thanks for watching. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace begins right now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00. today it counted as breaking political news that white house press secretary sean spicer, trapped in a humiliating came of he is in, no, he is out of president trump's good graces, briefed on camera. it counted as news because in recent days the white house has dramatically scaled back access to press briefings. this matters because the white house press briefing is often the only opportunity reporters have to pose questions to the white house. today for the first time in eight days, reporters got a chance to ask spicer about this issue of access. >> said it, look, multiple times prior to actually taking the job in december and january, explained that, you know, we're going to do what we can to communicate our message. we have a tremendous respect for the first amendment, your ability to do your job.

and report. and seek out ideas. then we'll work with you. i think the briefing is one aspect of what we do. we are here really early in the morning and really late at night, available to all of your questions, whether it's e-mail or in person. this is one avenue to do that. while you guys will always advocate for greater transparency and more access, i think that we have done a very good job of not just providing opportunities here at a daily briefing but also making ourselves available as a staff almost 20, 24 hours a day. >> let's go to the white house reporters who know the white house and its unconventional practices best. nbc's peter alexander on the north lawn and phillip rucker who authored today's piece on trump's washington, a place where business is held behind closed doors, the "washington post" white house bureau chief. thank you both for being here. i read your story last night before i fell asleep, phillip rucker. i'll put chunks of it on the screen. i think you summed up what a lot

of people especially in your business have sort of been working around but finally putting this on the table as another data point in how unconventional and how distant from all the norms. i worked at a white house known for secrecy. dick cheney put together an energy policy behind closed doors. i am used to hearing this criticism. i have never seen access to the press officers scaled back. that, to me, is sort of what came into sharp relief in your piece. i want to put up something from the piece. business in washington is happening behind closed doors, the federal government's leaders are hiding from public scrutiny. it represents a stark departure from the campaign promises of trump and fellow republicans to usher in newfound transparency. it's a reversal of the norms and it's the reversal of a trump promise. >> yeah. you know, it's a real sea change here in washington. we have seen it gradually over the last few months. it's not limited just to the

white house. it's the federal agencies denying key documents to congressional oversight members, the leaders of the senate drafting the health care bill behind closed doors in complete secrecy without even letting in some of their fellow republican senators to know what the text of the bill is. this is how they're conducting the public's business. it's important to keep in mind that it's not about us in the media, it's not about whether we get our pet issues talked about or we can get our facetime with officials or ask questions. it's about whether the federal elected officials are being held accountable to the public and whether there is a level of scrutiny and transparency and accountability for the actions that they are doing every day running the government. >> peter alexander, i have heard from other reporters on the beat that this is on top of the problem of what you are hearing from sources sometimes being undermined or contradicted from other sources or from the president himself, and not to put ourselves on a pedestal, but covering this white house is viewed as important by the

people that didn't support this president and even by those who did. talk about how difficult it is to get information from the white house you cover. >> the bottom line, i think, is covering any president is important by those who supported the president or those who opposed them. right now given the partisan politics in this country and the interest, there is great interest in finding out about all issues, not just the ones the administration wants to speak it. i think you put your finger on an important point which is that the white house will glad gli spe -- gladly speak with the projects about which they feel good. sean spicer or sara huckabee sanders begins by a cabinet official delivering the talking points they are focused on on that day but are less inclined to answer questions about something they'd prefer not to speak about. when asked today about russia broadly sean spicer said he hadn't spoken to the president

about whether russia interfered in the 2016 election. this is remarkable given the fact that, a, it's been all over the news for months. 17 intelligence agencies determined as they first communicated in october, that russia did interfere. it's not just on the topic of russia. on climate change sean spicer and his colleagues in the press office haven't spoken authoritatively on whether or not president trump believes climate change is real. the same holds true on other topics, the tapes. they say what the president said speaks for itself. the bottom line is they are undermined by the president's own tweets where he has said of his press, communications team, you can't hold them accountable for everything they say. how can they always know what i am thinking. the bottom line is at the end of the day, it's what the president says that goes. >> it's your job as a press staffer to find out what the president is thinking before you go out and publish. >> i am going to play something.

