distinction that you have to distinguish between russia's involvement in our election system and collusion. they are not identical. we can address the former while investigate the latter. >> flynn, kushner, stone, go all the way down. it seems it moves from suspicion to conclusion. something is going on. they're covering up something. >> that final last word. >> thanks to our guests. i'm nicole wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck. >> hi, nicole. >> it's wednesday. >> i thought it was thursday. >> tomorrow is not friday. >> if it's wednesday, when did bipartisanship become such a dirty word? tonight the tremendous divide.

>> we had a tremendous meeting, the republican senators met on health care. >> could there be a bipartisan solution on health care? >> i would sit down with them in a heartbeat. they don't have the license to do that from mitch mcconnell. >> i have said all along since they talked to the democrats from the beginning. >> or is there any chance the republican party could successfully go this alone? >> if we don't reach agreement by friday, it probably the end of a sole party effort for health care. >> not this friday. >> and later, the war on the press. >> i think that we have gone to a place where if the media can't be trusted to report the news, then that's a dangerous place for america. >> the white house's obsession with attacking the media. this is m"mtp daily" and it starts right now.

>> good evening. i'm chuck todd here in washington. welcome to a hump day edition of "mtp daily" and welcome to american politics where the idea of bipartisan is actually now a threat. yesterday senate majority leader mitch mcconnell essentially dared republicans to torpedo the party's health care legislation, which would leave them no choice but to have to work with democrats. now he's facing a growing chorus of republicans publicly saying that's not a threat, that's a great idea. >> i have said all along that i thought we should talk to the democrats from the beginning. >> i'm hearing a lot more people talking about working across the aisle this morning. is that something you're interested inni doing? >> it certainly is. it's what we should have done from the beginning. >> first you repeal the disaster of obamacare and after that we should --

>> would you be a proponent of trying to work across the i'll to make fixes as opposed to saying we have to start over? >> absolutely. this is not for republicans to fix or democrats to fix. this is for us as americans to fix. >> if for some reason it fails, the flood gates would probably open to reach a bipartisan compromise. >> and there's a growing chorus of democrats also spanning their ideological spectrum, publicly saying they joined the negotiations if truly invited. >> i can tell you myself as one moderate conservative democrat with many other moderates want to sit down and work with our moderate republican friends to fix and repair the affordable care act. >> i would sit down in hea heartbeat. they don't have the license to do that from mitch mcconnell. >> have a discussion on a bipartisan basis and maybe come

up with practical solutions. >> we're willing to debate and compromise on health care but we have to be included. president trump, my republican friends, the choice is yours. >> at this point can republican leadership ignore what appear to be truly growing calls for some form of bipartisanship compromise? the message from leadership today was essentially we're going to try. >> i think we're going to get at least very close and i think we're going to get it over the line. >> senator schumer said he'd like to come down and have all 100 senators come in and talk health care. would you be willing to negotiate with all of them? >> i have to find out if he's serious. he hasn't been serious. he just doesn't seem look a serious person. >> we'll continue working so we can bring legislation to the floor for debate and ultimately a vote. we cannot afford to delay on this issue. >> it's interesting, mcconnell and trump sticking to their guns wanting to do this one party. back in 2010 there were familiar

faces slamming democrats for overhauling health care with what they said was a partisan vote. >> in one with of the most divisive legislative votes in history, democrats decided to go the partisan route and blatantly ignore the will of the people. >> they wanted to pass it with their 60 people. if republicans had been included, there may have been space for common ground. >> would you support any effort to work across the aisle? >> tell me, who can you work with over there? i personally think we'll get everybody together and be able to do this. we have to. if we don't do it, we're going to have socialized medicine, that's all there is to it. >> on the other side of the aisle, which is more likely, that senator schumer wants democrats to work with o'connell to make trump care great again

or he wants the issue in 2018? folks, welcome to washington where the idea of bipartisan ends up dividing the two parties. joining me now is senator mike rounds, republican from south dakota and former governor. i think that matters because governors have been weighing in a lot. >> welcome back to the show. >> thank you for the opportunity. >> senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said make some changes. we're hear they're hoping to make the changes fast enough so the bill gets sent over to the congressional budget office before you guys leave town this week. can this be just tinkered with in order to win over either the skeptical conservatives or skeptical moderates? is it a small tinkering here or do you need to do something bigger? >> we know now the plan in its current form would reduce premiums by about 30% over the current projected law by 2020.

