that we cover. you can see it week night as 6:25 p.m. eastern. if you haven't checked it out, you should. it's a fun show. the news continues right now. i want to hand it over to chris. "cuomo prime time" starts now. >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." president trump is attacking the special counsel like never before, including a declaration today that he could be running the probe himself if he really wanted to. really? former a.g. michael mukasey is here. what he sees as the reality of what trump has to worry about and when the probe should end and how. we're going to zero in on why trump is so panicked about ducking the mueller interview. this notion of a perjury trap, is it real? one of his close confidants will be here with some insight into why trump is so newly panicked. and the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani, told me last week facts are in the eye of the beholder. i told him that's not true. he then went on another show and doubled down, saying the truth

is not the truth. is that just misspeaking or part of a campaign of deception? it's time to go deep. let's get after it. in an on the record interview with reuters, the president says that he could run the probe himself if he wanted. all this coming after his biggest tweet storm yet about mueller and word that his white house counsel cooperated with mueller's probe more than trump might have known. here to discuss that and much more, former attorney general michael mukasey. judge, good to have you as always. >> good to be with you. >> so if you were to hear that the president has decided, i'm taking over this probe. i'm taking it over. what would your reaction be? >> i would shake myself and wake up. >> just a dream? >> yeah. >> can he, or should he not? >> i -- i have no idea whether he can. i can't believe that he can. he'd have to fire mueller in the

process. of course not. it's ridiculous. >> he says he can. >> he says a lot of things. >> you're here to defend that proposition, by the way. >> which proposition? that he could run the probe? >> yes. >> come on. >> absolutely not? wrong move? illegal? unconstitutional? unpresidential? all? some? >> not -- not necessarily. look, he has the executive power. the executive power includes running the justice department, i guess. the attorney general is not provided for in the constitution. that's a statute that creates the justice department. but it would be zany. we'd be living innen even more unreal world than we're living in now, so i can't imagine it. >> so you dismiss it as bluster. >> i do. >> the idea about the white house counsel cooperating with the mueller probe, chris christie says huge mistake for trump's lawyers to let him do that. one, did they have a choice? and, two, do you agree?

>> they had a choice, and i don't agree with chris, not wit withstanding he's a very insightful guy. from the president's standpoint, i agree institutionally it's a bad thing because it 234er9 fears with the prerogatives of the president, including executive privilege. he has i think an obligation to successors to defend that. but given the fact that he waived and let him go in, i think it's helpful to him. >> when he found out it was 30 hours, does that sound like a long time to you? >> yeah, it sounds like a long time to me. >> in this context, i'm saying. >> look, i don't know what they were talking about. 30 hours for an interview is a long time. on the other hand, buried in "the new york times" story about that was the statement that so far as everybody understands, it was mcgahn's position that he never saw the president do anything outside his authority. >> his attorney told the president's legal team that mcgahn does not believe he incriminated the president in any way to mueller. >> okay. and add to that the fact that

when mcgahn was told to play some role in the firing of mueller, was told that he might play some role, and that the president said he himself would fire mueller, mcgahn's response and reaction was, you do that and i'm out of here. and it didn't happen. so what does that tell you about mcgahn? it tells you that if he saw anything criminal, he wouldn't still be working at the white house. >> the idea that the president wants to sit for an interview but is concerned that mueller is out to launch a perjury trap, what do you think of that? >> um, not entirely unreasonable. and there is, in fact, i think, a museum quality specimen of a perjury trap in this case. >> how so? >> it's the flynn prosecution. flynn was interviewed at the white house by peter strzok, their principal investigator, at a time when the fbi had him on tape with kislyak, the russian -- the russian

