era from '93 to '95, comparatively speaking. but i think jim clapper can a perfectly reasonable thing in having access to this and believing that president-elect trump and president obama both ought to know about it. so he transmitted it to them. now, with it went from there and who had a hand, bloggers, russians, who is on first, i don't know is on second. i don't have any idea how it got out and where it got to and who pulled the strings to make all those things happen. >> how often -- how common is it in the intelligence community to sometimes outsource a dossier? we know it wasn't the case in

this instance but is it a common occurrence because you have a source that has better access to some human intelligence than an american citizen would? >> oh, sure. we work closely with some of our allies all the time, certainly with the brits. and also with other countries' intelligence services. not all intelligence services, we're certainly not going to cooperate with the north korean intelligence service. >> sure. >> but for countries that are aligned with the united states and close to the united states and have demonstrated they can be trusted with material, we give it to them and they give theirs to us. we work together a lot with a number of countries. >> obviously the issue of morale in the intel community is something that i know a lot of intel folks i have been talking to is concerned about. i want to play for you what lindsey graham said today about donald trump's comparisons of the -- ofn intel leaker to nazi germany. here is what he said. >> i don't think it is helpful

for the commander in chief to question to question the competency, loyalty of those who are risking their lives to defend the nation. and the last thing i would say about anybody working in the american intelligence community is to compare them to nazi germany. i can only imagine what we would have said if a democrat had said that. >> senator graham seemed almost shaken by that comment. >> well, i didn't see what he said as a comparison. i saw it as a rhetorical question. but it still did reference nazi germany, and so it's understandable how someone could be upset about it. look, words get a bit strong in one of these conflicts of the sort we are going through now between branches. but the thing to remember about them is that our system was

designed so that the three parts of the government would get into fights. this is madison's idea, to have conflicts, and the conflicts bear out in a different way than other countries. where we have had one president elected every four years since the spring of 1789. in the amount of time since then france has had five republics, two empires, two kingdoms and a reign of terror. we have done a pretty good job in setting up our conflicts, madison did, so that they would siphon off the anger and upset and so forth and we get down to business. i bet you that's what is going to happen in about a week. >> so you don't sound concerned, then, if there has been some chatter about concern that rank-and-file intel folks might just say, i am out of here? he doesn't respect our work. i am out of here. i can make a bunch of money in

the private sector. that there is an en masse resignation? >> a few may. i think mr. pompeo already is building a good, positive reputation, and it looks like the d.n.i. is going to be an extraordinarily able individual with a good background. i think that's what will matter. >> you think, in many cases, that pompeo's directness today to the committee sort of sticking by the intel community itself, sticking by their conclusions, helped with morale today? >> he showed that he had a judgment, and he told us what it was. he told the president-elect what it was. that's what you want. you -- if it's different -- i had occasions where i had a different view from president clinton. it happens. but if you have a reason for it, state the reason, and go on.

that's the way the people up the line can get a good handle on what the various subordinates think and how they're reasoning. >> james woolsey, former d.c.i. former head of the cia. thanks for coming on. appreciate your time. >> good to be with you. two more trump cabinet picks had their day on the hill. we'll look at how james mattis and ben carson handled their hearings. stay tuned. : this mom didn't hae to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at safelite.com and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there, so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.

welcome back. it was a big day for vice president biden. we'll show you the emotional surprise he got from president obama later in the show. but first, earlier today. my colleague andrea mitchell sat down with the vice president for what we like to describe as a wide-ranging interview. this one actually was. the vp was, you know, mixed with serious policy and some laughter. here you go. >> one of the big issues is he said drain the swamp. now he is -- [ laughing ]

>> yesterday he repeated that he's not going to release his taxes, ever, and said he doesn't need a blind trust. he's going to just turn it over to the sons. has he done enough? the office of government ethics says what he did is meaningless. >> i don't think he's done enough. and he say sink in the swamp. if you don't drain , you sink in it. look, it's -- >> you're one of the -- with all due respect, sir, one of the poorest people to ever emerge from -- [ laughter ] >> public office. the poorest guy in the senate. you have a house. i don't know what other assets you have. he could run his business as well as run the government. the laws do say he can. >> i don't doubt that you could. you shouldn't run both. are you going to be a president or are you going to be a businessman? you don't do both. i love you. but i love him.

i love him, too. so do i. they also know you should get your annual check-up. it could save your life. it's a new year. schedule your check-up today to learn your four health numbers and start the year off right. cigna. together, all the way. welcome back to "mtp daily."

