new york. . trump takes on the special counsel. let's play "hardball." . good evening, i'm steve kornacki in for chris math fotm tonight. trump is throwing shade towards mueller, leading the campaign into the potential collusion with russia. if an interview with fox news today, president trump said he was bothered by mueller's relationship with james comey and some of the people mueller has been adding to his team. >> well, he's very, very good friends with comey, which is

very bothersome, but he's also, we're going to have to see. we're going to have to see in terms, look, there has been no obstruction. there has been no collusion, there has been leaking by comey. but there has been no collusion, no obstruction and virtually everybody agrees to that. so we'll have to see. i can say that the people that have been hired are all hillary clinton supporters. some of them worked for hillary clinton. i mean the whole thing is ridiculous, if you want to know the truth from that standpoint, but robert mueller is an honorable man and hopefully he'll come up with an honorable solution. >> and today sean spicer telling reporters the president has quote no intention of firing mueller, even though he does have the authority to do so. meanwhile the washington post out with a story today detailing the president's irritation with the endless stream of russia news quoting from the story,

frustration with the investigation stews inside him until it bubbles up in the form of rants to aides about unfair cable television commentary or as lights aimed at attorney general jeff sessions over rod rosenstein, a view of what they view as his fits of rage. his view has been more sour than they note he appears to have gained wake and the darkness around his eyes reveals his stress. he holds morning calls many days with his outside team to discuss the russia news the calls detailed by three senior white house officials are a part of a strategy consultation, in part presidential venting session, during which trump's lawyers and public relation guru review the latest headlines and battle his avowed enemieenemies.

and if some instances the president's own justice department overseeing the probe. more now, i am joined by msnnbc halle jackson and ashley packer, msnbc contributor david k. johnson, author of "the making of donald trump" and evan seg greed, author of "gop, gpx." halle, yesterday, the news was, donald trump was saying the interview, we played a cut suggesting he had been trying to send a message to james comey when he put that tweet out raising the possibility of having tapes. now he's commenting in this interview we played about this special counsel, about robert mueller, is the white house saying no intent to fire, he does have the right to do so, they're saying, what kind of message is he trying to send here? >> reporter: listen, that has been the right, you are right. that has been the consistent page from the white house on robert mueller, specifically. let me quickly update you on

news at this late hour. we now have the response from the white house to the house intelligence committee who as you will remember has asked for any relevant materials related to potential recordings that donald trump may have had of these conversations with james comey. the deadline was today, close of business. it is now what 7:04 at least here in washington. five minutes ago, we received that response. it was essentially a citation of his tweets yesterday that carefully worded language that some reports say was in fact signed off on the white house counsel's office to respond to what the house intellicommittee had been asking for. that's where it has come from the president, himself, that is what we have seen from day one in this administration. >> so if terms of this issue of firing, they are saying no this is a president who has fired an acting attorney general, who

fired an fbi director. how much wickle room is built into that statement? >> reporter: a little bit. right. you we heard they believe the president does reserve the right essentially. people serve at the pleasure of the president is the lean you we heard from the press briefing and white house officials over the last couple weeks. that said, we know what the procedures would be t. president would have to direct somebody else to do that to ultimately try to get rid of robert mueller. it seems as though at least at this point there is no intention. he also said he hoped the certainly counsel will come up with an honorable solution to all of this. >> in speaking of those tapes, president trump was asked today why he wanted james comey to believe there were tapes of their conversation. this is what he said. >> when he found out that i, you know, that there may be tapes out there, whether it's fostal tames or anything else and who knows, i think his story may have changed. you'll have to take a look at

that. because then he has to tell what actually took place at the events and my story didn't change. my story was always a straight story. my stare was always the truth. but you have to determine for yourself whether or not his story changed. but i did not change. >> it's a smart way to make sure he stayed honest in the hearings. >> well, it wasn't very stupid, i can tell you that. he was -- he did at mit what i said was right. if you look further ba back before he we heard about that i think maybe he wasn't admitting that. >> not entirely clear how comey's story has changed. sean spicer says the goal of the tweets to to keep comey honest. >> i think the president made it very clear, he wanted the truth to come out. he wanted everyone to be honest about this and he wanted to get to the bottom of it. the reality is he wanted to make sure the truth came out. talking about tapes made comey, in particular, think to himself,

