maybe something happened. i'm not blaming anybody. i'm saying maybe nothing happened and maybe it did. there was a different attitude by the north korean folks when -- after that meeting. so i don't think it was a great meeting. nobody knew about the meeting, and all of a sudden it was reported that he was in china second time. the first time everybody knew about, the second time was like a surprise. and i think things changed after that meeting. so i can't say that i'm happy about it. >> with me now, cnn global affairs analyst joseph eun, he secured the release of american otto warmbier from north korea. it's nice to have you back, joe, and talk to you begin. let's talk with president trump. he seemed to incinerate that it was china, that it was x wi who may have been the one who moved

kim jong un away from this summit. >> i would say it is entirely consistent with the chinese position to want to slow this down. they are worried. i mean, yesterday we heard vice president pence saying, you know, president trump will not get played. i think the chinese are telling kim jong un don't get played by trump. so it is consistent. what china wants is above all to have action for action, slow it down, see how it goes. what washington wants is immediate and quick denuclearization. and i would say right now after what meetings with the chinese leader, certainly kim jong un is getting some second thoughts. >> i read that you say between we're talking kim and the two men today, trump and moon, you say it's moon who has the most at stake, that it's south korea.

why do you say that? >> well, it was, of course, moon's idea beginning with just after he got elected, ramping it up during the winter olympic games and now a bit of shuttle diplomacy going back and forth. more than that, his whole domestic policy platform, domestic politics, is based on this. remember, one day after the singapore meeting june 13th, there are very important regional elections in south korea where he's leading by a whole bunch. so there are electoral reasons for moon as well history reasons and so he has most at stake. >> and he's one who floated the notion of a nobel peace prize for president trump depending on howe this whole thing goes. one of the things was he guaranteed kim jong un's personal safety.

>> i will guarantee his safety. yes, we will guarantee his safety. we've talked about that from the beginning. he will be safe. he will be happy. his country will be rich. his country will be hard working and very prosperous. they're very great people. they're hard working, great people. >> when you hear that president trump, joe, is guaranteeing the safety of kim, how can he do that? and that he will be rich and happy, et cetera. >> well, i think this is fundamental misunderstanding of where north korea is. now, kim jong un and north koreans think they are negotiating from position of strength. they have the nuclear weapons. they have icbm. so they're saying why us? you guarantee our security? no, hold on there, we're not going to go in there with the idea of surrendering

immediately, which is what the demand from washington is. so there is this huge mismatch between the expectations in washington and in pyongyang. >> but on the mismatch and the expectations, if north korea, and that's a big if, if north korea agrees to give up their nukes, they're going to want something in exchange. what is that something you think? >> their something is complete security guarantee, regime survival and, quite honestly, we can give no first attack security guarantee that we will not be attacking first. but we cannot guarantee personal security. we cannot guarantee regime security. we cannot control what the north korean people do themselves. >> despite what the president did guarantee today. this is happening, the backdrop, is north korea has invited a

select few journalists to witness the closing of one of its nuclear sites and our own correspondent is there in north korea as well. watch. >> we're going to be traveling to the north korean mountains to the nuclear test site. to give you a sense of just how remote this area is, we'll have to take a train about 11 hours into the mountains and then it's a four-hour drive beyond that, maybe more in roads are bad because of the weather and an additional at least one-hour hike just to that, just to get to the nuclear test site. this is a place that has never been seen by fornl journalists before. the north koreans say they'ring transparent here, that they're bringing us, the press, to show you the implosion of tunnels and removal of buildings and shutdown of entire areas. some say this is all for show,

that they can be rebuilt but the north koreans say that's not the case. they say this is a good faith gesture that they are willing to work with the united states and its allies to give up the nuclear weapons ahead of these crucial planned talks in singapore next month between the north korean leader kim jong un and president trump. >> joe, a u.s. defense official told cnn that many in the administration think the closing of that test site is just a total p.r. stunt. is it? >> well week don, we don't know. we really don't know. we don't have enough information. certainly the number of steps north korea has taken, including closing of that plant as well not testing nuclear icbm i would say is not insignificant. and they have some right to feel they've taken the first steps and they want to see the next steps from washington. i think the gap is so wide now

