trump's extraordinary legal strategy. his lawyers argue that a president cannot obstruct justice, can pardon who he wants and perhaps even himself and can end any federal investigation if he chooses to. mr. trump claims this investigation is illegitimate. >> it's a witch hunt. that's all it is. there was no collusion with russia. >> and his biggest defender has been rudy giuliani. >> they had spies in the trump camp. this investigation never should have taken place in the first place. >> there was no collusion with the russians. in a moment, i'll ask giuliani about that legal strategy, the circumstances surrounding the firing of fbi

director james comey and whether the president ever plans to sit down with robert mueller. rudy giuliani my guest this morning on "meet the press". >> trade war. the u.s. announces steel and aluminum tariffs against canada and mexico. >> the idea that we are somehow a national security threat to the united states is quite frankly insulting and unacceptable. >> this morning my exclusive sitdown with the prime minister justin trudeau. and the culture wars, roseanne barr, samantha bee and the debates over whether conservatives and liberals are treated differently when they cross the line. katy tur, rich lowery, editor of national review and joshua johnson, host of 1a on npr. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press qwest".

>> from nbc news in washington. the longest-running show in television history upon this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning. we have two big interviews lined up and we'll get to them right away. rudy giuliani has been a supporter of president trump. this morning i'll ask mr. giuliani about the novel legal strategy that argues that the president's powers are essentially unlimited and when the president does it that means it is not illegal. so does this mean that no matter the president's motive for firing fbi director james comey it was legal and does this mean president trump will never sit down with special counsel robert mueller under any circumstance? i also had an exclusive sitdown with prime minister justin trudeau of canada after he responded to tariffs on steel and aluminum. we'll hear his thought and what he believes trade wars between neighboring allies could mean and this comes after what president trump did or said was

about him, the i alone can fix it president sought to fix nuclear sengzs with nor nuclear tensions with north korea's kim jong-un and sought tariffs with canada, and mexico. picking economic winners and losers. >> the trade is going to be easy. >> rewarding his political allies with pardons. >> the president has constitutional authority to do so. >> and criminal behavior. >> i suspect that we are on a path where there's going to be an inevitable clash. we will get to the point where the justice department will not go any further and i don't know who gets fired or what happens, but we'll be -- buckle up your seat belts. >> on pardons the president seemed to signal that he will protect allies who refuse to testify against him. pardoning dinesh d'souza who pleased guilty to campaign

finance fraud and he will pardon others for campaign violations and lying to investigators, charges similar to those leveled against michael flynn and paul manafort. on trade, the president welcomed the top north dorikorean offici with a photo-op. >> i don't want to use maximum pressure because we're getting along. mr. trump rolled out steel and aluminum tariffs on some of america's closest allies and attack canada on twitter. >> policy of grievances is alienating some of america's long time partners. angela, what happened? what happened, angela? >> paris? i don't go there anymore. paris is no longer paris. canada has treated us very, very unfriendly. mexico has been very difficult to deal with. >> as mr. trump flexes his

muscles. >> he's the president of the united states and has all of the powers under article 2. mr. trump continues to be obsessed by russia tweeting 19 times this week alone. joining me, former new york mayor rudy giuliani. welcome back to "meet the press". >> nice to be with you. >> let me start. >> of course. >> we're not playing baseball. >> fair enough. fair enough. we won't do last names, giuliani, all right? >> all right. >> from the memo in "the new york times" it remains opposition that the president's actions here by virtue of his position as chief law enforcement officer, that would amount to him obstructing himself and that he could, if he wished terminate his inquiry and exercise his desire to pardon if so desired. as you heard me refer, it has echoes of nixon's arguments that when the president does it it is not illegal. is that the argument here, sir? >> no, no, it isn't.

first of all, i didn't make the argument and i agree with most of it an as any lawyer, i would have organized it differently. i look to the obstruction part of it differently, and we can word it on the facts. if a prosecutor is looking at an act such as, let's say firing comey, and there are five explanations for it, four of which are innocent and the president has asserted each one of those positions and one of those is obstructing the investigation although he contradicted that and made clear he didn't in his interview with lester holt which is unfortunately seized on by the special counsel selectively, we don't have to whole big constitutional law which would take a year to resolve. i would prefer to put emphasis on the fact he didn't do anything wrong. he didn't obstruct and we're willing to sit down and argue that out with the special counsel if he has an open mind about it. >> are you making a case that he didn't obstruct or are you making a case that a president cannot obstruct justice.