what peter just described was the white house press secretary who stands behind a podium with a seal on it saying that he had never talked to the president of the united states about russia's role in the 2016 election. this to me struck me as interesting. when you take it on top of jeff sessions testifying last week that he has never been briefed on russian hacking in our election and james comey saying that, for the eight interactions he had with the president, a few in person and several over the phone, the president of the united states, who asked him to let flynn go, never once asked him about russia's role in meddling in our democracy. watch this glen and let me know what you think. >> did the president in any of the interactions that you have shared with us today ask you what you should be doing or what our government should be doing or the intelligence community to protect america against russian interference in our election system?

>> i don't recall a conversation like that. >> never. >> no. >> do you find it odd? >> not with president trump. >> you received no briefing on the russian active measures in connection with the 2016 election? >> no. i don't believe i ever did. >> on russian sanctions, just very plainly, yes or no answer, does president trump believe that the russian government interfered in the 2016 elections? >> i have not sat down and talked to him about that specific thing. we've been dealing with a lot of other issues. >> glen, i would cry but it would create a crisis in the makeup room. tell me what to make of this. >> i think sean should changes the words on the front of the podium from the white house to the tweet speaks for itself. the president of the united states views the russia investigation, first and foremost, as a question of his legitimacy to be president. it still irks him deeply that he

lost the popular election. i'll toggle back to the fact that sean spicer's first interaction with the press was not a q & a but yelling at us about crowd size. the reason he is not interested in the russian thing -- and i think we can deduce clearly from those three interactions that he is not -- this is not like a scooby doo mystery that he wants to solve -- is because ultimately even entertaining this line of inquiry raises the legitimacy of his election in his own eyes. so it's not surprising from sort of a psychological perspective that he is not interested in it, but it is -- frankly, covering the stuff day to day it was a great question asked today because we're not really thinking about that. that's the 40,000 foot question is why isn't the president as focused on this as he ought to be? we don't have an answer. >> fill rucker, phil rucker, do

theory? why not multi-task? why not say, i can walk and chew gum. i can be the legitimate president and also be tough on russia? what's the theory that the people around the president offer for the president's inability to do that? >> i simply don't know. glen is absolutely right that he views this russia question, the cloud, as the president has termed it, as a challenge to his legitimacy as president. i don't know why he can't just acknowledge what 16 u.s. intelligence agencies have already concluded beyond a doubt, which is that russia was involved in hacking in the cyber attacks of democratic officials' e-mail accounts with the aim of shaping and influencing the election in 2016. that's the conclusion of the intelligence agency of this own government, and the president will not acknowledge it. i did a little research after the spicer briefing today to figure out what trump has said in the past about the issue, and he's been all over the map. as you might imagine.

there was a press conference in early january right before the inauguration where he actually admitted for the first time publicly, the president, that is, that russia did the hacking, but then in other interviews in the spring he says, oh, maybe it was china, maybe it wasn't russia, we don't really know. and that's kind of where we have left it. he has not been conclusive on this. >> let's bring into the conversation my panel. joining me now me today. "washington post" columnist, msnbc analyst eugene robinson. elise jordan, "time" columnist and adviser to rand paul's campaign. and my friend donnie back at the table. we've had a lot of conversations in private. let's not have them all on tv. >> the show has been great -- >> that was a great intro. >> seriously, you know, i think of all of us here you probably know trump the best personally. at a personal level, what is it about him that cannot do what i just said. who cannot say with confidence my victory was legitimate and i am going to be tough on russia?