and really president moon has his work cut out for him. >> joseph yun, thank you. >> during that meeting, president trump was also asked about his demand that the justice department look into the fbi or justice department infiltrated or surveilled the trump campaign for political purposes. at issue the fbi's use of this confidential source. president trump didn't refer to this person as that, he kept using the word spy. here he was. >> a lot of people are say being they h -- saying they had spies in my campaign. that would be a disgrace to this country. that would be one of the biggest insults that anyone has ever seen andprobably illegal. if they had spies during my campaign for political purposes, that would be unprecedented in the history of our country. >> with me now journalist, author, cnn political author

carl bernstein. nice to see you again. >> good fob wito be with you. >> the president's use of the word spy, the correct word is confidential source. >> heme menant it to be nefario to intervene into a legitimate information into his conduct, the conduct of his family, the conduct of his campaign related to what happened in the presidential campaign and whether the russians intervened with aid from his campaign. this is a legitimate investigation that at every turn he tries to undermine and demean and this is part of the coverup what we are watching, a coverup by the president of the united states. >> isn't that what so much of this is about is undermining mueller? >> of course. >> we don't know how the -- what the end of the movie is, right, but whatever the findings, this would undermine it.

>> that's what he saw the to do go from beginning, on the press, to make the conduct of everybody else involved except himself, his aides and his family the issue here. take a look at what chris christie said today about mueller. he said bob mueller is not a partisan guy. so far a number of guilty plea, a couple of indictments in a year. pretty good work. as i've said all along, to the president he means, bob mueller's honesty and integrity never have been questioned and shouldn't be and having worked with him for seven years, i still haven't questioned his integrity. i might have read a word or two here. here you have chris christie during the campaign saying look, he's not only a good guy, he

conducting a legitimate investigation that's making progress. leave it alone. the president, by contrast, will not leave it alone as this investigation is closing in on him and members of his family. that's what we're witnessing. and what's so extraordinary is that his coverup is being aided and abetted by republicans in congress and helped by his base rather than seeking the facts here. >> on that note, carl, adam schiff says history will judge this congress harshly for not being strong enough to act against -- >> i think history will judge everyone including congress and members of the republican party, what they did at this juncture in history when this abuse of power and coverup by the president of the united states occurred and none of that is to say that this coverup is necessarily an obstruction of justice. we don't know all the this

evening but if, as he says, there's no there there, no collusion there, even though we have seen members of his family, his closed e aides invite with enthusiasm collusion ant -- this is a coverup. that's what we need to keep our eyes on. he is trying to interfere in this investigation and what we seen from the deputy attorney general rosenstein is trying to protect and keep this investigation alive before trump shuts it down, which trump has told people around him he is intent on doing. >> one of the questions was about the deputy attorney general and on that the president wouldn't answer on rod

rosen stein in front of hoon. >> stick around with me, carl bernstein. i want more from you as we wait for sarah sanders to take the podium. the journalists are ready to roll. quick break. we'll be right back. with an t originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. allow you to take advantage of growth opportunities... with a level of protection in down markets. so you can be less concerned about your retirement savings. talk with your advisor about shield annuities from brighthouse financial- established by metlife. introducing walit's a great days. for a great deal! tender, center-cut sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, a draft beer or a coke, all for just $9.99.

