this sunday, breaking news. rescue workers have begun to pull boys from that flooded cave. we'll have the latest from thailand in just a moment. also, courtside seat. president trump prepares to announce his supreme court choice. >> you turn in monday at 9:00, i think you're going to be extremely happy. >> docrats hope to stick together in opposition and win over at least one republican to defeat the nomination. >> it would be very difficult for me to support a nominee who did not consider roe v. wade to be settled law. >> it's a fight over the direction of the court for a generation or more. my guest this morning, republican senator, roy blunt of

missouri, and democratic senator, dick durbin of illinois. plus, north korea nuclear talks. north korea says the u.s. attitude is deeply regrettable, and accuses the u.s. of a gangster-like demand for denuclearization. >> if those requests were gangster-like, they are the -- the world is a gangster. because there was a unanimous decision at the u.n. security council about what needs to be achieved. >> is this president trump's mission accomplished moment? also, the russia investigation. michael cohen says his family and country have his first loyalty, and a senate committee agrees that russia tried to help mr. trump win the election. my guest this morning, president trump's lawyer, rudy guiliani. joining me for insight and analysis are, "washington post" columnist, eugene robinson. danielle pletka of the american enterprise institute. nbc news senior political editor, mark murray, and susan page, washington bureau chief of "usa today." welcome to sunday.

it's "meet the press." from nbc news in washington, the longest-running show in television history. this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning. we do have a lot to get to today. the troubled nuclear talks with north korea. president trump's upcoming nato meeting. and that planned one-on-one with vladimir putin after the nato summit. i have my interview with mr. trump's lawyer, rudy guiliani on the latest on the russia investigation and the michael cohen developments. and, of course, biggest of all, it's president trump's announcement tomorrow of his pick for the supreme court. he's doing that in prime time. but let's begin with a story that has the entire world's attention. and right now it looks like it could be a good news ending, at least. the effort under way right now to rescue 12 boys and their soccer coach. they're fighting weather. this is the big window that they have. four have been rescued so far. bill neely is standing by right now in chiang rai, thailand.

bill, what can you tell us? >> reporter: good morning, chuck. from a very rainy northern thailand. and just a few minutes ago, the third and fourth of those boys went past here in ambulances. so four of the 13 -- the 12 boys and their coach now in the hospital receiving medical treatment. they came down the jungle path in ambulances. the first two just a few hours ago. and let me bring you right up to date. because as we speak, there is a news conference going on with the rescue commanders. first of all, confirming four children are now free and in the hospital. they say 90 divers in all took part in this operation. 50 international divers, 40 from thailand. ten were at the very apex of this operation. ten went into the -- really, it's a ledge rather than a cave, where the boys have been trapped for the last two weeks and one day. and the way it worked, according to the rescue commander, was

that one diver put one boy literally underneath him as they we went through the submerged sections of that cave. remember, even now it's possible that there are boys walking or wading or even diving through this absolutely treacherous cave complex. so the divers put each of the boys actually beneath them. this has all happened faster than anyone expected, three hours faster. he now says they have used all the oxygen tanks, and they have to resupply those tanks. so this remains an ongoing operation with nine people still to be got out. and it is still a very perilous journey, because they are going along what is potentially a death trap. remember, just a few days ago, a highly experienced thai navy diver died, collapsed ask died. so still a very dangerous

operation for these boys deep down. and the commander launched this operation, saying this is d-day. it's either now or never. there is no better time. oxygen levels were falling inside that cave. as i said to you, rain is falling, as well. there was a torrential downpour a couple of hours ago. so there was a red line for the commander. beyond which they couldn't pump the water out fast enough as this rain that water fell. so the operation is ongoing. the boys are being taken out two by two. we expect that this could be over, certainly within 24 hours. and four boys now being treated at the hospital. we don't know what condition they're in, and we don't know exactly which boys are out. but an extraordinary operation. >> wow. >> reporter: going on as we speak. chuck? >> bill neely, thanks very much. now joining me is republican senator, roy blunt of missouri. he's a member, of course, of the republican leadership team. senator blunt, welcome back to

