>> was there classified information on former congressman weiner's computer? >> yes. >> who sent it to him? >> his then spouse, uma abidine appears to have a regular practice of forwarding e-mails to him for him to print out to her so she could deliver them to the secretary of state. >> look, this is terrible. it makes me mildly nauseous to think we might have had some impact on the election. but honestly, it wouldn't change the decision. everybody who disagrees with me has to come back to october 28th with me and stair at this and tell me what you would do. would you speak or would you conceal? i could be wrong, but we made a decision between those two choices that even in hindsight -- this has been one of the world's most painful experiences -- i would make the same decision. >> fbi director james comey said he would do it again despite the sickening sense that he may have

played a role in picking the president. with us we have mark halperin, former treasury official and "morning joe" economic officialist steve rattner, professor at university of michigan, normer democratic congressman harold ford, junior, and co-founder and ceo of axios, jim vann da hiem is with us as well. >> harold, you have your notes. >> professor is all it says at the top. >> in his testimony, director comey cited the tarmac meeting between then attorney general loretta lynch and president bill clinton as a turning point in the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mails. take a look. >> number of things had gone on, some of which i can't talk about yet, that made me worry that the department leadership could not

credibly complete the investigation and decline prosecution without grievous damage to the american people's confidence in the justice system. the cap per was, not picking on attorney general loretta lynch who i like very much, but her meeting with president clinton on the airplane was the capper for me. i said, you know what, the department cannot by itself credibly end this. that was a hard call to make, to call the attorney general and say i'm about to call a press conference. >> first of all, can i say something? >> yes. >> congratulations. >> thank you. >> numbers up lately. show is going well. >> it is. thank you. >> last two months are the highest rated -- more people watching in the last two months than ever before. >> it's like we're a family. >> i'm reading there are other things to say congratulations about. >> we're talking to "new york

times" reporter michael schmitt who wrote a piece on comey's role, plus former fbi agent clint watts who recently testified on capitol hill about russia's influence on the election. mark halperin, you've been quite a skeptic all along of james comey and how he's handled this situation. what did you think of his very strong defense of the decisions he made over the course of the campaign? >> i can understand why he made some senators more than mildly nauseous. congratulations to you, also, on the ratings. i think the ratings are great. >> they are. >> i don't know if i told you, the last two months, more people watched us in the last two months than ever before. thank you so much for thinking about us. >> i understand why we're talking about it. he got a lot of hard questions yesterday, but he basically is saying, it made him mildly nauseous and it was a tough

call. but he didn't really explain why, in what he thought was a tough call, he came down on the side of doing what you're not supposed to do which is talking about an investigation. he said he couldn't reveal yet everything that had gone out. i understand his point about the justice department and i think loretta lynch clearly put things in a bad place, but by the book what he d is sll not really explaine why hese to go against what you're supposed to do as fbi director or the justice department in order to talk about the investigation at the time he did. >> i think everyone can talk about the technicalities, legalities as to whether he should or he shouldn't have. i was watching dianne feinstein yesterday, a lot of people pushing back against comey. i was stunned. i don't understand how hillary clinton's e-mails are forwarded to uma abidine's husband so he can print them out. >> classified. >> i don't know. maybe there's no law against it. seriously, maybe there's no law

against it. >> there actually is a law against it which, of course, willie, it had several -- >> apparently they felt she did not know she was doing anything wrong. it's incredible. it's everything that was wrong with the campaign. >> it was everything wrong with the campaign, and just a cluelessness and the idea that they played by different rules. totally different rules. >> trump feels like he plays by different rules in other ways, but in this case dealing with classified information, forwarding it to a guy under fbi direction. >> to remind everyone, that's what brought this to a head. the lettthis was all pegged to . he did say -- comey said i remind you senators, i didn't make this public. i wrote you a private letter that you leaked to the public. he made the case a lot of people have made. if i had not said anything and hillary clinton won the election

and this came out later, we would have had the same thing on the other side. >> and he had also, harold, and i think his most compelling argument is, he had saidhere was nothing here, case closed, nothing. if there are any developments, he had to let them know, and there were developments. he let them know by letter. i think he could have written the letter differently, but at the same time -- >> three things. you said a few days ago on the air, the only person under investigation on election day was donald j. trump. that was not mentioned. if he felt compelled to say secretary clinton, this matter was being reopened because of huma abedin and anthony weiner, he should have felt compelled to do the second. his passion was defending the agency. it sounded like he making the case of why he felt like he had to do this. he did have a choice. to mark's point, he could have

followed the rules. if it turned out secretary clinton had broken the law, there was a process. she would have had a vice president. if she had to step down, she would have had to step down. i still don't give him a pass like he wanted after this testimony yesterday. >> we're going to have an extended conversation in the next block about this in a moment. we want to get do the other huge story of the morning. they don't yet have a cbo score and many members aren't read it yet. today congress is set to vote on legislation that impacts one-sixth of the nation's economy. health care hits the floor of the house hours from now. the renewed push follows key meetings at the white house where a number of republicans flipped from no to yes. two days ago congressman billy long and fred upton announced they would vote against the latest version of the overhaul over concerns about how people with pre-existing conditions could be covered. when they left yesterday's meeting with president trump, they had an agreement in hand. >> when he called me yesterday, i told him i was a no, and i

told him i was a no because of the provision on pre-existing illnesses. yesterday i read him back his statement where he said this bill would be just as strong on pre-existing illnesses as obamacare. i want him to keep that pledge. >> when they made what i consider the change, the pre-existing conditions, that's when i said i'm a no. the president said, billy, we really need you, we need you, man. i said you don't have me. we went through that for0 minutes. he called back yesterday. we need you, we need you. i'm happy to annnce the people in the seventh district of missouri will be pre-existing conditions covered adequately. >> their solution, pour $8 billion over five years into states that decide to no longer cover people with long-term health issues. the money would go to people entered into the controversial

high-risk pools, those states set up in stead. the upton amendment helped change the momentum on the bill, giving leadership enough confidence to call a vote as early as 10:00 this morning. >> let's go to jim vandehei. what's turned this? >> what's turned this is, paul ryan and donald trump needed a win and needed to get some of these moderates on board. they're so worried about the pre-existing condition, that specific piece of legislation. they feel now they have enough money to go home and justify it. think about the stakes of this vote, though. go back to barack obama when he had full democratic control and decided to do health care. it cost him control of congress because it's complex and easy to demagogue. now republicans, having watched that, are doing the same thing and doing it without reading the bill and without waiting to find out how much does it cost, how many people will actually be -- >> jim, we've obviously been around this a long time. republicans, especially conservatives since you and i

were first on the hill a quarter century ago have always talked about, you've got to read the bill, you've got to score the bill, you've got to have a cbo score or you're being reckless and irresponsible. here they are going to read, organize one-sixth of the economy without even getting a cbo score. you can get the quotes of just about every member of congress that's a republican, a conservative saying this is just not what you do. yet, they're making the same mistake that passed through administrations of may going head first into this area. >> the darndest thing is they don't have to. if they waited two weeks and passed it, it would be a big achievement. waiting two or three weeks. but the reason they won't wait is they're worried, members go home and have a break and believe they'll get hammered on this issue and then they'll oppose them. >> harold, this is day trading i

don't understand. these guys and women that are going to vote for this bill that may not want to vote for this bill don't understand, this vote hangs around them forever. if you're in one of those districts that hillary clinton won. if you're in a district where she was close, there's going to be most likely a big swing coming up in '18 if you look at historical trends. and they can't just do this to give anybody a quick headline that's going to evaporate in two days. this stays with them. i don't understand the political day trading on something this important. >> i think what you and jim are going back and forth on, he wants to say he repealed. put it in the hands of the senate and see if we can go forward. it doesn't go away. they think it's going to pass and they can move the taxes. this is the issue. your point, not scored, hasn't been read, that's the thing weeks ago they said we can't vote on something we haven't read. $8 billion, i like fred upton a

lot, i'm not convinced $8 billion would solve the problem. surely it can't be enough to cover it all. >> steve will have charts on that in just a little bit. willie, they haven't read the bill -- the republicans for years have made fun of nancy pelosi for saying we need to pass the bill to know what's in the bill. that has been one of the mainline of at daks against the affordable care act from the very beginning. they are doing the same thing ce it's even worse because they're cobbling a bill together and they had six, seven years to do this. they're not ready yet. >> we heard it almost every day during the affordable care act debate. this is paul ryan back then, quote, i don't think we should pass bills we haven't read and don't know what they gospel. i don't have the date right here. it was during the affordable care act debate. >> unbelievable. >> mike viquera is covering all

this on capitol hill. good morning. majority leader kevin mccarthy says he believes they have the votes. that was last night. where are they this morning? it's a razor-thin margin. >> i think kevin mccarthy, the majority leader, is putting the best face on it. i think it's still fairly close. they are expressing confidence because you don't go forward unless you do so. they're not going to wing it. we've seen that historically, saw it in the tarp vote, in the medicare part d prescription drug vote way back in 2003. it ends up being a big huge mess. you talked about the fact there's no congressional budget office score. this bill was only put online, the public was only able to see the exact language of the bill at about 8:00 last night before the house rules committee took it up and worked into the night. not only that, the total debate on the floor will probably last between the rule and the bill itself, probably about two hours. obviously they are ramming this thing through.

there's been high stakes, high pressure negotiation going on, the old-fashioned way behind closed doors. vice president pence was in the capital each of the last three days, monday, tuesday, wednesday, leading with a parade of undecided lawmakers trying to get the vote, trying to twist arms. we saw fred upton, a brilliant play by fred upton, he holds out for his constituents concerned about the pre-existing conditions, the waiver, the escalating premiums that will result from that. he extracts $8 billion by going down to the white house and march b out in the driveway and more or less waving this agreement around saying he's the one who has procured that. when you look at the details of this, plus the fact it's going to go to the senate and change considerably, a lot of these changes stripped away, republican leadership is asking a lot of moderates who have constituents who are concerned about the provisions of the bill and lost coverage to walk the political plank for a bill they know is going to change, that's not going to look anything like this when and if it comes out of

congress. >> mike viquera, thanks so much. to your point, nancy pelosi said what you called last night, she called it a moral mon stros stay. moderate republicans know this will be tattooed on your head forever. >> forever. mark halperin, i don't want to be overdramatic, i know there are members of congress, members of the house that may not remember what happened in 1993 when bill clinton passed what we republicans called the largest increase in the history of the country. it passed by one vote. you remember the scene when they marched a certain congresswoman from pennsylvania down the middle, and republicans were all chanting bye-bye? this vote seems to have echoes of that. you have the republicans that are going to be facing a tough re-election in 2018 and a bill that's extraordinarily -- i think extraordinarily unpopular.

