Return to Transcripts main page
White House Under Fire Over Wiretapping Claims; White House Defends Health Care Bill. Aired 3-3:30p ET
Aired March 14, 2017 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Julie (ph) - QUESTION: Sean, you said earlier that the White House doesn't have projections on how many people will lose coverage. Is that a projection that hasn't been made yet? Are you saying that the White House is not gonna come out with those?
SPICER: We don't -- that's not something that OMB does.
QUESTION: So, but -- if you're advocating for a plan that you say the president wants to cover everyone, how are you going to be able to assess whether he's been successful if you're not going to project that yourself and CBO projections, you're saying, are invalid?
SPICER: Well, I -- I think that you -- if you look at what the goal is, which is to make healthcare available to every American, as I said, I mean, you have a choice right now that's either we support a failing system, that there is no choice and that the premiums are going up or you provide them with a system that we're looking at, which does address the 30 million people. It gives them a tax credit, it gives them greater choice.
And one of the issues that I have with a lot of the models that I see around if they're very static. They talk about this piece, this prong only. I think when you look at the subsidy and the cost of a current plan right now, without looking at prong two and three and how those will additionally drive down costs, then it's not a fair analysis of where the plan's going. But there's no question that right now, there is -- you know, we're -- you know, I detailed it to Jim.
We have a system that mandates that people buy health insurance under penalty of law and it's not working. So the question is, what can we do instead? And what can we replace that with that gives people greater choice and lower costs? I think in most cases -- of course, some people are always gonna choose in a free society to not purchase something. We live in a country of 320 million people. At some point, you can't force a product or a good down people on a free society.
But I think if you can give them a quality product that serves their needs that they have at the time at a price that they can afford, there's a greater likelihood in every economic model that suggests that that will work. So I think it's frankly economics 101 and basic common sense that dictate the more competition and the more choice that we institute in this system, the greater likelihood of more and more Americans getting healthcare is something that is easy. John?
QUESTION: Thanks a lot, Sean. I want to ask you about the American Health Care Act, but I -- I want to first see if you have an answer to a question that I asked you yesterday, and that was one that you did not know the full answer to about whether there are repercussions for violations of that five-year logging ban (ph).
SPICER: I'm sorry. I -- I do owe you an explanation on that. I will check with counsel and get back to you. So...
QUESTION: OK. And then on the American Health Care Act, you used language very similar to language that House Speaker Paul Ryan used about why Republicans should support this legislation. You talked about this binary choice. It's either this particular legislation or it's Obamacare. You have Republicans in control of the House and the Senate, you have President Trump in the White House.
Why do they have to vote on this particular bill? Why can't they negotiate for something that, for instance, the Freedom Caucus thinks may be a better piece of legislation?
SPICER: Well, to get back to a question that Major asked, I mean, at the end of the day, whatever it is has to at least get 218 votes. You obviously want the greatest number of votes as possible, but you need to get, you know, 218 votes and in the case of the Senate under reconciliation only 50 votes. But that's your floor and I think that what you need to do is to get enough members coalescing around key principles to get you to that floor.
Now, you can obviously go, you know, as high as, you know, 435 in terms of the ceiling. I'm not sure we'll hit that. But we -- you know, the floor is what's gonna coalesce the greatest number of members around a bill that gets you to 218. So we -- we will continue to work with them, provide ideas and input. And regardless of what caucus or faction you're a part of, if you have an idea that can enhance this bill and make it more patient-centric and achieve the goals, then we're all for it.
That's -- so that's a process and I think Speaker Ryan's been talking about this since 2010. There have been a lot of ideas, a lot of debate and a lot of issues put forward into how to craft this. So this has been something that's been in the work for seven plus years in terms of getting members at least in the Republican conference to coalesce around principles and ideas and solutions to make this a more patient- centric thing.
QUESTION: Two quick clarifications and then one other thing. It sounded like you were telling Mike to ask Paul Ryan about face phases two and three. Phase two would be regulatory measures that the president and Secretary Price would be in charge of. When can we expect to see a list of those from the White House?
SPICER: I will ask Secretary Price. I know that he mentioned yesterday when he came out to talk to folks after the score that his office was working on that. I've got a -- I will -- I'll be glad to see if we have a timeline on that and then -- and then follow up with you on that.