we've made some strides. included in it are some major changes to medicaid that would begin to bend the cost curve but we do have some changes that we'd like to make. our goal isn't just to pass something, it's to pass something which long term is the right thing to do. we'd like to be able to provide insurance coverage for as many people as possible, but we'd also like to make sure we're not simply dumping things on states, whether they did not expand or if they did expand. and part of that is equalizing what each state could expect to receive in terms of federal participation in the medicaid program over a longer period of time. that's no easy to do or it would have been done already. >> i want to read you a critique from the health care bill. you're going to assume it's coming from somebody from the left but it comes from a conservative columnist from the post. he writes "let's be clear, the investment tax and medicare surcharge on obamacare are a drag on economic growth but if

republicans want to to eliminate them, they should do so with broader reform and changes in the tax code, anything but medicaid cuts for the poor. paying for a massive tax cut for the wealthy with cuts to health care for the most vulnerable americans is morally reprehensible. again, i'm not quoting paul krugman here. i'm quoting former speech writer for george w. bush. what do you say to that critique? >> that could have been a quote from members within our own conference, me included. it's one of the areas that we've discussed making changes on. i do give the leadership a lot of credit because they had that scored and now we know what that is, just in terms of the investment taxes being repealed. that's $172 billion over a ten-year period of time. if we decided since it doesn't impact people under $200,000 in income, if we decided we were not going to repeal that obama

era tax, we would have $172 billion available that we could reapply back in to perhaps fix some of the issues that have been of concern to people around the country. so i think that's on the table. >> interesting. >> and one of the items we share here -- i give leadership a lot of credit. if we hadn't scored that and laid that out separately, we wouldn't know how much we have going forward. it's one more bit of information that's very important to the senate. that's what this is about. this is policy driven. we really want this to be a good policy change for a lot of people out there. that's what we're after. >> let me ask you this, how can you be convinced can you do a good policy change with one party making the policy? a lot of your colleagues look at this, ron johnson is one of them that says, okay, the democrats did it in a partisan way, now republicans are doing it in a partisan way, then everybody will fail and then finally everybody will come to the table

together. the fact is you have colleagues that would like to do a bipartisan deal but mitch mcconnell presented the idea as a threat, not an idea. what's going on here? >> well, first of all, we know that the dems since 2009 have lost the house, the senate, the presidency. they've lost a lot of governorships and a lot of statehouses. they see that and recognize that. they know what we did to them when they put them in place themselves. now they're looking at this saying you're talking about repealing and republic placesla we've drawn a line in the sand when you say repeal. they've drawn a sand to make us feel what we felt. second of all, i really think once we done the tough work here of making the repeal for the vast majority of these taxes and changing some of the market driven issues that have not

allowed obamacare to be successful, i think there's a very large group of republicans and democrats that will come together and make other very substantial changes over a period of several months. for right now i think politically they'd love to see us twist and squirm for a while. >> and you don't want to call their bluff? >> no, i think it -- in this particular case they've made it very clear that as part of their conditions, we're not going to be able to repeal a lot of what's in obamacare. >> you haven't opened the door. when you made the decision to do reconciliation, that's shutting the door. that wasn't an invitation to work with you. >> not necessarily. what it is is it says we're going to get it done. a lot of what obamacare did was through reconciliation as well. but that doesn't mean that we can't and once again, you can pass reconciliation with 75 votes but you only need 51. so if there was an interest in putting something together, i think that would still be available, i think it would still be on the table. we'd love to see it.

we have to be practical as well. they'd like to see us try and do it and they think if we're not successful, they've won politically. second of all, they could step in. in the meantime, if we are able to do this, i think there's an opportunity to make other changes that they would like as well. >> senator mike rounds with interesting news here that maybe some of the taxes could remain in place, not all of them but some of them. senator, thanks for coming on. >> you bet. >> let's go to the other side of that aisle. i'm joined by democratic senator tom carper of delaware, a member of the finance committee. welcome back, sir. >> thanks, chuck. i'm a recovering governor, too. barely recovered. >> most of you i think wish you still had the title is what i've learned over the years. you know, one of the other things i had my researchers do, i said tom carper, that's a guy who is always involved in all

