News on Youtube Jul 28 2018

ROBERT COSTA: Hello. I'm Robert Costa. And this is the Washington Week Extra, where we

pick up online where we left off on the broadcast. Joining me around the table,

Nancy Cordes of CBS News, Josh Green of Bloomberg Businessweek, Vivian Salama of The

Wall Street Journal, and Ana Swanson of The New York Times.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was on Capitol Hill this week before the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee to address questions about President Trump's meeting with Russian

President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. In his opening statement, Pompeo said the

United States would never recognize Crimea as part of Russia.

It was certainly a testy hearing, as the senators pushed for details on what was

discussed in President Trump's two-hour private meeting with the Russian leader.

SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ (D-NJ): (From video.) Did he tell you whether or not - what

happened in those two hours?

SECRETARY OF STATE MIKE POMPEO: (From video.) Yes, Senator. The predicate of your

question implied some notion that there was something improper about having a

one-on-one meeting. I completely disagree with the premise of your question.

SENATOR ROBERT MENENDEZ (D-NJ): (From video.) I didn't ask you a predicate.

I asked you a simple question, and I hope we're going to get through it: Did he tell you

what transpired in the two-hour meeting?

SECRETARY OF STATE MIKE POMPEO: (From video.) I have had a number of conversations with

President Trump about what transpired in the meeting.

ROBERT COSTA: Pompeo was also questioned about progress in getting North Korea to give

up its nuclear weapons program. He admitted North Korea is continuing to produce fuel

for nuclear bombs despite its pledge to denuclearize. And, in a sign of potential

progress, North Korea handed over the possible remains of U.S. troops killed in the

Korean War on the 65th anniversary of the armistice. Nancy, you were on the Hill.

Pompeo, defiant, and revealed a few details about where this is all going.

NANCY CORDES: But no new details about what everyone there wanted to know about, which

was this two-hour conversation between the president and Vladimir Putin. You know, you

assumed that he was going to throw them a few scraps, new information. After all, these

are not just, you know, random rank-and-file lawmakers; these are members of the Senate

Foreign Relations Committee. But he essentially told them no dice, the president -

ROBERT COSTA: Why is that? Does he not know?

NANCY CORDES: Well, he claims he does know, but he insisted that the president has a

right to a private conversation and that, you know, if he believes that keeping those

details secret enables him to build a relationship with Vladimir Putin that will create,

you know, progress down the road, then he has every right to that. And that was somewhat

astonishing to these senators, who say, look, we're learning more about what happened in

this meeting from the Kremlin and the Russian media than we are from our own government.

ROBERT COSTA: Ana, what do you make of Republicans and how they're handling this foreign

policy question? You see on trade they're breaking with the president at times, people like

Senator Bob Corker, and Corker's out there too on foreign policy raising sharp questions.

ANA SWANSON: Yeah, that's right. Well, I think he - the president has kind of put them

in a tough spot. I mean, a lot of these more free-trade Republicans were elected on the

basis of a - kind of a devotion to free trade and to free markets, and the trade

policies in particular really put them in a tough spot when it comes to that.

So we'll have to see, you know, how this plays out with the midterm elections

approaching, but I think they're very wary of crossing the president on some of these

policies and, you know, having some kind of potential negative reaction from them as

they're out on the campaign trail.

ROBERT COSTA: What did the White House make of Pompeo's performance?

VIVIAN SALAMA: In general, the White House is very fond of Pompeo.

The president - Pompeo's the president's guy right now, and that is a very fluid title I

would say. (Laughter.) It changes quite a bit.

But right now Pompeo is someone that President Trump trusts tremendously, gives a lot of

responsibility to, and he really thinks that he's doing a really good job.

How long that lasts, if it goes on for a long time, we'll wait and see.

But that's why he's giving - given him such tremendous responsibility, and in some cases

sort of phasing out a lot of other advisors.

You know, we see that General Mattis over - the secretary of defense not as engaged as he

used to be and not kind of in the inner circle as he used to be.

General Kelly, obviously, chief of staff, a lot of questions about whether he lasts.

But right now Secretary Pompeo has held two very significant positions in the

administration and he's still in the president's favor, so we'll wait and see.

JOSHUA GREEN: One of the things that's remarkable to me is Congress is a coequal branch

of government and could take steps to pass laws to roll back some of these trade

sanctions or really lean on the White House in a way that it had to respond to to get

more details of the president's meeting with Putin and that sort of thing.

So far they haven't been willing to do it, and what you've seen is the line they're

willing to go up to and toe is they'll say, you know, nasty things in hearings.

You'll have senators like Ben Sasse of Nebraska call trade policy stupid.

They'll criticize things in press releases.

But they won't take that actual step of forcing concessions or forcing things from the

White House, I think by and large because they're still afraid of Trump and all the

voters they know in their own party who still support him.

ROBERT COSTA: But they've been tougher on Russia with sanctions than the president may

want them to be, it seems, over the last year, the Congress.

I mean, they've pushed Russia on sanctions.

VIVIAN SALAMA: Oh yeah, absolutely. And this is the issue that we see, is that you have the

president's rhetoric on one side and the administration and Congress' take on the other.