"meet the press." >> good to be with you, and good to hear those boys are getting out of that cave. and hopefully today will be good news for them and all of their families. >> sometimes it's just nice to cover a good news story. let me begin in asia and north korea. mike pompeo was there this weekend. seems like the meetings did not go well. i'm sure there are some people thinking, i told you so, when it comes to north koreans. you were skeptical. you were on here right before when the summit was announced. you were skeptical. the president tweeted, we have nothing to worry about within 24 hours of the summit. 26 days later, they're calling the americans gangsters. >> well, yogi bear grew up in st. louis, missouri, and this is dejavu all over again. this is standard operating procedure for three generations now of dictators and north korea. and i hope we at the end come to success. but i think nobody should be surprised by foot-dragging. nobody should be surprised by saying one thing and then apparently that's not what maybe they meant to say when they said

it. this is -- this has troubled now four u.s. presidents, and i hope president trump and secretary pompeo are more successful than anybody has been up until now. >> and i've got to ask -- let me play -- this was the president within hours after meeting with kim jong-un. >> we're going to denuke north korea. it's going to start immediately. as soon as he arrives, he's going to start a process that's going to make a lot of people very happy and very safe. i mean, he's denuking the whole place, and he's going to start very quickly. i think he's going to start now. they're getting rid of a missile testing site. they're doing so much now. so it's a process, and it's really moving rapidly. >> you know, just the -- is this the naivete of a first-term president? >> i think he's optimistic about anything he is involved in at the time. at the same time, i think what you've got to look at here is actions. and as long as the actions continue to keep the economic pressure on north korea, actions

here will speak louder than words. and only those kinds of actions will ultimately bring north korea to the place we would like them to be. >> since the president gave -- we gave a lot to the north koreans. international prestige, that moment. is it time for the united states to -- they threw a high hard one at the united states by calling us gangsters. is it time for the president to announce, okay, the military exercises with south korea are back on? >> well, i thought it was a mistake to give the military exercises up. as you know, when i was on here the last time, i said the one thing i wouldn't give up would be our presence, certainly, in south korea. i'd hate to give up our ability to act interoperably with our south korean allies. and the president and the secretary mattis, secretary pompeo have to reconsider that, i would think, at some future time. particularly if these negotiations appear to be going on for a long time. and that's what you would have to expect from the north koreans, is, again, foot-dragging, standard operating procedure, let's see

how much world attention we can get. and then at the end of the day, how much economic assistance the north koreans would be able to get. >> so the president stopped the happy talk publicly? is he his own worst enemy here? under-selling, under-delivering? >> i think what you've got to look at is actions as opposed to his optimism about coming up with a final solution. i hope the president sticks with the sanctions and continues to work with others in the neighborhood to maintain the sanctions as well. that means japan. that means south korea. that means china. >> all right. the president has another tricky summit coming up with another authoritarian figure. this one by the name of vladimir putin. are you nervous, considering how the kim jong-un meeting went, where the president gave a lot more than what was expected, including getting rid of the military exercises? are you concerned, for instance, he's going to hang crimea to the russians? >> well, i would hope not. i would hope not. i think the russian discussion about crimea, about ukraine generally, particularly the

eastern part of ukraine, where clearly the russians continue to have military forces there. what's happening in syria and iran. i think it's fine to talk to the russians, but the president should clearly understand that neither the russians nord nor dictators like kim jong-un are going to be charmed by anybody. they are very cold-blooded, calculating. putin would be in that category. >> i was going to say, both kim jong-un and vladimir putin seem to have an idea of what they want out of these summits. does president trump know what he wants? >> i think he's surrounded himself with a pretty good team. >> does he listen to them? >> i hope so. pompeo, bolton, mattis, all should -- and general kelly all are giving him the right kind of advice. i think he's comfortable with the team he's put around himself for the first time in his presidency, and hopefully that will show up in these talks. >> i want to ask you about seven of your republican colleagues went over to russia. six -- most of them from the