the gangs in the senate, i mean that as a compliment. we have the gang of 20, the gang of 16 in 2009, dealing with a bunch of issues, gang of ten focused on health care, a gang of six in 2011 on deficit reduction. you've always been somebody that is participated if there's been seven republicans and you're one of the seven democrats or vice versa. where is that this time? i've been waiting for a group of you, maybe five on the left and five on the right that you buck schumer and mcconnell and say enough is enough. why hasn't that happened? this is the senate. it's not the house. >> i might be mistaken on this, chuck, but i think it's starting to happen now. we have reached a point where i think we can hit the pause button. it's clear that the republicans didn't have the support for what they've come up with. and what i've been doing is reaching out to republican senators, i've been reaching out to republican senators and also

to republican governors. and i sense a real interest in reflects what i here coming back from around the country. folks want us to work together and find common ground. as it turns out, there's quite a bit we can find common ground on. we can agree with president trump, for example, when he said let's provide better care for less money, cover everybody. unfortunately what the republicans offered is worse care for more money and didn't cover everybody. i think the piece that you read from the former speech writer for george w. bush really said it all. >> i really feel the problem that you're going to have -- i tack you at your word. i'm aware of the bipartisan outreach you've done on this issue specifically, but there really seems to be a trust issue between mcconnell and schumer and a trust problem between i'd say the trump white house and democratic leadership. is that a divide that can be

bridged by a handful of you? >> i think day one chuck reached out and extended the olive branch. it's a much better relationship that existed with mitch and harry reid. chuck can work with almost anybody. i think they're building a better personal relationship and that is good. is this a time to hit the pause button and go to work and figure out areas that we agree, and other ideas, good ideas. or do we just hit the pause button and say we'll come back and see new two weeks. let's go to work on some of the ideas that are good ideas and their good ideas and at the end of the day, we want to say you've got to get worse coverage so that we can provide tax cuts to those who really don't need tax cuts. >> color me skeptical about

whether the democratic base would allow some outreach here. you've got hillary clinton that called the gop the death party over this bill, you've got elizabeth warren that's gone on the senate floor and called it blood money at times. to some that is incendiary rhetoric. but also, the base of the party, they're not in the mood to compromise with anything trump. is there a lot of will that's anything centrist? >> what i think we should do is preserve those pieces or parts of the affordable care act that ought to be preserved, fix the ones that should be fixed. there are some things we can change and we ought to change. the reinsurance proposal that tim cane and i are offering will stabilize the marketplaces and ensure better competition and

more insurance companies participating and as a result lower premiums, lower co-pays and deductibles. that ought to be a bipartisan agreement. and there are others as well. >> as you know, there is a growing chorus of democrats that would like to see the party just move to single payor, campaign out of tim ryan, rising potential, leader someday in the house, elizabeth warren has talked about this. if republicans try to go this alone and they succeed in passage and we'll find out later how successful it is as far as the public is concerned, do you think the entire democrat being party sort of starts rallying around the idea of single payor or does the democratic party say no, no, no, let's preserve obamacare? >> what we want to preserve are -- with respect to single payor, let me put my governor hat back on. i worked a lot on welfare reform

reform. rather than testing an idea on the whole country. we've learned to test ideas, good ideas or not good ideas, on the states. those interested in the single payor, that might be an approach we try in a couple of states. see how it works. maybe it's a good idea. maybe we shouldn't do it at all. >> but you're not ready to experiment on the federal left yet is what you're saying? >> states right from our creation as a country. great laboratories in democracy. let use them. >> tom carper, a frequent gang member and that's not a critique when it comes to the united states senate. thanks very much for coming on. >> thanks so much. >> we'll see you later this sunday alongside your colleague louisiana senator bill cassidy. the two of them will be on together to talk about health care. more on the fate of health care. and later the white house's obsession with attacking the press. this is a story about mail and packages.