And finding some sort of middle ground between the two is very difficult because the

administration insists that it is tough on Russia, and you can actually look and see that

there is a track record to prove that.

But then the president's rhetoric doesn't always go in that direction.

JOSHUA GREEN: Right, and even on the sanctions there was some talk in the White House

that, well, you know, we may not - we may not enforce those sanctions. And so you

never really know what you're committed to as far as U.S. policy toward Russia.

NANCY CORDES: I thought one of the fascinating things about that hearing was Pompeo

telling these very frustrated senators, hey, don't pay attention to what the president

says; pay attention to what U.S. policy is. And, you know, they said, look, our allies

and our adversaries respond to what the president says. They take action based on what

he says. You can't separate his comments or his tweets from U.S. policy. You can't say

just, you know, don't pay attention to what that man is tweeting; here's what U.S.

policy is, it hasn't changed. It doesn't work that way.

ANA SWANSON: Exactly. He seemed to walk pretty far down that line, you know, saying

that policy is policy and the president's statements are just statements, but then

sort of seemed to realize what he was saying in the moment, Pompeo, and then had to

reverse himself, thinking the president is not going to like this line of argument.

NANCY CORDES: Right. I mean, the EU may not actually be our foe, but if the president

says the EU is a foe, you know, that is going to have repercussions with our relationships.

JOSHUA GREEN: Yeah. At the same time this has been enormously frustrating to Democrats

and Republican senators I talked to because, in fact, you know, the things that the

administration says when it's not Trump speaking, including Secretary Pompeo himself,

tend to differ sometimes quite dramatically from what Trump himself is saying or

tweeting. So, yeah, it isn't necessarily clear that the two are one and the same.

NANCY CORDES: Right.

ROBERT COSTA: And I wonder about Pompeo and North Korea.

The president - you go to the White House these days, you see pictures of Kim Jong-un

near the lower press office on the way to the Oval Office, and the president had this

embrace of the North Korean leader. Yet, Pompeo in his own dealings takes - appears

to take a tough line in talking with North Korea.

VIVIAN SALAMA: Sure, and actually the North Korean foreign minister was quite critical

after he met with Pompeo the last time in Pyongyang, and said it was a tense meeting.

He was not thrilled with the outcome of the meeting.

And so there are definitely very tough negotiations going through.

We understand that the North Koreans are not sort of 100 percent sticking by the rules

that they had committed to when they met in Singapore in June.

And so the administration, definitely Secretary Pompeo, going in there and saying,

listen, we're not messing around here. You've got to do this.

ROBERT COSTA: The Helsinki meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin seems so

long ago, but it was actually only last week.

(Laughter.) There have been so many twist and turns since then, that is for sure.

President Trump surprised many of his advisors, including deputy - Director of National

Intelligence Dan Coats, by inviting Vladimir Putin to the White House this fall.

After a week of criticism and concern for that overture, the White House said the meeting

was now going to be delayed until 2019. And today it looks like Vladimir Putin

is inviting President Trump to Russia. Was the White House getting a lot of

pushback from congressional Republicans to not have Putin come?

NANCY CORDES: Not only were they getting pushback, congressional Republicans were

flat-out saying: Vladimir Putin is not welcome here on Capitol Hill.

ROBERT COSTA: The leader said that.

NANCY CORDES: Right. And this is a, you know, courtesy that is typically extended to foreign

leaders when they come to the White House. But the Russians were not agreeing to the meeting.

And so the White House had to do something and had to walk it back and had to look like

it was in charge because Russian officials were signaling that perhaps Vladimir Putin

wasn't going to come to this meeting after all, which is kind of a slap in the face, and

added more fuel to this notion that the president was being subservient or submissive to

Vladimir Putin, who was playing it cool.

ROBERT COSTA: Is Putin going to have Trump actually come to Moscow?

VIVIAN SALAMA: So, I mean, rhetorically he said that he would be open to the idea, but

the White House today saying that they would want an official invite. So we'll wait and

see what happens. Obviously that's something I think that they would like to show, that

image of President Trump going into Moscow, kind of on Putin's turf, that would be

a big deal for them. The question is whether or not the U.S. will go for it.

And obviously with all of the backlash that happened after last week's meeting I can't

imagine that, you know, they would really kind of go for this.

And obviously we've seen just them walking back the initial invitation of having Putin

come to the White House, where they said: We will do it after the first of next year -

or, after the first of the year when the witch hunt is over, obviously referring -

they're referring to the Russia investigation.

We don't know when that's going to be, and if it's going to ever happen.

And so we're going to have to wait and see on that one.

JOSHUA GREEN: At the same time, though, we know that Trump loves the drama and the

theater of official state visits and summit, and really gets jazzed up for these meetings

with Kim Jong-un and President Putin. So really, I don't think it would surprise me

that much if Trump did agree, against the advice of his staff, to go to Moscow and

meet with Putin, if he feels he can get something out of that deal.

ROBERT COSTA: What do U.S. allies think in Europe when they see the president cozying

up to Russia? I mean, he's - President Trump's clashed with Canada, he's clashed with

European leaders. What do they make of this continued push toward Russia?