i better be honest. i better tell the truth about the circumstances regarding the situation. >> actually, parker, you wrote this story, we were quoting a minute ago about what's taking place behind the scenes, the mov mood of the president, what people are seeing there, so in relation to this issue of the tapes, it looks like this grievance trump had in mind, fbi comey told him you weren't under investigation. he thinks he got him to say it. i don't know if that's true or fought. >> that seems to be where he is coming from on that. but in terms of your report, that sour mood, a more sour tan your associates, his friends can recall seeing, those venting sessions, give us a sense beyond this issue here of what he thought comey did to him, what itself the bill of grievances? what are the things he is venting about, in particular? >> sure. well, broadly, he is venting about russia, and he basically feels it is this dark storm

cloud that hangs over his entire administration. he is frustrated with the press coverage. he thinks the press automatically believes comey's side of things than his. he is obsess thad comey basically urged a friend of his to leak these memos to the media and comey's reputation hasn't been tarnished about that. she frustrated there is a special count sell. he is frustrated the special probe has been widened to include possible obstruction of justice. he is just generally frustrate thad this russia thing that started with possible collusion during election, which he says are not true not only will not go away seems to be snowballing by the day. >> david k. johnson, wlon p someo sworn /* /- someone who has win about him extensively. this mood that surrounds him, that is defining him now that emerges and ashley is reporting again. people around him say they haven't seen him this sour before.

what's your sense? this a side of donald trump that would surprise you to see? is it something you have seen before? >> i have said well before the election, well before he took office, donald's behavior over time would become more and more erratic, that's what you are seeing. he is not qualified to serve on city council. he has many responsibilities. even though he's let the responsibilities go, given the general decision over military matters, instead of controlling them directly. he has these burdens he has to deal with, issues he doesn't understand. donald is appalling le ignorant about the world. so he is lashing out. she used to be able to cowell journalists. he is not able to do that, tow. >> one of the details from the story from ashley is these phone calls that apparently take place every morning, trump, his legal team. they get on the phone, he talks about the headlines the idea what's sort of like punching the

pillow instead of lashing out at the world, they want him to be venting to his lawyers privately, get it out of his system. it doesn't sound like this basic combative nature, there is snow way for a political or legal professional to correct it. >> look at what happened a month ago, the last time he went out and vented on twitter. he went out and said comey should not hope, should hope there aren't any tapes about his conversation, it was a before there was any sort of testimony that was going on. >> that by comey's own admission triggered comey to go out and leak legally this unclassified memorandum which he wrote to himself to the "new york times." i think when you see donald trump go out and do it that way, that only causes more and more problems. republicans privately grumble every time he tweets and he doesn't tweet something that is actually main stream. i think one thing that howie just noted that the white house

will have problems with now is that the president or the white house is saying that the tapes don't exist and they're citing twitter. well, white house aids are saying tweets are just tweets. they're social media, they are confirming legal methods through a house committee that tweets are an official statement of the president in the white house. >> let me ask you what trump is saying in an interview, hey, look, i'm a pretty smart guy here, i 'ut this suggestion out in the air. i got comey to say i wasn't at that point through those memos under personal investigation. the flipside said because trump put that tweet out, he released his memos. it led to the special counsel, they are driving trump to the point of distraction right now. does trump look at this and say i screwed up here on some level or does donald trump look at this and say, yeah, i outsmarted the guy? >> well, in his own mind he may well be worried about how he

handled it. this is a basic tactic donald has used, delegitimize anybody coming after you, an opponent to yours or an obstacle you want to acheap. denigrate the people rung against you, ted cruz, lying ted, hillary clinton, if she were to win, it would have been illegal votes. and with comey, he is trying to suggest there is some improper collusion between mueller, between mueller and comey. notice he didn't just say they know each other ander thatfriend friendly. they're very, very good friends. this is his tactic of delegitimizing anybody that is not doing what he wants. >> on that front, you have few reporting on this tonight, this whole issue that donald trump has not been interested in talking about publicly, russian meddling, russian interference in the presidential election, take away this whole question discussed about collusion.

