Mediaboss Marketing

Nicholas Kamm | AFP | Getty Images

U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan speaks at his weekly press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2017.

The officials who issued the statement House Speaker Paul Ryan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch have recently been meeting to strike a joint plan that the GOP wants to push through Congress this year.

When President Donald Trump won the White House and Republicans held on to both chambers of Congress in November, tax reform became a top priority for the united government, as the GOP sees it as a lever for spurring faster economic growth. The issue has so far simmered in the background as the GOP struggles to reach a deal to repeal Obamacare, another key campaign plank that has repeatedly stalled amid party divisions.

The border adjustment proposal was a key revenue-raising plank of the plan House Republicans unveiled last year. It taxes imports but lets exports go untaxed.

Retailers that get many of their inputs from overseas raised concerns about the proposal and said it would pass costs on to consumers. Numerous senators also knocked the provision, leading to doubts in recent months that it could become part of a joint tax proposal.

Many questions remain about what shape the plan will take. While the White House released a brief summary of its goals for tax reform earlier this year, it has released little about specific policy since.

In a statement responding to the GOP leaders, Finance Committee ranking member Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said, "Republicans are dripping tax ideas out like a leaky faucet with no specifics to back them up."

In its earlier outline, the Trump administration called for reducing income tax brackets from seven to three, with a top rate of 35 percent and lower rates of 25 percent and 10 percent. The proposal would chop the corporate tax rate to 15 percent from 35 percent.

The White House said there will be a "one-time tax" on the trillions of dollars held by corporations overseas.

It would include various other provisions like the elimination of most deductions.

Questions have grown about how low Republicans can take business or individual rates while keeping the plan revenue neutral.

See the article here:
Republicans scrap border adjustment from tax reform plan - CNBC

Republicans in Congress rendered a vote of no confidence in President Trump's Russia policy on Thursday with passage of legislation to severely limit his ability to cut deals with Vladimir Putin.

The package sanctioning Iran, North Korea and Russia includes language requiring congressional approval to waive penalties on Moscow, a loss of negotiating flexibility for the president, a self-styled deal maker, that his administration furiously tried to kill.

Trump has coddled Putin since entering the presidential race two years ago despite Russia's meddling in the 2016 elections and other actions to undermine U.S. interests, and Republicans don't trust him to crack down on Moscow's belligerence.

"We do think there was interference in the elections, we do take that seriously we don't have much doubt about it and probably the Russian government needs to understand, on this issue, they're dealing with Congress as much as they're dealing with the president," Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., said.

The bill cleared Congress in overwhelming bipartisan fashion, passing in the House 419-3 and in the Senate 98-2 both veto-proof majorities. White House officials say Trump hasn't decided if he will sign the legislation or risk the indignation of seeing his veto overridden.

The package sanctions North Korea over its nuclear weapons program and Iran for its ballistic missile program and sponsorship of terrorism. But it's the tough measures on Russia, preventing Trump (or future presidents) from relaxing sanctions absent Congressional approval, that stand out.

Foreign policy analysts and individuals who served in past administrations say that it is highly unusual for Congress to hamstring a president's ability to conduct foreign policy. The trend over the past 25 years or so has been to show deference on these matters to the executive.

"It's unusual. The last time Congress overrode a presidential veto in a major foreign policy issue was Ronald Reagan in 1986 on South African sanctions," said Aaron David Miller, a scholar at the Wilson Center who has advised secretaries of state of both parties.

Congress' move to reassert its influence over foreign policy is the result of an atypical confluence of events.

Democrats supported the dtente with Russia pursued by former President Barack Obama, transforming into born-again hawks after Moscow meddled in the 2016 campaign to boost Trump. Putin viewed the Republican as a fellow nationalist less inclined to oppose Russia internationally.

Since Reagan, at least, Republicans have been defined in part by their hardline suspicion of Russia. They have accommodated Trump's unorthodox populism on issues like trade, but resisted his effort to soften the GOP policy on Russia.

That culminated with Thursday's vote that sent the sanctions package to the president's desk, as multiple investigations into Russian meddling in 2016 that could implicate Trump or his campaign continue in Congress and by Robert Mueller, the federal special counsel.