ANA SWANSON: I think they're pretty stunned. So the president has called the European

Union a foe. He said on trade that they were possibly as bad as China.

And those are just really unprecedented statements.

The administration, through their trade actions, has also branded Canada and the European

Union and Mexico national security threats, in a way, because of how they import steel

into the country. And so it's really a new era. I mean, I think, you know, the

president has targeted these countries for several reasons. You know, one is just that

he doesn't have as much respect for the kind of international system and alliances

as some of his predecessors. Another is that he's very focused on trade deficits.

So when he sees a trade deficit pop up, for example with Europe, they then necessarily

kind of become an enemy or a foe.

ROBERT COSTA: When you think about what's driving all of this with President Trump, his

foreign policy, you're the author of a book about Steve Bannon and President Trump, the

former chief strategist, "Devil's Bargain." Bannon's a nationalist.

Is that what's pushing President Trump to work with Putin and to continue this Russia

relationship - another nationalist leader?

Or is it just more that Putin's a strongman in the grand theory of foreign policy?

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, I think it's both of those things.

I mean, Trump has certainly internalized the Bannon worldview of antipathy to

multilateral organizations, the idea of U.S.

primacy, America first, and the idea that America, because we're such a strong country,

ought to strike bilateral trade deals with individual countries, which is what Trump is

trying to do. But I think it's jarring to a lot of our allies. You know, there was

tremendous fear among Europeans that Trump would - and still may - impose auto tariffs.

And one of the reasons there was such relief and the stock market shot up on, I think it

was Wednesday afternoon, after the meeting with President Juncker was that, you know,

there seemed to have been truce for now. But I don't think Europeans know what to make

of this. And as far as Trump, I think instinctively he is a nationalist and a protectionist.

You can go back and look at his interviews going all the way back to the 1980s.

And he would be talking about how America struck lousy trade deals with Japan.

He has been saying the same thing for decades now. The countries have switched from,

you know, the EU and China, where it used to be Japan. But I think he has a way of

looking at the world that he is putting into action and is so different than the

way U.S. presidents before him of both parties have behaved, that we're all

still trying to wrap our head around it.

ROBERT COSTA: We'll leave it there. Wrapping our heads around it all every week. (Laughter.)

JOSHUA GREEN: Trying to.

ROBERT COSTA: That's it for this edition of the Washington Week Extra. While you're

online, check out our Washington Week-ly News Quiz. I'm Robert Costa. See you next time.

For more infomation >> Lawmakers grill Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Capitol Hill - Duration: 13:28.

-------------------------------------------

The U.S. economy surges to a 4.1% growth rate while the trade war persists - Duration: 25:40.

ROBERT COSTA: The economy roars, and so does the trade war. President Trump claims his

policies are responsible for an uptick in economic growth and his critics wonder is it

sustainable. I'm Robert Costa. We talk trade, taxes, and have the latest on Mr.

Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen, tonight on Washington Week.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) I am thrilled to announce that the United States

economy grew at the amazing rate of 4.1 percent.

We're on track to hit the highest annual average growth rate in over 13 years.

ROBERT COSTA: President Trump touts a surging economy that grew during the second

quarter at the strongest pace in nearly four years.

He also took a victory lap over his recent trade discussions with the European Union.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) As the trade deals come in one by one, we're going

to go a lot higher than these numbers.

ROBERT COSTA: But some Republicans on Capitol Hill are increasingly wary of the

president's moves, saying the just-announced $12 billion in aid for farmers is a federal

bailout that proves the president's policy has limits.

HOUSE SPEAKER PAUL RYAN (R-WI): (From video.) I don't think tariffs are the right

answer. I don't - I don't support tariffs. I think tariffs are taxes.

ROBERT COSTA: And leaders of the House Freedom Caucus call for the impeachment of Deputy

Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversees the ongoing Russia probe.

It's a move the attorney general does not support.

ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS: (From video.) My deputy, Rod Rosenstein, is highly

capable. I have the highest confidence in him.

ROBERT COSTA: Plus, Mr. Trump's longtime attorney Michael Cohen accuses the president

of having prior knowledge about a 2016 meeting at Trump Tower that included his son, campaign

advisors, and Russians who were offering incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) Just remember what you're seeing and what you're

reading is not what's happening.

ROBERT COSTA: We cover it all next.

ANNOUNCER: This is Washington Week. Once again, from Washington, moderator Robert Costa.

ROBERT COSTA: Good evening. President Trump held up today's 4.1 percent growth report

as vindication of his economic policies, and the president insisted the second quarter

numbers are not a one-shot bounce.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) As the trade deals come in one by one, we're going

to go a lot higher than these numbers. These numbers are very, very sustainable.

This isn't a one-time shot.

ROBERT COSTA: But the administration's tariffs are startling - starting to rattle some

farmers out in the Midwest and elsewhere who are seeing a decrease in international

sales. Many Republicans say the $12 billion assistance plan for the industry

is not enough or a long-term solution.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID YOUNG (R-IA): (From video.) This is coming from the effect of what

the administration has done, and it's an admonition that tariffs are harming agriculture

and harming farmers, and so it's not what they prefer.