only for a limited time. so don't walk, run to outback. ♪ ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ just say the words ♪ and we'll beat the birds down to acapulco bay ♪ ♪ it's perfect for a flying honeymoon they say ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪

we're back. live pictures inside the press briefing room as we wait for sarah sanders to take to the podium. let's go to pamela brown who is standing by, our senior white

house correspondent. pamela, so many headlines made. oh, here she is. product meeting with south korean president moon. this is the sixth visit between them. significant conversations on important issues including the scheduled u.s./north korea summit. both leaders are kmicommitted t working together to accomplish the common goal of complete denuclearization of the korean peninsula. it's commencement season and the president and first lady would like to embassy tend a special graduation, bob graduated from the university of toledo this month after review of his transcripts from the late 1940s, showed he completed enough courses to qualify for an associates degree. his hard working diligence and passion to learn exemplified the greatest generation's commitment

to excellent and as you know, the president answered questions earlier and as a result we'll keep this short and lets get started. jonathan. >> reporter: do you agree with the south korean official who say there would be a 99% chance that the summit with kim jong un comes off? and how will the president ultimately make the decision about whether or not to go? >> the president addressed this earlier directly to you and said that we'll see what happens. we continue to prepare for for the summit and if they want to meet we will certainly be ready and the president i think rightly stated that if north korea agrees to denuclearize it can be a bright future for them. we continue to prepare. >> reporter: what preconditions does he have? what does he see the north koreas have to do to make the trip? was it premature to make those

coins commemorating the summit? >> on the first part of your question, the president has laid out what he wants to see as a commitment to denuclearization. that has not changed. in terms of. coi -- of the coins, this is not something the white house has anything to do with. we don't have any input on the design, the process, this is a standard procedure by the white house communications agency, made up exclusively of career military officials and these coins are designed and done by that organization. pamela? >> reporter: thank you, sarah. why would the u.s. guarantee the regime of a dictator who is a serial rights violator and responsible for the recent death of an american college student. why is that the right things to do? >> the goal would be to have complete and total denuclearization of the peninsula. the president has been up front about that part of the conversation and we're going to continue to move forward.

>> reporter: just a follow-up really quickly. >> i'm going to keep moving because we're going to be really short today. >> you talk about preparations for the summit. can you describe for us how the president himself is personally preparing? who is he working with, how much time does he devote on a daily basis to get ready for the underlying themes, questions and difficulties on a summit of this magnitude? zas you all know, he spent a significant amount of time meeting both in person and having regular phone conversations with other world leaders like you saw today with south korean president moon as well as he has constant and regular meetings with his national security team. this is something they talk about on a daily basis and will continue to in preparation. jordan. >> reporter: i want to ask about this meeting regarding documents that they've requested about the russian investigation. can you say what specific documents the lawmakers will be allowed to see?

chairman nunez has requested all documents related to intelligence sourcewill . will he get to see all the documents? >> reporter: the president asked chief of staff kelly to set up the meeting. it is set to take place on thursday this week. the individuals expected to attend are chairman nunez, chairman gowdy, fbi director wray, dni director croates and d.o.j. director ed o'callahan. no one from the white house will attend. >> north koreans are bringing in george i journalists to see a denuclearization site. what are the white house's comments on this? >> i don't have any comments on that. >> reporter: can you tell us the outcome of discussions between the south korean president and

president trump today about the size and cost of u.s. troops in south korea? >> the focus, at least in the meeting that i was in, that specifically did not come up but certainly conversations primarily centered around preparations towards the scheduled summit. darlene. >> reporter: you said no one from the white house staff will attend the meeting on thursday. does that not mean that the chief of staff would not attend? >> he's charged with coordinating and making sure it took place but at this point is not expected to attend. michael. >> reporter: can you respond to why no democrats would be at that meeting? the democrats have said they think it's inappropriate to have a meeting set up with just republicans and the justice department. would the white house welcome democrats to be at that meeting? >> we'll keep you posted. my understanding is they haven't been the ones requesting this information. >> reporter: they say to the