and it's also a story about people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you

well commonwealcome back. we' we've heard quite a lot about russian attempts to intrude in elections and today in european elections to get a better grasp worldwide and to find any lessons the u.s. could learn going forward. >> facing down russia's activity is no longer just a bipartisan issues. to successfully protect the integrity of our electoral systems, we must move as a global community. >> all of the experts agreed who was personally behind russia's meddling. >> do you have any doubt that russian interference is driven by putin himself? start with you, ambassador

burns. >> no doubt about it. >> ambassador? >> the same answer, no doubt. >> no doubt. >> none. >> we'll be right back. let's dance grandma! and you're not going to let anything keep you sidelined. come on! that's why you drink ensure. with nutritious calories 9 grams of protein, and 26 vitamins and minerals. that was the best one ever! giving you the strength and energy, to get back to doing what you love. and finish! from the number one doctor recommended brand... ensure, always be you.

health care is working along very well. we could have a big surprise with a great health care pack e package. so now they're happy. >> what do you mean by big surprise? >> you could have a great, great surprise. >> that was cubs manager joe madden over the president's shoulder. the president made those remarks after a meet and greet with the chicago cubs at the white house today. let's get straight to tonight's panel to talk all things health care. >> national political reporter for political and chris clayton, our friend from the midwest, and in d.c. today doing a little -- worrying about how nafta and trade impacts ags.

eliana, let me start with you. you have a growing chorus of republicans desperate from cover and mitch mcconnell and donald trump not ready to cave. >> it's an interesting situation. i don't actually know where the president stands on this. he's been -- has barely been involved at all. i think we saw the totality of his involvement in the senate process in that bill. mitch mcconnell's role is somewhat confusing to me. he hadn't even begun negotiations with the senators who aren't on board with in when he pulled the bill or rescheduled the vote yesterday, which is somewhat puzzling. the three most difficult senators to get on board with this, susan collins, rand paul and dean heller of vaed, they e they're going to have to get two of those three. you can't put the puzzle together without the conservatives, ted cruz, mike lee and so on. which one of those three they're going to have to get, they're going to have to do some

negotiations. >> but what i've been trying to figure out, is this bill going to move to the right or the left? where is it going to go? i've been convinced it was going to go to the right and then mike rounds hinted that some of these tax cuts, they're all uncomfortable with essentially the construction of tax cuts with medicaid cuts, like we don't want to do that. >> i thought it was going to go more to the right as well given how the senate is set up, who is in obvious office, the fact that republicans have all this power but i think the fact that democrats are even playing with the idea, being able to go on your show and say they would be willing to do this. to me it's surprising to do this. they're facing a base that is so anti-trump and angry at trump that any democrat that says, yes, i want to work with the republicans on this bill, is really i would say putting their neck on the line. if you face any kind of reelection in your district, i don't think that you can get re-elected by saying i helped the democrats get away with repealing obamacare. i just don't think that it's

feasible for most of the democrats that are going to be there. you imagine the democratic primary, even if it's in 2020, it's so long ago, you're going to be standing on the stage saying you helped health care? >> i agree. what's the expectation of the midwesterner. in some ways in rural america, they didn't look obamacare. but you made the point -- what they didn't like, they liked the coverage, they didn't like the cost. have the republicans not heard the criticism correctly? >> in some sense they have, though, because in a lot of states you're down -- you have one provider left or some places you have none. you have very limited number of health care options with that provider, if maybe your doctor, your old hospital is not part of that network. so there's been a lot of scale back of coverage. you're down to one providers

right now and that one company is debating about pulling out. the smaller states where you don't have the big base of population, it is a real struggle to keep both an insured or hospital or network coverage going. >> he to me represents the conundrum for the republicans. their base lives in rural america. they felt as if obamacare hasn't provided the promises they made. at the same time, it's not that they want it to go away and some of the reform might make it go away. >> some policy wonks said it would have been great to know this foive years ago. republicans are not that comfortable talking about health care and not that knowledgeable about it. this reveals many of them, all of them campaigned on repealing obamacare. this leaves the form, you know, the base of it in place because they're not serious about taking it all away. it would be too politically

painful. that's why i do think that conservatives will get on board in the end and call it an obamacare appeal, even though it not quite that. >> i guess i'm trying to figure out how this ends. i think mcconnell has a limited amount of patience but i'm sitting here thinking if they're they're keeping taxes in place, i don't know if conservatives can sign on to that and, number two, how can that pass the house? >> i think that's the conundrum that has not been solved. i don't think there is an answer to this. but the idea that republicans understand that it going to look really, really bad if two things happen, either one, they do nothing and it fails completely and they move on and say we're going to get tax reform or infrastructure done, i don't think they can do that. two, it's going to look really bad if they make all thee --