just in terms of actual hacking by russia in the future or for that matter hacking by any other foreign government, any oath other entity, there are specific stems that can be taken, learned about from the experience in the last election, your reporting is the administration hasn't taken kaen any of those steps right now? >> reporter: our reporting is there are new and urgent warnings about exactly that, steve the idea that issue old meddle in the next election, in the mid-terms in 2018 or the next presidential election, it seems a long ways off. we are told that is very short period of time when it comes to this big pick thing. let me break it down briefly, multiple current and former u.s. officials in the intelligence field have explained how russia meddled in the election, interfered in the 2016 election, it was through several ways like, for example, that fake flow of fake news rather on social media by propagateing other elements in our online

feeds by, for example, hacking and leaking embarrassing political campaign materials as well. there are specific steps that these officials are telling us should be taken in order to make sure that doesn't happen. there are real questions whether the trump administration is talking steps to do that. for example, key positions in the homeland security, not acting positions still remain tonight. we contacted every state and dozens of state officials say stay there had limited contact on election security and had some confusion about this dhs designation on what's called critical infrastructure. it felt like they were fought getting the information they needed from the department of homeland security. there was pushback. i will tell you when i asked sean spicer about it today, his response is we were sending a letter about sending data over to dhs. over to this election voting commission that the vice president is running to try to review the data and go inthis

thorough review as they put it. they hinted at possible hearings or public events coming up in july. so the point of this election commission, which by the way was created after president trump made this unfounded claim without everyday that millions of people voted illegally, they are pointing to work with tech companies to ensure the integrity of the system. one white house official tells me, some of the moves the public will see or fought see. let me leave with you this. i had a conversation with one official today who said basically what you did, forgive everything else, forget the special counsel investigation, the congressional investigation into this. the bottom line into this, will we be protected enough the next time? because as this warning, we are hearing again and again, russia will do it again. they did it once, it's coming. >> on that photo, halle jackson, david k. johnson, edmund zigfried, thank you for joining us. one day after republicans unveil their health care bill,

it is already on political life support. another republican senator coming out against it to say the one a moderate in a state won by hillary clinton. that puts the immediate future of the obamacare replacement plan in serious jeopardy. we will driv into that. new details about response to russia's meddling in last year's election. a big few report today about how vladimir putin, himself, directed the election hack. how president obama struggled with how to handle it last fall and no comey tapes, no problem for president trump who had a big week, at least with his base, which showed it is sticking with him. finally, the "hardball" roundtable is here tonight with three things i don't know. this is "hardball," where the action is.

. well americans say they believe former fbi director james comey over president trump. this according to a new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll.

45% say they are more likely to believe comey's version of events from his senate testimony earlier this month. 22% say they are more likely to believe the president. that's a 2:1 margin. we'll be right back right after this. hey you've gotta see this. c'mon.

no. 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. this bill is currently if front of the united states senate, not the answer. it's simply not the answer and i'm announcing today that in this form i will not support it. >> will not support the republican health care replacement bill in its current form. who was that? senator dean heller, a republican from fast. . and that is a critical, at least potential critical announce p. let's show you why. here's the deal. republicans introduces the plan, three is sort of the magic number here, if there are three defections from republicans, this bill will not pass the

senate. this bill will die. so yesterday when it was unveiled, the news was you had four of the most conservative republican, rand palm, ted cruz, mike lee, ron johnson, they said we don't like it right now. we need to see changes before we get on board. have you four on the right. now you have heller, he's a moderate relative to the rest of the republican conference. helder is from the only state, nevada, where republicans running for re-election that hillary clinton won. so here's the dilemma, if you are mitch mcconnell, if you want to change this bill, you want to make it more moderate, more acceptable to somebody from a swing state running next year, do you make changes that rec losing these guys on the right who said they need to see the ting go in the other direction. that's one of your dem mas, do you alienate too many of these guys, here's another possibility, let's say he says, i can't when re-election, if i vote for this i am against it, that would be one of the three.