extent that the white house is brokering a deal between the justice department and -- >> i hardly call brokering a deal to help coordinate a meeting and help congress receive information that they've requested. to my knowledge the democrats have not requested that information. so i would refer you back to them on why they would consider themselves randomly invited to see something they've never asked to. jeff. >> reporter: the president spoke at length this morning about his vision or sol use to dealing with chinese company zte. both republicans and democrats on the hill are criticizing that saying he is bowing to pressure from beijing. senator schumer called it a wet noodle solution. what's the white house's response to that? >> there are a number of issues we're constantly having conversations, zte is one of those. this is something the president has asked commerce to look into

and he's outlined some possible actions against zte by commercial but at this point they're still in cushion and there's nothing else to add beyond what the president already said this morning. >> did he respond to their criticism of what they have said on capitol hill? >> like i said before, senator humor is probably not somebody this without will and certainly i think his weakness when it comes to china, we finally have a president who is actually calling out china on their unfair trade practices and not just calling them utility but actually doing something about it and aggressively pushing forward in negotiations, something that we haven't seen in decades and so senator schumer is probably the last person we would call and ask for on how to make a deal. >> anita. >> i wanted to change top, what

reporters were barred from going too the event and one was forcibly removed. do you approve of how that was handled? >> we'll look into the matter. i know epa has put out the statement. at this point i'd refer to you them as we look into the incident. certainly we weren't there and were in other meetings here but something we are certainly going to look into. at this point i'd refer you to the statement the epa put out. i can't speak to a situation i don't have a lot of visibility into. >> the president in the oval office said he was disappointed after his second meeting with xi jinping kim jong un seemed to have a change of attitude. is china a spoiler and why? >> the president spoke to this directly. there's nothing more to add at

this point. mike. >> reporter: can you add more about the president's comments, you said that china, south korea and japan were willing to invest very large mums is the u.s. planning to add to that very large sum? >> i don't have anything to add beyond the president's comments. >> can you talk at all about what president moon said about kim -- about the new tenor coming out of pyongyang, what president trump learned in the we're going to continue in preparation. we'll see what happens. >> is there any situation barring a security incident in which you feel the white house feels it is appropriate to physically touch or physically handle -- >> i'm not going to weigh into random hypotheticals that may or may not exist.

you're asking me to speak to blanket possibilities, which i'm not going to do nor would i never ask you to do. john, go ahead. >> reporter: thank you, sarah. there's been considerable discussion back and forth about the tenure of speaker ryan, whether he will relinquish his gavel early and have a new election of a speaker before the elections. conservative lawmakers on capitol hill made it clear that they want ryan to stay, congressman warren davidson said that's unfair to the new members coming in and he also said that there should be a discharge position so members can have an up-and-down vote on repeal of the affordable care act and

immigration. does the president agree stwawi the states of the congressman? >> i haven't spoken to the congressman. i wouldn't want to weigh in on that. john. >> reporter: the president spoke about the protections he's prepared to offer not only personally but also for his country. in preparing for these meetings and when the summit date actually takes place, does human rights take any consideration in the meeting president trump will have with kim jong un? >> i'm not going to get ahead of the discussion that the president and kim jong un could have, but certainly we would expect that would come up and be addressed. charlie. >> reporter: following up on john's earlier question, does the president back speaker ryan's decision to stay in office until after the election or is he concerned that there's maybe a period of time when he's not getting as much done as he could serving as a lame duck speaker? >> at this point that's something for speaker ryan and

members of congress to make that determination, not something that the white house has weighed into at this point. francesca. >> reporter: thank you, sarah. we heard from president trump before that meeting with president moon, but after sitting down with him, does president trump feel more like the summit is worth having and that it will happen? and what is the white house's drop dead date so to speak for deciding whether or not to go to the summit? >> we're going to continue to prepare and see what happens. nothing more to add at this point. ben? >> in gaza the violence continued today. does the white house have any plans to meet with the palestinian authority? >> there are no changes at this point but if something changes, we'll let you know. >> so carl bernstein with me here. let's just run through some of what we heard beginning with this thursday meeting, the white house has a meeting between the justice department officials.