>> two reasons. think of an inflatable doll. if you put a pin in it it will shrivel like this. his self-esteem is so fragile that any blemish, any wart, brings into question his totality. the other thing, instead of us sitting here going he is not asking about it, he is asking about it, he just knows where it's going to go. he knows the more you connect russian meddling and donald trump -- i've said many times that this all comes down to his financial dependency on very questionable russian characters in his real estate business. follow the money. that's what it's all about. he is not as concerned with the election. but the more you peel back the onion what's going to surface -- he owes. he owes exactly what he owes russia, how he owes them and how

that will undo him. >> eugene what do you -- gene. >> i am eugene. >> my tv husband. >> referenced scooby doo. >> i love scooby doo. glenn makes the point of how it gets to the core of what donnie is talking about, the legitimacy of his presidency. do you think we'll still have a denier in chief on bob mueller lays out his case? >> if we still have a chief. sure. i think donnie is absolutely right. i think there is something of a sort of primal challenge to him, to his person, to his authority, about just the fact that there is this investigation, and the fact that his crowd wasn't as big as obama's. it's -- there is something internal there. i think there is something external in that he doesn't want people delving too deeply into the arrangements of the -- financial arrangements of the

trump organization. he went through long periods, more than one but one in particular, where he didn't have any money. and there was no sort of, you know, domestic business model to keep him afloat, so where did the money come from? i don't think he wants people peeling back that onion. >> that's it. >> elise, is he surprised that the likes of glen and phillip and peter alexander covering him every day, that the scrutiny would be as hard as it is? he seems confounded by this idea that there is a press corps. these people go to work at the white house. their offices are under what used to be a swimming pool and they go to work there. the president seems so put off by the scrutiny. they're there because on a day like 9/11 you are the one that needs them. like the relationship with nato, he views everyone as putting him out but they're actually there to get a message out for the

country. do you think he has come to terms with any of the sort of efficiencies or the need to have a free -- to hear the white house press secretary reaffirming today that we are in fact for the first amendment. it was stunning! >> again, it all comes back to the ego. trump's needing to feed his ego constantly. he has had this decades' long issue with the press. it's a tortured love affair. he is his own fake publicist. calling reporters using his fake voice. >> glen, has he ever called you as his fake publicist? >> no. he would call reporters. when i was a reporter in new york city hall he would call all the time. i thought about this the other day. before i was covering the campaign i think my last interaction with donald trump was not returning one of his phone calls. >> oh, my god!

quickly. >> his accessibility and openness during the campaign when appearing on tv was a drug for him as a candidate. and on some level you wonder if he almost wants to be in front of the camera talking. and if he views -- i wonder if those within the -- if there is a camp in the white house that view the sean spicer daily press briefing as a distraction because we know the president is obsessed with the ratings that sean spicer gets. >> thank you guys for being with us. when we come back one senator says there is a good chance mike flynn is already cooperating with the fbi because they have him, quote, dead to rights on the false statement he gave them. democratic senators looking for the health care bill being crafted behind closed doors by republicans. georgia on the mind of democrats and republicans from coast to coast. partisans from both sides ready to spin the results in their favor. how much does it really matter and what will we know this time

tomorrow about whether or not trump is political baggage? garfunkel (instrumental)

[ snoring ] [ deep sleep snoring ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. seats seven, sleeps six. life's as big as you make it.

but we've got the get tdigital tools to help. now with xfinity's my account, you can figure things out easily, so you won't even have to call us. change your wifi password to something you can actually remember, instantly. add that premium channel, and watch the show everyone's talking about, tonight. and the bill you need to pay? do it in seconds. because we should fit into your life, not the other way around. go to xfinity.com/myaccount

i think there is a fairly good chance, just reading the tea leaves here, as a former u.s. attorney, that michael flynn is already cooperating with the fbi. it would be consistent with, first of all, that they have got him dead to rights on the false statement that he gave to the fbi in the white house. >> that was senator sheldon whitehouse acknowledging that ousted national security adviser michael flynn committed a crime by lying to the fbi. our panel is back with me on the