appropriations committee. no democrat was with them. why? >> well, i think there's merit to talk. >> this looks like russia's attempt, though, to get rid of sanctions. >> well, hopefully, it doesn't work in that way. and i don't think it will work in that way. i think there's nothing wrong with talking to the russians. there is nothing wrong with the president talking to putin, there's nothing wrong with my colleagues talking to the russians. but you've just got to understand who you're talking to. these are people who run a dictatorial government. they're people who are exerting all the influence they can, everywhere they can. and they don't have many resources, but they're making the most -- >> were you invited to go on that trip and you declined? >> i did not go on that trip, but i was going to be in missouri for 4th of july parades and reopening the arch, and had a lot of things already scheduled. >> there's a report this morning that your leader in the senate, mitch mcconnell, is recommending to the president of his four finalists for the supreme court,

he believes that raymond kethledge or thomas hardiman would be easier. and recommending he go in that direction. where are you? >> i'm looking to see who the president nominates, not trying to anticipate who that might be. i haven't talked to the president about this, nor have i talked to senator mcconnell about it. but i think we can confirm any of the four names being mentioned, shall there are reasons to look in both the pennsylvania -- the pennsylvania and michigan nominee -- >> that's kethledge and hardiman. you lean more towards there? >> i'm not sure i'm leaning anywhere on the four nominees. i think they'll all be -- they're good judges. i think they would be fine justices of the supreme court. i do think the president has to think about who is the easiest to get confirmed here. and i expect we'll do that on sort of a normal timetable of a couple of months. >> your colleague, lindsey graham here last week says he believes roe is essentially settled law.

he believes in precedent and wants to see a nominee that also believes in precedent. where are you on this? >> well, i think these judges, which everyone has nominated, should follow the ginsburg strategy, which is no hence, no foretelling -- >> it's the 21st century. i think the american people should know, no? >> you don't think the notorious rbg standard is good enough? >> that's -- this is the 21st century, where we expecting everything -- >> i think we expect judges to judge the case that comes up before them. i'm not a lawyer. this is maybe a pretty good month not to be a lawyer. but precedent is important, but precedent is not the only thing. we have had bad precedents that were reversed after decades. >> that's not a nonstarter for you. >> what is not a nonstarter? >> the idea -- that if somebody doesn't believe in that -- >> i think judges need to look at the case, the court needs to look at the case and determine that case on the facts of the case. >> senator roy blunt, i have to leave it there. >> good to be with you.

>> thank you for coming on and sharing your views. joining me from the other side of the aisle and actually from the state next door in chicago is democratic whip, the number two in the senate, dick durbin of illinois. senator durbin, welcome back to "meet the press." >> thanks, chuck. >> got the illinois/missouri rivalry right in front of me here. let me start with the supreme court. mitch mcconnell has said he would like to see it go in the direction of thomas hardiman or raymond kethledge, believing they would be less controversial perhaps than the other two. what's your assessment of that, sir? >> before i get into that, hearts and prayers are with those boys in thailand trapped in the cave. i hope our hearts and prayers are also with thousands of children, toddlers and infants, removed from their parents by the trump administration under zero tolerance. they're trapped in a bureaucratic cave, too. so let's not forget them. but to your question, all of these nominees have been

precleared by something called the federalist society. this is a group that looks carefully at each one of the nominees to make certain they can check all of the boxes when it comes to the most conservative political agenda in america. so whoever is nominated by the president, i was told by the white house, they'll come off that list. leonard leo, the leader of this group, is the one who made the key decision. >> so what is the democratic party strategy in the senate? you have -- you can do the math. you know you have 49 democratic senators. first let me ask you this. is everybody going to be united? >> i can't say that until the president announces his nominee. obviously, each senator understands this is an historic decision. it will decide the future of this court for a generation or more, and so i know they'll look carefully at each nominee. i can't predict how all of my 49 or 48 colleagues in the senate on the democratic side will vote. i will tell you, though, simple math tells you, if john mccain is absent, it's a 50-49 senate.