one of the questions was this was nunez and galdi, republicans who want this information from the d.o.j. and the democrats are saying no, you shouldn't be turning over your confident information and confidential source. somebody asked sarah are democrats invited to this meeting? she said we'll keep you meeting but nobody's shown interest. >> let's look at this meeting for what it is, which is a here herring in which the president of the united states once again has tried toin floun introduce of a deep state conspiracy of which the fbi investigation, the mueller investigation has been fainted by efforts to persecute him instead of to try to find out what happened with the russians and indeed other

matters that the special prosecutor is charged to investigation. who attends this red herring of a meeting is much less important than his intervention. the democrats might well be admitted and get to see this information, but what we are witnessing is the president trying to put on a parallel and equal split screen track investigate the investigators, not the russians what they did, not the possibility of collusion and it is all part of a coverup. and it remains to be seen whether he will let this investigation go forward to its conclusion, an investigation which, as i've indicated by reading chris christie's comments is making real progress according to mr. kriscristie.

i think that's are the kind of things that republicans ought to pay attention to rather than the notion of a deep state conspiracy of which there is no evidence that it exists. >> stay with me, carl. joe e es -- joseph moreno with s well. did the d.o.j.'s response enable or diffuse the situation in right move or wrong move? >> it's hard to say, brooke. i remain confident in our institutions at the department of justice, i remain confident in rod steen, at i would hope in they were asked to do something improper that they would push back. i think as a trip wire, hopefully that's still in tact. i mean, the president of is

there's nothing with impolice ently wrong to investigate an allegation of something that could have gone wrong. that being said, there is not a president who will sit itslely by and let the investigation unfold. it's a distraction. it's a red herring and a way to distract from the underlying subject matter. >>are you saying the deputy attorney general felt he wasn't being asked anything improper? >> i have to think if he were, knowing rod rosenstein, he must have pushed back. he must have made a decision that what he was doing was still within the realms of appropriateness. it probably will not play out to anything. it probably will not bear any fruit, but it's probably not improper, at least at this stage. i have to think he made that determination. >> i think we need to look at the question once again of rosen stein trying desperate all

right, i will call this meeting. we'll take a look at this because if he doesn't, he's subject to being fired by the president of the united states. that's the underlying thank here. whether it's an objection or not he first rim is spy, quote, in his campaign as opposed to what the fbi calls confidential informationant. >> sources. >> confidential informants or sources. i've looked at many investigations by the fbi in my career. they are riddled. >> and the purpose is to obtain

has been alleged to be a spy, quote, the confidential source, his purpose and task from what we know was to find out through questioning, whatever means seems appropriate of some people in the trump campaign, even perhaps leading them on with some questions, to find out whether there were some nefarious dealings but indeed this is another opportunity, we got to see very clearly the president of the united states has been re if believe this investigation is a pitch hunt. cler yet we have a whole

political party going along with the fiction of a witch hunt because, one, that political party in congress is afraid of president trump's base and wouldn't tra did and, two, they are demonstrating that they're not interested in the truth of what happened here, they're interested in their high deand the natural instant s as and. >> carl bernstein, thank you. joe moreno, thank you as well. coming up, president trump is laying out deals with a chinese telecom company that the we'll discuss whether the president also won this round. president trump now saying his summit for north korea may or may not happy. what's the story about this challenge join?