set. eugene, it strikes me as this is one of those washington stories that's been discussed privately now for months. >> yeah. >> but this was the first time when senator whitehouse said this on tv yesterday for the first time and this morning on "morning joe," publicly. >> it's been discussed privately but always in the context of has he or hasn't he. no one has known. i have never heard anyone come out and say, well, yes, it looks like or i think he is cooperating now. i am not a former u.s. attorney, so i don't have that experience to rely on. i -- and i don't know what other signs the senator is looking at that tell him that. i am not sure that i have seen those signs. so i don't know. maybe he knows something i don't know. >> i'm going to bring in julie davis, white house correspondent for the "new york times." this part of your beat. i thought what the senator was saying was that he had committed

a crime by lying in the first interactions with federal investigators about the contacts with kislyak, the contacts that he either didn't disclose or wasn't forthcoming about. i sought senator whitehouse was offering a legal analysis of where it could be. >> it sounded like educated speculation based not only on the fact that we know flynn did misrepresent his communications with kislyak and also now that there have been additional questions about other contacts he may have had that he didn't disclose including the trip to saudi arabia, his lobbying on behalf of turkish interests. i think what the senator was trying to say was that, because the evidence has mounted so much against general flynn that it wouldn't be a surprise given that we are not hearing from him publicly and he's sort of gone silent publicly, if he were cooperating. it may be that the senator has

more concrete evidence than that. he didn't share that. it seems like this is, as you said, sort of elevating what had been in sort of the rumor mill into a more educated guess by somebody who knows how these investigations work and how these things tend to unfold. >> elise, he also probably knows either in person or by reputation some of the members of bob mueller's team and a few of them are known for their agent to -- i don't know if flip is the term of art -- but flip a witness, get them to be more forthcoming by making some sort of arrangement with them. what's your sense for where the flynn part of the story is? >> i would look at flynn's personal history, in his previous firing with president obama. he became enraged after he was fired as the head of the defense intelligence agency, and some of his former colleagues said that something really shifted in the way that he behaved afterwards. and he was publicly trashing obama, every form that he could

go, you know, from television, op eds. his mission was to take a strong stance against president obama. in contrast, now he is being quiet but he is not someone who -- >> who finds peace. >> exactly. that is why educated speculation, perhaps, but it would seem to be in keeping with his previous firing. >> julie, i raise bob mueller. i want to show you something senator bob corker said to me this morning and ask you if you think anything is sacred on the other side of this. >> i think we need to keep supporting what's happening through the intel committee. >> what about bob mueller? do the republicans have to make it abundantly clear and get it on the record that they support bob mueller. >> i cannot possibly imagine the president terminating bob mueller. it's not even -- it's ridiculous to even consider or talk about. i mean, it's -- it just cannot happen. so let's put that aside.

if they even have ever discussed that, which i would doubt they have. but mueller aside, his investigation is going to go on. the intel committee, i think, is handling itself exceptionally well, and we need to continue to support their efforts. >> julie davis, 8:41 a.m. on today, i'm marking it on my calendar as the day that a very well respected republican senator said he could never imagine this president firing bob mueller. i -- i don't think it's going to happen. i don't have any reporting that suggests it's imminent but i can certainly imagine him wanting it to happen, can't you? >> i totally agree with you, nicolle. i wouldn't rule anything out. we know the thought has crossed his mind. whether it's a matter of him just venting his frustration at what he considers to be an investigation that's gone out of control, that's being conducted by a person and by a team that he thinks is sort of rigged against him and conflicted against him, or whether it's

actually a more serious discussion of how would we go about getting rid of him and can we actually do this. i tend to think it's more the former, just venting his frustration. we know this president does not much mind the idea of crossing lines that people like senator corker say are uncrossable and that it could never happen. i think the real question now is he has already tweeted that he -- he thinks this investigation is a witch hunt, that he thinks that mueller and his team is conflicted. what are they going to do about it, and it's not clear that there is anything he really could do short of removing him. >> julie, the last word on your piece on mark carollo. he is the last person on the inner circle that's disparaged the president. how did he get in? >> he is long time republicans communications operative. marc kasowitz needed someone to do pr. this is a big investigation.