>> i'm a lawyer and i'm sort of a conservative lawyer in a legal sense and i don't like to get to an argument we don't have to get to. you don't have to get to that argument. i don't know exactly how the court would resolve that. you never want to say you can't ever because you open too wide a floodgate. you might want to say he has very broad powers and someone who wants to question that under article 2 has a big, big burden of showing there is no innocent explanation for what he did. they just can't do that. i would like them to exercise constitutional restraint here. >> let's unpack this again. you say that he can terminate the inquiry. does this mean he can terminate any federal investigation? is that the argumentsa=éna here? any federal investigation he can terminate? >> that is pretty clear. thjdñixd power of the attorney general is a presidential appointee. when i was u.s. attorney i wast appointed by presidentqfá nobody ever attempted to

terminate an investigation, and it would have been a scandal of immense proportions unless i was being an idiot and that's an unrealistic thing and if you're asking on a theoreticalt( senset could lead tov ñiimpeachment. if he terminated an investimaá%=9 oflp himself -- >> constitutionally, you're mcking the argument that constitutionally he could is whatq you're saying. >> i'm saying con stustitutiona it surexd looks that way. i haven't made that argument and we don't have to make thatñi argument. that's not involved here. what's involved here is a simple exercise of constitutional power with very good reasons for it >> doeslpxd that mean constitutionally theok presiden can order any investigation to be opened? any investigation,çó if he says i want her investigated. he can order that tomorrow if h] wanted to. >> ñijfyeah, but let's look at % irsw3 investigations oflp

conservatives during the obama conservativeas never the obama fully investigated. they had to cease thatq because the organizations went to court and showed they were being d(so the president can't take ay their personal constitutional rights. so the president like nixon had somebody on the interviews list, boy, we would have had a very serious issue.xdnb the person would not be prosecuted and could have gotten the case dismissed and that would have been another part of the articlesok ofñi impeachment. >> you are saying that -- are you making the argument thatfái% only congress can hold the presidentzgh accountablet( to tw that the justice department,r justice system has noñr authori of holding the president accountable under the law? >> the department of justice is añi creature of the president. i knowe1n'fq based on president rulings, meaningó[ at the

h certain amount of independence i am tremendously in favor of that and that is all of the president's decision and that isñi constrained by the congress's impeachment power and thelp court's ability to undo indictments orxd investigations that are unfair. one of the possible remedies here is thisñi whole investigat1 may be totallyxd illegitimate a that's certainly something we reserve the right to raise and a judge could determine that. >> for example, and manafort -- and manafort is not theq president. trj considering a motioo dismiss it. >> not the whopw case. it's a part of it. >> case one. the one in d.c..çay?5 >> obviously,çó they'll make th5

that's eye very good question, chuck.ñrt(c that's a legal opinion and that's not afá co(ou decision a we realize the whole switching for the criminal case and what a!  is this all about? t everyone and we'll put pgoing to sit for an interview unless we get all of thosec documents and jay and i andlp je

so i guess i'm confused here because this memo looks like there was never an intention of the president sitting down with robert mueller. you have sn%sá the monthsi] and $ñoh, maybe he wil! and then you're, like, maybe he won't. i don't know if you're vacillating because youw3 chang your mind or the president's changing hisq mind? what is real here? does he really want to sit down with him? >> i will tell you the straight, ñrç. the president wants to testify. i know a lot of people don't believe that. i know a lot ofjf people don't believe that's theq position. it's a true position.ñi he believes he's innocent. hexd believesñr if hert. chance to explain it people wilr understand no collusion with thi russia russians a justice. forget the powers. he didn't do it. he never talked to the russians and i was on that campaign.xd chris christie was on thatq