ambassador. they went to interview him about that conversation. now, they didn't have to interview him about that conversation. the only reason to interview him was to get him to make a misstatement so that he could then be prosecuted. >> there is a cynicism if not a jaundice attached to the idea of a perjury trap. it is a form of entrapment, and it is arguably prosecutorial misconduct. it means that you brought somebody in with no fact-finding purpose, that you did it just to try to trap them with their own words. do you think mueller would do that to the president? >> look, i think the predicate for that investigation, as i understand it, was a logan act violation by flynn. >> so you're suggesting that flynn was set up by the fbi? >> yes. >> but that seems to suggest that he did nothing wrong and that but for the fbi's actions, he would have never been in any trouble. >> look, it was strzok's initial impression, as related to his superiors, that flynn did not lie. he said that initially. they later reversed themselves and flynn was indicted for

making a false statement to an fbi agent. >> but as point of fact, judge, he's told them things that were not true and things that he should have known and recollected in realtime. >> right. maybe he did. and maybe he did it because he thought there was some impropriety about having the conversation with kislyak. >> that's why sally yates, then at the a.g.'s office, then went to don mcgahn and said you better figure out what's going on with this. >> i don't think there was any impropriety in that conversation at all. in fact i think flynn would have been committing malpractice if he had not had the conversation with kislyak. he is the guy who was going to be the national security -- >> then why did he lie about it? >> beats me. >> that's a good question, no? >> it's an excellent question, but i don't know the extent to which he lied, whether he said the conversation took place or what. i do know that it was strzok's initial reaction that flynn was being truthful. >> here's my problem with it in the context of the president. one, i could think off the top

of my head of ten fact finds questions that not only would be appropriate to ask the question to the president, but he's the only one who can answer them. so you have a legitimate fact-finding purpose in interviewing the president if you're conducting 9 mueller probe, yes? >> they're all questions about his state of mind. they're not questions about what he did. >> why not? >> because we know what he did, and we even know what he says about his state of mind. >> well, do we know? rudy giuliani right now is disagreeing with what i thought was an established fact, that the president had a conversation with jim comey, then the head of the fbi, about what to do with the mueller probe. he's saying the conversation never happened. there's a question of fact. >> whether it happened or not, i think what he was saying initially was that even if it happened, the account that comey gave of it is not incriminating of the president, and i agree with that. >> well, now he's taking another step and saying it never happens, which means jim comey is one of the biggest liars we've ever seen in our life. >> that's what the president said, that it didn't happen. comey apparently may very well have had a memo to the file

saying it happened. people write memos to the file to serve their own interest. comey is not above that. >> isn't what they're worried about is putting someone we know who has a problem with abusing the truth, who has a problem with freelancing, who has a problem with sticking to what he is told to do and putting him across from people who would be uniquely motivated to point that out? >> i think what they're concerned about is the ultimate fact here, which is that this is not going to end in a trial. it's not going to end in charges. it's going to end in the house of representatives with an argument in favor or against impeachment. and the only thing he would be doing is providing grift for that particular mill. there's no legitimate criminal investigation going on here. >> well, that's an opinion. but the idea that he does nothing but add grift to the mill, i would suggest -- >> no. there is this legitimate investigation of people other than him, but there's no possibility of bringing a charge against him. >> there is no possibility because the doj guidance. it doesn't mean that mueller's

main probe responsibility is to get the facts and find out what happened. the president's part of that. and you say, well, why would he do it except to give grift to that mill, that mill being something nefarious in your perspective. i'm saying -- >> no, not nefarious. it's for inclusion in a report to the house. >> right. >> that can then be used to consider impeachment. why would the president walk into that? >> because of the truth. he says he wants to tell the truth. if he doesn't sit down with mueller and we have some type of objective body, which i hold out hope that's what mueller is. everybody loved him until this probe didn't start going the way the president likes. now all of a sudden he's suspect. but if he doesn't sit down, it will always be an open question of whether or not he was hiding anything from the american people. fair point? >> fair point. but i would -- sitting in the president's place, i would rather have an open question than have somebody who went to hillary clinton's party and cried when she lost make the decision about whether i'm telling the truth or not. >> that's highly prejudicial,