Some Republicans were careful about how they discussed that vote, not wanting to finger Trump as the motivating factor behind the legislation. But it was clear that their lack of trust in Trump to confront Putin and negotiate agreements favorable to the U.S. played a role.

"President Trump is the fourth president that I have served with," Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said. "They all at various times thought that they could work with Russians, and Putin has had an ability to sort of extract concessions and then never live up to his bargain."

Trump has courted Putin assiduously and declined to subject the authoritarian Russian regime to the bombastic jawboning he's directed at other U.S. adversaries like China and Iran, not to mention allies like South Korea and the countries in NATO.

His approach to Russia in particular is consistent with his recent predecessors: Obama and Bill Clinton, both Democrats, and George W. Bush, a Republican. All thought they could charm Putin and turn him into an ally of the West.

Instead, the strongman pocketed favorable agreements while continuing subversive activities to counter American influence and priorities. Trump's bilateral meeting with Putin this month in Germany did little to convince critics in Congress that Trump has changed his thinking.

Congressional Republicans, seeking to tamp down on suggestions that they're trying to box Trump in, blamed their vote for the sanctions legislation on Obama. Trump's predecessor launched a "Russian reset" in a bid to forge more cooperation with Moscow.

Putin responded over Obama's two terms by helping Iran develop a nuclear energy program, establishing a military presence in Syria and rescuing Bashar Assad's regime, invading Ukraine and saber rattling NATO countries on its western flank.

Obama ignored GOP demands that he confront the Kremlin, and Republicans said they wanted to claim more power to keep the heat on Putin, even if that means defying a commander in chief of their own party in the short term, to prevent a similar situation from unfolding in the future.

"We had a very, very bad experience with the last chief executive," Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, said. "We just want to ensure that whoever is president, we don't have to go through that again."

Read more:
Republicans render vote of no confidence in Trump's Russia policy - Washington Examiner

Sen. John McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham head for the Senate Floor for a vote at the U.S. Capitol.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

As members of Congress met on Wednesday to engage in delicate negotiations over health care and sanctions against Russia, Trump dropped another political hot potato into their laps by abruptly tweeting his decision to bar transgender people from serving in the military.

Trumps sudden pronouncement thrusts to the forefront a largely overlooked debate among House Republicans over the funding of gender confirmation surgeries and hormone therapy for military personnel. Since June, Missouri Republican Rep. Vicky Hartzler has been pushing to reverse an Obama-era policy mandating that the Pentagon pay for these medically prescribed procedures. In early July, she introduced an amendment to the annual defense policy bill that would forbid such funding, though a coalition of Democrats and 24 GOP lawmakers narrowly defeated her proposal in the House.

Hartzlers justification was largely economic; she argued that surgeries are costly and leave troops unable to fulfill their duties for extended periods of recovery time. In reality, the cost of transgender troops medical care is negligible. Yet many GOP lawmakers bought into Hartzlers logic. While stopping short of endorsing a total ban on transgender service members, they nevertheless agreed that taxpayer funds shouldnt be used for gender-related operations. After the amendment failed, a group of House members approached the president with a plea to take action.

By imposing a full ban on transgender soldiers, however, Trump went far beyond the cessation of medical funding that many in the House GOP members backed. His tweets left many Republican legislators to oppose the policy or clarify their stance. (Democrats uniformly opposed both the funding ban and the full ban.) For example, Kansas Republican representatives Kevin Yoder and Lynn Jenkins, both of whom voted for Hartzlers amendment, released statements in support of allowing any able person to serve. Ken Buck, a GOP congressman from Colorado who also voted aye on the amendment, wrote in reaction to Trumps ban, America needs a military comprised of patriots willing to sacrifice for this country. Any American who is physically and emotionally qualified should be allowed to serve. Francis Rooney, Kevin Cramer, Mike Gallagher, and other House members who supported the amendment have all issued similar statements in support of allowing transgender troops to serve, or at least questioning the ban.