campaign. we both tell you we neverw3ok s russian. we never heard him talk about it. p't. every lawyer he has including this one alwaysxd wants their client not to testify and ini] case like thisq when your client's the president and -- and they have everything they need and you've got thisçójf additional argument that he doesn't have to testify. >> yeah. >> my ñigoodness, it's tough. tr farrow group ofçó conditionsr which he can do it, if wez( can justify the fact that they have áj @&h(lc% >> right. >> and that they'll conclude the investigation. look, we're talking about north korea. >>lpi] doe1fá you realize yeste f=l5 terrible calling the president. i had to call him twice and iñi had to take him away from north korea, iq toldlp secretary of sr pompeo, don't get angry at me, i'll only do it if i have to. >> let me go back to the letter. there was something else in this memo and it hadlp to do with

response to donald trump jr. you have received all of the note,ñi communications and testimony indicating that the president dictated a short, but accurate response to o yorkfá times"i] article on behaf regard to the first trump tower meeting in july 2016 andi] thiss what jay sekulow said to me on "meet the press" about that incident. here it is. >> youw6want to declare the president was not involved in the drafting of the statement and to not issue that statement and itg july he said itt(!u came from d trump jr. and he said the presidentqñt)(upáed a small response. i know it's not a crimeçó to li to those of us in theq media. let me ask you this. was he misinformed at the time or what happened? >> i think -- ixd obviously ask jay aboutxdxd this. i think he was uninformed at the time just like i was when i came

in the case. he was on the case. this was a point that maybe wasn't cl% in terms of recollection and his understanding of it and what jay did was he immediatelyñrjfñi cod it and even if itqçó had÷ oath he can calli] it recanted d it's jay, and not the president and that's the wisdom of not jt the president testify and it's one thingñi to do it with it's a hypothetical point. i would think the presidential power, there's nothing that limits the presidential power of pardon from a federal crime andr not a stateá7t crime. president trump is not goingqr do that. he's obviously not going to give up any of his pardonlp powers o any future president's pardonlp powers, but under thesefáfát( circumstances he isn't going to

dor was this a veiled threat toe1 mueller? we can end your probe. >> you're not asking thel wrotexd the fáxdmemo. >> fair enough. as a threatt(çó or are you worr that thei] media would interpre it as a threat. >> almost impract#gl. theqqfájffá president of the un states pardoning himself would just be unthinkable and it would -- it would leadi] to probably an immediatefáa5 e1 impeachment. you get the house and the senate would be underfá tremendous pressure. het( didn't e÷ anything wrong. this is a terrible investigation. >> yeah. >> if you're not supposed toi] interfere with the president theoretically, they'req interfering with the president, american foreign policy and the world directly with north korea. >> if robert mueller comes to you and says, okay, mr. giuliani, we're not going to

t the president shouldxd be ableq to compelled to testify about his+ actions as president, butok do u have -- can you make that same case if mr. mueller wants to question his actiopá as a candidate? >> while he's president -- >> while he's president. >> yeah. the ideaa5çó is you can't --t( can't interfereñr with him eith with indictment or question, you can't interfere with the president's time, his effort and his concentration. >>jf even if it's about a potential crime or something that may have happened before he was president? >> yeah. he could have -- once he's not president he could be prosecuted for it. >> you don't believe that as president. >> as president -- >> look, again, there's not( -- don't want to let you believe that there is a case that says this, this ise1 what john wrote and that's the part of the opinion and i agree with e1jf80 what he wrote and that's the part of that i agree with the mostñi and it can't be indicted