QUESTION: And also, it sounded like you were saying that the White House is confident that you'll get to 60 votes on those things in phase three, those measures that conservatives have been asking for.
SPICER: Right. QUESTION: Is the White House confident about the 60 votes?
QUESTION: OK. And then -- and the final thing is also on healthcare as well. Yesterday, Secretary Price said that he wasn't saying to disregard the CBO report completely. But that sounds like what the Administration is arguing and you're arguing as well from the podium. You said that the CBO estimates are too consistently wrong.
QUESTION: And you question their credibility...
SPICER: No, no, no. Just to be clear, CBO is a budget office. They look at impacts on the federal budget. That is why there were created and that's what they do. I think to look at them in terms of their budget numbers is one thing, that's their job.
I think on the aspect of budget impact, it talks about how well we currently see a 25 percent increase in premiums this year under Obamacare in the individual market, it markedly shows that under the current American Health Care Act, there'd be a 10 increase decline in premium.
Where I think the CBO has gotten it wrong and it's not a question of what we characterize it is, it's a fact. The CBO, when it tried to project people and coverage was over 50 percent wrong the last time. The point that we're trying to make is that when you look at their record and you say the last time they did this they were off by more than 50 percent, they projected 24 million people would be covered by Obamacare and the exchanges in 2016. In fact, that number was initially 10.4 million and it's dropping.
So, the question you have to ask yourself is if you are using that as a gauge to determine your vote, you need to question whether or not they do counting people like they do counting numbers? I think on the budget thing, that's what their wheelhouse is for. That's what they do. They count -- budget. They look at budgetary impacts on things. When they've come to counting people, they've been wrong and vastly so. I think it's important for people to understand the context in which those numbers are given to you. I think that's something -- I just want to make sure.
QUESTION: Sean, I asked you yesterday about the President's response to Steve King (ph)? Do you have anything on that?
SPICER: The President believes that this is not a point-of-view that he shares. He believes he's the President for all Americans and so I'll leave it at that.
QUESTION: Reports surfaced Friday that the President will support primary challengers to conservative lawmakers who don't support the final version of the American Healthcare Act. Can you confirm that report? If it's true, can you offer us insight into what the President is looking for in Congressional candidates in 2018?
SPICER: I'm not -- I don't have anything for you on that.
QUESTION: It's Ronica (ph).
SPICER: Ronica (ph).
QUESTION: I'm sorry.
SPICER: No, I'm sorry.
QUESTION: Fix it now, you get it done. OK, two questions. First one, does the President believe that he was surveilled through microwave and television?
SPICER: I'm not going to -- I would just say that the President has tweeted about this. He's pretty clear that he believes that there was surveillance that was conducted during the 2016 Election. I'm going to wait for the conclusion of that. I think there's pretty sound evidence that it's been -- the microwave is not a sound way of surveilling someone and I think that has been cleaned up. It was made in jest, so, I think we can put that to rest.
QUESTION: OK, second question. Newt Gingrich said that the COB should be abolished. You're saying some pretty harsh words against part of aspects of the COB. Would the President agree with that?
SPICER: CBO. QUESTION: Excuse me.
SPICER: No, I got it wrong with you, now we're even.
SPICER: Look, that's how Speaker Gingrich -- I'll let him comment on the House. The CBO is established I think in the Budget Act of 1974. It's up to members to decide on the House and the Senate whether or not they want to go through this. We've got OMB, they've got CBO. I'm not getting into the business of telling the House who their score keeper should be and how.
QUESTION: Sean, I wanted to circle back on the -- you started to answer it, but ultimately if you did, I want to clarify. Can you stand here today and say that the President will keep his promise of insurance for everybody?
SPICER: I think the President's goal is to provide insurance -- to make insurance available to everybody. Yes. That's what he intends to do. I think that is -- the goal of this is to make sure that every American has the choice and a plan that they can afford and that they have the choice to buy. That's not what they have now.
QUESTION: I wonder if the White House has a view on the kind of reports from Bloomberg that John Kushner's family stands to gain half a billion dollars from a real estate deal with Combine Corporation (ph), which is linked to the Chinese government or it has been linked to the Chinese government in the past.