A number of GOP senators have also questioned or disapproved of the ban. A spokeswoman for Iowa Senator Joni Ernst was quick to make the defunding-vs.-ban distinction. She stated, Americans who are qualified and can meet the standards to serve in the military should be afforded that opportunity, but then added that taxpayers should not be footing the bill for operations. Utah Senator Orrin Hatch said, I dont think we should be discriminating against anyone. Transgender people are people, and deserve the best we can do for them. Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomeys office released a statement reading, in part, Senator Toomey believes that every person should be judged based on his or her merits. That is why, during his entire public career, he has supported measures to protect individuals from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Its rare for so many GOP lawmakers to speak out against the president. For some Republicans, Trumps announcement may provide an opportunity to portray themselves as moderates on the debate. With Trump flanking them to the right with a total ban, their proposal to defund transgender surgeries may seem less discriminatory to voters. On the flipside, a member of congress who fails to back the ban may appear to be soft on social issues in the eyes of Trumps evangelical supporters.

Top Comment

"You, the American people, deserve to know what I'm about to do. With a heavy heart, I've decided to nuke..." 20 minutes pass. "...these nachos. More...

When the Obama administration first allowed transgender troops to serve openly in the military in June 2016, there was little backlash from Republicans. Scuttling surgery funding was a pet issue for Hartzler and a handful of others in the House; maneuvers to get the provision included in the annual defense policy bill largely played out behind the scenes with little media coverage. For many GOP lawmakers, Trumps decree puts a startling and unwelcome spotlight on an obscure debate, adding another headache to an already contentious congressional session. Indeed, reports suggest that Trump neglected to consult or even inform many in Congress of his decision. Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain seemed irked by Trumps cavalier move to abruptly announce the ban over Twitter. Graham told The Post and Courier, we need to have a hearing, not a tweet, while McCain said in a statement, The Presidents tweet this morning regarding transgender Americans in the military is yet another example of why major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter.

While the administration may hope to use the ban as red meat for Trumps blue collar base during the midterms, the presidents shoot-from-the-hip approach to policy doesnt appear to be doing much to win over allies in Congress.

View original post here:
Trump's Transgender Troops Ban Is Backfiring Among Congressional Republicans - Slate Magazine (blog)

View Caption Hide Caption

WASHINGTON All 10 Georgia Republicans serving in the U.S. House, as well as one of the states centrist Democrats, backed a government spending bill on Thursday that would set aside $1.6 billion to build a wall on the southern border.

The lawmakers support helped send the $790 billion national security-focused spending measure to the Senate, where it is expected to be made over, if it can advance at all.Sanford Bishop of Albany was one of only five Democrats to cross party lines and support the legislation.

I voted in support of this legislation due to the needs of our veterans and service members, Bishop said.

The bill would fund military installations in Georgia and elsewhere, veterans health benefits and the maintenance of the countrys nuclear fleet for the budget year that begins on Oct. 1. It would also set aside $50 million for the Savannah port, as well as seed money for initial construction on President Donald Trumps signature border wall with Mexico.

Read more: Five Georgia companies signal interest in Trumps border wall project

Democrats had pushed for a standalone vote on the funding for the wall in an attempt to force Republicans into a tough vote, but GOP leaders blocked that request. Instead, Georgias Republicans flaunted their votes on the issue.

I have had the opportunity to see the dire situation at the Southwest border firsthand and I understand the threats coming through the border into our nation, said Buddy Carter, R-Pooler. This legislation provides the resources necessary to begin construction on a Southern border wall to protect Americans from the threats of illegal immigration.

The Senate is not expected to pass the legislation before it leaves for its August recess. Democrats there have vowed to filibuster any spending bills that fund Trumps border wall.

Heres how Georgias lawmakers voted:

YES

Republicans Buddy Carter, Drew Ferguson, Karen Handel, Rob Woodall, Austin Scott, Doug Collins, Jody Hice, Barry Loudermilk, Rick Allen, Tom Graves

Democrats Sanford Bishop

NO

Republicans None

Democrats Hank Johnson, John Lewis, David Scott

Previous

Stacey Abrams put her ex-boyfriend in prison.Literature-ly.

See the rest here:
Georgia Republicans okay money for Trump's border wall - Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)

This is a rush transcript from "The Fox News Specialists," July 26, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

EBONI K. WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Hey, everybody. I'm Eboni K. Williams along with and Eric Bolling and Kat Timpf. And this is "The Fox New Specialists."