though. if you were going to say that he were lying even if it's just in a report, you've got a standard of proof. that's a crime, perjury. it's not just we believe comey, we don't like you, so we're going to believe him and not you. >> you give reasons why, but ultimately it's a credibility decision, and i wouldn't want the credibility decision made by the people who are staffing that investigation. >> you don't have any concerns if you were representing the president that he would be able to tell the truth in the chair? >> i would have his concerns about his tendency, as you put it, to improvise. of course i would have concerns about that. i'm rational. >> judge, thank you for your perspective. as we go through this process, i will call on you time and time again. >> love to come back. all right. in a new attempt to discredit mueller, the president says study the late joe mccarthy. does he really want to be making comparisons to mccarthy now? the truth is the truth. something that we actually have to say these days. next. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish,

prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla.

otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

but climbing 58,070 steps a year can be hard on her feet, knees, and lower back. that's why she wears dr. scholl's orthotics. they're clinically proven to relieve pain and give you the comfort to move more. dr. scholl's, born to move.

to borrow a phrase from the bard, shakespeare, trump doth tweet too much. this latest set of salvos against mueller is the best proof yet that trump really thinks he has something to worry about. here is our latest raft of proof. 14 tweets. clearly these tweets were not guided by any steady hand. why do i say that? well, no one caught the repeated misspellings of the word counsel, and no one helped him

avoid self-harm. the proof of that, mccarthyism at its worst, he wrote. right? here's the tweet. study the late joseph mccarthy because we're now in a period with mueller and his gang that make joseph mccarthy look like a baby. rigged witch hunt. if anyone in politics can claim the mantle of mccarthyism, it is president trump. let us remind ourselves with the men side by side, senator mccarthy was a demagogue. he relied on conspiracy theories and zen oh phobia to generate fear. sound familiar? not to mention, do you know who mccarthy's lawyer was? roy cohn. you know whose personal lawyer he became? donald trump's. now, some more proof. just listen to how desperate the efforts are. it reminds me of groucho marx. who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes. >> i'm not going to be rushed

into having him testify so that he gets trapped into perjury. when you tell me he should testify because he's going to tell the truth and he shouldn't worry, that's so silly because it's somebody's version of the truth, not the truth. he didn't have a conversation -- >> truth is truth. i don't mean to go like -- >> no, it isn't truth. truth isn't truth. >> so what was that? was that a one-off, a misstatement, or is it part of a pattern of distortion and fabrication? listen to this. >> you're saying it's a falsehood, and they're giving sean spicer, our press secretary gave alternative facts. >> in a situation like this, you have, over time, facts develop. >> what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening. >> if fact-counting is anything, we've never had any anybody with the level of mendacity that he has, not even close. >> it's in the eye of the beholder. >> no, facts are not in the eye of the beholder. >> yes, it is. >> i said it then. i'll say it again. facts are not in the eye of the

behold herb. the truth is the truth. each one of those, you take them in isolation, and could you explain them as something kind of innocent? yes, of course you could. i could do that very easily. but taken together, what do we see? the same mistake keeps being made. what does that mean? it's not a mistake. it's part of a narrative to put out there, and it's one of deception. the president saying what's being seen and written about is not what's happening. listen. it all matters. there is no other reality than the one that we know because of what we can show. and if trump really wants to put an end to this, he can do it very easily. he could do it by demanding of himself what he has always demanded of others. sit down and state your case. no hiding. no pleading the fifth. in other words, let's get after it. all right. the president now says he can run the mueller investigation. can he? and what if he tried? what is behind the truth in this situation? is it the real truth or orwellian poppy cock.

that is the making of a great debate, next. i said it, poppycock. ♪ let your perfect drive come together during the final days of the lincoln summer invitation event get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models

plus one thousand dollars bonus cash. ♪ hawaii is in the middle of the pacific ocean. we're the most isolated population on the planet. ♪ hawaii is the first state in the u.s. to have 100% renewable energy goal. we're a very small electric utility. but, if we don't make this move we're going to have changes in our environment, and have a negative impact to hawaii's economy. ♪

verizon provided us a solution using smart sensors on their network that lets us collect near real time data on our power grid. (colton) this technology is helping us integrate rooftop solar, which is a very important element of getting us to our renewable energy goals. ♪ (shelee) if we can create our own energy, we can take care of this beautiful place that i grew up in. ♪

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network.