they didn't read it, couldn't read it until 8:00 last night, 8:00 last night, to reorganize one-sixth of the economy. they don't even have a cbo score on it for a country $20 trillion in debt. they have no idea how much it's going to cost. they have no idea how many of their constituents are going to be kicked off of the health care rolls, 24, 25 million. how many in their districts. yet they're going to jump off the cliff just so they can get a headline that will burn away into the mist within 24 hours. trump will tweet something else. >> on one side unscored, unread, untested policy that will be considered risky by many constituents and many health care analysts and a very shaky

future, to say the least, in the senate. on the other side, the reason you'll see a vote today, one, if house republicans in the white house can't make good on a promise to repeal the affordable care act after seven-plus years, they can't do anything. >> why do they do it today? this is not the end of the world. they're not pirates of the caribbean at the end of the world and on the ship with johnny depp and it's about to go over the end of the world. they have next week and the next week. they can wait for the scoring to come back. they can do something really radical. they can read the bill that they're voting for. nobody there has read the bill. >> because if they wait for the scoring, it's less likely to pass. >> why? >> because there will be a political uproar. >> exactly. so you're saying the leadership is forcing the members -- you just answered my question. the leadership is forcing

members who are already vulnerable to take a vote before finding out how vulnerable their seats are going to be. they're going to be sitting around wondering why nancy pelosi is sworn in as speaker of the house on january 4th, 2019. >> there's one of two options if they go forward with this, whether it becomes law or not, as you said. one is they sell the country on the fact that this is better for them than the affordable care act, if they can do it, which is going to be a challenge. or two, they lose hair majority but they feel good because they got rid of the affordable care act. those are their choices. i think a lot of members are willing to lose to fulfill this promise, but they have not produced a bill they can understand or sell today. they've got to pass it today or they'll never pass it. >> they've got to pass it today or else find out how bad the bill is if they actually read it. then their constituents won't let them pass the bill. that is political day trading and it's stupid and sho

shortsighted. it's never going to pass the senate. your statement they want to go back to the district and say they repealedbamacare is not something they'll be able to say because the senators are going to look at this and say, are you kidding me? what's wrong with your people? >> unless the senate changes the bill in a way that house members feel compelled to vote for with a different coalition, maybe lose some freedom caucus people and get more mod rats, they have to try to fulfill this promise. i understand the risk they're taking, but they have to try or i think they'll never pass a major piece of legislation. >> steve, you're looking at the potential impact on people with pre-existing conditions. you have charts on that. >> i have charts. but let me say this, the last bill was scored, right now 24 million people lost insurance. this bill was moved to the right to get the freedom caucus on board, so we know it is less patient friendly than the last

bill. >> you think the $24, $25 million will go up? >> it will allow people to not get all the benefits. this is a worse bill for the average american than the bill that was scored by the cbo. so we know how ugly it is and yet they are voting for it. okay. charts. let's talk about pre-existing conditions. under the obamacare you could not charge people a different amount of money if you have a pre-existing conditions. this bill would allow states to opt out of that requirement. this chart shows and i don't have my magic pencil today. >> no magic pencil? >> i know. what can you do? this chart shows what could happen to premiums for people with pre-existing conditions. if you're terribly ill with metastatic cancer, your premiums could go up $140,000, simply pregnant, up $17,000. >> pregnancy is a pre-existing condition? >> it's a pre-existing condition. they could charge you more if

you show up pregnant and want health insurance. if you have asthma and want health insurance, they can charge more. this is what consumers may be facing. >> ausm, $5,500. by the way, for a family in central pennsylvania that voted for donald trump to find out their child has autism and needs treatment and they're struggling just to pay their rent and they find out that because of donald trump and the republicans in congress they're having to pay $5,500 to help their autistic 4-year-old child? that's not not a 90/10. >> i tweeted this out, it got 90,000 pre tweets. just for the politics, to give you the sense of the politics of it. what does the administration want to do about it? they want to set up a fund to provide some subsidies with

pre-existing conditions. by one estimate, you would needed 330 billion over the next ten years to subsidize this. the new bill has had in it, $130 billion. that could also have been used for other stuff. you see that blue sliver at the bottom? that's the $8 billion. >> a little short. >> a little short. the idea of $8 billion on $330 billion changed votes is hard to imagine. >> here is what i don't understand -- so many things i don't understand about my party's political calculations here, it's mind-boggling. one of the things i don't understand about donald trump's political calculation is by all measures the people who are going to be lurt the most are his voters. >> can we get to what alex was talking about? it's going to get to that exact question. >> did you do your homework and look at these? >> no, i didn't. >> no. he never does.

>> by some estimates about 27% of americans have pre-existing conditions of one sort or another. the top ten states to exceed the national average in pre-existing conditions are all trump states. here are five of them listed here, west virginia, mississippi, kentucky, alabama, tennessee. so to your point and for obvious reasons, a disproportionate number of people with pre-existing conditions are in trump states. >> you know what states you don't see, michigan, ohio, pennsylvania, you don't see states where barack obama voters switching to donald trump gave donald trump the presidency, those maps that donald trump is passing out to everybody right now, if this law passes, you can just paint those states blue because those people are going to go back and vote for somebody else if this passes, right? >> yeah. >> they'll be hammered the most. >> we have a lot more on today's

expected health care vote. among our guest, physician turned congressman michael burgess, mark meadows, congressman greg walden who drafted the replacement legislation, also senator bob corker and senator richard blumenthal who grilled fbi director jim comey during yesterday's hearing. we have much more on director comey's day of testimony. that's next on "morning joe." so tell us your big idea for getting the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom... let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong. i like it. promote that guy. get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed. when you book direct at choicehotels.com. book now. whaaaat?!ortgage offer from the bank today.

you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free. free? yeah, could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no. go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars. rates could rise again. go to lendingtree.com right now.

whoa,i just had to push one button to join. it's like i'm in the office with you, even though i'm here. it's almost like the virtual reality of business communications. no, it's reality. intuitive one touch video conferencing is a reality. and now it's included at no additional cost with vonage business. call now and see why 3,000 companies a month are switching to vonage. business grade. people friendly.

♪ ♪ i'm dr. kelsey mcneely and some day you might be calling me an energy farmer. ♪ energy lives here.

hey you've gotta see this. cno.n. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote. do you agree with me that anthony weiner 2016 should not have access to classified information? >> yes, that's a fair statement. >> would you agree with me that if that's not illegal, we've got really bad laws? >> well, if he had -- >> he got it somehow. >> it would be illegal if he didn't have appropriate clearance. >> do you agree with me he didn't have appropriate

clearance? if he did have appropriate clearance, that would even be worse. >> i don't believe at the time we found that on his laptop he had any kind of clearance. >> for him to get it should be a crime. somebody should be prosecuted for letting anthony weiner have access to classified information. does that make sengenerals sens? >> it could be a crime. >> would you agree with me that it should be, anybody that let's anthony weiner have classified information should be prosecuted. if our laws -- >> there is no anthony weiner statute. >> well, maybe we need one. >> it's a good question, right? >> it is a good question. >> let's bring in former fbi agent clint watts and "new york times" reporter michael schmitt. clint, a lot of americans out there are asking, and asked during the campaign even and showed up in the polls, why aren't we indicting these people passing around classified information?

harold and i both know if, as members of congress, we had gone to a classified briefing and then sent an e-mail out to a friend and say, hey, could you print this out, we would have had a knock on our door a week later. they would have seen it -- >> that afternoon. >> probably that afternoon. they would begin an inquiry and we would be under investigation. i'm not saying this about uma or about hillary, i'm saying in general. you can even say with petraeus. are we giving our public officials a lower standard than we would give you or harold or any of us at this table? >> absolutely. the more popular you are, the better the chance you'll get away with it. i think that's really been a debate in the intel community, national security community. why is it general petraeus who had a pretty egregious violation of national security laws in terms of classified formation let go sort of with a slap on the wrist and you see other

people whoave disclosed leaks in the past that have gone to jail during the obama administration. so it's a very uneven standard. >> the intel community is especially angry, you talk about general petraeus and hillary clinton, and i'm sure some will bring up the 12 classified e-mails with uma abidine. the intel probes, the complaints i've heard all along, there's a double standard here. why are these people not getting sent to jail when i would be in jail right now if i did this? >> it's confusing to everyone. classified information is classified information. transmitting it or leaking it out there should naturally result in a uniform standard. but it's basically become a free pass for any senior executive that does this or miss speaks during a press conference that they're not indicted and sent to jail. >> michael schmitt, james comey talked about intent. he didn't want to find intent here and i certainly understand

why. i certainly wouldn't want for her or her family to go through anymore than they've been through, but at the same time it does look very selective, doesn't it, with general petraeus, hillary and uma now. >> petraeus sort of cast a shadow on this investigation, because petraeus was allowed to take a misdemeanor when comey wanted him to take a felony. there was a showdown over this. what they thought hillary clinton did was not as bad as petraeus. they thought they had to clear a higher bar and come up with her mindset. if you listen to comey yesterday, what they said is at first when they walk into comey's office in october and they say, hey, we need to look at these e-mails, they think these e-mails are from the first three months that she was secretary of state, and they had never been able to find those e-mails during the investigation, and thoi thautd if they knew what she was doing

was wrong, it would be in the first three months. >> i don't understand the mindset. harold and i had clearance when we were in congress. we would know if we were sending an e-mail after a classified briefing or if somebody passed -- >> you would be mindful about printing out. >> we would know what we were doing was wrong. and that could establish intent, to do something wrong and something illegal. we're talking about the secretary of state here who has been in public life for 40 years. 're talking about general petraeus. these people know more about what the law is and what the law isn't. how do you scrub intent away from these people? >> i think what they believed was that they needed to have hard evidence that they were going to court that she knew exactly what she was doing. they needed an e-mail of her saying something like, hey, i don't want to have a government account because, if we do that, then people are going to get into our stuff, so let's have this special system. they never found that.

i think what happened in their minds was they said, well, if petraeus took a misdemeanor, then we have to clear a higher bar with her because what she did was not as bad as petraeus. petraeus lied to the fbi, petraeus obstructed that investigation. when they compared the two, that's how they looked at it and it was a real shadow on how they saw things. >> how interesting, willie, that comey wanted a felony for petraeus, but the justice department knocked it down to a misdemeanor. >> as you both said, that cast a shadow over everything we saw with hillary clinton and comey. comey said yesterday he faced two doors in late october. one said speak about this, send a letter to congress, the other said conceal it. he said he couldn't rightly go through the conceal door. he said hi would have done the same thing today. do you think he went through the right door? >> i think he did. i was surprised when he made the announcement. when i look back at what he did, the things we don't discuss are,

you had a retroactive investigation against clinton versus a proactive, active investigation against associates to the trump campaign. there's a difference in distinction in that. the other part is, you're looking at two choices. you're looking at russia influencing the election saying the election is rigged. there reese voter fraud. this, if it goes through and says the fbi was in the tank for clinton. if youook back at the russia hack and leaks, sanders supporters, you didn't get it because it was rigged for clinton. trump was echoing those things. i believe comey in the back of his head is, if i conceal this and it comes out later, our president has no mandate to govern, we have conspiracy. i think that weighed heavily on his head going into that decision and if it leaks, by the way, somewhere out in new york city, now he's got a big problem going into election day. >> jim vandehei. >> michael, for those watching

at home and sorting through this and trying to figure out if anything else will come out that will be revealing, what are you looking for? what should people be looking for? >> are you talking about hillary clinton or trump? >> talking hillary clinton and trump. but do hillary clinton first. well, i think what was going through comey's head was that this was going to be a process they thought when they go into his office in october was going to play out over many months, is going to take them a very long time to get through all these e-mails. the problem that happens is that there's far less e-mails when they actually get onto weiner's computer to see them and they're able to go through them at a much quicker fashion. and by four days before the election they have an answer and they know there's nothing there that changes what they know. at the same time, as they're coming into the election, they have these folks around trump that they're looking at. they're not really sure what their connections are to the russians. they thought if they spoke out publicly at the time about that, they would really taint them and trump could use that to argue,

look at how this is rigged. >> can you tell us before we wrap this up, about the giuliani angle? i saw some snippets, he's going to investigate the giuliani leaks. >> the rule is that giuliani is getting leaks somewhere out of the new york area about these anthony weiner e-mails. if there were those leaks there, i respected what comey said yesterday, he's going to run these down. it also shows the divisions potentially inside the fbi. they usually run a very tight ship. if he's getting leaked information that could sway the campaign, that would be something pretty disastrous for the nib. >> giuliani acknowledged he had some information, what we learned later would be about anthony weiner. he said he got the information. the question is where he got it. michael schmitt and clint watts thank you both. so while you were sleeping, buckingham palace managed to break the internet. we'll explain the big news the royal family announced ahead. nbc's bill neely joins us live

from london. you totanobody's hurt, new car. but there will still be pain. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do? drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement™, you'd get your whole car back. i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®.

start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000. experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare. philips sonicare. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis like me, and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication... ...this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain... ...and protect my joints from further damage. humira has been clinically studied for over 18 years.

humira works by targeting and helping to... ...block a specific source... ...of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain and... ...stop further joint damage in many adults. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas... ...where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com this is humira at work.

we're following breaking news out of buckingham palace. lengths go to nbc news chief global correspondent in london. good morning.