Another very, very busy news day with major developments in the showdown over repealing and replacing ObamaCare in the Senate. Now, just a short time ago, the Senate rejected a repeal-only proposal that would defund many key parts of ObamaCare, the vote 55 no's to 45 yes'. There were seven Republican defections. We're also awaiting remarks from President Trump at the White House. The president is scheduled to make an announcement on jobs. We'll go straight to that as soon as he starts speaking. But in the meantime, today's log in the Senate is showcasing the uphill battle that Republican face on healthcare and getting a bill through. So Eric, we have talked about this ad nauseam. I know you had some very specific ideas yesterday about what the GOP could do at this point. Are you surprised, disappointed at the inability to even pass clean repeal?

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Extremely disappointed. I think I figured out what's going to go on here. So John McCain rushes back and votes against repealing. I think I figured this out. There's going to be nothing. The Senate will do whatever they can, maybe gets something so they can to throw it back to the house. There's going to be no healthcare bill. So what ends up happening, 2018, a year away, the midterm elections, one year away, the Senate is in good shape for the GOP. They could pick up five or six seats even with a failed healthcare situation going here. The house may be in a little bit of jeopardy. But if you do pick up five additional Republican seats, you can give rid of these squishes that voted against it. They were elected to go and repeal and replace ObamaCare and they can't vote to repeal it. McCain, Murkowski, Portman, Capito, Alexander, Heller and Collins, you guys should all be primaried next time you're up for election.

WILLIAMS: OK. So let's talk a little bit about some of the specific names, Kat. John McCain yesterday, many in the GOP hailing him a hero for rushing back, of course, from a critical illness that we know he's suffering with to at least vote for discussion, but then, of course, as Eric pointing out today, voting against the actual repeal.

KATHERINE TIMPF, CO-HOST: Right. As you pointed out, I think a lot of people are very concerned about the potential political implications or other implications -- real life implications, as well, of people not having healthcare when ObamaCare is just repealed. And that everything will kind of go nuts if that were to happen. It's a vote that I personally disagree with.

(CROSSTALK)

TIMPF: I said I just personally disagree with it.

WILLIAMS: You mean the perception from some people is that what's going on.

TIMPF: Sure. I think so. There could be consequences. I'm not exactly sure about that. The way I understand it, is that would be a gradual thing and wouldn't all go nuts like that. But I think that mostly as a perception type of thing. People don't want to just repeal and have nothing out there. I disagree with it. If I were somebody who's in the Senate and I had ran on repealing ObamaCare, I would have voted to repeal ObamaCare today.

WILLIAMS: Well, we'll get to more of that. Let's first meet today's specialist. She's worked at our U.S. embassies in both Baghdad and (INAUDIBLE), and she's a foreign policy national security analyst, and she's the national co-chair of the Maverick PAC, so obviously she specializes in all things foreign policy, Morgan Ortagus is here. And she's a Fox News political analyst, a recent candidate for the DNC chair position, and the former president of the women media center, and she specializes in singing Dolly Parton songs, Jehmu Greene is here. I've got to get some tunes from you a bit, Jehmu. But Morgan -- and many have said that the GOP just seems to be incredibly far apart on this. So is there any real hope around passing anything involving healthcare? We know they got the debate last night. But is there going to be a bill?

MORGAN ORTAGUS, MAVERIC PAC CO-CHAIR: Who knows, Right? I mean, I could be a billionaire if you could figure out if you're going to have a bill or not. I'm actually a little bit more hopeful than Eric. Because I do think a lot of people are frustrated with the president for calling out Senator Murkowski. I actually think, you know, this president is different from everyone else in politics, and he's going to use the leverage that he has in order to get a bill passed. The bottom line is we can't go into the 2018 elections. Republicans cannot go to the midterms saying give us five or six more seats in the Senate so that we can pass a bill that we want to pass because we weren't able to do it last year because we didn't have enough seats. We left a very convoluted message.

BOLLING: It's a better message, Morgan, we couldn't get anything together?

ORTAGUS: No.

BOLLING: Or it's a better message on top of that.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: . we got something together and it's worse than ObamaCare?