and can't be questioned and we think we alsoq have a very good argument in the practical sense. this isn't just theoretical and he's not sitting up there playing tidly winks and he'st( involved inj. four or five unbelievable negotiations right now.ñi >> at some point we will get this ig report out of the justice department aboutr fbi. its handling of the 2016 election overall and the clinton emails and all of this. you may ort( may not h known arou>pi]r want to go through a time line here of what you said around that time when we found outçó about the re-opening of the comey investigation. take a listen, sir.ñi >> does donald trump plan anything except for a series of inspiringi] rallies?xd >> what? >> you'll see. >> i'm talking about some pretty bie3 surprise. >> ifá heard you sayi] that thir morning. what do you mean? >> you'llr >> it appears as though the fbi átk be re-opening an investigation into the hillary

clinton email server. @&h(lc% something was coming. ì(lc% tell you the truth, i thoughtt(t would bek&r)ee or four weeks ago. >> do you expectt( to be named the ig repo.iç as a receiver of leaked information from the fbi? >> oh,ñr xdno, no. i didn't get any leaked information of the fbi. ? you had no prior knowledge that anthony weiner was going to trigger the start ofw3 a --e1 >> no idea at all. >> no idea thatkwgñr weiner was involved in this atñi all. had no idea they would re-open it. when i said that i speculated on the fact there was a lot of turmoil within ther was going --ñr >>xdi] you told a radioq show h that you'd gotten some head's up from both current and former. >> no. allán(ó[ñi -- all currentw3gu, but not necessarilyñ;with the fbi.

i do security work alli] over t world and i usew3ok fbi agents i consider them current people, th and then i have retired people. >> right. >> the fact is we had all, you know,ñi our kitchen cabinet had all speculated that mueller did ajf horrible job which is what r focus of the horowitz report will be and did a horrible job with thee1 hillary investigatio >> you said mueller. you meant comey. >> oh, sorry, please. i meant comey. comey did a terrible job with that and he cleared her andr condemned her at the same time. >> were you questioned by the ig? >> i was questioned once and they were veryt( satisfied with the answer which was the same

i told the president, don't praise him because b(cre's something wrong with you.ñi he used to work with xdñie1me, s something wrong with him and he's ñibecome thisi] machiavell politician. a week later he pulled it back and i had no idea he would do that. i've been in this business for 40 yearsfryand as you do, you developljñ instincts. >> mr.qi] giuliani, we'll leave1 there. thank you very much for coming on andñi sharinglp your views. >> very fair, chuck, thank you. >> when we come xdback, we'll ce ith the panel9hu$e again, offu ♪ (music plays throughout) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ here.

we perform over 50,000 operations a year in places like this. for the past 15 years, chubb has identified ways that we can strengthen our safety measures. and today, our hospitals have some of the best patient safety records in the country. now, we're constructing new buildings that will define the future of piedmont and chubb is here, insuring our expansion. two million patients a year depend on us. and we depend on chubb. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your manufacturing business. & so this won't happen. because you've made sure this sensor and this machine are integrated. & she can talk to him, & yes...

atta, boy. some people assign genders to machines. and you can be sure you won't have any problems. except for the daily theft of your danish. not cool! at&t provides edge to edge intelligence. it can do so much for your business, the list goes on and on. that's the power of &. & this shipment will be delivered... hey ron! they're finally taking down that schwab billboard. oh, not so fast, carl. ♪ oh no. schwab, again? index investing for that low? that's three times less than fidelity... ...and four times less than vanguard. what's next, no minimums? ...no minimums. schwab has lowered the cost of investing again. introducing the lowest cost index funds in the industry with no minimums. i bet they're calling about the schwab news. schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. >> we are back.

panelists, joshua johnson, pegg] noonan katy tur, and national review. okay. digesting the rudy giuliani and his interpretatione1 of the mem. katy r than rudy giuliani and donald what do you make of th " >> i+ actually thought it was revealing and an interesting one that he threw sekulow under the bus. he said this is all about public opinion. if donald trump tries to pardon himself then he will get impeached. if he tries to fire mueller or stop thezv investigation then will get impeached. so i think it's very clear what they're doing is they're allowing the president to spout off on twitter. giuliani will come in here and say one thing and he'll probably change his mind and say something else to otherñi newsñ organizations later todayñi or tomorrow. they're trying to confuse things. we have two strategies, one is tor