>> it's actually not respect -- >> those aren't exclusive, chris. i think from a legal advice perspective, it is. >> certainly trump's lawyers have taken and that's -- and will continue. >> i think bakari alluded to it. if i were on the trump legal team, i'd be advising him not to sit down with mueller for both of the reasons you started out with, chris. again, they're not exclusive with each other. and rudy giuliani, in his examples inartfully talked about who do you believe? is it only one or the other? his example is it comey's truth or is it trump's truth?

and only one or the other. and. >> you still have to prove it though, ken. >> you are correct. you are correct that there is an objective truth. something happened, and the american people as a general matter would like to know what those things are when it relates to their government. >> we don't get the god's eye view of who is telling the truth. >> well, that's not always true. that's not always true. sometimes it's yard, which by the way is a damn high standard. but, bakari, sometimes you will say one thing. i say another. one of us is right and one of us is wrong. >> yeah, i don't understand where all of a sudden we don't know the definition of truth anymore. i think that ken is not quite portraying what this investigation actually is, and i think rudy giuliani, although he's really shown himself to be inartful and a poorly disciplined attorney who has no idea what the facts of his client's case are, what we're seeing right now is that this

president, not only does he have trouble telling the truth, but he has trouble defining what truth is. i mean we live in a realm where we're talking about alternative facts. but in this case it's not just comey versus trump. i think that's where ken and the president and rudy get it wrong. it's not just comey versus trump. it's the words of cohen. it's the words of mcgahn. it's these investigators who have been out doing their due diligence for over a year now. so it's not just one statement. they're taking a totality of statements, putting them together, and if five people say one thing, odds are that is the truth versus donald trump. you would take those five. so it's not just comey saying something, but it's his presidential attorney saying those things. it's cohen saying those things when he has an opportunity to sit down with the investigators. it's not one or the other. we don't have to make that choice. and truth is truth. i don't understand why this is such a difficult task that we're putting ourself under. >> ken, one of the things i'd

love your take on is to the extent that this is true, okay, that the mueller probe made it somewhat clear to trump's guys, the legal team, that he's not a subject of the investigation, he's not a target of the investigation, they've interviewed dozens and dozens of people as far as we know. only a handful have they wound up catching lying in things because i think that's an important context for people because, you know, the trump team is making the supposition that anybody who goes in there, they're looking to get you and they're going to trip you up on your own words. they've had dozens and dozens go in and didn't get charged with perjury. the idea if he goes in them, they're going to get him, that's more on him than it is on them. fair point? >> yeah, i don't think the assumption is if he goes in there, they're going to get him. >> that's all they say all the time, ken. >> certainly if you're a lawyer advising the president, your job is playing defense frankly, and that would be, as i said

earlier -- that would be my concern if i was advising the president. and, you know, you look at michael flynn. i think there are serious questions about whether he actually lied to the fbi. as we heard earlier in your show -- >> then why did he take the plea? >> strzok himself -- for the same reasons that people like pat nolan and many others take a plea is they don't want to confront the potential alternative because the truth may not come out, and they know it. >> wait, i don't understand. let's take one more bead on that. >> sure. >> and they cut their losses. >> i get that argument in certainly criminal situations where you know they're going to get you on something so you try and cut yourself a good deal. but the argument keeps being made on behalf of michael flynn, general flynn, that, you know what, he did nothing inappropriate. he should have had that conversation with kislyak. there's nothing wrong with it. well, then, why did he lie about it, and why wouldn't you go to trial and let that come out? >> well, i don't know that that was the decisive factor.