ROBERT COSTA: But the president has pulled back from an all-out trade war with the

European Union, agreeing to adjust his proposals.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) This was a very big day for free and fair trade.

We agreed today, first of all, to work together toward zero tariffs, zero non-tariff

barriers, and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods.

ROBERT COSTA: Joining me tonight, Ana Swanson of The New York Times - welcome to

Washington Week; Josh Green of Bloomberg Businessweek, our old friend here; Nancy Cordes

of CBS News, another; and another, Vivian Salama of The Wall Street Journal. Ana, it's

great to have you here at our roundtable. The president took a lot of credit today for

these growth numbers. Can he take credit for this economic growth?

ANA SWANSON: That's right, he did. Well, in general I think that presidents tend to take

too much credit both in good times and in bad for the cycles that the economy goes through.

We are seeing very strong growth right now, 4.1 percent in this quarter, and GDP growth

this year could rise to 3 percent for the first time in over a decade. So those are very

strong numbers for the president. On the other hand, the question is how long do these

numbers last? And we think some of this is the effect of the tax cut.

And economists see that fading somewhat into next year.

And then also we had some very interesting numbers with trade as well, with the trade

tariffs increasing growth now but not in the way that the president probably wanted.

Actually pulling forward purchases, so people were trying to buy goods ahead of those

tariffs going into effect. So that's likely to drop off as well in coming quarters.

ROBERT COSTA: So you're saying maybe there's a frenzy of activity before next quarter.

So this will this frenzy of economic activity, all this growth, be sustainable if people

are trying to buy now and do different deals now before the tariffs kick in?

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, Trump says yes. Most economists say no.

I mean, as Ana alluded to, what happened was a lot of foreign buyers of U.S.

agricultural goods, like soybeans, moved forward a lot their purchases that would have

been made in the - in the next three months in the third quarter into second quarter in

anticipation that these products were going to be hit by tariffs, as they were on July

6th. And so that added about - a little bit over a percentage point to GDP growth,

which gave us this big headline number today. But if you think forward to what's going

to happen over the next three months, you know, those purchases are now gone.

They've already happened.

And so it's going to be tough for Trump to figure out a way to fill in that gap and

produce, as he says he will, a sustainable number in the 3 percent, 4 percent range.

ROBERT COSTA: Nancy, we've been looking at reports from different campaign forecasts.

And the Democrats seem to be gaining momentum ahead of the midterm elections, but

Republicans must like this report as they try to tout the tax cut and rally ahead of November.

NANCY CORDES: Sure, I mean, they'll take it. Regardless of what the reason for

the surge is, they can now get out there on the campaign trail.

Republicans heading home for that five-week recess in the House.

And they'll be, you know, talking about 4.1 percent everywhere they go.

That's a great number for them. And even if it does fall off in the third quarter, that's

only two weeks before the midterm elections. A lot of people have made up their minds by then.

The problem for Republicans is that people tend to vote more on whether wages are rising

or falling than what the overall GDP looks like. That's a number that people don't

really feel. And wages have basically been stagnant. If you think back to 2014,

President Obama had great GDP numbers, even better in the second and third quarter.

And Democrats did terribly in those midterm elections. They lost control of the Senate.

ROBERT COSTA: So the president's happy about these numbers. But he's also getting

some pushback from Republicans on trade. And we saw some movement this week.

You were at the White House, Vivian, reporting on the West Wing, deep inside, about how

the president seems to be taking a few steps back on trade with his deal with the EU.

VIVIAN SALAMA: That's right. And unlike a lot of meetings where when they go into

these meetings generally speaking a lot of the details are already ironed out,

this was something that was touch and go until the very end.

And it was fascinating for us to watch and report on, where literally as of Tuesday night

they started to say, wait, maybe we can actually come together and work something out.

And all through their meetings on Wednesday, between President Trump and the European

Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, they were really - it was really unsure until

the very end if they were going to do it. And so President Trump obviously coming

out super excited about the fact that he was able to say, hey, I brought you guys

something. I'm doing a deal. I'm helping our farmers.

And he really didn't go into these meetings expecting that much.

And so the White House was really excited about that, and especially, A, because they

could deliver something to the Republicans who are now going back to their home states

and campaigning ahead of midterms, but also coming off of a really rough week last week.

A lot of backlash after the president's meetings with President Putin in Helsinki. They felt

like this really kind of turned things around for them. And so it was a good momentum

for them to go in. And now the GDP numbers coming out today just capped that week off for them.

ROBERT COSTA: But what's actually in the deal with the EU? Is it an actual deal?

Because sometimes the details matter. It's not just about the president

claiming credit for some kind of broad-stroke agreement.

ANA SWANSON: Right. Well, both the Americans and the Europeans called this a deal,

but I would characterize it more as a deal to begin talking about a deal. (Laughter.)

And the details were pretty vague right now. The highlights were that the president

said the European Union had agreed to purchase more natural gas and more soybeans.

We have to see how exactly that would work and when those purchases would go into effect.

In addition, the two governments will be talking about reducing tariffs on a variety of

goods, including industrial goods. And then the two sides also agreed to talk about reforms

at the World Trade Organization, a lot of which seemed specifically aimed at China.