the white house referring everything to outside the white house. they brought in a seasoned person for this. i actually don't know. the white house would not respond to me when i asked whether they knew about his previous tweets criticizing the president, suggesting that mueller was great and unimpeachable and criticizing jared kushner and ivanka trump, things that the president would have considered completely beyond the pale for anyone who was actually going to be working directly for him. i think in this situation we may have a case where the communication need is so great for someone to be outside the white house kind of fielding these barbs that they may have chosen to overlook what he has said about mr. trump in the past. >> julie davis, thank you for spending time with us at a time that i know is a busy one for you. we appreciate it. up next, what are they hiding? my friend rachel maddow last night described the gang of 13 as the united colors of benneton

men's chorus. they are deep undercover with the health care bill. when senator mcconnell brings the bill forward, there will be plenty of time to have debate. it's the senate. i am not going to get ahead of -- i'll let senator mcconnell determine the schedule and run the senate that he sees fit. liberty did what? liberty mutual paid to replace all of our property that was damaged. and we didn't have to touch our savings. yeah, our insurance won't do that. well, there goes my boat. you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. ready or not, here i come.ek.) ♪

anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. northrop grumman command and control systems always let you see the complete picture. and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us. before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. woman: for some, lyrica can significantly relieve fibromyalgia pain and improve function, so i feel better. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness,

weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica.

cr there is nothing happening in secret here. in the fullness of time we'll all see the product that we've been working on as a result of their refusal to work with us. >> that was senator john cornyn saying there is no secrecy surrounding the plan for the obamacare replacement. despite the fact that no bill has been seen. cornyn blasted democrats in 2010

for secrecy during the obamacare discussions. his tweet then, quote, the people have a right to know what's happening behind closed doors with secret health care negotiations. joining me senator richard blumenthal from connecticut. tell me how the democratic process around obamacare was different from this process that the republicans are undertaking now. >> as a matter of history, as you well know, the progress toward the affordable care act was marked by numerous hearings, extensive consultation with the republicans, and a lot of openness by the president in formulating that bill. it was a very painstaking and sometimes painful process because this stuff is complex, as the president himself has learned. now what we have is really, to say it's secret, is to, in a

way, underestimate how close-held this process has been. close-held from republicans themselves. a number of my republican colleagues have said to me they have no idea about the details. so it gives new meaning to the word "secrecy." senator corker was on "morning joe" this morning saying he hadn't seen it yet. he was no defender of the process. i want to ask you if the president is writing your rapid response for you. he called the house version of the bill mean. he called the senate version looking heart. might you have an ally in president trump in terms of beating down whatever is in these bills? >> it's kind of discouraging in a way because, what we should be doing is working together, building on the affordable care act, trying to improve it. he has labeled democrats obstructionist, even as he has said you are absolutely right that the house bill is mean, that the senate bill seems to be

going in a heartless direction. but it's no help to have him as an ignorant by sstander. he is not part of it himself. to be demeaning both the house and senate in this way, he should be playing a constructive role trying to bring us together. it's called leadership. >> and it affect's everyone's lives. you hope everyone on all sides takes it seriously. to russia's role in our election. were you troubled by the white house press secretary acknowledging today he has never talked to this president about russia's role in the 2016 election. on top of jeff sessions last week testifying he was never briefed on russian hacking and james comey testifying a few weeks ago now that, in all of those, i think he enumerated eight encounters with the president, that the president never once asked him to the russia investigation. what's your reaction to that?

>> i find it absolutely astonishing and appalling, really, incomprehensible and unconscionable. it's the old sergeant schultz, see no evil, hear no evil. clearly one of the most threatening of recent actions on the world stage recently has been the russian attack, literally, i view it as an act of war, through cyber, through hacking, propaganda, misinformation, and as a matter of national security, the president of the united states should not only be talking to the white house staff about it, he should be acting on it, he should be giving it priority, and as you have observed on this show and on others, there is no question now, it is incontrovertible that the russians attacked this country. we should be preventing it and making them pay a price.