i think remember in flynn's case, you had his son involved, and they were holding threats over his son over his head. that's a pretty common tactic. we'll drop all this stuff on all the people you care about if you just take the bullet. and, you know, that kind of tactic is not appropriate prosecution, but it is used. and from a prosecutor's standpoint, i've worked with prosecutors. i've managed prosecutors. sometimes they think that looks appropriate. and the way this has all unfolded, there is at least some basis to be paranoid. look, paul manafort is fini finishing -- his jury is in the third day of deliberation. if there was going to be a colluder within the trump campaign, it was going to be the guy who for years worked with the pro-russian ukrainians, paul manafort. they've gone all the way through. they threatened him with everything they had, and there are no charges related in any way to the election, nothing.

and papadopoulos, who we just saw the sentencing documents, you know, that came out from the prosecutor again. he's a big nothing-burger. >> listen, i get you. that's never been my bar as you know, ken. it's never been my bar is if you can't catch trump, then this probe is a waste. that's never been my bar. i'm saying, bakari, we'll dealing with a guy in the man of president trump who has said so many times over the years, you never plead the fifth. you never run and hide. if you've got something to say, you go and say it. and now he's not following his own advice. >> well, i think that's absurd. i think that sometimes it's in your client's best interest to plead the fifth. i think lawyers are giving donald trump -- not rudy giuliani, but lawyers giving donald trump sound advice not to sit down with mueller because they know their client. but to simply just say these are one-offs, i mean papadopoulos, let's talk about all of the liars that they have from the president of the united states, papadopoulos, michael flynn,

rick gates, paul manafort, jeff sessions, melania trump and her plagiarism. i mean the list goes on and on and on. so this isn't a one-off. this is a culture in the white house. and so right now that culture is meeting the rule of law. and all donald trump has is his bully pulpit where he's going to stand up and say i'm going to take over the investigation. i'm going to do this. i'm going to do that. but the rule of law in this country wins. so we can have these as i nine or absurd debates about what truth is. to quote stephen colbert, truthiness. we can have all of these fickle debates but the point is the truth is what it is. and donald trump and his white house have a culture of not telling the truth. when you sit down across -- because i've been in this room many times before -- across from a federal investigator, i remind my clients all the time. martha stewart did not go to jail for insider trading. martha stewart went to jail for lying to federal investigators. every single one of them who

have been charged with lying, they are liars. and most times you go to jail for a year and a day for that. >> we'll end it there with one little note. i covered that martha stewart trial just about every day and there's another rule to that. when the prosecutors come to you and they want to make a deal and they want to talk to you, think twice before you tell them to get out and you're not nice. and that's another thing that's in play here too. what has he said about these prosecutors? what does that mean to the process? when we get more facts, come back and we'll go at it again. my next guest can go even deeper. he talks to the president regularly, travels with him still as well. what is going on in the president's mind right now? wouldn't we all like to know? that handsome man on your screen, he's got the answer. is he going to give it up? he better, next.

come away with me barnabas! but i am a simple farmer. my life is here... [telephone ring] ahoy-hoy. alexander graham bell here... no, no, my number is one, you must want two! two, i say!!

like my father before... [telephone ring] like my father before... ahoy-hoy! as long as people talk too loudly on the phone, you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

hopefully life brought you something better so you didn't have to monitor twitter all weekend, but i have to tell you this was extraordinary. the president went after the special counsel with literally well over a dozen tweets. he then said he could run the probe himself, which is just, to quote former attorney general mukasey, zany. and he now seems to really be dug in about ducking the

interview. but, would you, does he seem freaked out. let's figure out why. let's get after it with former trump campaign manager corey lewandowski. welcome back to "prime time." >> thank you, chris. great to be here. >> why so freaked out all of a sudden? >> well, look, i don't think it's freaked out. what i think it is, is the president and by and large the american people are tired of an investigation which has proven nothing of collusion, cooperation, or coordination between the trump campaign and russians or anybody else for that matter and it's time to bring this witch hunt to a close. >> but then wouldn't you ignore it, corey? if it doesn't matter, if nothing's really coming out, ignore it. focus on all the great things you're doing. >> well, the president has done amazing things since he's been in office for the first 20 months. if you look at the unemployment rate, you look at the economy, you look at african-american unemployment, hispanic unemployment, women unemployment, young people unemployment, all at the lowest in recorded history. but this is something that's hanging over the administration, which should never have been