one republican senator can decide the fate of any supreme court nominee. >> in 2016 -- i'm going to play a quote of yours in september of 2016 about that -- the other supreme court vacancy that we were dealing with back then. here's what you said. >> in a few weeks, the supreme court will start its new term with eight justices. we need nine. major legal questions are hanging in limbo because the court is deadlocked on 4-4 votes. >> there's been some talk among some of your colleagues for democrats to push for a delay until after the election. obviously, you didn't like that in 2016. where are you on this? >> well, i asked senator mcconnell when kennedy made his announcement whether he was going to be consistent. he said during the course of the vacancy at the end of the obama presidency, let's wait and let the people decide in an election. many of his colleagues came to the floor on the republican side and said the people of this country are going to vote. they'll decide the future of the supreme court. well, i asked senator mcconnell, are you going to use the same

standard this go-round? and obviously, he is not. the net result of that, of course, is we are going to move forward quickly to fill the vacancy, and i think it's pretty clear senator mcconnell was seizing the moment, stopping obama from filling the vacancy with an extraordinarily qualified man. >> i understand, but where are you on this now? do you want it delayed? i understand you want to point out hypocrisy on mcconnell's side. but there's hypocrisy on your side on this, too, right? do you think -- if it was wrong to delay in 2016, is it wrong to delay now? >> well, come on, chuck. get real. senator mcconnell invented this new rule, and wouldn't even consider a meeting with merrick garland and now says we have to hurry through. totally inconsistent. the net result is he's trying to play to his political advantage. >> what did you guys do wrong in the merrick garland situation? if you could redo it, how would you do it? >> i'm not sure we could have

changed it. when it reached the point where the senate republican leader refused to even meet with the nominee of president obama, a man extremely well-qualified, it was clear that the fix was in. they were going to keep this vacant in hopes they could put a republican in the white house. it happened. now neil gorsuch, chosen by the federalist society, as well, has gone to the bench, is voting in lockstep on the republican conservative side. and they want to fill this vacancy to give them an advantage on any future rulings. >> i've got to ask you, though, now going backwards even before garland, let's go to the harry reid decision back in 2013, when you decided to scrap it for everything but the supreme court. the filibuster. there were predictions this would be slippery slope, and here we go. in hindsight, mistake? >> i think at that time harry reid faced an impossible decision. they had announced -- the republicans announced they would not fill the d.c. circuit court of appeals, which is a critical court, second only to the supreme court in its importance.

they were facing all of these filibusters day after day, jurist after jurist, and harry reid made this decision. he did make an exception for the supreme court, which mitch mcconnell swept away. chuck, let me tell you, though. we look at this decision in general terms and talk about the process. but let's get down to the heart of it. this supreme court is going to decide whether or not people and families with preexisting conditions can have access to affordable health insurance. that's it. it's real. and it's a constitutional challenge by the trump administration this court will face. >> right. >> this court will decide the future of women's health care. and the freedom of women to make choices about the future of their families. that is a critical decision this court will face. so beyond the procedure, beyond the gamesmanship, it is a life and death important decision to be made by this court on so many issues. >> and yet you have this political dilemma that stares i think you and chuck schumer really in the face as the two leaders, which is this.

staying united to stop the supreme court pick could cost you red state senators. not fighting it as hard might allow the red state senators to get re-elected and get democrats in control of the senate. that's your dilemma. >> it is a dilemma in one respect, but not in another. i will tell you, the men and women that i work with on the democratic side really take this seriously. they understand it's an historic decision. it's about more than the next election. it's about what country the united states of america is going to chart as its course in the future on this supreme court. i think each and every one of them take that seriously, that personally. it goes beyond the next election. >> all right. and final question. you brought up the issue of trying to reunify these kids with their parents, the migrants at the border. a court -- the trump administration is trying to buy more time. the court doesn't look like they're going to give them that more time. what's the recourse, though? if the court says, you know, no, you're not living up to this commitment, it's not like you can put hhs in jail or

something. what is the actual recourse? >> i can tell you this. what we see in this process, forcibly removing children from their parents at the border, and then putting them adrift on a bureaucratic sea where they can't even find them. if you take a child into a hospital for treatment, the first thing they do is strap a bracelet on the wrist to make sure they aren't lost in the hospital. it is a convergence of cruelty and incompetence that brings us to this moment. and now a judge in san diego -- >> how do you enforce it? is it the administration saying we only have so many resources? >> i can tell you they have the resources to get it done. chuck, this is not an accident. this is a policy of deterrence to stop future flow, to be mean to these kids and their families, to say to others, don't even try it. and that to me is cruel. it's not what america is all about. >> senator dick durbin, i have to leave it there.