we have agreed, unless they pay a price they'll do it again in 2018 and 2020. may not be the democrats next time. it may be the republicans. so we should have a bipartisan interest. the only question here is why they are so resistant to recognizing this national security threat, and i heard the explanation earlier on your show that emotionally he resists it because it seems to threaten the legitimacy of his election, but no one is insisting that it had an impact. the point is to prevent it from happening again before it does have an impact. i have to say that one of the reasons that they may not be talking about it in the white house is that there may be some knowledge that, in fact, there was collusion on the part of the trump campaign, that there was some aiding and abetting and cooperation and they don't want to talk about it because, in fact, that is under investigation and they don't want to be involved in a

potential allegation of conspiracy to obstruct justice very much under investigation now as well. >> senator, thank you so much for spending time with us. please come back anytime. it's a pleasure to have you. thank you. we'll be back on the other side of this break. phone with our allstate agent,

and i know that we have accident forgiveness. so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight- four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it.

p3 planters nuts, jerky and whaseeds.at? i like a variety in my protein.

totally, that's why i have this uh trail mix. wow minty. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein. the law that was written behind closed doors over there in harry reid's office. >> it was done with the white house, in a small room of just a few senators. >> leadership, worked behind closed doors, out of public view. >> written behind closed doors without input from anyone in an effort to jam it past the -- not only the senate but the american people. >> there is no conversation, and no one knows what's in this bill but one senator. >> oh, what a difference a few years makes. that was republicans expressing

their outrage at the way obamacare was crafted. joining our panel for the conversation is the president of the american action forum. former director of the cbo. former chief economist to the president's council of economic advisers. you also made me smarter in the final seconds before a press interview about anything policy related. make me smarter about what's worse for republicans today, the optics of how the senate version of health care is getting done or the substance of it, if you know anything about the substance of it? >> i think the optics and messaging are the big problem. if you step back and look at what came out of the house of representatives, it was a trillion dollar tax cut. if the republican had said we'd like a trillion dollar tax cut and reform two major entitlement programs every republican would have said, good idea. if they did it between january and may they would say this is a miracle. instead it's perceived as a

disaster. they have a big optics problem. in the end it won't be the senate closed door thing. it's the problem is the problem. they'll need messaging that says we are doing this because the number one problem is the economy. when they did the affordable care act it took too many of people out of the labor force, created an unstable budget am from. people have more money and we have fixes for health insurance. >> john boehner said you're never going to repeal obamacare, that you can't take something away once you have given it to someone. you were at the cbo during the passage of george w. bush's medicare part d. it was very unpopular. it got bad press. conservatives didn't like it. it created a new entitlement. i remember going to the president and saying i got beat up on talk radio and he said i don't care because no one will ever take this away. i don't care if it gets bad press. do you agree with john boehner that you can never take

someone's health care away or do you think republicans are really going to repeal obamacare. >> i understand mr. boehner's point. it's a serious political point. no doubt about it. i am enough of a numbers guy to know that, if you leave all the entitlements on auto pilot we seven years from now we have a big federal def yiicit. we better get smart and fix the programs one by one. medicaid, medicare, social security, affordable care act, this is america. we can't let the social safety net fall apart. that's back to the original problem which is they need to convince people these are good medicaid reforms. >> you made ads. you made people buy things they didn't want and need. >> you did that? >> slime bag titan. >> you can't make people -- like the old thing. you can't make a dog eat dog food they don't want. the president of the united

states called the house bill mean. he called this senate bill which no one has seen, maybe they got him a bootleg copy, looking heart. how do you make people do something they don't want -- people don't want to give up -- frankly, this involves people's lives and their kids' lives. >> i love our president now. with legislation. it's mean, silly, goofy. this is the way he describes things. i don't understand why they're trying to do it. you can't win with health care. it's a losing proposition. either well to do people help those that need it get it or those who need it don't get it. you can't win. as far as the optics, interestingly enough, let me push back a little bit having run a business. at some point in time in order to get something done, at least, maybe less people or one person bakes the cake and puts it on the table. it will get dumped on but i don't have a problem at some point with something -- you're