launched, should come to a close. and, look, we've spent tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on an investigation -- >> we spend tens of millions of dollars watching him play golf every weekend. the money is not the issue, corey. >> yeah, but chris, the issue is this. this mueller investigation has had the opportunity now to interview everybody, to talk to everybody. >> except him, except the man in the middle. >> but the president didn't do anything, chris. >> i'm not saying he did, but then why wouldn't he talk to mueller? how many times have you heard the president say, you see that guy plead the fif snth thth? that means he's guilty. if you've got nothing to hide, you talk. how many times has he said, i want to sit down with mueller? so do it. man up and do it. >> i'll tell you this. i've spoken to the president on numerous occasions where he's told me he has wanted to sit down with mueller. >> do it. >> but he's listening to his attorney. >> since when? you don't think his attorneys tell him, don't tweet?

you don't think thhis legal counsel are telling him to do things all the time that he doesn't listen? >> i don't actually think his attorneys tell him not to tweet. i think the american people love the way he works through twitter and his ability to go directly to them. look, i'm not a an attorney. >> i am. the tweets hurt. >> if somebody asks me should donald trump sit down with robert mueller, my answer is absolutely not. >> why? >> there's no value to it. because there's nothing to sit down for. >> truth. truth, my brother. sit down and tell the truth. >> what are we trying to get to? chris, chris, what is it that we think that the president needs to answer that's going to demonstrate that there was some type of collusion when we know it didn't exist? >> why does that have to be the bar? why can't he talk about what happened surrounding the instances of what they want to construe perhaps as obstruction? why can't he sit down and ask questions about what he knew about the meetings that his son and son-in-law took. >> chris, chris, i can't remember ever barack obama sitting down and having a

conversation or george w. bush ever sitting down and having a conversation about private matters or with a special prosecutor. >> we didn't have the russians knee-deep in our election and dozens and dozens of meetings between obama's guy or bush's guy, pick any guy, the way we've seen with this administration. >> look, it took a federal court order for bill clinton to be required to sit down and have a conversation with ken starr and his team. they refused to do it without a federal court order. that's a fact. >> no. he was subpoenaed, and it went away. clinton never required a subpoena to do it. >> of course he required it. they had to go to court to require the president to do this. >> no. the subpoena wound up going away. he wound up complying. now everybody is saying that was a mistake according to your legal reckoning. he should have never done it. so which is it? >> look, bill clinton was the former attorney general of arkansas, the governor, a yale-educated attorney, and he gets stuck on the word "is."

he gets stuck on the word "is." bill clinton ultimately lost his law license for lying to the special prosecutor. >> so? >> under oath and was disbarred. >> right. >> on the word "is." if you are an attorney, why would you ever recommend to your client that you sit down and have a conversation that you're not required to have with a member of the opposite side? >> corey, the argument that you're forwarding is no one should ever sit down with anybody and ever answer any questions because they may lie and they may get caught lying so they should never do it? is that a standard for the president of the united states, our highest elected official, a man who is supposed to be the paragon -- >> chris, the standard is very clear. you listen to legal counsel who has expertise in the field that you don't. donald trump is not an attorney. he's listening to his legal counsel. >> he says he knows better than the generals. he knows better than the intelligence community. but now all of a sudden some

lawyers tell him don't talk to mueller, and he forgets everything he's ever said about candor and truth before. >> well, with all due respect, the think the president has been a little busy question nuclearizing the korean peninsula -- >> how are we doing with that by the way? i thought the threat was over. >> chris, you know what just happened? >> what happened. >> u.s. soldiers' bodies were returned from north korea. that took place during the korean conflict. we finally get those soldiers back. that is a win for the american people. >> thank god for their families. thank god for the dignity of those men who served this country. it has nothing to do with denuclearization and don't do that. don't hold out their memories and their integrity of service and their families as a proxy for progress on what he was supposed to get done. it's about nukes, corey. >> a direct result of donald trump meeting -- >> he went and he hugged that guy who is an oppressive despot, who held those same bodies for years and called him a good guy. people love him. come on. >> one family member being