what's the big announcement? >> reporter: good morning. the big announcement is that the queen's husband, prince philip, the duke of edinburg is retiring at the ripe old age of 95. this announcement came from buckingham palace deciding he'll no longer kiri out public engagements. he has the full support of the queen. at a long time, been at her side for 69 years. he is the longest serving consort of the longest serving monarch. she's been monarch for 64 years. when leaks came through from the palace that there was going to be some kind of announcement this morning, there was feverish speculation as to what this might mean. people thinking it could be the death of a member of the royal family. "the sun" briefly online announced that prince philipad died. well, he hasn't. 's just retiring. he is 96 next month.

he carries out dozens of engagements. indeed, he was active for 110 days last year. i suppose it's not really unreasonable that this man would choose to retire. he was seen just yesterday at a cricket club in london. he joked, i am the world's most experienced plag unveiler. he won't be unveiling too many more plaques after the autumn. but extraordinary that he's still going, age 95, 96 next month. >> bill, they can breathe a sigh of relief, prince philip has a history of sometimes getting in trouble with the things he says. maybe in retirement over the next 10 or 20 years he'll temper his words a little more. prince philip. >> bill neely, thank you very much. mark halperin, the british constitution, of course, has you

next in line for this next position because you've watched "the crown" on netflix more than anyone else stateside, your state position. of course, the british subjects await your response to this news. >> it's a big deal, and he's i think going to still be active. i'm not quite sure why they felt compelled to make the announcement. it shows america's fascination with the royals is second only to bill neely's. >> exactly. he just seemed to be popping out of his chair. couldn't stand it. >> come on. bill was very excited. >> he's a straight newsman. >> he looks amazing, doesn't he? 96 years old, physically he looks great. >> i'm with bill neely. >> in and out of the hospital a lot the last few years. as bill pointed out, keeping up a couple hundred engagements a year with his plaques and ribbons. >> you've done charts on this,

right? >> he also, as joe says, occasionally says things -- >> i don't get the obsession. everybody calm down. plaques, flowers, events. >> shh. it matters. >> no reason for the position except they were born into it. i don't get it. >> it matters to the people of britain so it matters to us here on "morning joe." steve rattner will be in charge prince philip and the importance of the monarchy to the british people coming up. also, the white house, next, middle east peace? donald trump is nothing if not ambitious. >> yes, he is. >> will he solve one of the world's most intractable issues. he said yesterday it's not really as tough as people would think. kind of like health care and the presidency, and you fill in the blanks.

when i first started working with capital one, my dad called them up and asked for "the jennifer garner card" which is such a dad thing to do. after he gave his name the woman from capital one said "mr. garner, are you related to jennifer?" kind of joking with him. and my dad was so proud to tell her, "as a matter of fact, she is my middle daughter". so now dad has the venture card, he's earning his double miles, and he made a friend at the company. can i say it? go ahead! what's in your wallet? nice job dad.

start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000.

experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare. philips sonicare. manait's a series of is nsmart choices. and when you replace one meal or snack a day with glucerna made with carbsteady to help minimize blood sugar spikes you can really feel it. glucerna. everyday progress.

but i want to see paes with israel and the palestinians. there's no reason there's not peace between israel and the palestinians. looking at that. >> we'll be discussing details of what happens proven to be a very difficult situation between israel and the palestinians and let's see if we can find the solution. it's something that i think is, frankly, maybe not as difficult as people have thought over the years. >> despite alluding past presidents and world leaders for decades, the president is confident that peace in the middle east is easier than once thought. >> yeah. we learned earlier this week that no reason for the civil war now. >> could have been solved. >> no reason for the israeli and

palestinian conflict. jerusalem. >> it didn't even come up with the press conference yesterday on the american side. you heard president trump when he made his statements in these glowing i want to make a beautiful peace deal. we can make it reach peace between the israelis and palestinians. you can see the difference when you heard the palestinian authority president speak. he laid out what those core issues are, jerusalem, refugees, borders, settlements. the complexities of it. international law. >> how do you solve jerusalem? at the end of the day, how does get solved? >> international law, whether sides agree to have joint sovereignty over it, a split down the middle and east jerusalem becomes the capital of a palestinian state t depends on whether or not you can get these sides to sit down and agree. >> can there ever be a deal if hamas isn't at least part of it?

maybe not sitting at the table but quietly talking to the palestinian authority saying, okay, we're listening. we're not saying we're going with this, but we're listening. we will not kill you for striking a deal with the israelis if we sign off on it. >> yeah. you cannot have a peace deal with israel and the palestinians if all of palestinians are not unified in a single representative body. >> we don't want to say this, but hamas has to, at least, have a sort of sign off on it. >> oh, of course. not just hamas. so many other palestinian factions that yield considerable influence but perhaps hamas is the most powerful that can create instability of the palestinian authority and plo to negotiate a deal with israel. the palestinians have not had that now for some time. they've tried to make efforts. it has not succeeded. that has worked to the advantage of the israelis in continuing to be able to do what they want to do. >> where is the give? where could there be compromise?

palestinian authority, first of all, doesn't recognize israel's right to exist. that seems like a tough place to start in negotiation. >> the palestinian authority but hamas doesn't. >> excuse me. >> yeah, yeah. now asking them to recognize israel as a jewish state, something that the palestinian authority has been reluctant to do. on the palestinian side, there has to be a unified negotiating consensus. they have to have some key po t points. on the israeli side there has to be an acknowledgement of what it would look like. palestinians say you haven't defined a border for us to recognize. you keep moving the benchmarks, the issue of settlements keep coming up. >> and on the other side of the coin, one gets a sense that for israel, there's not really a constituency, netanyahu can't get everybody together at the same place so they're going to say keep the status quo. >> the israeli government has

shifted to the hard right. you've had more settlement, political parties represented in the israeli government, not inclined to have a two-state solution. by that, really a peace deal. they want to try to maintain the status quo. perhaps even a one-state solution, which obviously would be problematic for both sides. certainly on the israeli right of this government. >> jim vandehuy has a question. >> you saw him smirk when trump is talking about how easy it would be to get peace. what do those around him say? >> not a lot of clear consensus in the trump administration as to what the administration's position will be. when trump was next to netanyahu, he said two state, one state, it's up for them to decide. that's not yet clear from the administration, including those

around president trump. you haven't heard the secretary of state, certainly haven't heard jared kushner or the key players who would be involved in this. other presidents have appointed middle east envoys. that hasn't happened at the state department level yet. it's hard to say that the administration has a clear deal, not even committed to a two-state solution. it remains ambiguous what the trump administration is setting up to achieve in the middle east other than a comprehensive peace deal. what that looks like remains completely ambiguous. >> ayman and jim, thank you. we'll talk to some of the key player this is morning as the republicans push ahead for a vote on the health care bill today in a few hours. later, he could probably do without all the presidential tweeting this morning. senator bob corker is here wit his free advice to the president. ep it here on "morning j."

we're on to you, diabetes. time's up, insufficient prenatal care. and administrative paperwork... your days of drowning people are numbered. same goes for you, budget overruns. and rising costs, wipe that smile off your face. we're coming for you, too. for those who won't rest until the world is healthier, neither will we. optum. how well gets done.

so how old do you want uhh, i was thinking around 70. alright, and before that? you mean after that? no, i'm talking before that. do you have things you want to do before you retire? oh yeah sure... ok, like what? but i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement? we're absolutely doing that. but there's no law you can't make the most of today. what do you want to do? i'd really like to run with the bulls. wow. yea. hope you're fast. i am. get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade.

then you're a couple. think of all you'll share... like snoring. does your bed do that? the dual adjustability of a sleep number bed allows you each to choose the firmness and comfort you want. so every couple can get the best sleep ever. does your bed do that? for a limited time save $900 - $1200 on select final clearance beds during our spring clearance event. only at a sleep number store or sleepnumber.com i'm proud to make dog chow in (vodavenport, iowa.an. dog chow's been a part of my family's life for over 40 years. my grandfather made it and now i'm making it. as a micro-biologist i ensure that dog chow leads with high quality ingredients.

oh, it's actually...s your sfx: (short balloon squeal) it's ver... sfx: (balloon squeals) ok can we... sfx: (balloon squeals) i'm being so serious right now... i really want to know how your coffee is. it's... sfx: (balloon squeals) hahahaha, i had a 2nd balloon goodbye! oof, that milk in your coffee was messing with you, wasn't it? yeah. happens to more people than you think. try lactaid, it's real milk, without that annoying lactose. mmm. good right? yeah. lactaid. it's the milk that doesn't mess with you. i feel great. >> do you have the votes? >> yes, we do. >> tomorrow, thanks to president trump's leadership, congress is going to vote to repeal and replace obamacare. >> they don't have a cbo score. >> don't need one of those. >> don't need one. >> do you know what we'll do? >> what? >> we need to pass a bill.

>> just blah. >> so we know what's in it, right? >> right. then you can read it. >> worked last time. >> it worked last time. >> you can see it being carried out in the world. >> failing "new york times," whose subscriptions are up like 8 billion percent. >> totally failing. >> totally failing. >> that's why ooii'm here. >> failure makes you stronger. >> it does. >> you know what? you're stronger in broken places. do you know what i mean? new york times is like 800,000 times stronger. you said you heard this before. >> yeah. >> where in the world have you heard it, we must pass it so we know what's in it. >> this is the same thing that gop said about obamacare. but worse. it's not cbo scored. it's been debated for a couple of days and this reminds me of that scene, speaking of "star

wars" where the admiral is saying it's a trap. these guys are jumping over a cliff and don't know what they're voting for, or how many people are going to be affected. of course, in the end the good guys won that battle. >> unlike "star wars" you're not coming out of hyper drive and stopping and looking around and seeing you're in a trap. you have been walking up to this point. >> and you've seen it every step of the way. >> for years. >> it's been screaming at you, saying "i'm a trap, i'm a trap." >> you know what it's more like? it's more like the austin powers scene where he has this -- >> trying to make the -- >> driving the big cement roller down. >> kind of we all feel that way. >> you had seven years. and instead you put something out last night at 8:00 that

people just started reading at 8:00. haven't even scored it yet. >> that might cost you your re-election. >> harold ford, i just -- can they not see what this could do to them in 2018? >> politically, it could be a disaster. points have been made. tom cotton, he this original american health care act was put forth said get this right. john kasich said, look, you're going to jeopardize our bill here in ohio to treat the drug addicted and mentally ill, which we've been able to do. $7 billion out of medicare, original affordable care act, medicare, to be able to handle -- you have seniors in all these states that will be affected. i don't know what was talked about yesterday at the white house other than we believe $8 billion has been restored. it hasn't been read. a year and a half from now, polling comes out by this failing "new york times" to show

that these congressmen and senators are in deep, deep trouble, they're going to look back at this day. i will be happy a year from now if those numbers are there. you have to wonder for the country and for those who will be affected by this, is this the right thing to do? i think the answer is a resounding no, because we don't know what's in it. it hasn't been scored. we don't know how much it's going to cost. it could come back far worse. >> not sure who it's going to impact. >> you're a democrat. i'm a republican. i was not pleased when the affordable care act passed. i want to see something that's more market based, that makes more sense. so i'm not even saying don't pass -- >> steny hoyer says it needs to be fixed but this is not the way to do it. >> do it the right way. one-sixth of the economy, this is not conservative, what they're doing. this is radical. willie, you try to pass something that you put on line at 8:00 the night before, and

there is no cbo scoring, this goes against every single principle that conservatives have stated the past 30 years they're for. >> the real-world impacts steve rattner showed us the premium increases for somebody with metastatic cancer would go up $140,000, if you have a kid with autism, $5,000. it goes on and on and on. so, yes, there are political costs for people who may vote for it today but there are real-world costs for people living in the country. >> thank you for telling everyone. >> we have steve rattner, bob costa with us, mark halperin. >> again, congratulations on the ratings. >> thank you. >> we're humbled. >> second month in a row. >> highest ratings ever. >> let's bring in republican congressman, michael burgis of texas. >> michael, how are you doing? >> never been better, sir, how are you? >> never been better? >> spent three decades practicing medicine so i'm curious, did you have a chance to read the bill?