the senate voted this afternoon to change the law for trump's pick for sectary of defense. retid generalames mattis, clearing the first hurdle standing between mattis and a spot in trump's cabinet as head of the pentagon. senate voted on a waiver allowing him to leave the military. it passed 81-17 with bipartisan support and goes to the house. it's separate from the confirmation hearing. that hearing was happening today but ended up having less to do with mattis and how to run the d.o.d. and more to do with committee chairman john mccain's ongoing campaign against vladimir putin. >> should we ignore the lessons of history in our relationship with vladimir putin, and what should we be doing? >> we have a long list of times that we have tried to engage positively with russia. we have a relatively short list of successes in that regard. >> how do you differ with what the president-elect has

expressed about putin? >> senator, yeah. i am not sure where it differs. i can tell you that my view of putin is that he has chosen to be both a strategic competitor, to quote the chairman's opening statement, and an adversary in key areas. >> let's bring in the panel. david sanger. national security correspondent at "new york times." molly balls. staff writer with "the atlantic," a chris clayton, the policy editor or dtn focusing on ag policy and issues in the heartland. he also writes about politics of rural america. chris, good to see you. >> good to see you. >> visiting from iowa. david, let me start with what you heard from both pompeo and mattis today. much tougher talk on putin and russia than what's coming from the top. obviously, it's what some of the

hawkish republicans on these committees want to hear. do you buy it? do you think this is going to move trump? >> i certainly buy it in terms of mr. mattis, general mattis, because that's been his long-held views for a long time. i think i buy it with mike pompeo, who i don't know as well. you heard something very similar, a little less hawkish from rex tillerson yesterday. what's that tell you? that the three major national security officials who we've heard in their confirmation, assuming they say the same thing to president-elect trump that they are saying in public, are going to be up against a view that mr. trump and his national security adviser have held, which is much softer toward russia. and that's going to be one of the first big conflicts, i would suspect, of the new administration. because if you took what donald trump said to me and my colleague during those

interviews we did with them, he would be interested in lifting sanctions against russia. >> it's going to be sanctions, molly, where we'll find out what's real and what's not. key members of the cabinet may have one opinion, but it will be on his plate to decide what to do there. lindsey graham wants to get tougher sanctions. and he made that pretty clear in the various hearings that he has been asking questions on. >> well, it's the bigger question -- i believe, actually, i was on this show when you interviewed senator corker. what we said was these hearings will be a referendum on trump's russia policy and they have been. that's emerged as the biggest scsm between him and republicans in congress, though there are others. so how much is trump going to consolidate decision making or allow different views to become policy among his cabinet. we know that members of his

cabinet at least personally have different views than his on something like sanctions. which view will win out. will he be able to convince trump of a different policy, or will they have to implement the policy he favors, especially on russia, about which he's been fairly consistent? >> chris, how is this playing in heartland. i say it with the back drop of david's paper. interesting piece. they talked to trump voters, i believe it was in iowa, actually. excuse me. where one person sameply saimpl they don't know what to believe anymore and they're waiting for full-fledged proof before they believe anything. >> his very strong supporters are not being swayed much by this at the moment. the evidence hasn't fully been there for them to really change anything. if you were more of an independent voter you may be more uncomfortable. i have had friends back in iowa say things right now are scary and fun at the same time. i am not sure how to interpret

that. >> that's an interesting way of describing it. >> everybody is still pretty much remaining in the corners where they have been, you know, since the election. >> still, is there genuine -- would you call it genuine excitement out there in some trump corridors? >> well, certainly, okay, from farmer view, they're very much excited. we do a poll four times a year. we did one in december. we call it the ag confidence index from about 500 farmers. they were very disenchanted with the way things were at the present time. they had tremendous expectations for 2017. it was off the charts. the disparity between where they felt and the way they think 2017 will play out is widely different. >> pompeo's hearing revealed something that, when you play too much politics and you get caught playing politics -- it was politics of wikileaks. an exchange between angus king

and mike pompeo. >> do you think wikileaks is a reliable source of information? >> i do not. >> the fact that you used the word "proof," need proof, that would indicate that you did think it was a incredible source of information. >> i have never believed wikileaks was a credible source of information. >> how do you explain your twitter? >> i don't -- i would have to -- >> your tweet. sorry. i don't want to be accused of the wrong term. >> i appreciate that. i would have to go back and take a look at that, senator. >> here is the tweet, by the way, that angus king was referring to that mike pompeo said. need further proof the fix was in from barack obama on down. busted 952 e-mails from dnc leaked by wikileaks. >> the fascinating part about this was wikileaks was just the conn conduit and mike pompeo knew this from his time on the intelligence committee. if you believe the cia's report, which he seemed to believe, then