let's say they lose rand paul a. lot of people say there are no changes that can make rand palm who is as close as a libertarian you have. there are no changes if you get him. >> that would be one, that would be two the key number is three, even if they got those others on board one more defection, could it be lisa murkowski? rob portman from ohio? a wild card, could a flake from arizona, cory gardner of colorado. if you get it one vote can sink it. the other thing is the politics of this, if republican dos succeed in passing this, if they do succeed in implementing it, take a look at this. it's the history of how parties pay a price for touching health care, three times, int '90s, hillary care, remember this, democrats had the advantage, a 48 point advantage when bill

clinton came to office over republicans on health care. then they propose what happened they called hillary care. in that 48 point advantage, they lost 39 points. it was fought popular. republicans won the congress in '94. then barack obama came to office. in that campaign if 2008, it was 31 points. obamacare proposed dropped all the way down to 7. now look what we are seeing. this is our brand-new pom. democrats had an advantage of 7 points at the end of last year's election. republicans put tear plan out, that democratic advantage more than doubled. just ten points, it jumped to 17 points. what's the seeming political message from this, if are you the party if power, it looks like you pay a political price, extremely sensitive issue. for more on the state of play, let's bring in a political reporter, benji the dilemma for mitch mcconnell, he has a

moderate. dean heller says i need changes. four on the right side saying we need to see changes. where does he make a play on this? >> well, he has a couple of options here t. best thing can you try to do is when over one side and isolate it to one or two senators to be under extreme pressure. no one wants to be the entire vote that held up this entire bill and the entire apparatus of right wing media and activists on all sides focus on you. the things that satisfy the moderates can antagonize the conservatives, so, for example, lisa purchasekowski, sue collins expressed concerns about abortion, reproductive health in the bill, like the funding planned parenthood, if you get rid of that provision, you will antagonize the conservatives for sure. similarly, they've expressed concern about people losing

coverage, medicaid cuts, senators rob portman have also raised issues with medicaid cuts, well, if you lessen the medicaid cuts, then you also antagonize conservatives, you potentially have to keep the taxes to pay for it. so are you if a dilemma no matter which direction you go. >> all right. thanks, benji, appreciate that. joined now here on set in new york by why vet, a congress woman in new york. she tweeted this, -- congress woman, i'm guessing are you against it. let me ask you this, though, bottom line, your party is the minority party in the house? >> absolutely. >> let's say we find mitch mcconnell this threads this bill. look ifitative gotten it through

the senate, is this thing as good as implemented? >> i hope not, steve. we know this is a major, major mean bill. it's going to take healthcare away from 23 million americans. we've bought the to sounds the alarm here. there is no time to play around with this. the republicans have decided that they're going to take this march into omight havion as i would say. and i think that americans need to mike sure that they make their references known now him we have no time to sit back an wait and see what happens. there is clearly a willingness on the part of the republicans to follow this path in trying to give donald trump a victory. and it's a loss for the american people. >> is there a bigger picture lesson to arrive at this moment, donald trump had to win the election, republicans had to win back control of the house in

2010. they had to get the senate in 2014. all of those things happened, all of those things were achieved by the republicans, at least in part by saying we want to repeal obamacare, enough voters at the elections did put them in office to do that. when you look back at it from the implementation from obamacare enactment to today, are there missed opportunities there for democrats that allowed republicans to do that? >> i think we had not touted as much as we should how this has revolutionized the way americans are able to access health care in america. >> do people make that connection? somebody receiving benefits? >> clearly that are. all of the polling indicates this is not popular with the american people right now. when you think of first of all the wealth transfer that is embedded in this. which is the real crux of what the republicans are trying to actually achieve, to take health care services away from seniors,

mothers, children, it's unfathomable that we would be in this place in the 21st century where we would actually leave americans high and dry unable take care of themselves and tear families, with respect to their health. to be able to give wealthy people who didn't ask for it a tax cut. i think that the american people are pushing being, they're pushing back real hard and we're going to encourage them to continue to make those calls, send those e-mails, come to washington, d.c. it's time for us to make our preferences known here. >> we have a minute left. i want to get you on the record on something else, an issue that's bubbled over over this georgia, republican candidate, won that in the wake of that some of your own democratic colleagues in the house, tim ryan most notably, a democrat from ohio, he challenged nancy pelosi for the leadership election. he lost soundly, he is saying,