clearly, clearly not going to get bipartisanship on, going away, baking it and bringing it back. at the end of the day, no matter what you do with that cake it's a losing proposition. >> eugene. >> i agree. there is another thing about health care that is, if you own the health care issue, if you have -- here is our new health system, you're now responsible not only for anything that goes wrong with the system but anything that goes wrong with health care, period. i have employer health care. probably totally unaffected by affordable care act, ahca, whatever, but my premium goes up and i am mad. i am mad at you because you did it. you own everybody's health care. >> elise, why can't republicans get it right? they had all the years of the obama presidency to come up with their own alternative. spotlight was on them and i get it, they got stage fright. >> i think it fundamentally comes back to -- i agree with bine boehner. you can't roll back on

entitlement once it's in place. margaret thatcher couldn't do it. the senators need to be supportive of health care reform. what's their call going to be when it so directly affects so many men and women in their states? the problem is the president. [ laughter ] >> you know what, on that subject we have breaking news. our own peter alexander is reporting right now that jeff sessions is the latest member of the trump administration to lawyer up. donnie, does that surprise you? >> no. they're all going to have to, talking about some of our private conversations, you'll see a lot more people lawyering up. >> what kinds of people? >> i think, start to follow the real estate community right now in the sense of, i have heard from very reliable real estate sources that a lot of the top real estate firms that have been in business with kushner and trump have -- are preparing for inquiries from the justice department. they're in business with them. what you'll start to find out in the case of kushner, he is

incredibly leveraged on 666, which means he needed money -- >> say what 666 is. it's a big office building. >> what people don't understand is how levered they are. what i have been told from a lot of people -- >> what that means is how ind t debt they are. >> you own a piece of real estate and you use the equity to buy other real estate and you really don't own the building anymore but you're still responsible for the debt. thus a lot of people believe was the reason for the russian meeting. i am sounding like a broken record. it will go back to the real estate with trump, kushner and the russians. >> your paper has written about this a lot. follow the money seems to be -- >> it's always a good principle. i really thing that's the prong of the three-pronged investigation that has the potential to do the most damage to this administration. >> do you believe republicans are wise to have the back of bob mueller even if he stokes the ire and sort of invokes the rage

of this president? >> absolutely. i think you have to defend the integrity of these institutions. they know that. that's far more important than near-term politics. >> also, republicans who are defending the integrity of the process, it's not just that. for sheer optics and messaging, act like you have nothing to hide. that's a lesson that this president certainly cannot heed. >> doug, thank you so much for being here. please come back. up next, the high-stakes special election that could have major implications for both parties. we'll go live to georgia where polls close in less than three hours.

so that's the idea. what do you think? hate to play devil's advocate but... i kind of feel like it's a game changer. i wouldn't go that far. are you there? he's probably on mute. yeah... gary won't like it. why? because he's gary. (phone ringing) what? keep going! yeah... (laughs) (voice on phone) it's not millennial enough. there are a lot of ways to say no. thank you so much. thank you! so we're doing it. yes! start saying yes to your company's best ideas. let us help with money and know-how, so you can get business done. american express open. looking for a hotel that fits... so you can get business done. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over 200 sites to find you the hotel you want at the lowest price. grazie, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. (upbeat dance music) (dance music abruptly stopping)

(dance music starting then stopping) "america" by simon and is that good?strumental) yeah it's perfect. bees! bees! go! go! go! [ girl catching her breath } [ bees buzzing inside vehicle ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. with easy-access 3rd row. life's as big as you make it. [hissing] uh- i- [sound of wrench] [intricate guitar riff]

[engine starts] [guitar continues]