>> yeah. the base bill was read in committee a month ago when it was marked up in that 28-hour markup. the amendments, of course, have been -- two of the three have been available for several weeks and the last amendment that was available last night was two pages. so, yes, those -- i have read all of those. >> and what do you think of it? >> how are you feeling about them? >> look, i am a member of the authorizing committee that went through the 28-hour markup a few weeks ago and i thought we had a good product that the committee produced. remember, too, that this bill was actually passed in december 2015 as a reconciliation bill, passed the house and senate, was vetoed by president obama. that, of course, was the base bill after the november 8th election, the base bill we began working on in december this year. i would just point out, too -- you've had an election in 2010, one in 2014, one in 2016 where

obamacare was on the ballot and people spoke and wanted something done. today is the next step in what is likely to be a very long process. i, like you, am anxious to see the fine minds over in the senate get work on this. they've leveled a lot of criticism at their house counterparts as we've worked on this. fair enough. after 1:00 this afternoon, it will be upon their docket. >> congressman, you said there have been elections. there have been elections to replace obamacare. you also had an election of a president who promised premiums would be lower, that more people were going to be covered and i think you'll agree with me, that this bill doesn't deliver on. >> the bill is a step in the process. i would also point out -- although i supported governor romney in the 2012 election, i think it was his failure to

involve health care in the presidential debate that likely led to his lack of success in 2012. but look, there are plenty of arguments on all sides of this. i will say that i like the bill, as we brought it out of committee a month ago. but good members have offered good suggestions. those have been listened to by the house leadership and certainly yesterday the white house got involved with the upton/long amendment. those were good changes, reasonable changes. we went and met with the rules committee, had a two-hour meeting. i think that's all as the founders intended. now, it does have another step to go. that's over in the senate. and, just like you, i'm anxious to see the great work that they will do on our product. but we're the key that gets through the door on something being done and, joe, i agree with you. a market-based system in health

care, i think, is important. there do need to be mavth signals to which people can respond. when you look, really, at the substance of the bill, remember, too, that a governor would have to ask for a waiver for those figures that you were talking about earlier, a governor would have to ask for a waiver out of the essential health benefits and the community rating aspects of our base bill. are any governors going to do that? i have not heard from any who will. they have the option and some members felt very strongly that there didn't need to be more flexibility for the governors. they will now have that. if someone has that waiver given in a state they have -- in the individual market, not in the employer market, medicare or medicaid. but in the individual market a very narrow segment of people could be exposed to those premiums you showed. that's what the $8 billion is there to help. >> congressman, thank you for being with us.

michael burgess from texas. >> we have bob costa with us. >> let's bring in bob costa. what's going on? >> i woke up, joe, to text messages from my sources at the white house and their phrase was "game day." they're seeing this i guess, as the culmination and the time to come to the field and get some votes. it's been quite a challenge for them since late march when the bill was pulled. i asked them what got you here to the vote? privately they said it was about president trump and the white house stepping back, letting congress work its will. mark meadows, the freedom caucus, the tuesday group, to crack these negotiations and compromises. president trump wasn't involved in tryinto cut the deal. it was congress that had to find its way here. >> wow! by the way, we have donald trump -- we've been celebrating this morning. >> i know. >> highest ratings ever.

did he just do that? >> just did that. he doesn't watch the show. never. tells everybody -- >> now he's talking about fox again. >> say hi, everybody. now, read the tweet. >> i don't get it. >> you're doing okay. >> no, i don't think it's okay. >> i'm worried about you. but go ahead. he tweeted right after we were talking about -- you all were -- i never bring it up. >> right. >> you guys congratulate us. what are we supposed to do? it would be rude to ignore you. so we said that we have the highest ratings. >> president trump congratulating our friends across the street. congratulations to "fox and friends" on its unbelievable rating. >> it's like he's waking up. you're president of the united states. you have the middle east peace

process to worry about, north korean michls possibly rning down on seattle. >> big healt care bill. >> big health care big. and right at the front of his mind he has to be thinking about prince philip. this is a first -- but talking about "fox and friends." >> word of congratulations on a big day. >> wasn't there a second one? it seemed a little critical, the second one. >> no, it's not critical. bob costa, let me ask you the most important question. >> i'm confuse sfld what ad. >> what are you doing at south bend? >> i'm a member of the board, an alum. >> such an important, mature man. >> he is very important. >> are you chairman of the board yet, bob, or just a member of the board? how do you arise -- >> this actually amounts to trolling someone.

>> we're not trolling him. >> what are we doing? >> i'm on my condo board but that's it. >> i'm working on that. >> makes you more comfortable, bob, about the vote today? the margin is razor thin, as we said earlier, majority leader mccarthy says he has got the votes. is he right? >> he's right. i think they're within -- they probably have four or five vote s than any need. they're comfortable coming to the floor. i was flying to south bend for this one day. >> just one day. >> just one day. that they had to get a bill through the house, joe, because it shows that the house is incompetent if they can't get the bill through the house. once it gets to the senate, the real politics that no one wants to talk about but all the members talk about is that once it's in the senate and doesn't pass the senate for some reason,

republicans, in their view, can blame senate democrats. but if it never gets out of the house, it looks like incompetence. >> there are some people that wanted to talk to you. >> go ahead, harold. >> i yield my time. >> he might be right, that this thing goe to the senate and they have a chance to blame somebody. congress voting on something and nothing happening and end up having to come back. >> btu. >> people in health care are going to have -- the market is going to change if this passes. there will be some thinking that some terrible thing can happen and markets react. i think this it could be far more damaging than they give it credit for. >> also is the party out of

power? has it ever had success in blame being the minority party for not getting anything done? has that ever worked? didn't work for democrats. >> congressman jason chaffetz's hometown paper "the salt lake tribune" is pointing out a bit of irony or maybe hipocrisy. chaffetz returned to vote on republican health care bill and on a 12-year-old foot injury, temporarily wheelchair using representative jason chaffetz will return to vote on the gop's bill to replace the affordable care act that could allow states to opt out of coverage for pre-existing conditions. >> from what i saw this morning, mark halperin, reading through all the news, something about congress exempting themselves

from this bill on pre-existing conditions. >> my understanding is that they changed that because they recognize the political problem. i want to say i don't disagree with you about the political peril particularly because the thing hasn't been scored. they haven't explained it. a lot of people ithe country won't like it. i agree with that. the difference between btu tax and cap and trade, democrats hadn't run on that. it was presented in front of them by the administration. every republican in the country for eight years has run on repealing the affordable care act. bob's right, if they couldn't pass this out of the house just because of public perception of incompetence but an actual question could they get a majority for anything controversial? big risks here, potentially horrible policy. they don't understand it themselves. >> but other than that, it is a perfect legislative piece. >> and thank god chaffetz got his surgery before it's all

over. >> but steve rattner it's not an either/or. it's not a you vote for donald trump or hillary clinton. there is a third option. you actually do regular order. you go through the process, do all the things that republicans and the house accused harry reid in the senate of not doing. use the process. >> sure. they could have gone through the process. there's obviously a lot of political pressure to get this done before the recess that they're going on tomorrow. there's a lot of political pressure from the white house just to get it done. even if you went to regular order they're still faced with basic choices. the first health care bill that they didn't pass, that they pulled, has a 17% approval rating. this health care bill is worse for americans than the one they didn't pass. imagine what it's approval rating is going to be. the point is, they're walking into a complete political mine field. and with respect to the senate, one thing that i think bob costa alluded to, an open question of

whether they'll need 50 or 60 votes in the senate. this one it's not clear. they might actually need 60 votes. my last point that harold ford alluded to, insan cpaes will have to decide the next few weeks or months whether to participate in the exchanges next year. if this is going through that mess at this moment imagine how many insurance companies will say leave me out and obamacare could have bigger problems just of its own weight because of the political process going on right now. >> we're already hearing that, mika. over the past couple of days, we've heard some insurance bailing because of the concerns. >> chairman of the committee on energy and commerce and one of the architects of the american health care act, republican congressman greg walden of oregon. thanks for being on the show this morning. >> thanks so much for being with us. how do you think this will end up scoring out? >> i think it will show we're

going to bring premiums down, get insurers back into the markets. we've been talking to those people you just referenced for months about the market collapse. recently, you saw iowa may have no insurer in the market. we haven't done this in secret or silence. we've been reaching out for months and months saying what can we do to fix this market so that individuals have access to affordable health insurance? one out of every three counties in america, you have no choice but one. five states you only have one choice. as you mentioned, iowa may have no insurer on the individual market. we can't stand idly by and say obamacare is working. everything is fine. we have premiums that come down 10%. i think we're on the right track here. obviously, it's a work in progres progress. >> at town halls we saw you made

promises to constituents about pre-existing conditions and keeping this plan affordable. >> right. >> some say that this plan goes back on those promises. what can you say to voters in your district? >> worry protecting people with pre-existing conditions. those conditions continue to be protected. to add another layer of safety net we add another $8 billion. this would only apply in states that seek a waiver and get it. they have to have a risk pool behind anything they do. we have this guarantee in place that they will be covered. if you have continuous health insurance coverage, you are fine. there is a tiny segment of the country that waits until they're sick to buy insurance. everybody has tried to deal with that in different ways. the invisible risk pools working in maine and alaska have worked well to bring down premiums and gain access for people. for 93% of americans will never

be in that situation because they're on their employer plan, military care, whatever. they are completely protected. preer trying to get insurers come back into the markets and individuals will have more choicethan they havetoday, which is getting to whe t have no oice. >> willie geist. good to have you with us this morning. >> good morning. >> let me ask you about the meeting you had with president trump, the addition of some $8 billion for high-risk pools. most patient advocacy groups came out and said that's not nearly enough to clear and cover the people who will need it under that plan. is it a fact that if this bill passes, people with previous conditions will not be covered? people who are covered now? >> no, i don't believe so. >> really? >> you're only looking at the 8 billion we added in, not

considering the billion dollars already there for the fund that can be used for high-risk funds. people will bel actually be able to afford it. 19.2 million americans say i'll pay the irs a penalty rather than buy the insurance. the market is fail iing. it's not working for them, whether you have a preexisting condition or not because they're not able to get the insurance, afford the insurance. what kind of protection do you have in a state that may have no insurer left on the market? that's what we're trying to -- >> you're confident telling somebody in your district right now with a pre-existing condition that he or she will remain covered? >> yes. >> all of them, under this new bill? >> yes, i am. >> all right. >> because oregon would have to get a waiver. i guarantee you my state would make sure that that waiver would take care of people like that. and so the hhs would have to

sign off on that waiver. it worked in maine. it brought down premiums and increased coverage. that's our goal here. >> chairman, harold ford. good morning. very qukly. >> good morning, harold. >> your veor, i mow she's of thether party but said it would triple insurance rate and cut jobs. i assume you disagree with her. why? >> i do. right now they have an $882 million shortfall in the medicaid budget today and thinking of throwing 350,000 people off the rolels. i have been part of the oregon health plan since 1989 and '91. i helped those first waivers go through. i care deeply about expanding access to affordable coverage. we don't have affordable coverage in many sectors in

oregon. i hear about it when i'm home, which i am almost every week. people say i don't qualify for the right thing here miechlt premiums have sky rocketed. my deductibles have gone off the charts. i may have access to insurance but i can't afford it. when you go to pay a $2,000, $3,000 deductible, i'm priced out. it doesn't work. we are trying to fix it so it will work for all americans. >> good talking to you. thank you so much for being with us. bob costa, final thoughts? >> i will say this, bob costa. listening to these republicans that come out here, as you're only out there for one day. he has to be out there for one day. he's hosting every show now on tv. he's going to be taking this over pretty soon. come on, bob. we have to put a moat around this set. you're on this board that you're on out there at notre dame and nick contasore can't even get on

his co-op board. >> i got nothing. >> we've had a couple of republicans, two or three publicans. they've got a really tough sell to make. i agree with harold. this will be very tough for them to make this sell in 2018. i have been impressed with the people we've had on today. they've -- and i don't say this negatively. it is a positive. they got their talking points down. they've got their message. greg walden had a very persuasive message certainly for his base and maybe even some swing voters. it looks like these republicans are kind of leading forward. >> what i wanted to ask the chairman, joe, chairman walden, congressman long from missouri. the president has this moment this week where he to try to get his legislative agenda together. i'm trying to report this out. what did the president say? was he acknowledge at a timed

that health care hasn't happened yet? was he pleading with walden and long to get their act together? there was this meeting, they had to get walden and upton and billy long all on the same page. was the president the deal maker or not? did he close it or was it about congress working together? >> i have a sense, mark halperin, i know you've got to go. i have a sense that the president is in a situation like n gn newt gingrich was in. he said i'm your speaker and if you don't open this government i can no longer be your speaker. we have to reopen this government or else i can't lead you anymore i know donald trump would never say that, but he's at that point in his presidency.

and you've pointed it out before. if they can't pass this through the house, donald trump's effectiveness as a president is shot. >> it wasn't quite a braveheart moment where they said the presidency is in existential threat. invested emotionally and intellectually. and two guys from wisconsin, rein priebus, and paul ry, speaker of the house, tried to figure out how to move this through in a more public way. they didn't go all out and say it's all or nothing, do or die. on the reality that if this didn't pass they didn't have any way to go forward on anything else big. >> can you bring me back a t-shirt? i want a notre dame t-shirt.