>>

hey! we didn't have a homeowners claim last year so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships. get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it.

president trump is denying reports that the u.s. and china have reached a deal that would save zte. if it goes through, "the wall street journal" reports that the u.s. would lift a crippling sales ban on zte. while trump is facing criticism for even negotiating a deal, he says it will help american companies. >> we caught them doing bad things. we caught them. not anybody else. we caught them doing bad things and we essentially made it so difficult that it was shut down. by shutting them down, we're hurting a lot of american companies, really good american companies. and i will tell you, don't think that we didn't hear from them by

shutting down this massive phone company. so what i envision is a very large fine of more than a billion dollars, could be a billion-three. i imagine a new management, new board and very strict security rules and i also envision that they will have to buy a big percentage of their parts and equipment from american companies. >> with me now cnn senior economics analyst steven moore back with us, a former trump economic adviser. and also with me peter barnard. peter, listening to the president that this would benefit american companies, is that spin or is it truth? >> it really completely contradicts the broader argument he's been making, if you think about the argument for steel or aluminum tariffs. there are lots of u.s. companies

that are hurt by the fact that they would have to pay more for steel and aluminum if they can't get the best price for those components of what eththey make overseas. the logic that trump is offering that we need to help these companies because they sell things to american companies is exactly the logic critics were using against his protectionist policies generally. >> marco rubio for one, republican, calling out the president's deal making ability. you have chuck schumer saying president got played. this is the type of insult that will no doubt infuriate president trump. this has been one of his signature issues for decades and these are the reviews. stephen moore. >> a couple of things. first of all, donald trump is the first president in a long time to take on china in a very frontal way and stand toe to toe

with beijing and say no more. we know they've been cheating week know they've been stealing to the tune of about $ $300 billion to $400 billion a year. i'm a free trade guy but i believe it is time that we have a president that stands up to cln a china and demands concessions from them. i think zte is a poker chip in this grander negotiation, which is whether china will stand down and make concessions. the latest i'm hearing is that president trump is getting frustrated that there has been not as much progress as we'd like to see that, beijing is stone walling right now and the big question ahead of us putting aside of zte issue is whether or not there will be these very large tariffs imposed on china as a way to punish them. that's on hold for now but i think it's only a slight reprieve. i think we're going to have to force china back to the bargaining table here.

it's a big problem. we can't continue with them stealing and cheating. >> isn't this also zooming out peter and we've been talking about north korea in this impending summit, will it or won't it happen next month? china is a key player here. we're hearing from the u.s. administration that it's china who maybe influenced kim jong un in the last week or so to back off this potential for the summit. would it explain how the president is behaving toward china and zte and tariffs to make sure this whole thing happens. you with me? >> yeah. i feel like donald trump seems not to recognize is that america doesn't have unlimited leverage over every country. other countries have leverage over us. the most important this evening you have to do in foreign policy as in life is to prouioritize. if you pick fights with everybody simultaneously, you're not likely to win on any of them.

china is north korea's most important economic partner. if we're picking a massive fight with them, get to the brink of a trade war, what do you think the impact of that going to be on our ability to get them to do what we want on north korea? the president has to prioritize. that seems to be what he's unable to do. >> let me just respond to that. first of all, north korea is just a puppet regime. they do whatever beijing tells them to. >> that's not true. no serious north korea watcher would say that. >> i believe they're a puppet regime. north korea -- south korea is the only country they do business with. these are both big priorities. we have to denuclearize north korea. we need to -- we can't stand down here. i think that's the point. there's too many people, i think, on the liberal side or

basically -- >> gentlemen, for give me. surprise, it's the secretary of state at the state department briefing. let's listen. >> creating conditions such that the north korea regime no longer threatens the world. final thought, i gave some remarks yesterday on the president's strategy with respect to the islamic republic of iran and i think it's important that i reemphasize that the tasks that iran needs to undertake aren't that difficult. i've seen reports that these are a fantasy and they can't happen, but we asked for things that are really very simple that, frankly, most nations in the world engage in. we asked them to stop firing missiles into riyadh. it's not a fantasy to imagine the iranians not to fire missiles into another nation and