SPICER: I don't -- I mean, I'd leave that -- I'd refer you back to the Kushner companies to talk about their entity. Jared went through extraordinary lengths as you all know, and we provide a lot of documentation on this, to make sure that he -- although he's not taking a salary here, that he complies as if he was an employee. Went through extraordinary lengths to make sure he deconflicted himself and can work through the Office of Government Ethics.
QUESTION: If Jared's currently working on preparations for teaching (ph) things related to Milaka (ph)?
SPICER: I'm sure he's - he's involved in a lot of stuff, I don't know specifically who's involved in that visit so I can (ph) - yeah.
QUESTION: Sean, you did just say that the president still stands by making sure that, you know, insurance can be afforded by everyone.
What's your specific response to the CBO's estimate that for someone who's 64 years old making $26,000 that right now, under current law, they would shell (ph) out $1,700 in a premium but under this change the premium would go up from $1,700 to $14,600?
What's the message to a...
SPICER: I - I - yeah...
QUESTION: ...54 (ph) year old who, ten years from now, faces that prospect?
SPICER: I think that again, I will go back to the fact that I don't think that that analysis takes into consideration the choice that they have.
Part of the problem right now, Steve, is that a 54 year old doesn't need certain things, they don't need maternity care, they don't need certain medical services that are being provided to them by this government product that is being forces down (ph) them right now.
So, number one, you have a product that is being served up to older Americans, middle aged Americans or younger Americans that doesn't fit where they are in life and the services that they need.
And so, number one, having more choice and the ability to tailor a plan towards the needs that an individual has depending on their stage of life, whether it's an individual or a family. Number one.
Number two, that they don't have any competition, so when you combine both of those things together I think that number goes way down. And then the third is that - they can have whatever subsidy they want now but on the exchange, in many cases, again they're getting a subsidy to a plan that has a very high deductible so that they have a card but not care.
And that is, again, not an apples to apples way to examine the current plans and that -- that's where this really all comes down to.
QUESTION: So is the argue (ph) - the message that is wait till phase two and three come in and then we'll...
SPICER: Well - I think...
QUESTION: ...have something better?
SPICER: It's -- it's not just wait it's you have to look at the totality of what we're doing to understand how this is going to impact the plan.
But right now if - in the scenario that you're giving, a 54 year old doesn't have choice, is buying a plan that they - they don't want or need it (ph), for the most part. And has a subsidy that's probably not giving them the ability to go see the doctors that they need to because their deductible is off the chart. And that's one thing that's missing in a lot of these discussions is that you can - you can have a premium per month but if your deductible is off the - is skyrocketing then, again, you might be able to get an appointment but you're not getting care.
QUESTION: Oh, Cheryl (ph) thanks.
SPICER: Cheryl (ph). I'm not good on this (ph) side (ph) of the room (ph).
QUESTION: Budget. Budget coming out Thursday and I'm just trying to find out how detailed is that going to be?
Are you going to be giving agency levels, program levels, are we going to see what programs are going to be eliminated in the budget (ph)?
SPICER: I think - I'll let Director Mulvaney, he's going to have an entire presentation. I know they'll start background briefings tomorrow for you all to walk through different aspects of the budget.
I don't want to get ahead of him on this. I think - you know he - so let me - let's figure out where we go first on this with what he has and then - and then we'll have a full presentation on Thursday - Gabbi (ph).
QUESTION: Could you just say...
SPICER: I'm sorry.
QUESTION: ...if (ph) the infrastructure plan is going to be part of that or is that going to be later (ph)?
SPICER: No, that's separate. That is separate. Gabbi (ph).
QUESTION: I have to two questions.
QUESTION: The first one, the president, one of his signature campaign promises on immigration was to pursue H-1B Visa reform and on April 1st the United States will begin accepting new H-1B Visa applications, can we expect to see any movement on that before then?
SPICER: That's a good question - I don't - I think we've talked about immigration in the past I think there's an entire comprehensive process that's being looked at in both in terms of how we're preventing illegal immigration and then what we're doing about legal immigration, whether it's H-1Bs or K-1 or other visas that exist within the system.
There is an entire look that is being taken with respect to the visa program and - and we will probably - we will have more for you as we - as we get through the system.