>> i've come around. >> can you do that? >> absolutely. >> i would suggest you bring me one. >> i'll get mika a hat, too. >> oh, yeah. >> bob costa, biggest thing to hit notre dame since rocket ishmael. >> no doubt about it. >> republican quar um this morning. >> senators bob cooker and richard bluenthal will respond to accusations that russia is still involved in u.s. politics. isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months. and otezla's prescribing information

has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise

we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide. when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000. experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare.

it's a trap. >> they're coming. >> hang on. i'm going to floor it. watch out. move, move. >> careful, austin.

>> stop! >> watch out! >> no! >> watch out! >> oh. >> oh, my goodness. there was a seven-year buildup. >> slow roll. >> it was a slow roll there. >> it's a trap. >> have we congratulated "fox and friends" for their wonderful ratings? >> congratulation. >> the president doesn't watch us. you were offering us congratulations and then the president con greated you. >> you're the best. >> note worthy. >> nick? >> let's talk more about the ratings. >> no. i want to ask, what is the biggest, right now, issue that is facing your co-op board that you're on right now?

>> biggest issue is that the gym needs upgrading and the lobby needs upgrading and a contract is in place to service the air conditioners. >> how do you -- like what sort of stalin moves do you make to get tenants that aren't cooperative? >> the real trick is to rush the contract through before the cbo can is score it. if the tenants realize how much the contract costs, it sinks. >> bob costa on that board. >> can you get it through on a party line? >> bob's on every board. >> poor bob. >> i think we're bullying him. >> the guy is 14 and is on the board for notre dame. six months ago, he was talking about ousting paul ryan as speaker. chairman of the house freedom caucus, mark meadows, will join us ahead of today's historic health care vote. plus, democratic congressman joe kennedy joins us after his

impassioned plea to keep obamacare protections in place. "morning joe," which the president of the united states does not watch -- howdy, fellow. >> he's not even watching right now. >> we'll be right back. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business.

there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly.

a mihappy birthday, sweetie! oh, millies. trick or treat! we're so glad to have you here. ♪ what if we treated great female scientists like they were stars? ♪ yasss queen! what if millie dresselhaus, the first woman to win the national medal of science in engineering, were as famous as any celebrity? [millie dresselhaus was seen having lunch today...] ♪ [...rumors of the new discovery...] what if we lived in a world like that? (crowd applauding) ♪ we know a place that's already working on it. ♪

joining us from capitol hill, republican congressman mark meadows of north carolina. >> you were a central player in the last round here. why did you decide to go yes? >> well, obviously, at this particular point, what we've got is a bill that's better than where it started. actually, drives down premiums. that first bill that came out actually had an increase in premiums in the short term and e've been able to work with tom mcarthur and his amendment, fred upton and his amendment. it actually drives down premiums, makes sure we cover those people with pre-existing conditions. we think that it's a step in the right direction. i've been working with my senate colleagues to hopefully improve it in the senate before it comes

back for a final vote. we're optimistic that we'll pass it out of the house today. >> steve rattner, congressman. how do you know that it drives down premiums given that it hasn't been scored by the cbo. >> i'll be glad to address that if you would like, steve. >> let me make it a two-part question. that's one. >> sure. >> the second one is with respect to the pre-existing conditions, they would go into a high-risk pool. there are estimates that the high-risk pool would need $330 billion to fund that. $130 billion was in before. you added $8 billion yesterday. that leaves $192 billion shortfall. i'm not sure that you can say that everybody who has pre-existing conditions will continue to be able to buy insurance at an affordable price. >> we're going to have a phd discussion this morning on health care. but i'm glad to do that. part of your analysis is just not correct. when we look at pre-existing conditions, one of the things in this bill is that if you have

insurance and stay continually covered and you get a diagnosis, your premiums can't go up. so part of that number that you're talking about would suggest that they have to go into a high-risk pool. that's just not the case. the second part of that is that the benefit that fred upn looked at yesterday is to address a small group ofeoe that perhaps had coverage, lost their job, went into that high-risk pool. actually, that is a very small number. generally if you go back on to an employee health care plan, your pre-existing condition is covered. you talked about the cbo score. what we've done is looked at individual analysis where we're looking at driving down costs. the actuarial values and cost estimates would indicate lower premiums as much as 38%. we'll have a cbo score, actually, as they work ntd

senate. we've already had one here. with these modifications, modifications in the senate, we'll be able to address that. good point. >> mark halperin? >> congressman, we've been through this before. i know you think the system will be better but who are the losers in your district? who are the people that will be worse off than they are today if this were the law of the land? >> 74% of the people i served when the first bill came out that would have been worse off. based on the bill we have today, i don't see any losers. here is what we're going to do. not only are we going to have a high risk pool of which we don't have now -- we had it in north carolina before the aca. we'll have a high-ris pool. we still have a provision that says 100% guarantee. that means 100% of the people can get insurance coverage. so, as we look at it, it's very quickly, to me, to make sure that those people that i serve have something that's better

than what they have now. >> not one person? i'm sorry, not one person in america will be worse off? >> obviously, that could be the case. what i'm saying is the vast majority of the people i serve will be better off and when you look at that, when you look at any change in legislation, obviously, to make an assumption that everybody is going to be better is not an accurate statement. but the other point of that is that my job as a legislator is to make sure i improve the situation. we're down to one carrier in my district. and that's not sustainable. and so as we work with the president and this administration, we've got to make it better. >> let me ask you, congressman. do you believe that this bill, if passed by the senate ultimately, will stabilize the exchanges for 18, 19 when we go from a subsidy base system to an incentive base system? will we be stabilized by then?

that's obviously a question that every insurance company is asking. it's a question that every person who is insured by an insurance company is asking. >> sure. and it's a valid point. we look at stabilizing the markets, there are three things we're doing in this particular bill. one high risk pool. we have to have a transition period. this bill allows for a two to three-year transition period, depending what aspects you're looking at. obamacare subsidies will actually stay in place. we're working with senator thune in the senate, working on real good legislation on the tax credit portion of that, to make sure that those that are in their 50s and 60s can have the kind of coverage that we have. so, we're looking at a broad spectrum of that. and i'm optimistic that not only will we make it better, but we will stabilize the markets to

make sure that insurance is affordable, once again, so people don't have to choose between a mortgage payment and an insurance payment. >> congressman mark meadows, thank you very much for being on the show this morning. >> thanks a lot. >> thank you. >> up next, james comey ponders two doors. no, it's not a metaphor. the fbi's very interesting testimony on capitol hill had. ahead. ray's always been different. last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. at&t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques.

remote moisture sensors use a reliable network to tell them when and where to water. so that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. china. oh ... he got there. that's the power of and. i'm on it.ar does weathertech go to protect your vehicle? ♪ ♪ ♪ weathertech. made right, in america what's the story behind green mountain coffee and fair trade? let's take a flight to colombia. this is boris calvo. boris grows mind-blowing coffee. and because we pay him a fair price, he improves his farm and invest in his community to make even better coffee.

all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee.

the shlike a bald penguin. how do i look? [ laughing ] show me the billboard music awards. show me top artist.

show me the top hot 100 artist. they give awards for being hot and 100 years old? we'll take 2! [ laughing ] xfinity x1 gives you exclusive access to the best of the billboard music awards just by using your voice. the billboard music awards. sunday, may 21st eight seven central only on abc. was there classified information on former congressman wiener's computer? >> yes. >> who sent it to him? >> his then spouse, huma abedin, appears to have a regular practice of forwarding e-mails for him. i think for him to print out for her so she could then deliver them to secretary of state. i've lived my entire career by the tradition that if you can possibly avoid it, you avoid any action in a run-up to an election that might have an impact, dog catcher election or president of the united states. i sat there that morning and

could not see a door labeled no action here i could see two doors and they were both actions. one was labeled speak. the other was labeled conceal. >> democratic senator richard blumenthal. good to see you. since we heard the sound bite of that question of huma abedin passing information along to anthony weiner. is there stha a crime? >> if it was classified information passed to a person who was not authorized to receive it, there is a possible crime. >> isn't that what director comey said, that there was classified information in those e-mails? >> what he eventually concluded, the fbi, that is, is that they knew about all those e-mails before they undertook this additional investigation. so, there was nothing new to come from this additional trove

of e-mails. >> was that a crime, though? you're saying that was a crime, right is this. >> whether you had seen the e-mails before or not. >> senator we had a guest earlier saying it petraeus got lighter treatment an a lot of people in the intel community thought he should have gotten and that affected the decisions on hillary clinton and huma abedin. based on the testimony yesterday, what she did was a crime. should it have been prosecuted? >> the question of whether it should have been prosecuted and it still may be potentially. it's not outside the statute of limitations. it's one the department of justice will have to decide. who will decide it? that's why we need a special prosecutor to review all of this investigative material and questions, including the investigation of the donald trump campaign and its connection to russian meddling in our elections. that's the reason i've been

calling for a special prosecutor. >> hi, senator. i want to know if you feel confident in comey's response on the question of the election meddling. do you feel he gave an adequate answer about his decision to go public so late in the game, despite ha surances that were raised in this tradition to not intervene in an election and how important do you think his release was in the defeat of hillary clinton? >> his defeat was a critical factor in the defeat of hillary clinton. i think that any objective observer would conclude it played an important part. whether it determined the outcome is another question. and his answers on the reasons why he chose one of those two doors left a lot of us, including me, very dissatisfied and frustrated because there were other doors available. one was to wait and do the review that the fbi eventually concluded through its wizardry

as he characterized it yesterday. and the conclusion was nothing new here. and eventually he made a second statement to that effect. again, a special prosecutor now is necessary for this investigation because of the taint and doubt and lack of credibility. and director comey himself said yesterday that he could not make the decision about these prosecutions whether going forward or looking backward. and that the deputy attorney general would be the one to do it. that deputy attorney general now reports to the president of the united states because the attorney general has recused himself. so there is clearly a need for a special prosecutor, independent and impartial. >> senator, how can there be nog new here when you discover this trove of e-mails that were reallyhe center of so much controversy and concern and were seen at least as a break from regulation and hillary clinton making her own

rules, how could there be nothing new there when you find out those e-mails, whether you're seen them or not, and whether some of them are classified or not, and some were, you find out they were funneled from her top adviser to her husband who is under investigation for sexting or whatever else and is even being investigated by the feds and dealing with minors, how is that not really disturbing new information. >> the information and the e-mails apparently were part of the investigation previously. and when director comey in effect said they were not new, that there was not new material there, he was referring to what previously had been reviewed. >> but i feel like you're not hearing what i'm saying. i'm not saying the e-mails were new. i'm saying what was new is these e-mails have not just exist on hillary clinton's server, but they went from hillary to huma

and from huma to her husband who is not part of the campaign and is under federal, i think, watch, investigation for sexting minors. that's new. the handling of this information that you say is nothing to see here is not new. but where they went and how they were handled, that seems like something very new came out. >> and if there is new information in the sense of new legal culpability or new legal questions, that's an issue that should be reviewed. but the department of justice ought to be appointing a special prosecutor to review it. and it has to be viewed in the context of all of the facts. the laws relating to classified information. what its implications were, when it revealed, and those kinds of questions, you're absolutely right. they ought to be reviewed. >> senator richard blumenthal, thank you for being with us.

we greatly appreciate it. >> a huge dilemma. >> they made a decision. obviously, they're not going to prosecute but look, it comes down to, this is big news. >> no, we knew that huma was forwarding e-mails to anthony's computer. we knew some of them were classified. >> to print them out? >> to have him print them? >> what he's saying, the conclusion was you need intent to prosecute. there was no intent to transfer classified information. that's the argument. >> i just think it's bad. >> the bottom line is that there are two standards here. >> if a republican did this -- >> general petraeus knew he was transmitting classified information. >> are you kidding me? >> don't tell me huma and hillary didn't know they were transferring classified information. come on. >> anthony printed them.