these massive cuts to medicaid. they doesn't just pay for people when they have a cough. they pay for opioid coverage, for veterans' coverage. they can't just cut medicaid and say that they helped tax reform. >> this is where the republican governors play an interesting role. especially in the midwest. >> yes, and medicaid in rural america is huge. medicaid subsidizes the employers. you have a lot of small employers, you have a lot of people paid fair lily low wages rural america. medicaid subsidizes those employers with insurance basically. >> you're say they go can pay low wages and be thankful medicaid's paying their benefits. >> that's exactly right. if you start dabbling and who is eligible for medicaid, you're

taking a lot of people in rural america -- >> sounds like you also hurt small business. >> you hurt small business. i can't work for you anymore. my wife needs this insurance coverage. >> i'm going to pause it there. thank you. you're going to stick around for the rest of the hour. still ahead, another ransomware attack and they used tools created by our nsa. do we have a duty to stop this cyber exploitation. and tomorrow, stephanie ruhle with a one-on-one with economic adviser gary cohn. that's tomorrow at 9 a.m. keep it here. meta appetite control...

it's your glass of willpower that helps keep cravings... ...far, far away. feel less hungry with the natural fiber in clinically... ...proven meta appetite control. from metamucil.

edible arrangements for summer. order in store or online. 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™.

>> the 12th annual aspen ideas festival is in full swing. stay tuned for a special edition of "hardball" live from aspen. 7 p.m. eastern, right here on msnbc. but right now it's time for hampton pierceon and the cnbc market wrap. >> tech stocks rebounding, banks surging, helping the s&p post its biggest gain in two months. the dow jumped 143 points, s&p

up 21, nasdaq gaining 87 points. shares of jpmorgan chase and goldman sachs both rose more than 1%. pending home sales fell for the third straight month. mortgage applications also fell 6% last week. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide.

welcome back. hackers have yet again crippled businesses and banks with a globe sweeping cyber attack. the attack originating in the ukraine is similar to what we saw a month ago with the so-called wannacry malware. both use methods that come from a national security agency database. these were developed by the agency and happy to be made public in april by a group of hackers called the shadow brokers. as variations of these tools

spread, the nsa's digital break-in could mean the onslaught of cyber weapons could just be getting started. and the ukrainian got a taste of that as well on tuesday. this latest attack locked government accounting software and demanded ransom from customer attempting to withdraw cash from the country's state-owned bank. why hasn't congress put a little more pressure on the nsa to step in and deal with this stolen cyber toolkit? head of the counterterrorism center, you know how this stuff works. welcome back, sir. >> good to be here, chuck. >> it seems to me a bit problematic that people break into the nsa, these are tools created by the nsa. in essence, it our own weapons being used against us. number one, were we wrong to make the weapons, and number two, do we have a responsibility

to step up and help the world deal with this? >> i don't think we were wrong to make the weapons because i think the weapons can still be used for good and not just bad. but if you make the weapons, you clearly have at least two responsibilities. one, keep those weapons secure. and regrettably the nsa fell down on that part. second, you at least have the responsibility once they get out to make sure you are doing everything times a hundred to prevent them from being effective tools for the bad guys. i think the nsa has worked closely with technology companies like microsoft that are responsible for some of the vulnerabilities, but the problem is the nsa once of weapons are out there can't go out and protect everyone. we're seeing that the u.s. government can help, in this case has a huge responsibility to help but it can't do it all. >> you say you're defending the practice of making them. why? >> i am because i think some of those tools are exactly the same tools that are used to collect

really critical intelligence information and that information might be about iranian nuclear weapons or north korean nuclear programs or russian intent in the ukraine. all of them are criminal tools to getting into computer systems and collecting that intelligence that our policy makers decide on. but you've got to make sure they're secure. the gun shop owner if he's going to sell guns, he's got to guard them. he may not be responsible for the crime if somebody gets a gun and robs somebody but he sure is responsible to make sure they're safe. >> it seems to me we're dealing with a controversy and scandal that has to do with russia, using their cyber weapons against us. when we use it against them, is that not a tacit per miss slip