democrat from illinois. senator, thanks for coming on and sharing your views. much appreciated. >> thanks. >> by the way, nbc news will provide live coverage of president trump's supreme court announcement tomorrow evening at 9:00 eastern, 6:00 p.m. on the west coast. later on the broadcast, we'll talk to president trump's lawyer, rudy guiliani. next, the fight over the supreme court and a reality check on north korea. the panel is next, so stick around. i was able to turn the aircraft around, and the mission around, and was able to save two men's lives that night. my first job helped me to grow up pretty quickly. that'll happen when you're asked to respond to a coup. in 2001, i signed up for the air force. two days later, 9/11 happened. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage.

ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. no one thought much of itm at all.l people said it just made a mess

until exxonmobil scientists put it to the test. they thought someday it could become fuel and power our cars wouldn't that be cool? and that's why exxonmobil scientists think it's not small at all. energy lives here. welcome back. panel is here. eugene robinson, the bureau chief of "usa today," susan page, danielle pletka, and mark murray. welcome, all. let's start with supreme court. what we're learning this morning is that the senate republicans have a preference. they would prefer less of a fight. raymond kethledge. thomas hardiman. susan page, those who are two mitch mcconnell prefers,

essentially, kavanaugh is too much of a paper trail, and amy barrett would spark a culture war. >> he is associated with the last republican president, right, with george w. bush. who knew that would be a liability with the next republican president? the argument for barrett is the same for and against. she'd spark a culture war. some republicans think it'd be great. the question is, will president trump think that, as well? she's 46 years old. that's an asset. name her to the court, she's confirmed, she could be there four decades. >> eugene robinson, let me put up -- each one of these has a conservative concern about them. sort of, as susan mentioned with brett kavanaugh, it is the bush connections. one called him the low-energy jeb bush pick. kethledge, i think, is called an open border zealot.

barrett is the culture war. is that good or bad? it seems conservatives have a way of killing any of them. >> what are they suppose -- what are they looking for? an iron-clad guarantee, in writing, that we will uphold the entire conservative agenda, as you see it, by the way. not as other conservatives might see it. i think if conservatives take a breath and look at the candidates, they'd see, they're all really conservative, as far as we know. as far as we can tell from anything they've written. there's nothing i've seen pointed out in any of their writings that indicates they're closet liberals. when judges get to the supreme court, guess what? they take their job seriously and actually look at the cases. sometimes they don't decide in a way that their prior idealogical leanings would indicate. >> mark murray, thomas hardiman, i think, has an advantage over

all of the others with president trump, for one reason. >> yeah. >> his relationship with the president's sister. explain. >> yeah. those relationships do matter, particular we wily with preside trump. the argument also for thomas hardiman is he doesn't have the paper trail. to me, the biggest question about the supreme court pick is who ends up having the most pressure on them? is it someone like susan collins and republican senator lisa murkowski, or is it the joe manchin, democrat of west virginia. the hardiman and kethledge are not big paper trails, more jurists, and the pressures would probably be op the donnellys and manchins. if barrett, it could be pressure on collins and murkowski. >> the president, i suspect, doesn't really care whether it is a win or a fight.