>> the department had already cleared her. they dtiscover another trove of e-mails which they were wondering if there was something there. the question for director comey is why did you find at least something in an e-mail that said we have to present this to the public and the congress as opposed to just saying, we now are going to reopen that. >> the answer to that is because at the time they found them, they did not think they could get through them before the election. that's his argument. that's their argument. >> did he say that yesterday? >> no, awhile ago. >> he didn't say that yesterday. >> the biggest problem talked about around the table before is the letter he wrote to congress knowing it was going to change the outcome of the election, big or small ways, he could have said nothing in this letter should make anyone presume that we are going to come to any different conclusion that we got to before, but i said i would tell you if any more information came in.

>> it's not nothing to see here. >> i'm doing this because i have the responsibility to notify you. but don't jump to any -- he could have said that. but the way it was written. i thought and most everybody thought he would have never done it if he didn't have something new indictable. still ahead, the whip count inches away in republicans favor just hours away from a vote on replacing obamacare. much more "morning joe" straight ahead. he's on holiday. what do you need? i need the temperature for pipe five. ask the new guy. the new guy? jack trained him. jack's guidance would be to maintain the temperature at negative 160 degrees celsius. that doesn't sounke jack. actually, jack would say, hey mate, just cool it to minus 160 and we're set. good on ya. oh yeah. that's jack. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool?

try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. buttrust angie's list to help., [ barks ] visit angieslist.com today.

whoa,i just had to push one button to join. it's like i'm in the office with you, even though i'm here. it's almost like the virtual reality of business communications. no, it's reality. intuitive one touch video conferencing is a reality. and now it's included at no additional cost with vonage business. call now and see why 3,000 companies a month are switching to vonage. business grade. people friendly. welcome back to "morning joe." thursday, may 4th. 8:00 a.m. on the east coast. we have mark halperin with us. former treasure official and "morning joe" economic analyst

steve ratner, former democratic congressman harold ford jr. and founder and ceo of axius, jim vandahay. first, health care hits the floor of the house just hours from now. they don't yet have a cbo score and many members haven't even read it yet. today congress is set to vote on legislation that impacts one-sixth of the nation's economy. health care hits the floor of the house just hours from now. it follows key meetings at the white house where a number of republicans flipped from no to yes. just two days ago congressman billy long and fred upton announced they'd vote against the latest overhaul over concerns about how people with pre-existing conditions could be covered. when they left yesterday's meeting they had an agreement in hand. >> when he called me yesterday, i told him i was a no.

and i told him i was a no because of the provision of pre-existing illnesses. yesterday i read him back his statement where he said that this bill would be just as strong on pre-existing illnesses as obamacare. i want him to keep that pledge. >> when i made what i consider the change, the pre-existing conditions, that's when i said i'm a no. the president said really really need you man. i said you don't have me. we went through that for 20 minutes. he called back yesterday. we need you. the people in the 7th district of missouri will have pre-exi pre-existing conditions covered adequately with this provision we just talked the president into. >> their solution, pour $8 billion over five years into states that decide to no longer cover people with long-term health issues. the money would go to people entered into the controversial high-risk pools.

those states set up instead. the upton amendment has helped change the momentum giving leadership enough confidence to cull a vote as early as around 10:00 this morning. >> let's go to tim. what's turned this? >> what's turned it is they needed -- listen. you needed paul ryan and donald trump needed a win and needed to get some of these moderates on board. they're so worried about the pre-existing condition that piece of the legislation. they feel they have enough money to go home and justify it. think about the stakes of this vote, though. go back to barack obama when he had full democratic control and decided to do health care. it cost him control of congress because it's complex and easy to demagogue. now republicans having watched that are doing the same thing. they're doing it without reading the bill and without waiting to find out how much does it cost? how many people will actually be -- >> we've obviously been around this a long time. republicans, especially conservatives, since you and i were first on the hill a quarter

century ago have always talked about you've got to read the bill, score the bill. you've got to have a cbo score. are you being reckless and irresponsible. here they're going to reorganize one-sixth of the economy without even getting a cbo score. it's just -- you can get the quotes of just about every member of congress that's a republican, a conservative, saying this is just not what you do. yet they're making the same mistake that past administrations have made. going head-first into this area. >> and the darnedest thing is they don't have to. what if they waited two weeks and passed it? a big achievement, one they promised to do. so waiting two or three weeks. the reason they won't wait is they're worried their members go home over the weekend, have a break next week, and they believe they'll get hammered on this issue and any wavering republican will then oppose them. >> harold, let me ask you this. this is day trading i don't

understand these ys and women that are going to vote for this bill that may not want to vote for this bill don't understand this bill hangs around them forever. if you're in one of those districts that hillary clinton won, if you're in a district where she was close, there's going to be a pretty big swing coming up, and they can't just do this to give anybody a quick headline that's going to evaporate in two days. this stays with them. so i don't understand the political day trading on something this important. >> i think it's what trump wants. he wants to say we've repealed it. it doesn't go away. if they think this is just going to pass and they can move to taxes, this is the issue. your point, not score it. we used to go to the floor and say we can't vote for something we haven't read. $8 billion. i'm not convinced that $8 billion is going to satisfy the

pre-existing condition challenge. if that were all it took, we would have done this a long time ago. this surely can't be enough to cover it all. >> steve will have charts on that in a little bit. they haven't read the bill? everybody -- republicans for years have made fun of nancy pelosi for saying we need to pass the bill to know what's in the bill. that's beenne of the main line of attks -- >> very true. >> -- against the affordable care act from the very beginning. they are doing the same thing. except it's even worse because they are cobbling a bill together, and they had six, seven years to do this. they're not ready yet. >> we heard it almost every day during the affordable care act debate. this is paul ryan. i don't think we should pass bills we haven't read. i don't have the date here. it was during the affordable care act. >> let's go to mike vickera.

kevin mccarthy believes they have the votes. where are they this morning? >> i think kevin mccarthy is putting the best face on it. it's very close. they are expressing confidence because you simply don't go forward unless you say you have the votes. we saw it in the t.a.r.p. vote and medicare part d vote. nevertheless, they're going to go forward. there's no congressional budget office score. this bill was only put online, the public was only able to see the exact language of the bill at about 8:00 last night before the house rules committee took it up and worked into the night. not only that, but the total debate on the floor today is going to last between the rule and the bill itself about two hours. obviously, they are ramming this thing through. there's been some high stakes,

high pressure negotiation going on. the old-fashioned way behind closed doors. vice president pence in the capitol the last few days meet with a parade of undecided lawmakers trying to get their votes. we saw fred upton and from a purely political standpoint, fred upton holds out for his constituents concerned about the pre-existing conditions, the waiver, the escalating premiums that are going to result from that. he extracts $8 billion by going down to the white house and waving this agreement around saying he's the one who protocud that. it's going to go to the senate and change considerably. a lot of these provisions are going to be stripped away. republican leadership is asking a lot of moderates who have constituents concerned about provisions of the bill and lost coverage to walk the political plank for a bill they know is going to change and it's not going to look anything like this when and if it comes out of

congress. >> mark halperin, i don't want to be overdramatic here. there's some members of the house that may not remember what went on in 1993 when bill clinton passed what we republicans then called the largest tax increase in the history of the country. it's always a battle about that. passed by one vote. and you remember that scene when they marched a certain congresswoman from pennsylvania down the middle. republicans were all chanting bye-bye. that's -- this vote seems to have echoes of that. republicans that are going to be facing a tough re-election in 2018 and a bill that's extraordinarily, i think, extraordinarily unpopular. they didn't read it -- couldn't read it until 8:00 last night. 8:00 last night. to reorganize one-sixth of the economy. they don't even have a cbo score

on it for a country that's $20 trillion in debt. they have no idea how much it's going to cost. they have no idea how many of their constituents are going to be kicked off of the health care rolls. 24, $25 million nationwide. how many are their districts and yet they're going to jump off the cliff just so they can get a headline that will burn away into the mist within 24 hours. they'll be on to something else. >> on one side you have unscored, unread, untested policy that will be considered risky by many of their constituents and health care analysts and a very shaky future in the senate. on the other side, three things that are the reason you'll see a vote today. one is, if house republicans and the white house can't make good on a promise to repeal the affordable care act after

seven-plus years, they can't do anything. >> why do they do it today? this is not the end of the world. they're not pirates of the caribbean at the end of the world and on a ship with johnny depp and it's about to go over e end of the world. they have next week and the next week. they can wait for the scoring to come back. they can do something radical. they can read the bill that they're voting for. nobody there has read the bill. >> because if they wait for the scoring, it's less likely to pass -- >> why? >> because there will be a political uproar. >> well, exactly. so you're saying that the leadership is forcing the members -- you just answered my question. >> walked into a trap. >> the leadership is forcing members who are already vulnerable to take a vote before they find out how vulnerable their seats are going to be. and they're going to be sitting around wondering why nancy pelosi is sworn in as speaker of the house on january the 4th,

2019. >> there's one of two options as they go forward with this. and whether it becomes law or not. one is that they sell the country on the fact this is better for them than the affordable care act. if they can do it, which is going to be a challenge. or, two, they lose their majority but they feel good because they got rid of the affordable care act. those are their choices. a lot of these members are willing to lose to fulfill this promise but they've not produced a bill that they understand or that they can sell today. >> one of the -- >> they have to pass it today or they'll never pass it. >> they have to pass it today or else they'll find out how bad the bill is if they read it and then their constituents won't let them pass the bill. that is political day trading and it's stupid. it's shortsided. and let may just say something else. it's never going to pass the senate. so your statement that they want to go back to the district and say they repealed obamacare. the senators are going to look at this and go, are you kidding

me? what's wrong with you people? >> unless the senate changes the bill in a way that then house members feel compelled to vote for with a different coalition, they have to try to fulfill this promise. >> still ahead -- we'll dig into the impact on real people with real health problems when steve rattner breaks out the charts. plus michael schmidt and clint watts help us unpack james comey's testimony yesterday. and the fbi director will explain why anthony weiner's access to classified information is actually not illegal. but first, here's bill karins with a check on the forecast. >> joe, you have to see this video. turn around, don't drown when you see floodwaters. how about if it's a school bus driver with kids on it going through this river yesterday in louisiana. he actually goes off the road into the ditch. very lucky it wasn't deeper than it was. police were able to get all the kids ots.

a levee failed and left this huge lake in its wake. the water just flooded in arkansas and we wish all those people the best. they're waiting for the water to recede. still a lot of heavy rain. even a tornado warning near tindle air force base outside panama city. we'll watch those storms. heavy rain st. louis to indianapolis today. this is the likely area that it will occur. another 1 to 3 inches for you. let's time all this mess outs we go throughout the morning and throughout the day. we'll watch these storms down here in the panhandle continuing to head towards southern georgia and also toward jacksonville. as we go through the evening rush hour, detroit down through nashville and memphis and tomorrow morning at 6:00 a.m., the line of storms over the capital. washington, d.c., to baltimore. by the time we go through the middle of the day, that's when the worst is philadelphia to new york city. the evening rush hour the worst of it around the boston area. heavy rain event will affect a lot of people's travel plans in the eastern half of the country.