And many people interpreted that as a good sign, that the United States and the European

Union were once again on the same side with regard to China's unfair trade practices.

ROBERT COSTA: So that's one high level, Josh, about where this whole trade debate's

going, and the president working with the EU. But what about down where it matters

for people day to day? And it's not just the Midwest. I mean, it could be

lobstermen in Maine who are dealing with the effects of this trade war.

JOSHUA GREEN: Yeah, I think the immediate effects of Trump's trade war are not going to

be economic in the macro sense. Most economists aren't really worried yet about the

effects of the trade war because the tariffs are such a small percentage of the overall

U.S. economy. Where I think it's going to hit, though, is individual states and

industries, especially states that voted for Trump, and all sorts of localized areas.

So we've heard plenty about soybean farmers in Iowa, and it's certainly going to hurt

there. But these tariffs are spread across all sorts of different industries. You

mentioned lobstermen in Maine. I mean, they're subject to a Chinese seafood tariff, but

their lobster traps have also gotten more expensive because they're made with Canadian

steel. And so all across the country - whether it's, you know, Alaska, Minnesota,

Iowa, South Carolina - places where there are competitive House races this fall.

These tariffs are becoming localized issues in the way that we may not see on the

national news every night, but that voters in these states absolutely see and feel.

ROBERT COSTA: So why aren't Republicans speaking out more publicly? We hear it, Nancy,

privately. They're free trade Republicans. They don't like where this is going.

But they're reluctant to say much.

NANCY CORDES: Right. And it's interesting because on the campaign trail, you're

starting to hear some Democratic challengers say: You've got to get off the fence

and say where you stand on this. And South Carolina is a perfect example, because the

entire South Carolina Republican delegation has basically either stayed mum or has said,

you know what, maybe you need some short-term pain for long-term gain. The president

is going to negotiate something that is better in the long run for U.S. businesses.

The problem is that he has shown an ability to start a lot of negotiations over all types

of things - trade, and immigration, and everything else - not as much of a track record

on actually completing those negotiations.

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, and this is what Republicans privately say they're very worried

about. They are furious that Trump started this fight four months before the midterm

elections. And what you see, just anecdotally talking to autoworkers, talking to

farmers, is a lot of them are sticking with Trump for now. They're saying, well, we got

to give him room to negotiate. But we'll need to watch over the next couple months. Do these -

do these farmers and autoworkers peel away as the bite of this tariff starts to take effect?

ROBERT COSTA: Well, the president's throwing them a $12 billion trade package.

Is that enough, inside of the White House?

VIVIAN SALAMA: Well, it's a lot of money, but the point is, is that no one is convinced

that it's going to yield any long-term solutions.

And the problem from the White House perspective is that, yes, it's before midterm

elections, but one of the issues that President Trump takes issue with most is that he

feels like Congress, on this issue in particular, is starting to undermine his authority

to make these trade deals. And when they sit there and push back, and they don't

kind of trust his instincts to go for these long-term deals, he feels like they're

basically trying to derail any of his efforts to help these voters down the line.

ROBERT COSTA: Final thought on this. Ana, the president may be having a

handshake with the EU, but his trade war with China seems to continue.

ANA SWANSON: That's right. So there are trade wars on many different fronts right now.

So we've seen a step back with the European Union. However, that could be a temporary step back.

And meanwhile, we still have negotiations with the North American Free Trade Agreement

with Canada and Mexico, and a very big, potentially damaging conflict with China that

needs to be resolved. So there's a lot on the administration's plate when it comes to trade.

ROBERT COSTA: Are those countries expecting any movement? They see the president

moved with the EU. Do they expect him to maybe move before the midterms on their

own deals, their own agreements?

ANA SWANSON: Well, potentially. There is some discussion about trying to finish

the NAFTA agreement before the end of August. But it's still pretty much up in the air.

It's possible that this could prove to be a blueprint for these other agreements.

But it's also possible that other negotiations could be a blueprint for how this goes.

We did see with China the two sides come to what seemed like tentative agreements and

then actually have the president decide that those weren't tough enough measures and walk

them back. So could that happen with the EU as well? We'll have to see.

ROBERT COSTA: It is fascinating. You had a great tick-tock, Vivian, about how

everyone's trying to evaluate President Trump. How do you get him to move, to budge

on this signature issue of trade? And we'll come back to this next week.

But let's turn our attention to New York City, and the saga of Michael Cohen, the

president's longtime lawyer and loyal advisor, who is now signaling his willingness to

cooperate with federal investigators looking into Russian interference in the 2016

presidential campaign. At The Washington Post, I've been reporting on Mr. Cohen's

legal maneuvers all week. Here's what you need to know. Cohen is under siege, under

federal investigation in the Big Apple for bank fraud, and the FBI is looking into

his business dealings in New York. His break with the president has been dramatic.

A week ago The New York Times reported that Cohen secretly recorded a conversation with

then-candidate Trump in which they discussed payments to a former model who said she had

an affair with Mr. Trump. The tape is one of many the FBI seized in a raid on Cohen's

office earlier this year. Then, last Sunday, CNN obtained that recording we just

talked about and broadcast it. Mr. Cohen can be heard briefing Mr. Trump on financial

arrangements and Mr. Trump is engaged in the discussion. Here's why all of this

matters - it's a lot, I know. Trump's campaign ahead of the election had denied the

candidate had any knowledge of payments to the model, Karen McDougal.