Thank you guys very much. We're headed off to Detroit and Nashville tomorrow, if you're not on the trip. We look forward to - hope everyone wears their green on Thursday and Friday, gonna (ph) double shot it this year, because of the visit.
So thank you, see you, stay safe on the roads.
QUESTION: How are you (ph) all (ph) going to do those (ph) background (ph) briefings (ph) Sean (ph)?
SPICER: Right here.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: OK, so Sean Spicer there speaking. It's the first time we have heard the White House speaking on this health care bill, this Republicans bill since the CBO scored it just about this time yesterday.
I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you so much for being with me here again, Sean Spicer speaking about that. We're about to talk to our panel.
But, again, this is the first time since we have gotten hard numbers from the CBO essentially saying that 24 million people -- we will throw the graphic up and you can see -- 24 million more Americans would have no insurance by 2026 under this new plan.
And so a lot to chew on. I have got a number of people.
Let me just turn to you here in New York.
Just so I'm hearing this clearly, you have the White House -- you have Sean Spicer and the White House standing by the plan. We heard the president yesterday say it's going to be a big, fat, beautiful, big, whatever, negotiation, this health care bill, but that they're open to ideas.
You have Speaker Ryan who is not budging on this, right? This is sort of like the Ryan bill. And then you have, while we were all listening to that, Manu Raju on Capitol Hill hearing from the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, saying that the Senate will make changes to the House bill, but signals it will send it to the floor.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I also think the House is going to make changes, from what it sounds like.
I think they realize that they can't pass it. And, as Sean Spicer was saying, basically, it is now or never. We have to get this through.
And so I think that he made the case today that you have to look at the context of these numbers. People are not going to be leaving the rolls because they're not going to be forced into buying insurance. And that accounts for at least part of the discrepancy in the numbers.
BALDWIN: He also said, ask Paul Ryan.
But then what was interesting to me about this, at the end, he was asked, does the president still want insurance for everybody?
BALDWIN: Does he intend to stand by his promise?
BORGER: Right. And he said yes.
But his answer was to that was, everyone should have a choice and a plan they can go to. So their metric is access. Everyone should have access, not necessarily that everyone should be forced to have health care.
BALDWIN: Shove it down their throat, as he keeps saying about Obamacare.
BORGER: Which is what they would say the Obama bill was.
BALDWIN: What did you think?
MARK PRESTON, CNN POLITICAL EDITOR: I think my takeaway was, as we were talking right before the news conference, was whether or not Donald Trump was going to cut and run at some point and leave Paul Ryan out on this island.
I think we saw today that Donald Trump is willing to negotiate and wheel and deal, which we would expect that to happen. He was asked the bill is called Ryancare, as opposed to Trumpcare. And I thought it was interesting how he said that it's not his, it's not Donald Trump's. It's everybody's, is what he said, and that he's proud of it.
BALDWIN: He said Obama didn't put his name on it. It was the ACA.
PRESTON: Right. He said it's not about labels and names. And the Obama administration didn't call it Obamacare, although they did embrace Obamacare at the end, as we all remember. He says it's about getting the job done.
And for Donald Trump, getting the job done is getting a deal done. And to Gloria's point, where are right now, there's no deal to be had.
BALDWIN: But if you're so proud of something and you ran on this repeal and replace, why don't you want to put your name on it?
PRESTON: Because it's a loser.
I will pass if off to Gergen. It's a losing cause.
DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: You have to give Sean Spicer credit, some points for being gutsy enough to walk into the lion's den on something so complicated and spend an hour doing it.
But I don't think he persuaded very many people who are on the fence. The fact is, he doesn't have the hand to play. Once again, this White House is doing something they often do. If they have numbers that are favorable to them, boy, that CBO, they're really terrific on the premiums and the cost premium.
But on numbers that are unfavorable, boy, that CBO, they're lousy when it comes to sort of coming up with the number of people who are going to lose their insurance. You can't have it both ways and convince people. It just doesn't sound like a credible argument. BALDWIN: Speaking of the CBO, we wanted to talk to someone who was a
former director of the CBO. So, I have got Doug Holtz-Eakin with us as well.
And, so, Doug, it's nice to have your voice as part of this conversation.