ORTAGUS: Well, if the president and the Senate leadership and the house leadership have a bill that they can ultimately agree on and vote on, then.

BOLLING: You think that they are -- the Senate can't get their act together. Then they have to send that bill in conference to the house, house has to vote on it and then back to the Senate for final approval.

TIMPF: And the house had kind of a tough time getting it together as well.

BOLLING: Are we really under the impression that they're going to be able to make this process happen any time soon?

ORTAGUS: It doesn't look like it. One of the problems is that insurers have to set their 2018 rates in a couple weeks. So there's a lot of uncertainty in the insurance market. I would say that Republicans have no choice. I know it looks dire. I know this bill lives and dies and go to the Senate and the house. It's incredibly frustrating for everyone involved. But I would argue that Republicans have no choice but to stay here, don't go away for August recess until they get this right. How do ask for more seats in 2018 without pass something.

BOLLING: You're going to get them, even if it fails -- even health care fails, you'll get tax reform on the books. You'll get four or five seats in the Senate and you get rid some of these squishy Republicans that voted against repealing. Can you believe this?

WILLIAMS: All right, Jehmu. Bolling predicting something very optimistic for the GOP. I'm going to take a gander that maybe you see it differently. We know for seven years the GOP has talk about repealing and replacing ObamaCare. Here is their grand opportunity to do so, and yet we see hysteria.

JEHMU GREENE, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah. I don't think there's any disagreement between Democrats and Republicans that healthcare is still broken. Even the name sake of ObamaCare, President Obama, he was very clear that it needed to be fixed. And this is a real opportunity for politicians, the senators to prioritize purpose over politics. And when I ran for the DNC chair, one of the things that I really tried to focus on is prioritizing that purpose, but also the substance of it. When you think of the discussion that's going on here in this conversation and all over cable news, it's all about how the sausage is made, it's all about the numbers of what -- to get to the votes. However you think about healthcare, since ObamaCare, there are 20 million more Americans who have healthcare. We need to talk about the successes. We need to talk about.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: How many of those are on new Medicare and Medicaid recipients?

GREENE: It's still healthcare. What are you going to do? What are you going to do? Say you have it today, but you're not going to have it tomorrow?

TIMPF: Also health insurance and healthcare are different. I have friends on ObamaCare, so they have health insurance, but a lot of places won't take it. If I need to go to the hospital, and use all these different hospitals, nobody takes it. So having health insurance isn't the same as healthcare.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Right. And I think many people are clear on that. But let's just play the semantics out here. Jehmu, I think for a lot of people -- Eric, we can talk about Medicare, Medicaid, whatever, they just know that they've got something. And so, for those people that feels if you take it away, you don't replace it with something, though, Eric, I mean -- think about what the ads are going to look like. Think about what the messaging is going to look like in 2018.

BOLLING: You replace it with something better, and you're working on something better than ObamaCare. Remember, I'll give you another number, Jehmu, zero, the number of Republicans that voted for ObamaCare. And now look at you, one of the most liberal Democrats on the planet saying ObamaCare is a failure. It's a failure.

TIMPF: On the planet. Not just the country.

BOLLING: Am I wrong? I don't think I'm even joking about this. You're one of the more progressive people I ever met in my life. I love you, but you are now admitting that ObamaCare is a failure seven years later. We were telling you that seven years ago. But you guys pushed it through.

GREENE: That's nothing new. Like I said, President Obama was saying to Republicans for years, come together with us. Let's fix this. Basically, the same thing now that Chuck Schumer is saying. The same thing.

BOLLING: Whoa, whoa.

GREENE: . the same thing that Senator McCain said.

BOLLING: No, no. McConnell is saying come over across the line, Democrats. We have the house and the Senate. You need to cross the line come work with us. And it doesn't sound like Schumer nor Pelosi want to do any of that either.

WILLIAMS: Well, Schumer did say, Eric, yesterday, he sat on the floor with his glasses on the tip of his nose that, certainly, we want to work with you. He made a plea, Morgan, to moderate Republicans to hold out on this type of bill for something that actually looks better, some type of modification.

BOLLING: No, he wants to keep ObamaCare.

WILLIAMS: He wants to fix ObamaCare.