th -- permission slip that this is above board? president trump will say this is tit for tat and that's why he doesn't take this seriously. >> i think that's absolutely true. as the nsa uses these tools, we expect our adversaries will use other tools against us as well. it's up to us to use all our offensive power, and the power of the president's bully pulpit to make clear some things, electoral systems, critical infrastructure, should be off limits. >> obviously what's been interesting here is the first people to use these stolen nsa tools have been essentially 21st century bank robbers. don't know what else to call them. the old west, you'd call them bank robbers. they're doing things -- they're holding ransom. seems like a lot of companies are paying. and how much does that impede

the ability to stop this? >> i think the interesting thing here is they may be bank robbers and they may not be. >> we don't know who either? >> i don't think we yet know. ransomware traditionally is the bank robber. give me money, you can have your data bank. in this case there are some signs that point to doing it not just for monetary reasons but for political reasons. but the targeting of ukraine, usinging a ukrainian path sugge this might have a political path as well. there's money to be sent. i can't necessarily blame companies. had they do a cost benefit analysis when they say i could pay $300 and get my data back, i'm not worrying about it, i

need my data back. >> when you were in government, the last thing you would have wanted was a private company to pay ran sosom. disney, we don't know they paid a ransom to keep that movie from being put online but it certainly smells like this. >> this is business trying to do business and government trying to worry about the future and not encourage the activity. it true in hostages and terrorism. the point we really get is we need a much more co hehesive strategy to make all of us less susceptible to the attacks. >> should the public be losing confidence in the nsa? >> i think the public should really focus attention on making sure that the nsa does do all it can do defend and i think the public should not have great confidence in companies and the public sector protecting key data and information systems.

this is a huge vulnerability that we all have and the public has to understand that and exercise its own market muscle to make sure that governments and companies do more to defend the information which ultimately often belongs to those consumers. >> those consumes ars need to k what to ask for. michael leiter, some blunt talk. >> getting to the roots of the white house's war on the media. protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and. ♪ work up a sweat during the day, not at night. tempur-pedic breeze is now cooler than ever.

right now, save up to $500 on select tempur-breeze® mattress sets. find your exclusive breeze retailer at tempurpedic.com so when i need to book a hotel to me tharoom,vacation. i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it, with great summer deals up to 40% off. visit booking.com. booking.yeah!

welcome back tonight. well, not just tonight but i'm obsessed with the white house's war on the press and on media. let's be clear about this, that war is nothing less than a war on the truth. do we get it right all the time? nope, we don't. and when we don't, we run a correction and in some cases people lose their jobs. that's what just happened at cnn. cnn took responsibility for its mistakes. at this network we've done it quite a few times publicly as well. but because we try to get it right. we take what we do seriously because trust, viewers and readers' trust is all we have and without that we're nothing. we all know we get fired for not telling the truth. and of course that's the point, isn't it? of course the white house attacks, delegitimize the media to create running room for its own events. the white house is not above using anonymous sources to criticize the use of anonymous sources. here's sarah huckabee sanders

attacking cnn in an unbelievable way. take a listen. >> there's a video circulating now, whether it's accurate or not, i don't know. but i would encourage everybody in this room and frankly everybody across the country to take a look at it. i think if it is accurate, i think it's a disgrace to all of media, to all of journalism. >> excuse me? you got that? i don't know whether it's accurate or not but go take a look at it because it disgraces you? seriously? and that's been this white house's m.o., pedal a false story to claim the media is telling false stories. sarah huckabee sands are was just a bit more honesty about the white house's dishonesty. the media is not the enemy of the white house. we're just here to find the best

obtainable version of the truth. it can hurt you, it can hurt us and, yes, even you, mr. president. we'll be right back. i'm so bored, i'm dead. you can always compare rates on progressive.com. oh, that's nice, dear. but could you compare camping trips? because this one would win. all i want to do is enjoy nature and peace and quiet! it's not about winning. it's about helping people find a great rate even if it's not with progressive. -ugh. insurance. -when i said "peace and quiet," did you hear, "talk more and disappoint me"? ♪ do do do do ♪ skiddly do do ♪ camping with the family ♪ [ flame whooshes ] when heartburn hits fight back fast with new tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum new tums chewy bites.