wikileaks was handed this by the g.r.u., the militar inteigence wing of the russian military. they may not have been handed it directly and julian assange said he didn't get it from them. but the intelligence report said it went straight from the russians, if you believe it. >> wikileaks was a popular source out in -- i mean, chris, was it not? how often did you hear about it? >> everybody -- it was like a temptation, you couldn't stay away. i don't cover national security. i cover agricultural and biofuels. i was google using the wikileaks and looking up terms like ethanol, renewable fuel standards. you've really had a hard time just avoiding it because you knew that, you know, you could see the e-mails about how they were making the policy decisions. even if you read it straightforward without adding

adjectives or adverbs, you knew you were using information. the connyou knew it was informa not obtained appropriately. >> i am not an expert on russia but the experts on russia will tell you this is how they operate. they discover information that's so salacious that no one can resist it. even if it is unsavory. that's how they get you. this may be a sign of what lies ahead for the american system. the information is so irresistible to people, even if they know the province is interesting. >> stick around. the republican-led senate took its first step to repeal obamacare, but no one can agree on the next step and how fast you go to the next step. utah senator mike lee joins me

next on that topic. this is the goal post. the end zone. the goal of every team. we know you have goals. like getting exposure for your idea or business. with godaddy website builder, you can easily create an awesome mobile-friendly, get you more exposure website. we call that...a website builder touchdown. get your free trial of website builder now.

i have age-related maculare degeneration, amd, he told me to look at this grid every day. and we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression, including preservision areds 2. my doctor said preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula the national eye institute recommends to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd after 15 years of clinical studies. preservision areds 2. because my eyes are everything.

tune into nbc tomorrow night for a special event, a rare one an one aboard air force one. lester holt took to the skies with president obama. knowing lester, he probably trieto fly it. he loves hisirplanes. yo can see the full interview in barack obama, the reality of hope, tomorrow at 10:00 p.m. eastern. more mpt daily just ahead.

stocks finished to the downside. the dow sinks 63 points. s&p sheds 4. nasdaq falls 16. that's its first down day of the new year. the epa says fiat chrysler installed software in more than 100,000 vehicles allowing them to emit higher emissions. shares of delta airlines suffering. sinking 30%. managed to meet expectations. revenue slightly above estimates. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide.

hi my name is tom. i'm raph. my name is anne. i'm one of the real live attorneys you can talk to through legalzoom. don't let unanswered legal questions hold you up, because we're here, we're here, and we've got your back. legalzoom. legal help is here.

. moments ago u.s. senators heard from the top intelligence officers in the country about russia's interference in the election. the directors of national intelligence, fbi, cia and the nsa just met with an all senators briefing, behind closed doors, to share what they know about vladimir putin and the

election hacks, and we have one of those senators who attended the meeting with us. senator mike lee, republican from utah. senator, how are you, sir? >> doing great. thank you very much. >> i know you want to violate all of the classified rules that came about and the warnings that came about in there. let me ask it this way. are you convinced that russia played a role in the 2016 election based on what you heard today? >> again, it's always a challenge whenever you come out of a classified briefing where you've been told a whole lot of things that are classified, we're not allowed to talk about. to get to your question, what i am convinced of is that the russian government did make an effort to influence this election. that this has happened in the past, it has happened in other elections, but changes in technology have enhanced the ability of the russian government to play this role and to do so in a way that enables them to avoid detection for quite some time. >> there seems to be -- there is

so much out there on all things russia right now. you have a guy like john mccain who is advocating a special select committee. i think there are others in the senate i have talked to who would like to see a 9/11 commission-style deal here. almost try to take the politicians out of this. what do you want to see? what do you think is best for the country, because at some point it does seem to me we've got to get to an agreed-upon bottom of this in order to move on with our national foreign policy. >> yeah. i tend to agree. there needs to be an inquiry into it. i suspect the existing committee structure in the senate may be up to it. that said, i don't have a strong opinion about whether we should create another committee to look at efforts by foreign governments, including russia, to try to influence the outcome of our election. for the simple reason that we have seen an escalation this time. this is not the first time russia or another foreign power has tried to influence an american election. but this is the first time that they've been able to utilize