threatening american lives that travel through that airport. it's not a fantasy to ask them to cease engaging in terror. these were all a set of demands, demands we put on the rest of the world. if it was the case that some other country in the middle east desired to build a nuclear weapons system, we would work to stop them, too. these are a set of simple requirements that the irani iai regime could quite easily comply with and it would benefit the iranian people to an enormous extent. frankly, what we laid out seemed like a pretty straight forward set of requirements that we would put on any country in the world, to stop maligning behavior that threatens its neighbors and other areas of the world. i will take a couple questions. >> yes, matt, good to see you in

washington. >> good to see you, too. i had to think where i was for a second. >> it's certainly not pyongyang. >> reporter: we have just met but if you were a betting man, what would you say about this meeting coming off at the date and venue that's been set? are you prepared to go back or to meet again, wherever, with kim jong un if that is decided -- if that's necessary to actually fully prepare for a summit? >> i'll take your second question first. second one is we will do what it takes to make sure that this is a successful meeting, whether that's meeting with the north koreans in some third country or whatever it may take. we are prepared, the president will ask us to ensure that we've done all we can to make sure that we have the real

and i'm not a betting man. i wouldn't care to predict whether it would happen, only to predict that we'll be ready in the event that it does. >> mr. secretary, thanks very much. there were reports that when you met with kim jong-un you were looking at a sunset and he said won't it be great if there were american hotels lining the scene. do you believe that he's open to the idea of american investment in north korea and can you also give us your thoughts on what would explain the change in tone from north korea, the president said he thought china had something to do with this? >> you mean the tone -- this past week? >> in the past week. >> the trajectory. no, i'm not going talk about that -- speculate about that and we're continuing to do our work and lay the foundation for a successful meeting and i'm confident we'll get there.

with respect to chairman kim, i haven't spoken publicly about the conversations we've had. they were between he and i. but i do have a real sense that he would -- he would find american investment and american technology and know-how of real value to his people and it is something that he and i had a chance to speak about generally. and i do think -- i do think it is something if we get this right and we get the denuclearization right, that america would be quite capable of delivering them with lots of things that would make life better for the north korean people. >> thank you. the south korea government put the chances -- not talking specific numbers but at 99% -- >> i heard that. i heard they said 99%. >> is there something that gave president trump pause in direct conversation that this government had with the north

koreans and how would you describe since you've left pyongyang what kind of communication the united states has had with the government of north korea. >> i couldn't characterize that. if anything is giving us pause, kim asked for the meeting and we worked to find the date and location and got those set and since then we're driving on. it is clear, we're working to make sure that there is a common understanding about the contents of what will be discussed. but i'm optimistic. but again, it could be something that comes right to the end and doesn't happen, as the president said we'll see and that is the place that we find ourselves. >> so the president said -- thank you. the president said that the summit might be delayed. are you discussing now the -- the possible new date or it being delayed with the north koreans and what are the issues that would prevent it to be on june 12th?

are there logistical or things you want to discuss with them? >> we're still working toward june 12th. >> and you're discussing this with them? >> we're working toward june 12th. >> mr. secretary, if i could turn to iran, in your speech yesterday you talked about this unprecedented financial pressure that you want to -- on iran. i think your critics when think bring up the idea of a fantastic because the europeans won't go along with you on the sanctions and you can't re -- re re crate this pressure and how do you get others to go along like china and russia that continue to abide by the agreement. >> it is straightforward. this is a global this is a global challenge. i mentioned in my remarks yesterday, kud force -- it is a shared threat across the world

and i'm confident that we could develop a diplomatic response that achieves the simple out comes -- we wouldn't tolerate iceland doing what the iranians are doing. we wouldn't tolerate chad -- i'm tripping through the alphabet. we wouldn't put proxy forces that threaten americans in iraq -- the list is wrong. we wouldn't tolerate that. if someone created the equivalent of hezbollah, would we sit by? russia and china don't see that as a positive impact around the world either. so i'm confident there is a set of overlapping values and interests that will drive us to the same conclusion about the need to respond to the islamic republican of iran's threats to the world -- >> we have to move along.