and@ two, confuse things so much when the report ultimat%sf comep out they have an ability to push back and say this was all a big witch hunt. no onei] really gets it. republicançó voters, look whatñ we'reçó doing, ignore allñi@'r . we're making a deal with north korea, whatever. stay on our side. republicans in congressçó stayo our side, that's the only 2"jl (u . >> rich? >> i think the core contention in that memo is correct. th can commit obstruction of justice andxdlp exercise his la powers. he can abuse the lawful powers apá'sfá the subject for an ii proversion or constitutional system that you have an interior officer in theq executivexd bra who wants to question the president of the united states on his state ofjf mind. i'm not sure we've ever

encountered that before and it'r right to resist it for the personal interests and the good of the institution. irst thing itution. i thought of when it/qp)d this, peggy, was for nixon. for the viewers, let me play the infamous excerpt from frost nixon. >> so what, in aness i sense,e1 sayivgt there are certain w3 situations, where thefáv situatiohat it's in the bestñi interest of the nation orfá stco illegal? >> well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal. >> rudy giuliani was making a lot ofñi arguments that was lik he could do this, he could do this, he could do this. >> yeah. >> public opinion and congress would stop him, but -- what did you make of this? >> well,xd i -- i foundq his -- rudy giuliani's interview kind of+ delightfully loosy goosy, kind o&yhñ all over the place. >> i thought it thatc way, too.

>> butyoa5 sometimes iñi wond this strw4cgyxd or is ite.f a n sign of chaos, and then ixd thi look, i think there was a lot in there. he said again and i think we all sensed this.jf i have read some of the president's former detwitions, he does want3w to testify. i totally believe that. he enjoys the joust. i thought it was interesting that giulianiok asked if the ,j% an impeachment. however,jf the 20-paget( dowd a sekulow memo does speak about the possibility of presidential pardon. ne sentence in theñi middle of everything that was jfhuge. >> i thought it was telling that rudy wasn't quite willing tofá accept my use of the word ñi threat, butjf he didn't seem to push back on it that e1har joshua? he didn't push back on it that

hard, and i feel like there was little piece of that interview that was instructive to me that was useful. i understand what giuliani is trying to say. he's trying to say the president

i think if he can say ' and if hee1 can pull him closern workable strategy. >> want toa5 ask about pardonsd tho dinesh d'souza, and scoote libby, and joeú tu(áu and campaign+ finance violations, lying to investigator,3w corruptions. all of the potentialc charges that donald trump jr.çó can fac >> i think the arpaio pardon was grotesque and plusfá the ones há talking about clearly are meant toçó send the message that prosecutors can go too far and they could be political and there is an element where he wants toñi get under the skinv!

troll a particular set of prosecutors he doesn't like which is an unprecedented useñif the pardon power,t(xd obviously. >> veryçó clearlyñi it's the fd. >> dineshkm >> southern district of new york. >> for those who don't watche1 cable news.ok >> look at donald trump's longest andxd arguably one of h cloñ%,q friends and advisers. rogerfá stone said this is a ve clear message to robert mueller that if you indict anybody not having to do with collusion that is not appropriate and the president will pardon you. >> i liked the pardon of joe johnston, the prizefighter. otherwise, youi] know, it -- it inescapably looks these pardons bothq political andr political, but also a little frivolous. there arer important cases. the pardon power which is real

andxdi] oughtr used as matters of serious compassion for people who needx it. that's how it strikes me. >> i think for that reason the pardon ofw3 jack johnson and iq looked at that and saidi] aren' therer this power? think about presidential pardons you even knew about and the fact that joe arpaio was the very first pardon he gave last august overé>m=imq!%9 telepho contentious and grotesqueh there are living people who need their ownko legal counsel. >> i have to take a break in. when we come back, tariffs, trade war and the economy. my exclusive interview withjf justin trudeauy it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees.

fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. i think, keep going, and make a difference. at some point, we are going to be able to beat als. because life is amazing. so i am hoping for a cure. i want this, to uh, to be a reality. um, yeah. ♪ when i first came to ocean bay, what i saw was despair.