returned home was a direct result of this president having a conversation with kim jong-un. fact. you cannot deny that. that is a fact. those bodies would never have been returned. >> look, it's good that he got the bodies back. of course it's good. that wasn't the purpose of the summit. give me a break, corey. it's about denuclearization. >> chris -- >> come on. >> don't you think that's an important step? >> of course it is but i don't think it should be used as an excuse for getting nothing done with nukes. >> we're further along. >> and calling a guy who is a despot a good guy. come on. >> we are further along in denuclearization of the korean peninsula today than we have been in 30 years. >> the north koreans just called our proposals gangster proposals. that's good news? >> and look where north korea is. north korea is basically falling apart. they know the maximum harm campaign that we have put on them has hurt them economically. they have not tested a nuclear weapon or a test-fired a missile in nine months because this president has said if you do, there will be recourse. and the world is standing with

us. great britain is with us. france is with us. other nations of the u.n. are with us to make sure that we keep north korea in check because of the leadership of this president. >> i'll tell you what, it is good to hear someone close to the president recognize that you do need your allies abroad to help you get things done. i'm going to end the interview on that, corey. >> of course. >> because it's a ray of light on a cloudy day. thank you very much for joining me on the show. >> thank you, chris. >> i appreciate it. all right. melania trump, why is she pushing a message about bullying behavior and that it has to stop? she must know how hypocritical that sounds, not because of her, but because of who her husband is. he's the troll in chief. so what's going on with this mixed message out of the white house? d. lemon has a theory, next. sarah always chooses to take the stairs.

but climbing 58,070 steps a year can be hard on her feet, knees, and lower back. that's why she wears dr. scholl's orthotics. they're clinically proven to relieve pain and give you the comfort to move more. dr. scholl's, born to move.

if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.

the first lady, melania trump, offered some wisdom today on the dangers of cyber bullying. she reminded us all of its, quote, destructive and harmful toll. she said, most children are more aware of the benefits and pitfalls of social media than some adults. don lemon, is she talking about her husband? >> i guess so. you know who is in my office when you said my name, i had to

run. i just blasted here on the set. >> i gaves y you a heads-up. >> it sounds like she's talking about her husband, especially after her husband -- what did he call omarosa? crazed, crying, lowlife and a dog. it sounds like she's talking about him because she said the internet can be used or social media can be used in positive ways but can also be used in destructive ways. but it does sound like she's talking about her husband. >> it does, right? look, i don't know how else to take it. it doesn't make sense. i get boggled by a lot of things that happen in this white house, but you would never have her pick this. >> yeah. >> as a position with the president being the troll in chief the way he is. but then she wore that jacket on the way down -- and then that threw me for a loop because how could she wear that jacket? they said, well, she never saw the back of it. who sees the back of their jacket? that doesn't make any sense. in a world where everything is micro managed, how do they take these positions? >> chris, look, you and i don't

have secret service protection. a lot of people help us out. don't you think if i had a jacket on like that or you had a jacket on like that, someone would say to you, hey, chris, what do you mean by that jacket? what's going on with the back of your jacket? someone would say something. >> usually they're just telling me to put a shirt on. >> that part is true. when you think about it or talk to her people her people will say she's an independent first lady and we should be happy to have a first lady who's independent. the west wing and east wings are different and it seems different messages are coming out. especially and i want to tell you what's on the show tonight, the president called john dean a rat today. john dean is on the show and she's going to have a message for this president. i just want to tell you that. she's independent, but i don't think the message is going across well. i think it's contradictory and i