BOLLING: That won't fly. That bird don't fly.

ORTAGUS: We're also passionate about healthcare because it affects every single one of us. And it's this important. I was talking to people on the hill before I came on air. There's still amendments that the congress is working on. And I think that the senators that are there working on this bill should continue to do it. I mean, don't just walk away from this vote and not pass something. Senator Cassidy and Senator Graham have a bill about -- that the governors really like about giving block grants to the states. We can get in lead on this, but the bottomline is.

BOLLING: Stay right there. And then that goes to the house. What does the freedom caucus in the house say about that?

ORTAGUS: Well, then the president needs to get the house in line. I mean, we can't have this.

BOLLING: The freedom caucus says no. We're not passing that in the house.

ORTAGUS: Well, they need to get in line and support this president somehow. The Republican Party is acting like two different parties. Whether it's the house freedom caucus or its moderates in the Senate, those sides need to come together.

WILLIAMS: Are they two different parties?

ORTAGUS: They are, and they're embarrassing the president in the process.

BOLLING: You can't say that. This is not on the president whatsoever. This is -- leadership on the house and leadership in the Senate who put these two bills together, frankly, on their own. They didn't -- the house bill was never even allowed -- senators were not even allowed to see the house bill, let alone the other constituents within the house. This isn't on the president. You can't do that. Listen, you can say the Republicans are bifurcated and they are. But the president is simply saying get me something that I can get to the American people that's better than ObamaCare. And they failed at the house. They're failing at the Senate.

TIMPF: The way that the government is set up, executive and legislative branches are different, so, of course, he's not going to be writing this bill. I agree with you, Eric, that this should be placed on congress. Blame should be placed on congress for this. But a lot of it, like I've been saying, the GOP is having an identity crisis. A lot of them are way more moderate than the GOP of the past. The point where they're actually like the Democrats of the past, and some aren't. So I don't know how you reconcile those two. I really don't, no matter if you have seven more years. I don't know if you can ever reconcile that.

BOLLING: You repeal now and you work to replace it with something better.

WILLIAMS: Eric, we just saw today, two years, that is what the idea that was put on the floor. You get two years to replace it with something better, your words. They voted it down.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Well, no, no. McCain, Murkowski, Portman, Capito, Alexander, Heller, and Collins voted it down.

GREENE: You know why they voted it down? It's because -- since that original vote when President Obama was in the White House, more and more people have started to love ObamaCare. There's no other.

BOLLING: Are you suggesting that these seven senators have constituents that are in favor of keeping ObamaCare?

GREENE: Yes.

BOLLING: If you go to the election booths in 2018.

GREENE: They've been hearing a tidal wave of calls in their districts from them. And Morgan, you said this is about the Republicans getting in line to support the president. I'm sorry. Healthcare is not about supporting the president, whoever is in the White House. It is about these members who have been elected in their districts who represent hundreds of thousands of people who have now gotten healthcare since ObamaCare passed.

BOLLING: But you can't suggest that these seven no votes are in favor of keeping ObamaCare.

GREENE: . without any alternative.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Didn't Donald Trump say if you vote no on this, you are saying ObamaCare is working and you are supporting ObamaCare? He said that.

BOLLING: I bet you every last penny I have that not one of these seven senators will ever run on, I want to keep ObamaCare.

TIMPF: He did say that, though.

WILLIAMS: But Trump said that.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: No, the senators didn't. The senators didn't. He said effectively you're voting to keep.

WILLIAMS: Right.

BOLLING: Effectively.

WILLIAMS: Right.

BOLLING: Of course they are. But individually you want to run on I kept -- I voted against repealing ObamaCare? That's a losing proposition in the GOP.

TIMPF: They wouldn't. And I don't think they want that. They're just scared of the alternative because they don't know what.

WILLIAMS: Whose fault is that, Morgan? Let's just break this down. Whose fault is it that after seven years the GOP has this opportunity, and I agree with Jehmu. I've been very critical of ObamaCare. I don't like the mandate and I don't like the premiums. Let's bring them down. In the meantime, nothing is better -- it's really on the table. Nothing is polling better. The CBC scores are a mess. It is just not where it needs to be.