there are others making noise saying, hey, nothing personal against nancy pelosi, but her association is so sort of coastal, liberal, elite, whatever you want to say, that it hurts our party trying to win districts like this 6th in georgia. do you think there is anything to that argument? >> listen i know tim real well, a lot of my colleagues, most of them, all of them, i would say that is not the overwhelming september isentiment of the bod. clearly, nancy pelosi has been a champion for people in the country and across the board we have to determine as democrats how we work together in unity to sound the alarm, to forge forward, to bring that economic message -- >> you are saying within the democratic caucus, are you saying you don't think she is in trouble? >> no, i don't. nancy pelosi has been a source of inspiration and strength. she has moved the agenda on health care, keeping democrats unified throughout her tenure,

and i believe that she will continue to do that, with the support of democrats in the house of representatives. >> all right, congresswoman why yet cla why w yvette clark. more response to the russian interference, this is "hardball" where the action is. but to help others, they first had to protect themselves. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®... to help keep me protected. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently.

warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. it's important to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know™.

>> dean heller says he will vote against the bill in its form t. senate is expected to vote on the measure next week. in china, rescuers are searching for more than 100 people from a landslide. so far two people have been pulled out alive. now back to "hardball." all right. welcome back to "hardball." it is no secret that president trump frequently cast doubts over findings that russia interfered in our election. >> knowing something about hacking, if you den catch a hacker, okay, in the act, it's very hard to say who did the hacking. with that being said, i'll go along with russia, it could have been china, it could have been a lot of different groups. >> look, i want to find out if

there was a problem with an election having to do with russia or, be i the way, anybody, anybody else, any other country. i want to get to the bottom if russia or anybody else is trying to tamper or play with our election. >> this woke, he continued the trend, tweeting bety way, if russia was working so hard in the 2016 election, it all took place during the obamaed a m admin, why didn't they stop him. >> in a stunning article that lays out the obama administration's struggle to manage the russian assault during the most toxic presidential campaign in memory. according to post, in august of last year, cia director john brennan alerted president obama and three senior aides, americans had championshiptured putin's specific instructions on the operation audacious objectives to defeat or at least

damage the democratic nominee. and elect her opponent donald trump. cia director kept it out of the president's daily brief, to guard against leaks, 20 meetings in the situation room followed the osama bin laden raid. for months, that i struggled to find and appropriate response, only to set on a modest set of sanctions issued late december, well after the election, for more i am joined by a congressional reporter for the washington post and a senior writer for the wall street journal. it's your paper that reported this today. it is a fascinating read. let me ask you the, though the bottom lean question i took away after reading this was how much of this how much of the agonizing that the obamaed a pipstration went through last fall and how much of the facts that the sanctions didn't come down until well after the election, how much is a simple calculation or assumption on the

part of the obama administration, you know what, hillary clinton got this election in the bag. let's not stir anything up until it's over, let's get through the election. >> i think there was that surprise when they woke up the morning after the election, wow, this is what we are dealing with now t. president and histomy did not want -- his team that they spinning a political can you lus to this. they went to to the gang of eight if congress. we reported mitch mcconnell wouldn't give it to them. they were coming out knowing by the fall they had to go et alone if the president was going to say anything publicly and draw attention to this. he could be accused of playing with an election if you do that. there was a lot of hesitancy on administration members. one of the senior numbers that was closer to this article says it's hard to explain from the time of the obama presidency. it's like we choked.