certain modern technologies in a way that has enabled them to be more efficient in doing it. and a little bit more sly in the way they go about it. >> in your opinion, what should reta retaliation be? for what they did or do we not know the extent yet, and if we don't know the extent, you can't decide on what the punishment should look like? where are you? >> i think that is part of the issue. we don't yet know the full extent of what may have happened or what impact it might have had. more importantly, i am not as focused right now on this election. i am more concerned about where it goes from here. because what we do know is that, if this continues, if russia is able to continue to behave in this fashion, there is a grave risk that moving forward they could continue to have more influence than they have had in the past and more influence than they ought to. that's where our focus ought to

be. >> what does that mean? does that mean it is -- there is one thing about strengthening cyber security. that's one thing. does there not need to be a message sent that, hey, you don't do this? >> yeah. yeah. there is no question that there does need to be a message sent. one of the challenges in identifying what that message ought to be is that, in something like this, we really do need to have action by the executive branch, action by the president in particular. given the fact that the president is the commander in chief and that the president is in charge of our -- leading our foreign relations efforts. if we have 435 members of the house and 100 members of senate all independently proposing different courses of action, different acts of retaliation that we might undertake, things will get really messy and we could get ahead of our skis and causing some problems. >> do you have any concern, though, that maybe the incoming

administration is not as concerned about what russia did as you are? >> look, i am not going to try to speak for the incoming administration, and the truth is i don't know exactly what approach they're going to take as they take office. but i do know that, based on the information that i have received and that my colleagues have received, there is cause separate and apart from what impact, if any, they might have had in this election. there is cause to be concerned looking forward. and i think we can all unite behind that sentiment, and i do think the incoming administration will share that concern. and so, first and foremost, we've got to bolster our own cyber security, make sure those who are monitoring these things for us have the resources they need in order to give us this information in realtime. and then that will help us develop a plan for how to mov forward and how to prepare for future elections, to make sure that it's americans influencing the outcome of our own elections.

>> let me move to obamacare here. you co-wrote a letter. you, marco rubio, ted cruz, not only arguing for the repeal of the irreconciliation. you also want a balanced budget amendment. doesn't balancing the budget become a lot harder when you repeal obamacare? when you don't have the alternative in place ready to go to see -- i mean, there is a lot of -- the deficit, the estimates are the deficit explodes in certain places depending on how this is repealed if you are not careful. >> sure. you have to remember that, in our plan to repeal obamacare there is no scenario in which we just pull the plug and leave people standing with nothing, having people with a plan today, tomorrow not have health care plan. that's not how it works. there is a delayed implementation provision in this bill that will keep it from kicking in for at least two

years, possibly longer. in that time we'll continue to develop our plan that will have as its object to give more choices to consumers, to make sure they have portability with their health insurance -- >> you want more time -- let me pause you there, senator. you want more time to come up with a plan. that's not what the president-elect said yesterday. he plans on submitting a plan very quickly and he believes it's weeks, not months. >> yeah. >> between repeal. >> well, okay. i want to make a couple of things clear on that front. first of all, i think we need to avoid making the same mistake that was made seven years ago when the affordable care act was passed. you had a handful of people who wrote this 2700-page legislative proposal in secret. members of congress on both sides of the capital were told you have to pass this thing in order to find out what's in it. i don't think we should try to consolidate all the health care reform efforts into one single bill. >> then why rush to repeal? why rush to repeal before you have the alternative?

>> there is one way of looking at that. in order to make sure that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have input on this and have any incentive to have input in it, it's important for us to make clear that the status quo is not working, it's made health care less affordable and more difficult to access for so many americans. throughout my state and across the country. and we are willing to repeal that. we're willing to delay the impleltati implei implementation of the repeal but we need to put it into place. i think that gives everyone added incentive to work together to find reforms that we can vote on in an inrative process. >> you have the votes to repeal but it sounds like you have to actually repeal before the democrats come to the table. is there an argument to be made if you say that we are not going

to rush to repeal. or we'll go ahead and repeal immediately. >> if you're aware of a massive pool of democrats in the united states senate who are eager to participate in anything that repeals obamacare, please let me know who they are. what i am saying is i don't see any enthusiasm for that with democrats. i see there being an incrementally higher possibility that, once we've repealed it, some will step forward and say, this reform makes sense, that reform makes sense and we can attack it in a step by step fashion rather than rolling it all into one, negotiated in secret by a few people and voted up or down at the last minute. >> senator mike lee. we'll leave it there. it will be interesting to see where the trump administration falls on this. seems like everybody has a different time line on obamacare. senator mike lee, republican from utah. always appreciate you coming on and sharing your views. coming up how president obama brought vice president

biden to tears today at the white house. stay tuned. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. customer service!d. ma'am. this isn't a computer... wait. you're real? with discover card, you can talk to a real person in the u.s., like me, anytime. wow. this is a recording. really? no, i'm kidding. 100% u.s.-based customer service. here to help, not to sell.