if you have flights out of new york city tomorrow, a lot of airlines are already letting you switch it for free. new york city, top of the rock. one more nirce, beautiful day before we get that deluge tomorrow. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. apparently, i kept her up all night. she said the future freaks her out. how come no one likes me, jim? intel does! just think of everything intel's doing right now with artificial intelligence. and pretty soon ai is going to help executives like her see trends to stay ahead of her competition. no more sleepless nights. - we're going to be friends! - i'm sorry about this. don't be embarrassed of me, jim. i'm getting excited about this! we know the future. we're going to be friends! because we're building it.

with sleep number, there's an adjustment for that. tilt your tormentor and put those snores to sleep. does your bed do that? only at a sleep number store find final clearance prices on the best beds for couples. at angie's list, we believe

there are certain things you can count on, like what goes down doesn't always come back up. ♪ [ toilet flushes ] ♪ so when you need a plumber, you can count on us to help you find the right person for the job. discover all the ways we can help at angie's list. because your home is where our heart is. start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000. experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare. philips sonicare. why do people have eyebrows? why do people put milk on cereal? oh, are you reading why people put milk on cereal? why does your tummy go "grumbily, grumbily, grumbily"? why is it all? no more questions for you! ouph, that milk in your cereal was messing with you, wasn't it? yeah, happens to more people than you think...

try lactaid, it's real milk, without that annoying lactose. good, right? mmm, yeah. i got your back. lactaid. it's the milk that doesn't mess with you.

talking about the political fallout from the rush to jam through a health care overhaul. now rattner has charts on the impact on americans with pre-existing conditions. steve? >> okay, charts. so let's talk about pre-existing conditions. under the obamacare, you could not charge people a different amount of money if you had a pre-existing condition. this bill would allow states to opt out of that requirement. and this chart shows and i don't have my magic pencil, but this chart shows -- >> no magic pencil? >> what can you do. this chart shows what could happen to premiums for people with pre-existing conditions. if you are terribly ill with met

static cancer, your premiums could go up $140,000. if you're pregnant, it could go up $72,000. >> pregnancy is a pre-existing condition? >> they can charge you more. if you have asthma and want health insurance, they can charge you more. so this is what consumers would be facing before you get to any -- >> autism, $5,500? for a family in central pennsylvania that voted for donald trump who find out their child has autism and needs treatment and they're struggling just to pay their rent and they find out that because of donald trump and the republicans in congress they are having to pay $5500 to help their autistic 4-year-old child? that's not a 90/10. that's going to get them in trouble. >> i tweeted a version of this out. it got 20,000 retweets.

>> of course, a lot of -- >> we're going to tweet this all again. >> the politics. to give you a sense of the politics of it. what does the administration want to do about it? they want to set up a fund to provide some subsidies for these pre-existing conditions. but by one estimate you'd need $330 billion over the next ten years to subsidize this. the new bill has -- had in it $130 billion but that could have been used for other stuff. you see that blue sliver at the bottom? that's the $8 billion. >> a little short. >> a little short but the idea at $8 billion on $330 billion changed people's votes is hard to imagine. >> here's what i don't understand -- so many things i don't understand about my party's political calculations here. it's mind boggling. one thing i don't understand about donald trump's political calculation is by all measures, the people who are going to be

hurt the most are his voters. >> can we just get to the next chart because it's going to answer that next question. >> really? >> okay. exact question. >> did you do your homework and look at these? >> no. >> never does. >> so by some estimates, 27% of americans have pre-existing conditions of one sort or another. the top ten states to exceed the national average in pre-existing conditions are all trump states. here are five of them that i've listed here. west virginia, mississippi, kentucky, alabama, tennessee. so to your point, and for obvious reasons, a disproportionate number of people with pre-existing conditions are in trump states. >> you don't see wisconsin, michigan, ohio, pennsylvania, states where barack obama voters switching to donald trump gave donald trump the presidency. those maps that donald trump is passing out to everybody right now, if this law passes, you can

just paint those top four states blue because those people are going to go back and vote for somebody else, if this passes. >> steve rattner, thank you very much. coming up, the chairman of the foreign relations committee, senator bob corker is standing by. first, anthony weiner used to vote on laws. could he now become one? the weiner law. >> the weiner doctrine. >> it's not a good law. >> this is just a tease right here. one senator is calling for the weiner statute. it would prosecute people from mishandling classified material. it's part of the fbi director's testimony yesterday on capitol hill and that's next on "morning joe." when standard cancer treatment no longer works

for patients like lynn, advanced genomic testing may lead to other treatment options that can work. learn how genomic testing is changing the way

we fight cancer at cancercenter.com/genomics

do you agree with me that anthony weiner 2016 should not have access to classified information. >> yes, that's a fair statement. >> would you agree if that's not illegal, we've got really bad laws? >> well, if he -- >> well, he got it somehow.

>> it would be illegal if he didn't have appropriate clearance. >> do you agree with me he did have appropriate -- >> if he did have appropriate clearance, that it would even be worse? >> i don't believe at the time we found it on his laptop he had any kind of -- >> i agree. so for him to get it should be a crime. somebody should be prosecuted for letting anthony weiner have access to classified information. does that make general sense? >> it would be a crime. >> do you agree with me it should be that anybody lets anthony weiner have classified information probably should be prosecuted. >> if our laws don't cover that -- >> there's no anthony weiner statute, but -- >> maybe we need one. >> it's a good question, right? >> let's bring in former fbi agent clint watts and "new york times" reporter michael schmidt. we were talking about it beforehand. a lot of americans out there asking, and asked during the

campaign even, and it showed up in the polls. so why aren't we indicting thesis people passing around classified information? harold and i both know if, as members of congress, we'd gone to a classified briefing and then sent an e-mail out to a friend and say hey, can you print this out, we would have had a knock on our door a week later. they would have seen it in our inside mail and -- >> probably that afternoon. >> and they would say we'd have to talk to them. we'd be under investigation. not saying this about huma or hillary. i'm just saying in general you can even say with petraeus. are we giving our public officials a lower standard than we would give you or harold or any of us at this table? >> absolutely. the more popular you are, the better the chance you'll get away with it. i think that's really been a debate in the intel community, national security community. why is it general petraeus let

go with sort of a slap on the wrist and the others that disclose leaks in the past have gone to jail during the obama administration. and so it's a very uneven standard. >> and the intel community especially angry. you talk about general petraeus and hillary clinton and some bring up the 12 classified emailes with huma abedin. but the intel pros, the complaints i've heard all along and it's been also with general petraeus as well is there's a double standard. why are these people not getting sent to jail when i'd be in jail right now if i did this? >> it's confusing to everyone. classified information is classified information. transmitting it or leaking it out there should naturally result in a uniform standard. it's become a free pass for any senior executive that does this or misspeaks during a press conference that they're not indicted and not sent to jail. >> michael schmidt, james comey

talked about intent. he didn't want to find intent here. i wouldn't want her or her family to go through any more than they've been through but at the same time it looks very selective with general petraeus and hillary and huma now. >> petraeus sort of daftcast a shadow on this investigation because petraeus was allowed to take a misdemeanor when comey wanted him to take a felony. the issue of mind-set is what it came down to. what they thought she did was not assed about as petraeus. they thought they had to clear a higher bar and come up with a mind-set. if you listen to comey, what they said at first when they walk into comey's office in october and say, hey, we need to go look at these e-mails, they think these e-mails are from the first three months she was secretof state and they had never been able to find those

e-mailed during the investigation. and they thought if there was any evidence that she knew what she was doing was wrong, it was going to be in those first three months. >> i don't understand the mind-set. harold and i had clearance in congress. we'd know if we were sending an e-mail after a classified briefing or if someone -- >> mindful about printing it out. >> we would know what we were doing was wrong and that could establish intent to do something wrong and illegal. we're talking about the secretary of state here who has been in public life for 40 years. >> using a private server. >> talking about general petraeus. these people know more about what the law is and what the law isn't. how do you scrub intent away from these people. >> what they believed is they needed to have hard evidence if they were going to court that she knew exactly what she was doing. they needed an e-mail of her saying something like, hey, i

don't want to have a government account because then people are going to get into our stuff so let's have this special system. and they never found that. i think what happened in their minds was they said if petraeus took a misdemeanor, we have to clear a higher bar with her because what she did was not as bad as petraeus. petraeus lied to the fbi. petraeus obstructed that investigation. when they compared the two, that's how they looked at it. it was a real shadow on how they saw things. coming up -- congressman joseph kennedy who has been an outspoken voice in defense of obamacare. "morning joe" is coming right back.

i didn't really know anything about my family history. went to ancestry, i put in the names of my grandparents first. i got a leaf right away. a leaf is a hint that is connected to each person in your family tree. i learned that my ten times great grandmother is george washington's aunt. within a few days i went from knowing almost nothing to holy crow, i'm related to george washington. this is my cousin george. discover your story. start searching for free now at ancestry.com what's the story behind green mountain coffee and fair trade? let's take a flight to colombia. this is boris calvo. boris grows mind-blowing coffee. and because we pay him a fair price, he improves his farm and invest in his community to make even better coffee. all for a smoother tasting cup. green mountain coffee.

i got a mortgage offer from the bank today. whuuuuuat? you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free! free? yeah. could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. pappa's eatin' steak tonight. no. at lendingtree, shop and compare loan offers from top lenders and in just 5 minutes, you could save thousands. lendingtree, when banks compete, you win. i love date night. yeah. somebody's ruining it. yeah. well you could leave if you wanted to? are made with smarttrack®igners material to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com tidy cats lightweight with glade clean blossoms. our newest odor fighting scent!

gives you the power of choice plus... the power of pleasant. exclusively in lightweight! every home, every cat, there's a tidy cats for that. arbreak through your allergies. try new flonase sensimist instead of allergy pills. it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new flonase sensimist

is it fair to say the russian government is still involved in american politics? >> yes. >> is it fair to say we need to stop them from doing this? >> yes, fair to say. >> do you agree with me the only

way they're going to stop is for them to pay a price for interfering in our political process? >> i think that's a fair statement. >> so what kind of a threat do you believe russia presents to our democratic process, given what you know about russia's behavior of late? >> certainly the greatest threat of any nation on earth. >> that's direct enough. welcome back to "morning joe." mark halperin with us. "the new york times" nick confisori, also bianca and senator bob corker. obviously i want to start with your assessment of director comey's testimony yesterday and whether you agree with him that russia poses the greatest threat to the united states of any country on earth. >> well, i thought you were bringing me on to make a big announcement. my sta was just telling me about some news. so i'm a little b -- you've

taken me off task here a little bit. >> i've got to tell you, it is great news. our ratings are higher than ever before and we thank you for -- because of good people like you. >> yeah, well, he learned his trade well in the house. so i think russia no doubt, we're at the lowest point in our relationship with russia that we've had since 1991. and they are now isolated with their relationship with assad who is a war criminal and their relationship with iran. and the world community increasingly is isolating them and we're at a place in our relationship where that trajectory can continue to spiral downward or maybe there's a window of opportunity to see some corrective action take place on their part. but to say that they are the

greatest threat, certainly they are a threat. a lot of people made fun of mitt romney when he said so. the world is very complex, very different than when it was just us and them and the soviet union and the whole world sort of organized around those two principles but no doubt, they are a threat to democracies but it's a threat to them and they're doing the same thing they did here in ee as we all know. >> it's willy. it's good to see you. you said it might be better for the country and the process of government and for foreign policy if the president cooled it a little bit on the tweeting. as someone who chairs foreign relations, what is your biggest concern that lately, what's the thing the president has said most recently that concerned you? >> i think it's more of, he's got an outstanding national security team and really as i said yesterday, i really do cherish the relationship i have with them. with the administration, the white house, the president

himself. had dinner with him last week. i do think that words matter. and sometimes we'll be moving along. i'll give you a good example. we're moving along, pushing china, for instance, as it relates to north korea and all of a sudden, the subject changes to south korea paying for its thaad missiles there. the pressure is on china and south korea. there needs to be an organizing structure at the white house. i'm sorry. i think we've got tremendous talent over there people that i really have a great relationship with, but thus far, it's not hitting on all eight. and there's so much good that can be done right now. as i mentioned, with all the complexities that take place. and i hope that over time that struct surgoiure is going to be place so we're moving on all eight. i thought the call to erdogan after his unfortunate victory if

you will in consolidating power, you know, again, it affects our allies in the region. it affects what's happening on the ground in syria. and again, i just think sometimes there's not enough effort put in place to make sure that this is all aligned in a proper manner. >> your assessmentbout the president's foreign policy team being a good one seems to be the consensus in washington. obviously there are some great people around him. if that's true, though, why can't they impress upon the president the importance of not saying things like what you just said about erdogan or offering bizarre praise for kim jong-un in the middle of these conversations about what's happening in north korea and our raech with south korea. why can't they get to him and help create the message? >> so, look. i think there's still some growing pains. i think -- i hope that they'll overcome it. i don't know. if you look at the whole cabinet, it's a tremendously talented cabinet.