i knew something had to be done. hurricane sandy really woke people up, to showing that we need to invest in this community. i knew having the right partner we could turn this place around. it was only one bank that could finance a project this difficult and this large, and that was citi. preserving affordable housing preserves communities. so we are doing their kitchens and their flooring and their lobbies and the grounds. and the beautification of their homes, giving them pride in where they live, will make this a thriving community once again. ♪

. >> welcome back. the european union and canada all three announcing tariffs of their own. it was canadian prime minister called out personally by mr. trump. they are hosting the g7 economics which means he will have one on one face time with president trump in a couple of days. i began asking him about the ongoing renegotiations on the fate of nafta. >> i think our approach has been consistent all the way through. recognizing canada and the united states have perhaps the most successful economic partner thip and alliance and friendship in the modern world. no two countries that are as

interconnected. you sell more things to us than to u.k., japan and china combined. our economies are incredibly interwoven. there is an absolute path towards improving nafta and doing well on that. the fact that the president has moved forward with these tariffs is not going to just hurt canadian jobs. >> your reaction felt as if you felt jilted, as if you felt canada got like wait a minute, we have done all of these things for the united states over the years. it came across as if you felt as if canada was being taken advantage of. >> obviously we watched this president operate and worked with him over the past year. we know he prides himself with being unpredictable from year to year. one of the things i have to admit on having a lot of trouble getting around is the idea that

this entire thing is coming about because the president and the administration have decided canada, canadian steel and aluminum is a national security threat to the united states. first of all, the idea that our soldiers who have fought and died together it in the mountains of afghanistan and stood shoulder to shoulder some how this is insulting to them. the idea that the canadian steel that's in military vehicles in the united states, the canadian aluminum that makes your fighter jets is some how now a threat. the idea that we are some how now a national security threat is quite frankly insulting and unacceptable. >> what do you feel that the president wants from you? you don't know what he wants here. >> i know.

>> is it about nafta -- >> the reason i don't know is because he talked about the fact of this. he is worried about trade surpluses around the world. they have a $2 billion surplus on steel with us. so it's not like the trade is imbalanced against the u.s. favor on this one. >> you said you will retaliate. how serious are you and do you think you can mikyou make a den? how can you do that without hurting canada rather than the united states in. >> we are putting the same kinds of tariffs on steel and aluminum from canada to the united states and number of tariffs on consumer goods, finished products which canadians have easy alternatives. one of the truths about tariffs is they drive up costs for

consumers. on top of that these tariffs will be hurting american workers and canadian workers. >> go to nafta, do you understand what the united states wants? >> i think they want a better deal on their auto sector from mexico abdomen more on agriculture products. >> are you there? >> we are moving towards flexibility in those areas which i thought was very very promising. the united states wants a sunset clause in nafta. you don't sign a trade deal that automatically expires every five years. >> that's a nonstarter for you. >> you won't be at the table if that's on the table? >> no. you can think about investment. what company will want to invest if canada if five years later there might not be a deal with the united states. it is probably part of the whole thing.

that's not the way trade works. quite frankly, having an auto sector that spans from south herb ontario into michigan has been really an advantage for the auto sector. >> you i'm sure probably read that president trump bragged about a back and forth he had with you. he said tru dea u came to see me. he said no no no. we have no trade deficit with you. we have none. he apparently mimicked your voice when doing it. when you read something like this and you can't even agree on the same set of facts, do you trust the president as a negotiator? >> you mentioned that my father was prime minister. i was raised in a political family. i understand how people say things and people tell stories and people approach things.