It also raises questions about possible campaign finance law violations.

And it shows Cohen is willing to share tapes of his old boss.

Josh, we've been covering President Trump for some time. We'd go up to Trump Tower;

there would be Michael Cohen, the fixer, the confidant. To see him break like this,

to release the recording, what does it mean for this White House?

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, it's shocking, first of all, because Cohen has been associated as

Trump's, you know, fixer, protector, lackey, and attack dog, including with reporters,

for - you know, going back years.

So the fact that he's broken and is kind of openly flouting the material he claims to

have on Trump - not just this one tape that CNN had, but according to news reports over a

hundred tapes of recorded conversations - means that he's potentially a very valuable

witness against Trump should Bob Mueller, the special counsel, and his investigators

decide to bring him in and try and offer him some kind of a deal to testify or provide

damaging material about Trump.

ROBERT COSTA: Is the White House considering a pardon, Vivian, when they watch this

spectacle, they watch Cohen make all of these moves?

VIVIAN SALAMA: Well, frankly, they don't even want to touch the issue.

Every time we ask, they refer us to President Trump's outside counsel, Rudy Giuliani, and

others. Frankly speaking, though, it's fascinating to watch because, again, it's

like what Josh was saying, this was the man who a year ago was saying he would

take a bullet for President Trump, and now we see him turning in this way.

But President Trump, remember, takes loyalty very seriously.

And something like this, someone who was so loyal to him for so long, could really, you

know, just upset him in a way that we've not seen before and question those who are

closest to him because they could flip.

NANCY CORDES: What's really amazing about this saga is it's such a stark reminder that

so many people who are involved feel so little responsibility to the truth.

I mean, Michael Cohen, after Don Trump Jr.

was interviewed, said I'm so glad that he told the entire truth about his meeting in

Trump Tower and, you know, obviously, the president knew nothing about it.

Now Michael Cohen said, actually, the president did know all about it.

Rudy Giuliani a few weeks ago said Michael Cohen is an incredibly honest man; I trust

him. Now he says he's been a liar his entire life.

When you're hearing this from both sides, it makes it very difficult -

ROBERT COSTA: They were trying to keep him contained, and then he explodes

out with all this information.

NANCY CORDES: Right. But, you know, at the same time, you know, if people are willing

to change their stories not a little bit - you know, this is not tweaking around the margins.

These are 180-degree turns. And it really makes you wonder who, if anybody, is telling the truth.

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, to me it makes the existence of tapes all the more important

because, as you said, you've had Rudy Giuliani calling him a great lawyer and a terrible

lawyer. You've had Trump defending - or you've had Cohen defending Trump and going against him.

I'm not sure who's really got credibility to be able to sort of testify, but if there are

tapes or something that investigators can draw on to establish, you know, contemporaneous

truth of what actually happened, I think that's going to be important.

ROBERT COSTA: There aren't tapes about one of the big things that came out.

CNN then reported that Michael Cohen has knowledge of President Trump's awareness, his

prior knowledge, Cohen alleges, of that 2016 meeting at Trump Tower where Donald Trump

Jr. met with Russian figures. They discussed dirt on Secretary Clinton's campaign.

Cohen is now saying he's aware of some exchange between Donald Trump Jr.

and then-candidate Trump about the occurrence of that meeting in the summer of 2016.

President Trump issued a rebuttal, let's be clear, on Friday via Twitter.

It read in part: "I did NOT know of the meeting with my son, Don jr." The president

added: "Sounds to me like someone is trying to make up stories in order to get himself

out of an unrelated jam." Cohen, of course, is facing a bank fraud investigation up in

the Southern District of New York. But there's another thing, Ana, this week that

really caught my interest. I know Cohen's the headline for most of us, right, but

Allen Weisselberg, the longtime CPA accountant for The Trump Organization, gets

subpoenaed to testify as part of this Cohen investigation in New York, and he has

the keys to the kingdom in understanding that Trump financial network worldwide.

ANA SWANSON: That's right. So he's been handling the family's finances for

decades, running - including some of the campaign finances, as well as the charity.

In the tape that you played, he's referred to as the person who is setting up that

payment. And so he, you know, would have very deep knowledge of The Trump

Organization and its various activities abroad. We've seen a little bit in - of a

dive into that with reporting from around the world, as well as leaks like the

Panama Papers - things like, you know, offshore financial accounts, shell companies.

But, yeah, he's somebody who would certainly know where the financial bodies are buried.

ROBERT COSTA: That's the whole thing everyone's always wondering. It's about the

possible obstruction of justice with President Trump with the Russia investigation.

It's about Michael Cohen and what he may know about what the president discussed with

Donald Trump Jr. But it's also - it comes back to The Trump Organization:

Donald Trump's finances, the tax returns.

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, it does. And it's significant, too, because Trump said

explicitly a year ago that Mueller should not cross this red line of investigating

Trump Organization's finances, and that is absolutely what's happening now.