>> if we could just go back to the president's comments discussing china and he was -- he caused some alarm when he spoke about chi's second meeting with second meeting with kim jong-un and do you know about that meeting and why he's so hesitant to say the chinese were helpful in that meeting. >> i don't have anything to add to what the president said there. >> are the chinese helping push forward the u.s. and kim jong-un summit? can you talk about that role? >> the chinese have offered historic assistance in the pressure campaign. literally history assistance. president trump made clear and i have, too, it is central that the pressure remain in place and that china continue to participate in the pressure campaign and we have ever reason to expect they will continue to do so.

>> hi. >> president rouhani said yesterday that he questioned, who are you to tell another nation what to doo in its foreign policy. who are you to tell them, and what response do you have to him? >> i didn't see those remarks. the iranian people get to choose. the iranian people get to choose the kind of leadership and the kind of government they want. they get to choose the individuals who lead their country and then they get to live with the choices that those leaders make. i wasn't describing what mr. rouhani should do or what mr. zarif should do but only articling what merkamerica -- w america intends to so. >> thank you, mr. secretary. so my question on iranian hostage, yesterday you mentioned that the government is working very hard to bring the american hostage home. could you please give us an

update and elaborate what effort is underway giving the frosty relations -- >> yes, i suppose one might have two months ago described the relationship of the united states and dprk as frosty and we returned three americans. we almost always have our citizens detained by countries that aren't friendly to us. we work -- we work to find mechanisms that deliver these important outcomes. i've talked to many family members and i know how central that is. you can rest assured that not only is the state department but the entire united states government working diligently to bring each -- i mentioned a handful of names yesterday. there are more around the world. i didn't identify them yesterday in the remarks. you should know we're working diligently along every avenue that we can develop to get these folks to return back home. back to their families. i'll take one more. >> thanks. i'm trying to make this worth

our time. on iran -- >> that would be useful. >> since it is our last question. the demands, whatever you want to call them, that you laid out for iran yesterday, it seems like -- partially because you laid them out and because of what they are, there is not much room for negotiation, if any, on any of those. would you agree with that and because of the way that was put out there, what makes you think that iran is going to be willing to work with the u.s. on this, if it is sanctions won't that take a very long time at this point? >> i don't know which of those demands, but should we allow them to be terrorists? is that when we should compromise -- how many missiles are they allowed to fire. the answer is -- the benchmark i set forth yesterday is very low standard, the behavior we expect from countries around the world. there aren't a special set of rules we set forward for iran and we simply asked them to behave the way normal non --

nonbelligerent countries behave. and so i have every reason to think that the iranian people want that for their country as well. this is a -- this is rich country with a deep sieve lizization a -- sand a deep civilization and i'm convinced the people of iran -- when they could see a path forward, which will lead their country to stop behaving in this way, will choose that path. thank you all. i look forward to seeing you down here. everybody have a good day. >> sect of state mike pompeo making headlines on iran and north korea. barbara starr, i have you for 30 seconds, your takeaway. >> i think he is speaking partially to the people of iran and hopes they hear him and a reasonable message in his view from the united states so he's talking to the people of iran. on north korea, he's talking to

kim jong-un. i think he is telling kim, stick with us, stick with the summit, it will be okay. that we believe that we can make a deal happen. there was doubt earlier today from trump, secretary mike pompeo trying to be more positive. >> and working toward june 12th and that date for the summit. barbara, thank you. and thanks for being with me. "the lead" with jake tapper starts right now. thanks, brooke. house republicans want an investigation of the investigators. but if the democrats win, will there be an investigation of the investigation of the investigation? "the lead" starts now. a democratic outcry after the justice department tries to work to find a way to address the president's political concerns about the russia investigation. now gop lawmakers say even that is not enough. is the justice department facing a potential constitutional crisis? the highly anticipated summit with north korea could be