But, before we talk, let me just play a little bit more of Sean Spicer today talking about specifically about this bill and the CBO.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: You keep pointing out that the CBO did not take into consideration phases two or three.
Some people might say that the White House has been criticizing the CBO for not taking into account phases two or three in their scoring of the first phase of this.
How were they supposed to take into account something that doesn't yet exist?
SEAN SPICER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I think that that's a question for the House to offer.
There are constraints that are put on the CBO in terms of what they can consider. But I think that the point that we want to make is that -- and it came up yesterday at the briefing -- if members are going to base their vote off a score,they need to understand the totality and the comprehensive nature of the entire program.
And so to base your score off of one piece of information is literally looking -- hold on. Let me answer the question. I understand that.
But what I'm saying is, is that the question that keeps being asked is to see all of the reports on this about how it's going to impact, and not note -- I don't recall too many packages that ran on the evening news last night or too many of the stories noting that it was one piece of a comprehensive package, noting that it was prong one of three prongs.
So, respectfully, I think that when we have gone out here and tried to make sure that people understand the comprehensive nature of what is happening and why it has to happen. It wasn't by choice that we had to do this.
There are certain ways that it had to be conducted because of how it was constructed in the first place, in terms of how it gets repealed and replaced
The reconciliation piece of this, which is inside baseball Senate talk, is -- may not make sense to a lot of people, but it's the way that we have to go -- the process by which we have to achieve this because of the Senate rules. (END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: OK, Doug, here's your chance, because so many Americans are hearing all this, CBO, OMB. We're trying to make sense of all of this.
It's a really complicated issue. Help us understand. And I thought it was also just a valid question from John. If you won't phase two or three, how can the CBO know something that doesn't exist? What did you think?
DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, FORMER CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE DIRECTOR: CBO's job is to estimate the impact on the federal budget of pieces of legislation.
It score bills. It looks at the bill and says, how much more money will come in, how much more spending will go out? And they delivered their answer. They said this will save $337 billion over the next 10 years.
That's their job. And they can only score the bill. And I would emphasize, you score the bill, not the intent of the Congress. Right? You can't read people's minds. You read language and score it.
That's because CBO is in charge of keeping track of the cost. There are benefits to public policies. And it's the obligation of the members, the senators, the speaker of the House to make the case that the benefits of this public policy are worth that the costs the CBO has reported.
And I think that is what Mr. Spicer is trying to say, which is, look, there's a larger set of policy objectives here. It comes in three phases. It's worth what we're seeing in terms of the budget numbers that CBO has released.
But it's not CBO's job to make that case. It's the members' job. It's the president's job in the end if he wants this to pass.
BALDWIN: What do you think, David?
GERGEN: Doug, are you saying that CBO should not have issued the numbers of people who will lose their insurance, having issued such numbers in the past? Are you saying those are bogus numbers? CBO doesn't know what it's talking about?
If you look at any CBO cost estimate, it has a section called the basis of estimate, which is them explaining how they got there. You can't possibly get to an estimate for a bill of this type without taking a stand on how many people will use the tax credits, how many people will be taking Medicaid as part of their support in America.
So, sure, they should release those numbers.
(CROSSTALK) GERGEN: Are those numbers credible? Are the numbers credible on the
number of who lose insurance?
They are first-rate, professional numbers, as they always are. And they are subject, if you read their own words, to enormous amounts of uncertainty. And reasonable people can disagree about where the numbers land. There's no question about it.
But there's no reason to question the integrity of CBO or the intent of the CBO or them doing what they did. That's all perfectly natural. You can question, do they overestimate the importance of the individual mandate? Some people think so. You can question whether they understand the options that states have when they take $10 billion a year and have the chance to help some of the most expensive patients.
Those are all very tough judgment calls. And reasonable people can disagree. But I don't think anyone should question what they did. They did their very best, as they always do.
BORGER: But, Doug, don't you think now Republicans are kind of in a tough spot here, because their constituents who are already a little nervous about this are now saying, wait a minute, this is going to -- I may be -- not have insurance if I was on Obamacare, or what's it going to cost me if I'm 64 years old, or if I'm from a red state that could be affected disproportionately?