So this has to be a source of great angst to the president.

You know, you wonder, talking to advisors, if this isn't part of what's fueling these

Twitter outbursts and the kind of defensiveness that we saw this morning when he was

claiming I didn't know anything about this meeting with Don Jr.

and listening to him attack Mueller on practically a daily basis, as he does now.

VIVIAN SALAMA: And how far have we come from the days of nondisclosure agreements where

the president basically guided all of his, you know, dealings with nondisclosure

agreements, and suddenly it's all kind of coming out in the open.

It's definitely, definitely making a lot of angst, as you say, for the president.

ROBERT COSTA: And we still don't know if President Trump's going to sit with Robert

Mueller for an interview.

I asked Mayor Giuliani this week, the president could provide some clarity if he sits

down with Bob Mueller, and Mayor Giuliani said we haven't made any decision, that's a

biased group, the typical answer he's given to reporters for the last few months.

But that's the kind of thing we're all waiting to see, will he sit down with Mueller.

But let's go to Capitol Hill, because Freedom Caucus leaders in the House GOP Mark

Meadows and Jim Jordan introduced a resolution this week amid all the controversy about

Michael Cohen to try to impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversees the

special counsel's Russia probe. They argued Rosenstein should be removed because of

what they call the Justice Department's, quote, "stonewall" of congressional subpoenas.

But after meeting with GOP leaders, Meadows and Jordan backed off, and they said they

would instead potentially pursue contempt of Congress measures this fall, something a

little bit below the threshold of impeachment. This is just the latest example of GOP

leaders trying to contain the president's allies on Capitol Hill as the Russia probe

continues. It's becoming a pretty tough fight for Speaker Ryan there's so much anger

you must be detecting among Trump's allies in the - in the Congress.

NANCY CORDES: Sure, but a lot of anger among Republican rank-and-file that these Freedom

Caucus members went this route.

You know, after all, Republicans have been arguing don't elect Democrats, don't let them

lead the House, because all they want to do is impeach President Trump, and then their

own members go ahead and say that they want to impeach the deputy attorney general who

was hired by President Trump. So they didn't think it was a good look. They were very frustrated.

And Meadows essentially admitted to us on Thursday that this was sort of a strategy to

try to force Republican leadership into collaborating with them on that lesser contempt

charge. DOJ says we've given you thousands of documents, we can't give you every

document you want because some of them pertain to an ongoing investigation.

Freedom Caucus members like Meadows want every document they can get their hands on

because they're looking for evidence that this investigation was pursued wrongheadedly.

JOSHUA GREEN: Nancy, do you get a sense - I mean, do Republicans think that part of this

effort is meant to remove Rosenstein so that Trump can fire Bob Mueller and try and stop

or impede the special counsel investigation?

NANCY CORDES: Sure, yes. I mean, Meadows insists that that's not his goal, that he

hasn't talked to the president about that, he's not encouraging the president to do

that, but obviously, you know, there has been a concerted effort. And it's not just on

his part, but there are a few people in Congress, you know, who are - who are really

interested in looking for ways to discredit the investigation and the investigators.

ROBERT COSTA: When you're at the White House, Vivian, why isn't the president, who says

a lot of things on Twitter, is happy to rally against the Mueller investigation - why

isn't he pushing to impeach Rod Rosenstein or fire Rod Rosenstein?

Is it because he's wary of the obstruction of justice charge at some level?

VIVIAN SALAMA: Well, definitely conversations with his lawyers, everyone saying just

take a step back, take a deep breath, and just let this play out without your

interference in it. And, obviously, you know, going back to the whole experience with

what happened with FBI - former FBI Director Jim Comey and how a lot of people felt

that he - that was a potential violation and a potential case of obstruction of

justice, they're telling him to just kind of calm down and let it go for now.

But, you know, anything can happen, and we are seeing his now including with Bob Mueller

looking at the president's Twitter feed for possible obstruction of justice.

At the end of the day, President Trump is alone with his phone sometimes without -

(laughter) - you know, he's tweeting without consulting his lawyers sometimes, and so you

honestly never know what to expect.

And so it's not that surprising that Mueller would look at the tweets.

ROBERT COSTA: How long can this last? Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman,

his trial starts next week. Michael Cohen is making all of these moves.

A movement in the House to impeach Rosenstein.

JOSHUA GREEN: Well, I think it's really up to Bob Mueller and his investigators.

I mean, there's a - there's a school of thought that says he's not going to come in with

any charges before the midterms, so we don't know.

ROBERT COSTA: It's up to Bob Mueller. That's the answer for most of the end of this

program, it's true. (Laughter.) Thanks, everybody, for joining us. Our conversation

will continue on the Washington Week Extra. We'll look back at Secretary of State

Mike Pompeo's congressional testimony this week and find out what it revealed about

U.S. foreign policy. You can find that later tonight at PBS.org/WashingtonWeek.

I'm Robert Costa. Thanks for joining us.

For more infomation >> The U.S. economy surges to a 4.1% growth rate while the trade war persists - Duration: 25:40.

-------------------------------------------

Jinx the Anarchist Sex Worker Goes to Washington - Duration: 7:41.