ORTAGUS: It's every single elected Republican official fault, all of them, right? And it's all of us who are involved in the process. We can try to blame Democrats. We have power in both parties of congress and the White House, and we have to come to an agreement on this. So, you know, we can say it's these seven senator's fault. It's this senator's fault. It's everybody. Because whether you're in the house freedom caucus or you're moderate.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: They passed this. They passed this same bill in 2015. They got it to the president's desk who vetoed this bill. Now seven of them say I'm no longer on board? It's the same thing.

ORTAGUS: Right. But the debate isn't over, Eric. I mean, they're still in the Senate tonight voting on this.

BOLLING: No, it failed. It failed. They got 45 votes. It failed. It went down.

ORTAGUS: So no matter what else happens, you think it's a failure?

BOLLING: The straight repeal they passed in 2015, 18 months ago, everyone was on board. They got it to the president's desk. He had to veto it otherwise it was going to become the law of the land. Where are those seven senators who voted in favor -- I'm sorry, six of the seven who voted in favor of it in 2015, why are they against it now? Why? One reason why.

(CROSSTALK)

ORTAGUS: I don't know.

(CROSSTALK)

TIMPF: Because now there's no one to veto it and be responsible for something bad happening. It's about not wanting to be responsible. It's about wanting to run and just using these as talking points.

BOLLING: Agree.

TIMPF: . blah, blah, blah. But not having any real answers.

ORTAGUS: Don't forget.

(CROSSTALK)

ORTAGUS: . what happened to the military? We have evidence before that we've done these sorts of measures in congress and we still have sequestration, right now, because the congress was never able to come together. So I think, I would to guess that's some of the fears of the people that voted against it today. I'm not defending it. I think that they have to get a bill together or they do not deserve to win.

BOLLING: I'll tell you what, there will be primaries.

GREENE: It's all about talk when the reality sets in and they'll realize at stake, that's why they voted against it.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: We need more political will. We're going to take a quick break. But we are keeping an eye on that jobs announcement from President Trump. And when it begins, we'll go straight to it. But up next, will an unexpected -- of criminal leak investigation be enough for A.G. Jeff Sessions to keep his job? Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TIMPF: President Trump is supposed to deliver a jobs announcement at the White House any moment now. Eric, this is a big thing. This is one of the big reasons why a lot of people voted for President Trump. Jobs and the economy.

BOLLING: Yeah. And as the mainstream media focuses on Russia, this is what really going on. Jobs numbers have been fantastic. This is some news that we've found out -- we've been hearing about that Apple uses an outside vendor to make this LCD screen for the iPhone. Foxcom is one of the vendors -- probably the biggest vendor. They're going to open up some manufacturing plants I believe in Wisconsin. I think this is what it's all about. But that's great news. Starting out, supposed to like, 3,000 high-paying American jobs. Now these things have been built in China through Foxcom in other countries, but bringing them back to America, 3,000 jobs I understand now, maybe up to 13,000 going forward. This is just what it's about for Donald Trump.

WILLIAMS: This is where President Trump looks strong, right? I agree, Kat, this is why most people that voted for President Trump voted for him -- absent political experience because he's a business guy. He's the guy that knows how to make a deal and get things done. So I think when he first got elected, there's a couple of automobile manufacturers that either kept plants here or came back to their manufacturing home bases here in the United States, and this is the type of thing that he absolutely should be talking about, holding rallies about, doing everything he can to energize base, get more political capitol. To my view, Morgan, I think he spent some political capitol in all of these healthcare losses. But, you know, Eric, ultimately, I think this is a good thing for President Trump to be doing at this point.

BOLLING: Very good thing. Very good thing. Morgan, we're watching -- I think we're looking at the president. He's about to hit the podium. Again, let's remind everyone, this plant is likely going to be in Wisconsin. Paul Ryan comes from Wisconsin. Reince Priebus is from Wisconsin. Scott Walker, also from Wisconsin. Also been a supporter, I guess, recent supporter of Donald Trump. We see Vice President Pence there as well. Jehmu, this is hard to argue with when you look at the economic numbers of President Trump.

Continued here:
Are progressives ready to admit that ObamaCare has failed? - Fox News