Politically, do you think this is an issue?
HOLTZ-EAKIN: I don't think the issues were changed dramatically by the CBO score.
HOLTZ-EAKIN: They had to get a bill that would get 218 votes in the House, get 51 votes in the Senate, and be signed by the president. That means they had to find a piece of health care legislation, something about which there are great disagreements, both within and between the parties, that stretched from the Freedom Caucus to Susan Collins.
That has always been a difficult task. It remains a difficult task. And I think they're learning the lesson of governing. You have to pass bills about which you have some misgivings. There will be things in there that each member doesn't like. But they don't have the luxury, as they did when they were not in control, of just saying no all the time. They're going to have to say yes and make progress.
And this is a piece of progress.
BALDWIN: Doug, thank you so much.
I should also point out he's the president of the center-right American Action Forum. Thank you for your expertise on all things CBO.
HOLTZ-EAKIN: Thank you.
BALDWIN: Thank you.
I just want to pivot and the quickly and finally to the other piece of news that was made today on wiretapping, right? Sean Spicer was asked a couple of times that, when is President Trump or the DOJ going to provide any sort of evidence? We know the deadline has been extended.
And so he made news in his response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: As you know, the DOJ now has an additional week to produce evidence that President Trump was wiretapped by the Obama administration.
How confident is President Trump that any evidence will arise to support his claim?
SPICER: I think he is extremely confident.
There's been -- I mean, I have mentioned this before. I'll let them do their job. I will let the House and Senate and I will let the DOJ report this.
But as I have commented in the past, I think there is significant reporting about surveillance techniques that have existed throughout the 2016 election. I'll leave it to them to issue their report.
But I think he feels very confident that what will ultimately come of this will vindicate him.
QUESTION: And a quick follow-up.
QUESTION: When a decision is announced, whatever evidence or potentially no evidence is released, will he make a statement about the evidence or lack of evidence?
SPICER: I have been asked this, I think, at least three times.
And I don't want to prejudge what's going to come. I'm sure you will do a fine job of asking me the question when there is a report to be asked, and I will not be able to escape it. But I don't want to get ahead of what the president may or may not do.
QUESTION: Evidence will be presented?
SPICER: I don't want to get ahead of -- as I mentioned, I'm not going to...
QUESTION: Because the House Intelligence Committee has given the administration until Monday to...
SPICER: I understand. No, it has given the DOJ...
SPICER: ... and the Department of Justice -- again, we covered this yesterday.
But I'm not going to get ahead of what they may or may not submit.
QUESTION: Possible there may be nothing?
SPICER: No, that's not -- I think there is -- at least from where we stand, we know that there is significant reporting on this subject that...
QUESTION: Something will be presented?
SPICER: Yes, I feel very confident of that. Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: That was news, Mark Preston, very confident, extremely confident he will be vindicated, evidence to be presented.
PRESTON: This long, tortured nightmare about whether or not he was wiretapped will be answered on Monday, when they have an open hearing and we see James Comey, the FBI director, testify.
That's the bottom line. I don't know what Sean Spicer could say, other than the president continues to be confident. And what he is saying, as David was saying earlier, yeoman's work, I think, having to go out and answer the unanswerable. And I think that's what we saw with Sean Spicer on the wiretapping issue.
GERGEN: It was notable, I think, that in saying, in referring to the evidence, he talked about there's been significant reporting.
And that would exclude any other independent information coming to him from within the government. In other words, the president issued that tweet, put the tweet out there about the wiretapping based on news reporting, mostly, as far as we know, from conservative journals, and mostly it did not support his contention.
BORGER: There's also a big difference between wiretapping and surveillance, and President Obama ordering a wiretap vs. general surveillance of whether it is the Russians or whatever.
There's a story there. And the tweet itself, which was that President Obama ordered a wiretap and is a bad guy as a result, I'm -- that's the question that perhaps Comey will answer.
BALDWIN: That has bigger repercussions. Hopefully, we get answers on Monday.
BORGER: Exactly. Exactly.
BALDWIN: Thank you so much very much, as always.
BALDWIN: The White House is also responding to Republican Congressman Steve King's remarks that so many people are saying are racist.
Plus, the Republican raising eyebrows again with brand-new remarks about race.