he wants somebody who he can sit down and have a beer with. isn't that what the reporting said yesterday? >> that's not amy barrett, apparently. we're told it didn't go well? >> i have no understanding of why it might not have gone well or what the president is asking each of these individual nominees. i think he said the right thing. they're all conservatives. they've all kwa they're all qualified people. the fact someone has a paper trail shouldn't be diskwaul f disqualifying. they're serious about the law. >> eugene, what kind of fight do they need to put up in order to make this a voting issue? it seems it's never been a voting issue for the left the way it is for the right. >> i don't know the supreme court is ever going to be a voting issue for the left as it is for the right. unless and until roe v. wade is overturned. then it might be. roe is really what sparked, i think, the conservative -- not

obsession, because it is real, but the conservative focus on the supreme court. >> yeah. >> the fact that that is a voting issue for so many conservatives. then other issues hang off of that. i think roe v. wade is the central trunk of that tree. i don't think it's going to get there unless something happens to roe. i think they do need to fight because the base expects them to fight. even people who are now going to vote, they're excited, they want to see a fight. >> they want somebody to climb the statue of liberty. >> isn't part of the problem here that the democrats are stuck in the last decade? they want this. they're trying to make this a fight about roe v. wade and abortion. that's not what this is going to be about at the end of the day. what's interesting to me is that the courts have become so important in the last few years because congress stopped doing anything, because the executive

branch was under siege by obama and trump. it surprises me the democrats don't want to get to the 21st century and recognize the power of the courts. >> this is a good thing for republicans in the short term. this is going to help them with turnout. either way, they'll have a big fight. republicans and conservatives both on the court. watch out what you wish for over the long term. if you are credited with overturning roe v. wade, or with accepting a lot of new state restrictions on abortion rights -- >> with five men, by the way, doing it, especially if it is not amy barrett, right? >> you could pay a cost with women voters, with millenials who are clear where they stand on this issue. over the long term, this could be the seeds of problems for the gop down the road. >> this all comes down to winning elections. if the republicans have been much better in recent elections than democrats have been, you ask, you know, senator durbin, what was the biggest mistake democrats made with merrick garland? it was get iting mitch mcconnel to take over the senate. democrats held on to a majority,

you'd have supreme court justice garland. being able to win in mid-term elections and presidential elections gets you control of the court. >> well said. >> exactly. >> okay. but, what does joe donnelly do? he's the only one of the three that has a democratic base to worry about. >> i'm very much in terms of winning elections being what democrats need to do. they're out of power. they're out of the white house. they're out of control of state legislature. they need to win elections. you let joe donnelly vote however he has to vote. >> if the choice is -- >> cortez, you know, she would vote her way. she can have her issues. let joe donnelly have his and vote his way. >> we have a lot of foreign policy to cover. i can't wait to hear what danielle thinks about what happened in north korea. we'll be back with the

russia investigation with president trump's lawyer, rudy president trump's lawyer, rudy giuliani.my mom's pain from moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis was intense. i wondered if she could do the stuff she does for us which is kinda, a lot. and if that pain could mean something worse. joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, and helps stop further damage enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma other cancers, nervous system

and blood disorders and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common. or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel, my mom's back to being my mom. visit enbrel.com... and use the joint damage simulator to see how joint damage could progress. ask about enbrel. enbrel. fda approved for over 18 years. at&t provides edge-to-edge intelligence, covering virtually every part of your retail business. so that if your customer needs shoes, & he's got wide feet. & with edge-to-edge intelligence you've got near real time inventory updates. & he'll find the same shoes in your store that he found online he'll be one happy, very forgetful wide footed customer. 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 &.

& if your customer also forgets socks! & you could send him a coupon for that item. ♪ can i get some help. watch his head. ♪ i'm so happy. ♪ whatever they went through, they went through together. welcome guys. life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you. welcome back. there were two pretty big

developments related to the russia investigation that flew under the radar this holiday week. the first was the official report from the senate intelligence committee supporting the conclusion of three u.s. intelligence agencies, that determined that donald trump was helped by the russians in the 2016 election. the other story was the apparent change of heart by president trump's former personal lawyer, michael cohen. cohen once said he'd take a bullet for the president. this week, he told abc news, quote, to be crystal clear, my wife, my daughter, my son, and this country have my first loyalty. joining me is the president's current lawyer, rudy giuliani. welcome back to "meet the press." >> thank you very much. happy to be with you. >> you'd said the fourth of july was basically a deadline of sorts, for you to determine whether or not you'd recommend president trump sit down with robert mueller. it is now past the fourth of july. where do we stand? >> well, i think we're pretty much decided where we are. we await the decision of the independent counsel. we would not recommend an