that's quite a significant admissi admission. but it's both the fact that maybe they thought clinton had it in the bag so they didn't need to muddy the waters. they were concerned how russians might retaliate if they did make a public statement and there was a third element important to recognize, it wasn't until the obama administration ordered the full review of what had happened, which is after the election, if they realized this was not just an episode, this was a piece of a campaign going on for a very long time and that's what was documented in that early january report in the intelligence community. it's like they had bliernsd on, they were aware of part of the story, not the entire vision to see the entire thing at the time. >> take us through exactly we know here, vladimir putin, himself, ordering this, oldering this for us a specific reason. the united states having that intelligence well before the election. putin's specific role. tell us what we know here. >> right, there has been

suppositions for a long time that something like this, this sort of campaign of hacking wouldn't have happened without the direction of the senior most levels of the kremlin. it's a small inner circle. that is vladimir putin. we have before this article had the actuals, the closest thing to a smoking gun you can get t. intelligence is coming from a russian source that it's that sensitive that they only showed to the president, a few of his advisers, they wouldn't let him sit with the paper, they have to hand it being. it goes straight back to the cia, so this is basically, it is closing that circle around was it actually ordered from the upper levels of the russian government from the russian president, himself. that's a significant thing. this plays in not just those allegations, that they were out there. but the fact that the president of russia had an interest in trying to sway who the president of the united states is going to be. that's pretty serious stuff if it went that far and frankly was this effective. there was not a response, a lot

of people would say there was not a response in kind that's the the criticism you keep hearing even to this they from democrats. we should have done more, said more, realized what a big deal this was, if the president knew, he should have been further out there. >> let me bring in on that question, i read the book "shattered" recently about the hillary clinton campaign, towards the ends of the book, they report hillary clinton, herself, was a little perturbed after the election when she learned the extent, some of the extent of the obama administration's knowledge before the election of what russia and what putin were up to. if you are hillary clinton and you are reading this story today in the washington post, do you look at this and do you have a justifiable grievance maybe with the obama administration for not doing more? >> i imagine she is probably pretty upset about i. remember, too, hillary clinton has come out and said she does think the outside forces impeded her election, including jim comey

coming out and reopening the investigation i think she should have a lot of cause for concern about this. one thing the post story does capture is this idea that it wasn't until later on they realized what they were dealing with in this full spectrum campaign. one reason i think that's troubling. i'm not putting back the pieces that went back a few years ago it is not unknown that russia was hacking into the white house and getting into unclassified systems. one of the things that this article really keys in on is why did it take them that throng to put all of these pieces together to really understand that what was happening in the election, which, of course, was few, new, was it hard to put this as a pattern of behavior by the russian government to compromise government systems in the country. >> that's my other question, i'm curious if you have insight into

this. one of the items mentioned here in the article is james clapper last summer had a long history of russia meddling in american election, now, obviously not the nature of what we saw last year. what was that history and should that have alerted everybody sooner? >> certainly there was a long history of the russian government interfering in u.s. affairs, trying to successfully hack into sensitive systems. i think what it seems to me and from my own reporting too, people were surprised by is the idea that the russian government would turn these e-mails around and put them out there as a part of a campaign to start a trickle of information or to then start disinformation. >> that fact to me is also surprising, because those intelligence officials like jim clapper know well the russian government and other governments use these tactics. they were aware they were using them in europe in some instances as well. it shouldn't have come as a

surprise, it appears all these pieces were not put together in time. i think there the a lot of emphasis here to place on this very question of whether or not the obama administration wanted to be seen as tenning the scales. from my own reporting in talking to firm officials, that was something holding people back this ideas if we come out and say it's the russian, we're giving the russian what is they want. which is to fan anxiety about the lack of competence in the election. >> right, fascinating. an absolutely fascinating story. the weekend is here if you, didn't see it today, i encourage people to check that one out. thanks, to both of you for joining us. appreciate that. up next, health care is coming to a head. that republican plan is on the ropes in the senate. can mitch mcconnell find a way to get it passed? will it fail? if they do get it through, will republicans pay a price for it? are you watching "hardball."