look at some people inside the administration. i mean, really talented folks. i think they're going to get it in line. i hope so, soon. there's such opportunity with so many problems. i know i'm repeating myself. that's something you should ask someone else. >> senator, does it embarrass you that it was angela merkel and not the president of the united states who came down hard on vladimir putin in their meeting the other day regarding meddling in western elections? >> look, i think that, of course, numbers of people around the president have done that. tillerson has been very stern with them and will meet with them again in about a week. >> that's still not the same thing. >> yeah, yeah, so i'm really glad that merkel did what she did and we've got to figure out a way with the tape that was just played with lindsey interviewing. we've got to find a way to generate an outcome relative to russia ourselves. i can't say that it embarrasses

me. i'm glad that angela merkel did what she did and many of us need to continue. we've poisoned the well as it relates to russia and se cheap deal occurring relative to syria. i don't think there's any chae of that occurring. and the chance is, at this moment in time, is there an opportunity with them being increasingly isolated, per the statement you just mentioned, is there a way for us to affect their behavior. is there a way he sees some light to improve and to move back and to international norms. so we'll see. we've got to figure out the best way to make that happen. >> senator, it's nick. just changing topics here. there's a bill coming out on the house on health care. is there any chance it passes the house today? is there any chance for an up or down vote in the senate on the bill as written to get it quickly passed and move quickly past the issue ff republicans? >> no.

zero. >> i love talking to you. >> that's not the way it's going to work. >> so what are your big concerns with the bill you see written now in the house? >> it's interesting. we turned the volume off on health care after the last failure and decided in our own office we're not going to pay a lot of attention to what's happening until something does occur because it looks like it's going to happen today. i've got a briefing set up to walk through. there's a working group over here of republicans with, you know, with a range of ideology that are working to see where we go with the bill when it comes across. and i think you're going to see very responsible, deliberate action on it. people are going to want to improve it. i don't see any way it comes back in the form it comes. it's not because i have any specific criticism. i just know over here people want to make sure that it's something that's going to work for the american people. one of the things that people are going to focus on a great

deal, knowing of the huge fiscal problems we have in our nation is the whole medicaid reform piec that'sing if to be very much focused on. i used to be commissioner of finance for our state. we could have done so much better in medicaid if we just had the flexibilities to serve our constituents in a better manner. i think that's something that's a plus that people will be fo s focused on. my guess is we'll spend at least a month looking at the issue, making sure that it passes the test of time. >> mark halperin? >> timetable will be percentage consideration of a different type of health care bill. >> what's a time table? you know, nothing has been laid out over here. again, all of us pretty much are focused on other things until we get the bill but there's been a foundation laid, mark, of people who are beginning to work

together, of different ideologies to be ready when it comes and to be ready to dive in. i'm just making up a number. but i know it's not going to be immediate. i'm going to guess 30 days or so over here in the senate. >> all right, senator bob corker, thank you for being with us. thank you for being kind enough to take note of our recent ratings increase. very kind. >> oh, gosh. what a deflector you are. i hope there's a little blushing taking play, but thank you. >> congratulations, by the way. congratulations on all the news that are coming out today. >> all the news, thank you. >> all the news. he knows i'm a big prince phillip fan and after all these years of working he can relax. >> it's "star wars" day. >> i love talking to senators who -- mitch mcconnell gave the proverbial bless their hearts when they talk about taking up health care in the house. this is going to be a tough nut

to crack if they do pass it in the house. >> look, the two people -- the media focus will be on ted cruz and rapid paund paul. i think in the end, they'll probably lose senator paul. can they keep everybody else? they'll not pass the house bill but if the house passes something, the senate will work hard. don't underestimate mitch mcconnell. he's determined to get something to conference committee and then, you know, that's the last stage of complexity. but i think the senate will find a way to pass something through committee. we'll see about the floor. >> i think talking about pre-existing. at the end, the issue is going to be medicaid expansion. they just aren't going to slash spending on medicaid expansion which make it tougher to pass. gleelet's go to business be the bell with dominik chu.

>> facebook reported better than expected results but for the rest of the year, growth will be slowing down by slowing advertising spending. still seeing growth in regular users. then apple stock. we spoke about it yesterday. that big cash hoard it has. in an exclusive interview with cnbc's jim cramer, the apple ceo says he's ready to put a billiop dollars to work in u.s. manufacturing. it promotes advanced manufacturing jobs in america. it's going to create a virtual cycle for jobs. and alphabet, the parent company of google. if you are a gmail user, you may have been hacked. possibly a billion google e-mail users may have been targeted by a phishing scam. if you get an e-mail looking like you know them and it asks you to click on a doc, do not do it. it may be a good idea to check

any apps you use to check e-mail and change your password. nick brought up the idea it's "star wars" day. i'm wearing my darth vader cuff links, but i have no, no idea what other kind of hardware is being passed around there. i hear quite a bit of congr congratulations for your ratings. >> luke skywalker cuff links joe was wearing. >> i'm going to pass them back and forth. for some reason, he's always been a big hans solo fan. >> who hasn't? >> what's that? >> whosn a hans solo fan. >> dom, thank you. greatly appreciate that. still ahead on "morning joe," this. >> i was struck by a comment made by speaker ryan where he called this repeal bill an act of mercy. with all due respect to our speaker, he and i must have read a different descript krion.

there's no mercy in -- >> the chair now recognizes the -- >> that was democratic congressman joe kennedy with an empassioned plea to ago. no matter which scripture you read we will find out if the republican party is singing from the same him nall when they vote on the bill. congressman kennedy joins us next. can i get some help. watch his head. ♪ i'm so happy. ♪ whatever they went through, they went through together. welcome guys. life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day.

stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide.

start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000. experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare. so we know how to cover almost phalanything.ything, even a coupe soup. [woman] so beautiful. [man] beautiful just like you. [woman] oh, why thank you. [burke] and we covered it, november sixth, two-thousand-nine. talk to farmers. wknow a thing or two because we've seen a thing otwo. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ with us now a member of the energy and commerce committee

democratic congressman joe kennedy of massachusetts. thanks so much for being with us. >> thanks. >> be honest with us. >> i want to ask you, what do your constituents ask you? what concerns them the most when it comes to health care and specifically with regards to the news now that we may actually get a bill in the house? >> look, massachusetts is one of those states that actually has implemented health care reform well. not to say we don't have our challenges but we have about a 3.5% unemployment rate and 2.8% uninsured rate. the idea that this law is terrible and is sinking just isn't true and my constituents know it. what makes people so angry when i go back home is that we've gotten into a realm of discussion here where somehow republican leadership feels like they have a moral obligation to keep a campaign promise rather than a moral obligation to the 24 million people that are going to lose their health care, rather than trying to find ways to address concerns of rising costs and costs of premiums and

gutting the essential provisions of what health care means in this country. that's what enrages people about this debate. trying to hide it from the american people and drop it on congress with less than 24 hours notice and try to say, here it is. the details that have come out of this bill in the last 12 hours about what it es to special education, what it can do to employer-based health care plans and strips for essential benefit page f benefit panels for them -- packages for them it's stunning. you've spent time here, if you're proud of a bill you're not afraid to debate it and vet it and have the discussion publicly. they are not proud of this bill and you know it by the way they're handling it. >> they're rushing it so they don't get all the details on the bill. because if they go home, they're going to get pounded during the recess and not allowed to come back and vote for the bill. >> i think the hope here is if they can get the bill passed the problem will be solved and the downsides will -- but anyway, congressman i have a question for you, it would call the first

version of this bill an act of malice and i wonder if you think that is still true or room here for actually a genuine disagreement about, you know, the size of the role for government and delivering health care and deciding health care, are the republicans here in the freedom caucus and elsewhere who simply believe obamacare is doing it wrong? >> look, we can have a discussion as to what role of government should be and try to ensure that every single person gets access sest to quality affordable accessible health care. that is not what this does. it's a tax cut that guts medicaid to pass money to the wealthy and doing so guts what health care actually meanses to those that are working paycheck to paycheck. not a single person has ever told me that therobl that w have with our health care deliveryystem today is that medicaid pays doctors too much money. that has never come up. we can have debates about access to care and quality of care in rural populations and some counties across the midwest, we can have discussions about the

cost of care even in communities in massachusetts, absolutely fair, absolutely necessary for that discussion. but what this bill does, it does not solve the problem that we are seeing across our country which is why they had to pull the bill once and you're not hearing about the details of what this bill does. >> all right. congressman joe kennedy, thank you so much for being with us. if you see dell hunt, tell him to stay out of trouble. >> i'll do my best. >> yeah. we all do our best but it's never quite enough, is it. thank you so much, joe. >> thanks so much. >> let's bring in the deputy managing editor of "time" magazine to bat cleanup for us on a big day. so, tell us, mike m, this whole president's club thing that you just wrote one of the best books explaining the relationship, barack obama's back in -- back in the -- back in the scene, crisis with north korea, do you think these two piece it together so trump can get advice from obama on nuclear war? >> did you wonder whether obama

is wondering is he ever going to call me and talk about what i learned and what i think of these guys or clinton who went his own two or three rounds with the kims. you do kind of hope that he makes those calls some day. there's a the lot to be learned and both of those presidents, obama and clinton, called on their predecessors in clinton's case carter and obama's case clinton in order to help with north korea when, you know, they started acting strange on their watches. there were really tough times in both their presidencies on those fronts and they reached back. >> he needs to. mark halperin with us and has a question. mark? >> mike duffy, in what you're a student of this, in what ways do you ink trump has behaved at all like a normal predent that would be significant or meaningful? >> i'm guessing not just in the context of north korea. >> no. just overall? >> well, this week was interesting, right. i mean on one hand he -- on tuesday he called for a shutdown of the government in september. that's not a normal piece of

presidential. but over the last 48 hours, we've seen them do pretty traditional horse trading for votes. he had, you know, fred upton down and long from missouri and said let's -- what do you need? i need your votes. that seemed something familiar to me. they may not get it today when they vote at 1:30 but that horse trading is what presidents have typically done. >> michael, what would it mean to a new president to have not one, but two health care votes fall not in his favor, to go against him in terms of capital spent in the first 100 some days. >> i'm cringing and i think that's the point of today. willie, i mean, clearly the details in the bill are less important to the us what and republicans in congress than just getting something through. and with we're going to see a task of how unified joe's old caucus the republican conference is. we will get a second measure. and that really is what is at stake today. can they actually put one into the front of the other and try to legislate. long way to go after that.

>> michael duffy, come with us and stay longer on set in new york. we love havingou here. the issue of "time" magazine is a warning we may not be ready for the next pandemic. a great day today. a big day. "star wars" day. and go home and celebrate it with somebody you love. by roechg "rogue one" right. >> absolutely. >> that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. >> thanks so much, joe. good morning. i'm stephanie ruhle. look where i am live from washington, d.c., overlooking the white house, i'm here because this morning it is d-day for health care. the vote to repeal and replace obamacare happening within hours and republicans saying they've got the votes. >> we will pass this bill. i feel great about the count. >> the president in an all-out blitz. >> the president said billy, really need y