my approach with this president from the very beginning is i will focus on what we do want where we go. quite frankly when i talked with the president about the possibility of tariffs on steel and aluminum he agreed it would be hard. it really doesn't make sense. there is a new book out by ben rods. he writes this. he said obama not usually an outwardly sentimental man. he refers the a meeting he had with you. your choice will be needed more. you'll have to speak out when certain values are threatened. what did you interpret what president obama was trying to

pass to you? >> what i took from it is something that was deeply reassuring and something i have seen all around the world where canadians are. people realize when we show up as troops on the ground or as aid workers or as bureaucrats, canadians are there to help. we are thoughtful, engaged, polite, welcoming and also firm with our values. we fought like lions. we'll be polite but we are also not going to be pushed around. that needs to be firm about projecting our values and defending not just our citizens but citizens around the world in positive ways is what i consider the responsibility we have as canadians and what i'll do as leader. >> as you might expect there's a lot more. you can see the full interview

on our web site, meetthepress.com. when we come back, could democrats actually get shut out of races that they should and of races that they should and what's critical thinking like? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter. morgan stanley this farmer's morning starts in outer space. satellites feed images into watson which connects to millions of weather forecasts and iot sensors. it's a smart way to help increase yields, all before the rest of us wake up.

captured lightning in a bottle.

over 260 years later as the nation's leader in energy storage we're ensuring americans have the energy they need, whenever they need it nextera energy. welcome back. "data down load" time, california democrats were hoping for a gold rush in this tuesday's primary taking full advantage of the state's unique top two system with the top two votegetters regardless of party move on to the general election and they want to shut republicans out of every statewide race particularly of governor and senate and republicans are determined to get candidates to advance into the top two so they could go up against democrats leak gavin newsom for governor and dianne feinstein for senate and then there's the house, well, that's getting complicated. the golden state has

consistently elected democratic senators and voted democrat in every election since 1992 and out of 62 districts, republicans only hold 19 seats with prime pickup opportunities for democrats particularly in the 39th, 48th and 49th congressional districts in southern california. democrats may feel they are geared to wipe republicans off the map, but they may not get their hollywood ending because of this unique top two system. democrats have flooded the races in those 14 remaining gop seats. there are 56 democrats running in the primaries across those 14 races compared to just 38 republican. that means democrats run the risk of splitting their vote so none of their candidates actual actually finish first or second and it's become the twilight groups where they find themselves attacking members of

their own party all in the hopes that republicans split their vote for talk about your crazy game theories. anyway, getting shut out of winnable races would be a full-on disaster for democrats and we're counting on california to provide a bulk of the 23 seats they need to win back the house. democrats hoped this top two system could shut republicans out big time on key races across california, and perhaps it's evidence that the top two system are not leaving democrats in as strong of a position and republicans aren't exactly cheering this top-two system either these days. when we come back, endgame, culture wars and this question. d liberd it can grow out of control, disrupting business and taking on a life of its own. its multi-cloud complexity creating friction... and slowing innovation.

with software-defined solutions, like hpe oneview, you can tame the it monster. hewlett packard enterprise. less complexity. more visibility. (burke) so we know how to cover almost anything.en almost everything even "close claws." (driver) so, we took your shortcut, which was a bad idea. [cougar growling] (passenger) what are you doing? (driver) i can't believe that worked. i dropped the keys. (burke) and we covered it. talk to farmers, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ this is no ordinary coffee. it's single-origin kenyan coffee from the nyeri highlands,

6,000 feet above sea level. but how do you really know that the beans journeyed to the port of mombasa and across the pacific? that you can trust they're 100% authentic? ibm blockchain. a smart way to track every step, ensuring this coffee did indeed come from 6,000 feet above sea level. and not a foot lower. ♪ ♪ captured lightning in a bottle. over 260 years later as the nation's leader in energy storage we're ensuring americans have the energy they need, whenever they need it nextera energy.