zplmplts

all right. welcome back to "hardball" as we mentioned, we are a few days away of the floor bill. mitch mcconnell can only lose two people and five republicans have come out against it at least tentatively. let's turn to our "hardball" roundtable. ben white, chief correspondent with politico. national politics for "news week." let me start with you, i'm curious the dynamics in the senate. have you four conservatives led by rand paul. a lot of people are saying rand paul cannot be won over. if that's true, that itself one of those three off the table. now you got dean heller with an entirely different set of demands coming out t. dilemma from mcconnell if you placate

keller, do you lose the ones on the right, is there a way to thread in needle? >> there could possibly be a way to thread this needle. i don't think mitch mcconnell knows how to do that. it's a different party factioned for years. they're republicans in name only, you have susan cal lynnes and murkowski they haven't come out as a firm no. they have their own moderate issues. you have several other senators either saying i need to read the bills i haven't read the bill or they're saying it's too early to vote. >> murkowski made some comments that suggest to me unless x happens i won't vote for it. i can't see x happening. >> a lot of the people they have to placate is about medicaid and who wants to take away the health care from their constituents and can you survive the next re-election bid. iffure opponent says you took away health care from millions in the state, how do you explain

that? that's the thing i don't think republican versus yet to figure out. >> and the other issue, you showed this at the top, you go back 20 years, three times the party if power has taken a pass as the health care system. the party could pay a price. >> they can pay a huge price. you did a piece that showed the price the clinton administration went after health care. the obama administration took a hit. i think they're much better off politically if this fails and they move on to tax reform and does something that might boost the xi a bit. it feels like the house side, there is this balloon of health care, if you press one side, you lose more moderates leak heller, you press the other sides, you lose rand pauls, i think pence has the tie breaking vote they pass it. that's my feeling on it. >> the point was, i we heard this argument put out there, republicans would be better off

politically if they go through the motions, tell tear base and try to do it t. republican base has spent the last seven years saying you got to get rid of obamacare, can they go back to back to their base and try. i think they're going to try, and it gets cover for the white house. this was a good week for trump. there weren't any gaffs. there was a lot of attention on the congress. it gave his staff time to lawyer up and interview lawyers for the coming investigation. i think they are -- they're going to run it through, and they'll try. when they lose, they'll go back and say they tried. that is a win for them. >> all right. it looks like the aim right now is to vote next thursday. this is obviously a fluid situation. we have to squeeze a quick break in. the roundtable is staying with us next when i ask about this week in trump. i-

[sound of wrench] [intricate guitar riff] [engine starts] [guitar continues]

former president barack obama is weighing in. he will be returning to the campaign trail. set to hit the kpaen trail for the democrat running for the governor of virginia. ralph northam. the other is in nnl new jersey. be right back.

>> we're back. the president's job approval rating, 40%.

i guess it's a weekend questionnaire, but 40% we would until normally say a zbas disaster. he is saying, look, you put the issue to the vote in that district in go georgia. doesn't look like my party lost much ground. his party won it by four points in this one. zroo by trump standards this was a good week for him. he was able to get health care -- this bill written. they won georgia. his supporters who he really cares about, they're sticking with him where. >> russia hangs over all this. >> we call it a great week for him because he didn't fire the f.b.i. director or release a great bombshell on the russia investigation. he won georgia. big deal. it would have been a terrible embarrassment if you lost it. we're defining good weeks now. >> it's the nba play jofsz. win the home court. you were making this point last block, though. the standard for what a good week is. >> the bar is low, and it's -- it gave his staff time to lawyer up because that's what they have

to do. they're interviewing private lawyers. >> quick break here. another quickie, i promise. on the other side, the roundtable is back with us. three things i don't know. they're going to each tell me one. this is hardball where the action is. she's nationally recognized for her compassion and care. he spent decades fighting to give families a second chance. but to help others, they first had to protect themselves. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®... to help keep me protected. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem.

it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. it's important to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. there's more to know™.

this is going to be the shorter segment of the day. tell me something i don't know. >> tax reform can be written in secret because republicans like the way this bill worked out. >> speaking of tax reform, the board adjustment tax is dead, so that's $1 trillion republicans need to find to make tax reform revenue neutral. very hard. >> nina. >> a russian phrase i just learned.

it means useful idiot. >> ben white, nina, thanks for stopping by. that is hardball for now. the rachel maddow show starts right now. the washington post today dropped this huge story. it's more of a small book really about the russian attack on our presidential election last year and how the obama administration came to recognize that that was happening, what they understood about it, and importantly, how they reacted to it once they realized what it was. in just a moment, we are going to be joined live by one of the reporters who broke that story. >> it's ten front page worthy scoops. among the scoops the washington post got for this report is that u.s.