think she lost the moral high ground when she wore that jacket. >> that's the problem is it's good message. but is it good in the context of who she's married to. so we just got this memo that was written by the man trump wants to be our next supreme court justice. he wrote questions to ask a president as part of an independent council, kind of what mueller was, he's working for ken star. the questions will make you blush and wretch. but i will argue they'll make trump a lot more uncomfortable than you. why "morning express." let your perfect drive come together during the final days of the lincoln summer invitation event get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models

plus one thousand dollars bonus cash. hey, what do you guys wanna listen to? ooh, hip-hop! reggaeton. edm. what about bubble trance? bubble what? bubble trance. it's a thing. (man) oh. my point is, everyone's got different taste. that's why verizon lets you mix and match your family unlimited plan so everyone gets the plan they want, without paying for things they don't. and right now, the whole family can get six months of free apple music on verizon. oh. so let's play that reggaeton. old school reggaeton, not the new stuff. (vo) get 45 million songs with six months free apple music on us. only on verizon. switch now and get $300 off our latest phones.

you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom.

book now at choicehotels.com

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. . all right, a closing argument. i want you to keep two things really clear in your mind, okay? a perjury trap is what the counsel to the president rudy giuliani and the president himself keeps saying that's what they're worried about, that's what's waiting for the president if he testifies.

we have no reason to know that. a perjury trap is a form of arguable prosecutorial misconduct. this is form of entrapment. you're not supposed to do this, bring you into an interview just to try to get you to lie. and the precedent, is well, did they bring you in for fact finding purposes? perjury is what they're really worried about, a material misrepresentation of fact for the purpose of deception. it's a crime. so the idea if they believe comey instead of trump and that's it, that's not it. it's a crime. they would have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. okay, i argue rudy uses this phrase because it's part of their narrative that the president is being victimized. but what they're really worried about is perjury, that the president is going to do something to himself, he's going

to go off script, embellish in a reckless way that will be abusive of the truth and in that context it could be a crime. the scenario they want you to accept, different stories, prosecutors don't like comey and then they're going to get him -- even if i'm telling the truth, that makes me a liar. no, that's not the truth. and when rudy said the truth is not the truth, that's another rift on the rubbish. perjury is a crime, not a preference. you have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. now, did you see the memo that judge kavanaugh -- now judge kavanaugh wrote when he was working for ken starr for a different president, the questions that he wrote? the salacious and disgusting questions that's what's going to

be the headline. a lot of people are going to avoid them. not me. but not for the reason that you think. what came before this page, this is so meaningful. why? because kavanaugh was working for starr, and he was under attack by then president clinton. and they came to really resent what was being done and created and hardness and a harshness on the team. that's what rudy has reason to worry about, that a memo like this is sitsiting on mueller's desk right now. look at some of the things that kavanaugh, this is the man the president wants to be our next supreme court just. this is what's coming out of him. we're not going to give him any break until he resigns or confesses to perjury. the idea of going easy on him is abhorrent to me. listen to the reason. what he's especially convinced me of, the appropriateness of

obtaining his full and complete testimony, why? he goes onto talk about how because he's lied, he's lied to the american people, he's lied to his aides and he has disgraced this office, being the special counsel with mueller. a sustained propaganda campaign that would make nixon blush. this is what they're worried about. now you get to juicy bits. the seven out of ten questions he came up with for president clinton are the most vulgar -- i'm actually going to block them a bit in case kids are watching. before you get upset at me for putting these questions up here and say that's offense, many of you who would find that sexual language offensive are those who want kavanaugh as the next supreme court pick. he wrote these words.

i'm using them because i want you to look at the form of the question. again it's what trump's team is worried about. if monica lewinsky said this would she be lying? that's a specific way to ask a question, and here's why, it's laying it out in a way you already know. if you don't agree with it you may be materially misrepresenting. that's tough to handle especially for someone like trump, and that's what his folks are worried ability. not what will be done to trump but what will be done to himself when he's confronted by people who show he's lied. "cnn tonight" with don lemon starts right now. >> do you remember the show, i don't tell you the name, but it's just the facts. >> dragnet. it's not just the facts. it's going