ben will be joining nbcq news ad msnbc as at( political and national security contributor. welcome to nbc and welcome back to "meet the press." this was a week where the culture wars popped up yet agaiq between ther the samantha bee situation, and of course, race is intertwined in all of this and i want to pull up the first excerpt of your book i want to talk about is this, you write, racism was a constant presence and absence in the obama white house. we didn't talk aboutq it much. it was always there like white noise, when a new york reality show star huq a brand thatxd obama wasn't born in the united states and an idea that was covered as national newsf%rqw3 months and is still believed by a majority of republicans. what point were you trying to make with this? >> well, people would often ask me what did presidentr really tky the point i was making there is he took it as a given that some

of the opposition wasxd rooted racism, and that's what i mean was that we didn't always have to talk about it. we would practice for press conferences with you, chuck and say yoç( might be asked if some of this opposition is race and he would say yes, next question and kind of cbu-z. something more serious is underlying that and he internalizede1 a jackiexd robin ethos, and i accept that there will be morelp scrutiny andxd a element of race in the opposition i face and i will perform the rsurqj of this office with as much integrity as i can. >> does president obama believe that his -- it seems that you're implying here and i remember asking him this question, and he says ask me after i'm out of office thatláju electionñiçó is. >> well,ñ you know, there are s to the trump election. i think what i talk about in the end of the book and some of the trud owe is we were on the last,

final foreign trip when hq; sa justin trudeau and he'dt( gone through interiterations of what happened through the elections and how much ofñr iti] was russ and how much was the campaign on

he8tu1 punchlinu4qo she needs to be a better writer next time. there are more equivalent comments and i am momxd concernd that the same cultural currents and samantha bee, is the one that gave stephen colbert that the only thing donald trump'sxím mouth was good enough for vladimirq putin'sñi you knowq-w% it's our hate. it's our misgiving and it's our fear.xd

andçóçóxdokçó who do we really ? where is the root of thist( q really? i don't think it's there. i think it'sñr here. >> i would think -- look, partx when you are lucky enough in america to be a public figure, your celebrity is not onl0/ yo pleasur%/:ú it isc your responsibility. what is that responsibility? don't make it worse. don't make it uglier. don't make it sicker. samantha bee doesn't seem to understand thatfá responsibilit. roseanne didn'tñi understand it. i am very gladñi to see ar backlash against them almost as if the american people are saying stop it already, this is terrible andá making it wors. >> it's getting too loud andq

it's the thing we started to see before donald trump started campaigning and it's exaggerating and the insults that he would throw out. i do think what's unfortunate here is that the samantha bee controversy is now ñiqovershadog what is the story that she was trying to bring attention toçó which is a story that families are being ripped apart at theì(c border. that this administration is claiming there is a new law when it's just a policy and they're takingxd families apart even wh families aret( coming in accordg to reporters asking for asylum. that is a real issue. that is not beingr because we're all talking about samantha bee using a word that she should nott( have used. >> it wasn't just a word. it wase1 an obscene personal attack, an obscene and personal attack andt( that did obscure h point, but thatçó also showed maybe she wasn't serious about it. >> i don't think samantha bee and roseanne aree1 comparable. some arexd saying trump enabled

roseanne barr. she has been alp kook fu]ñ 20 ys andfá twitter time line has bee grotesque for 20 years or howeverr twitter and samantha bee wasxd hired to be a partisan xevulgar. my friend makes a friend, problem with institutions is no one considersnb themselves an insider anymore andjf has a responsibility to be a steward and e6dwvját considers themselves to be an outsider. >> you quote president obama as saying ten to 20 years too soon? maureen dowd said we're not ready for you? >> what he's talking about was the demographics ofuce coun and what he would say is in public, there will be an asian barack obama and a latino barack obama and the demographics, he arrived before the demographic tippizuáju and part of this is the ecosystem, though, and as i say, theó[ majority of republicans don't think he was born in america. >> the book "the world as it!u

is," ben rhodes, good luck with it. as always,t( if it's

he has no intention of pardoning himself. but he probably -- it doesn't say he can't. >> it would be an open question. i think it would probably get answered by -- gosh, that's what the constitution says and if you want to change it change it. but yeah. >> the president's attorney is making the rounds laying out new legal ground rules on the mueller investigati and where it's headed. to a new view on treating early breast cancer. this is being hailed as a game changer for patients. several dozen deaths reported with hundreds injured in gatd mala where a massive volcanic eruption has residents scrambling to evacuate. then to a self-titled doctor to the stars whose unorthodox operating room dancing has led