like finding new ways to be taken care of. home, car, life insurance obviously, ohhh... but with added touches you can't get everywhere else, like claim free rewards... or safe driving bonus checks. oh yes.... even a claim satisfaction guaranteeeeeeeeeee! in means protection plus unique extras only from an expert allstate agent. it's good to be in, good hands. welcome back. tonight's obsession. i'm obsessed about our national obsession with obsession. how are we so obsessed with politics that everything, even a nice wool sweater could be a controversy. a pro trump super pac was voted on by linda beane of l.l. bean.

calling for a boycott by those on the left of the anti trump group cr. this tweet. thank you to linda bean of l.l. bean for your support and courage. your summer polo or wrinkle-free fleece has become the latest version of the bloody shirt. touote sigmund freud, sometimes a cigar is a cigar. i offer this bipartisan proposal. tomorrow when you want to scratch your right-wing itch, put on your bean jacket. grand your sandwich on the way to hobby lobby. then scratch your left wing itch. join it with a starbucks cup. put dixie chicks on your ipod on your way to protest macy's for selling trump's clothing line. finish it off with the organic

salad you bought from whole foods or maybe we can calm down and not politicize every single thing. we'll be right back.

time for -- bring back the panel. you heard mike lee, conservative senator, everybody has a different plan on how to replace it. chris clayton, getting rid of obamacare, what do they want to get rid of? >> high premiums. there was a but there was quote in there that health insurance was like gold. so i had a lot of friends who had to rely on obamacare for

insurance and think the premium are too high. they want to see the price come down. >> it's going to be such an effort they are going to go to far and that average person in missouri or iowa say wait a minute, i just want the price lower. >> you have complaint and two features that are popular that the republicans know they cannot touch, preexisting condition and ke your kids on until age 26. so to keep those two things in, and then go do what chris says, which is cut the premiums here, you have set a numbers that don't work. i think what you're hearing from mike lee and everybody else is let's slowdown until we come one a set of numbers. what was the other thing donald trump was saying we have $26 trillion -- $21 trillion

debt we are approaching. >> the only thing who think there's urgency to do this republicans on capitol hill. there's no other clock driving this, other than political promise. >> well i think that there are a lot of conservative actions who feel this was the prominent promises that donald trump made. he campaigned hard on it. as chris said -- trump made this point himself, that the minute it's not obamacare an more the republicans own the baggage. liberal economist claim, we can't know that obviously. but as soon as it's trump care or repeal of obamacare that's who gets blamed for anything in

the health care system. republicans are aware of that. they are not so quick to do is now. >> what's the peril if they botch this with the role of the american base? >> you live in a small town, you see coffee cans in the convenient store, somebody didn't have insurance, kid with cancer, someone had an accident or whatever. they are trying to raise money or spaghetti feed to raise somebody for someone who doesn't have insurance. that's gone done because more people are insured. but if you waive off obama care, then you're going to see more of it it. you're going to see rural hospitals to stay sound because people are coming in not able to pay for anything. >> there's no way to right this as fast as they think.

thank you all. after the break, the obama/biden bro mans hit a new level today. i'm a concrete mason.

i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma ...that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that is going to make his immune system evade the tumor. with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous. and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard. i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now.

in case you missed it at the white house this half noon sa tribute to joe biden. president obama called him best vice president he ever had and surprised him with a country's highest civilian honor. >> this gives the talk about our

bromance. visit college after challenge and made friends with lady ga ga. >> i have not mentioned amtrak or af ators. for the final time as president i am pleased to award our nationest highest award of honor to the presidential medal of freedom. >> i guess you might call it a big deal there. for joe biden. it was a moment. by deb who praised president. >> this honor is well beyond

what i deserve. but it's a reflection of the extent and generosity of your spirit. >> it's all we have for tonight. back tomorrow with "mtp daily." "for the record" with greta. thank you chuck. hidden behind closed doors. russian intelligence. we talk to joe man chun inside of that room. heartbreaking video two teachers kidnapped. shoot-out, a broad daylight and captured on the camera. all of that plus surprise good-bye for the one and only joe biden who