Today we are going to fight, we're gonna stand strong for what we believe in: each other.

Last month the corridors of power in Washington opened up to the world's oldest profession.

40 sex workers met with 30 members of Congress to push back

against the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act.

Why would professional lawmakers meet with professional law breakers?

Reason tagged along to find out why.

So what we're doing right now is super exciting because, as far as we know,

there has never been a sex worker lobby day on the hill, but there is today.

We're going to be going to our representatives, talking with them.

A lot of them aren't super familiar with sex worker rights.

Particularly in the wake of SESTA and how SESTA has impacted us.

SESTA is a bill that passed recently

that heavily restricts and criminalizes advertising for sex work on the internet.

The Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act or SESTA

would allow sex trafficking victims to have their day in court

by eliminating federal liability protections for technology providers that knowingly, knowingly

facilitate online sex trafficking.

Today when the house votes on FOSTA, we will be sending a clear message

businesses that sell human beings online can no longer do so with impunity.

FOSTA stands for Fighting Online Sex Trafficking Act.

It is a law that purports to fight minors being forced into sex work

and it purports to do it by increasing liability for online intermediaries.

The bill also provides increased criminal liability and thus deters websites and individuals

from selling human beings online.

Websites will no longer be able to turn a blind eye

or actively conceal this horrific practice

without facing very real consequences.

The federal government says if you're an online platform,

you generally are not liable for what goes on, by users, on your site.

FOSTA and SESTA before that are the first steps towards enforcing more liability

allegedly to go after sex traffickers.

We're really fooling around in an odd way that you don't expect.

We're fooling around with one of the legal foundations of the internet

that's been really so successful particularly with social media.

Cragislist and Reddit have already shuttered sections of their website

citing FOSTA liability concerns.

Facebook, and other large technology companies have backed the legislation

while a trade group representing startups has opposed it.

Thank you very much for being with us today as we sign this crucial legislation

to combat online sex trafficking and bring criminals to justice.

Signing the bill was very much in character for President Trump.

It's a bill in which it appeals to people's gut instincts about things.

It doesn't ask questions about are we going about this in the right way,

what are the costs, you know all of those issues, populists don't ask those questions.

Thank you mister President.

The only surprising thing is he didn't support it more strongly

and I think that's probably because he himself has legal and indeed political issues

connected to various kinds of sexual issues let's say.

Today Carl Ferrer, the CEO of Backpage.com

the man behind what authorities are calling one of the world's top online brothels

facing criminal charges for the very first time.

The purpose of government is not to make people into better people morally.

If government's role is to enforce a majority or a minority's view

you're going to be coercing people who are pursuing their idea of what the good life is.

To even discuss sex work is something that we weren't sure what the response would be for that.

And that is the problem that we're trying to overcome here right now

is the lack of communication because we've found that most people

don't even know what FOSTA and SESTA are slash were.

And that they were very effectively manipulated essentially

into believing that it was truly an anti-trafficking law

when in reality it is hurting survivors of trafficking and itr's really hurting sex workers.

Sex workers often advertise on the internet as a way to screen clients.

And this is a huge help in keeping people safe.

If you don't have the ability

to check on someone's criminal record for example before meeting up with them

you don't know if they could be violent or not.

And because FOSTA limits in a lot of ways the ways I am able to advertise and run my business

it makes it more dangerous for me.

The Department of Justice had sent over a letter, very last minute

kind of sticking to the, I don't know if I'd call it ad hoc,

but the fast moving nature of the bill

that they obviously weren't even consulted before it was brought to the floor.

And even DOJ was saying that they question highly the constitutionality.

We live in a system where the process is supposed to be deliberative, it's supposed to be fairly slow,

you're supposed to have committee work, it's supposed to be informed and detailed

the original law had many problems and there was a lot of informed criticism of it

and Congress on the house side was responding

but then suddenly it was pulled out of committee on the house side

brought to the floor for a vote and passed and then signed by President Trump.

Once it got out of that and got defines as 'are you for or against

coercively forcing children to engage in sex.'

You know, that was the definition and no one was gonna vote for that.

These are tough bills because you, the titles of them and what people say that they do-

it's a set up, because then it's going to be an election year

and it's like 'well this person voted for child slavery.'

He was great!

-find a meeting that goes better than that one!

I mean he talked to us for an hour-

I don't often leave a building feeling hopeful for my government.

Exactly, yeah feeling like 'wow I feel like I'm being represented by my elected officials.'

Over 30 more congressional representatives would open their doors to Jinx

and other sex worker activists that day.

And by the end of the month, the Electronic Frontier Foundation

joined Human Rights Watch and the Woodhull Freedom Foundation

in a lawsuit challenging FOSTA in federal court.

What do we do?

Stand up, fight back!

I'm not saying I'm happy with Washington D.C.

I''m not saying I'm happy with the politicians.

I'm glad they did the thing that they are supposed to do, which is represent us.

So you can't bring down the whole system overnight.

We can't decriminalize sex work overnight either.

But as we continue to have dialogue with our representatives.

Perhaps we can shift it a little bit closer to the kind of government that we say we have.