. as we've been reporting all day long it's special election day in georgia's sixth congressional district. what are you hearing? >> reporter: well, nicole, as befits the most expensive house race in human history nobody who i spoke to today woke up unclear of who they're going to vote for. people here have been inundated with tens of,000s of ads. now, of the voters i talked to i would say that osoft folks were more enthused about their votes than the folks vetting for cairn

handle. they didn't necessarily care who. but some of the other folks who have not had a democrat represent them in their district in their lifetime, were pretty fired up. here's some of the voters i talked to today. >> i'm seeing really grass roots efforts and support, so i believe we can flip it. >> the amount of money that's been poured into this is criminal from the perspective advertising doesn't do much for people. >> reporter: can a democrat win here? >> sure, sure. >> reporter: you think this one will? >> yes, i do. i do. >> reporter: so nicole, probably more than half or about half of the votes here have been cast today. it's been kind of rainy and gross here today. if you weren't already fired up to get out and vote nothing about today's weather is going to want to make you rush down to

your polling place. >> thank you so much. we'll be watching all night long. eugene, what do you think the stakes are for both sides? >> well, stakes are pretty high now because it's kind of become a referendum on the trump and trump agenda and things like that. and this is a really heavy lift for democrats. the thick has been changing, but it's been republican hands since 1928. so if they were to pull off this upset, it would be a big deal. the culmination of early voting and lousy weather today, i think it off sets a chance. without that, i would say it would go to him. trump went in with his tweets. one thing this house is good at is polling its base and taking

the temperature of its base because that's their whole political strategy. and those seemed like political tweets, not craze etweets. maybe i'm overthinking it, but it seems like the white house thinks handle is going to win. >> we're going to take one more break and be right back. re real. after five hours of spinning and one unfortunate ride on the gravitron, your grandkids spot a 6 foot banana that you need to win. in that moment, you'll be happy you partnered with a humana care manager and got your health back on track. because that banana isn't coming home with you until that bell sings. great things are ahead of you when your health is ready for them. at humana, we can help you with a personalized plan for your health for years to come.

he's happy.t's with him? your family's finally eating vegetables thanks to our birds eye voila skillet meals. and they only take 15 minutes to make. ahh! birds eye voila so veggie good i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma ...that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that is going to make his immune system evade the tumor. with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous.

and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard. i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now. welcome to holiday inn! ♪ ♪ whether for big meetings or little getaways, there are always smiles ahead at holiday inn. over hereno!ver here! (dog barking) whoever threw it has to go get it. not me! somebody will get it...

♪ (dog barking) anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. from the b-2 to the upcoming b-21, northrop grumman stealth bombers give america an advantage in a turbulent world. and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us. the president has spoken very clearly about how he, the first lady, and our country feels about the loss of this american. >> i want to bring in sumi terry

in our final moment. an attractable situation without a lot of good options. >> there were passtures the trump administration might engage with north korea, but with this it's out of possibility. i'm sure it's going to do maximum pressure against north korea, which probably means a travel ban of americans traveling to north korea, more sanctions. >> what is the fate likely of the three americans who are there? i understand their working quietly behind the scenes trying to ensure their safety. do we bring more international pressure to bear? what happens? >> i think there's going to be more pressure for the north korean region to release these americans. but i believe the problem is

north korea released this last american only because they knew he was going to die -- i'm not sure what's going to happen. >> does president trump's -- does that make you more optimistic? >> no, because all the other previous administrations have followed this approach trying to get china to deal with north korea. i'm afraid china is not going to follow through where and trump is going to realize -- in fact, i think mr. trump tweeted that saying you can try, but we can see you're not going to do much in reigning in north korea. you're going to be continuously disappointed by chain abecause china has a fundamentally

strategy when it comes to north korea 3467. >> we're going to have to come back and spend more time. >> absolutely. >> my thanks to you all for joining our panel today. that does it for this hour. "mtp daily" starts now. hi. >> if it's tuesday, somebody's voting somewhere. the music, and tonight that somewhere could have major national implications. tonight ticking down to final buzzer in georgia. >> yoofeel pretty good about the outcome tonight. >> will democrats finally put a win on the board or will republicans and lucy win one again? >> this is agenciy a jump ball. >> plus exactly how widespread were russia's hacking attacks? the topemra