welcome back. time for the lid. panel is back. all right. i'm still pretty fired up about the white house yesterday. they complain about fake news and sarah huckabee sanders utter the phrase, i don't know whether it's accurate or not, but take a look. talk about undermining every argument they ever tried to make in media criticism. >> i don't think truth or accuracy is something that is particularly meaningful to this white house. that was on display yesterday. what i think is sad about this is i think those white house briefings have become useless. >> i would be going. i'd put a tape recorder. >> there are no facts that come out and the exchange between reporters and the white house, they don't happen at those

briefings. >> i i'm hard pressed to understand the fact they are not on camera. >> i find them useless. you come to washington about once a month trying to cover your beat. you've been sitting at committee hearings. i assume you thought maybe i'll get to the white house briefing room. do you find it helpful this. >> no. aye been to the white house briefing room once covering a obama event on climate change, i believe it was. it used to be helpful just to look at the transcripts of it. what it is become is a crutch for the cable news networks. every day at 1:00 or whatever, they're going to be able to fill a whole bunch of time space without actually going out into real america outside the beltway and covering stories no matter what the story is. they're not covering anymore because they focus so much attention on what is said in these briefings and the drama of

it all. it's just become dead space for about six or seven hours of nothing but spicer said this, et cetera. >> the white house -- >> that's an interesting perspective. i appreciate you sharing it. >> the white house has turned it into a form of theater where it's way for them to communicate to their supporters, we constantly insult the press and the cable networks broadcast it to the white house supporters. it's an active political theater for them. >> as a reporter who spends some time in the beltway but also a lot of time out in the different parts of america. i wouldn't say rule. i'll say baltimore and urban america too. i think it doesn't serve the purpose of the press to make this where we fight and where our big battle is. when i interviewed people who don't have running water who voted for donald trump because they thought their lives would be better, when people don't

have jobs. it served this idea that we are this elitist place it needs to be exactly the say it was or we're going to have this argument at 1:00 every day. it lets the white house say they are always arguing about this. they don't care about what's going on in your life. >> you have an obligation because you never know what they might say, i'd put, go out there, have the camera. we shouldn't send our corresponds deko corresponkocorrespon correspondents. >> it's suppose to be the the place where you learn so much stuff. their chief spokesperson lie and throw tantrums up there, it's become a disheartening place. >> the briefings serve the purposes of the white house more than the purpose of reporters. >> or the public. chris, before i let you go, you were at this nafta hearing.

you said something about when we have this big trade fight that all ag policy is local. you said the midwesterners, the weak guys don't want to see nafta change but the florida guys do. you have 15 seconds. >> the florida guys strawberries, oranges, tomatoes, et cetera have lost a lot of market to mexico because it's cheaper to produce food over there and they can produce it year round. in the midwest do no harm. don't touch anything that will mess up what we're already sending down there. >> you would have assumed florida was the free trade state and the midwest that powered donald trump would be the anti-nafta and it's economically the other way around. thank you. we'll be right back.

just like the people who own them, every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be with customer contracts, agreements to lease a space or protecting your work. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you, every step of the way. so you can focus on what you do and we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here.

if you could book a flight, then add a hotel, or car, or activity in one place and save, where would you go? ♪ expedia gives you the world in your hand, so you can see more of it. ♪ expedia. (b♪by crying) minutes old. ♪ a baby's skin is never more delicate. ♪

what do hospitals use to wash and protect it? ♪ johnson's® the number 1 choices in hospitals.

in case you missed it members of the chicago cubs headed to the white house today and you almost did miss it. the event was closed to the press but the white house allowed cameras in. according to cubs skipper who said when you get a chance as a citizen to go to the white house, you go. here's the thing about the cubs. it's not the first time the 2016 world series champs have visited the white house. not the first time they did it this year. president obama, a white sox fan did celebrate the cross town rivals on january 16th, four days before he left office. it's unusual to have a team visit the white house more than

once to celebrate a big one. after 108-year wait can you blame the cubs for wanting to keep the celebration going as long as possible. that's all for tonight. "for the record with greta" starts now. thank you, chuck. there's chaos tonight in your nation's capitol. an all out scramble inside a deeply fractured republican party. trying to get their own health care bill off of life support. >> is health care possible by friday? >> pigs could fly. >> first, we have breaking news. we are just learning fired fbi director james comey's memos are now going to capitol hill. now these are the documents that the red hot center of the ongoing obstruction investigations. they will get the memos and ever