interview for the president unless they can satisfy us, that there's some basis for this investigation. it is our firm belief, and we think nothing contradicts this, that the president did nothing wrong. all the leaking that's gone on, there's been no leak of any fact that says the president conspired with anybody in russia. i know from having been on the campaign, there was no contact with russians, no discussion with russians. we've got to see something. i mean, something started this investigation. what we're asking them for is, is this the witch hunt that a lot of people think it is, or is there a factual basis for this? you did the big, long counterintelligence investigation, which seems very, very questionable, with very bias people who hated trump and wanted to stop him. what did they find? show us something. mueller has been at it for 13, 14 months. 1.4 million documents. 29 witnesses.

what did he find? is there somebody who says there was a meeting where trump discussed conspiracy to do this? there's nothing. >> actually, mr. mayor, in the public record, and you and i had a discussion about one of these, in the public record, we have the president admitting that he misled the "new york times" on the donald trump jr. statement when it came to his role in the infamous trump tower meeting in june of 2016. you said there's nothing. this is a public record of the president contradicting. i know it is not a crime for the president to lie to us in the media. however, how is that not itself probable cause for mr. mueller to want to question the president? >> well, because the fact is, also in the public record is the conclusion of that meeting. that is, nothing was done about it. the person came in under the guise of having information about clintons, but also to talk about adoptions. all she did was talk about

adoptions. >> wait a minute. first of all, we don't know that. >> we do know that. >> that hasn't been established. the story changed three times. >> no, no, no. >> how are we sure? look, your own legal partner here in the president's team, jay sekulow, misled me. you said he didn't intentionally do that. i take your word. >> he didn't. >> i take your word at that. somebody misled him then. your client may have misled him. >> they already have all these facts. they can do with them what they want. they don't need -- i can tell them that the president's testimony will be exactly the same as he said about this. >> which part, what he said in the public record? we don't know what he said privately. >> he has had an opportunity to think about it, to refresh his recollection. he's given a statement about it. it is clear that there was no discussion with him about this. and, nothing happened from it. >> what's the president afraid of? he's not afraid to sit down with kim jong-un or vladimir putin. why is he afraid to sit down

with robert mueller? >> the president is anxious to testify because he knows he's done nothing wrong. it's us, his lawyers, who have real hesitation about it. look how bias the people who started this investigation were. >> you think robert mueller is a biased man? >> i think he is surrounded by biased people. almost exclusively. a guy donated over $30,000 to hillary. he has someone who was crying at her loss party, whatever you want to call it, and he was the lead investigation who is going to go to jail. the fbi agent who said, you have to stop trump. i mean, has there will been an investigation of this magnitude with such obvious indications of extreme, disgusting bias, with totally corrupts the process? can i expect these people to be objective about donald trump? >> it sounds like you think robert mueller is corrupt. >> i do not think he is corrupt.

>> you're alleging then that he was willing to have -- you're making allegations that he was willing to have corrupt fbi agents on his team. >> well, no, no. that's a fact. he had a corrupt fbi agent on his team. >> he fired him. >> he put him on the team. >> he got rid of him. >> after other people found out about the corruption. he never bothered to vet him properly. he remains with the chief, assistant, and several others very close to him, who have extraordinarily close ties to hillary clinton. if we'd not looked at the other guy's texts, we wouldn't have known how much he hated trump. maybe they should see the texts of other people working for him. but we're willing to do it, if they can satisfy us that there is a bases for this. john dowd started this in january. since we started it, we don't get an answer. i'm sorry, chuck. as a lawyer, it makes me suspicious. please be clear.

president trump wants to testify. we have to hold him back. the only thing they've been -- we've been able to do is, it becomes easier as evidence of the corrupt nature of this investigation becomes clear. >> let me ask two other questions. are you concerned michael cohen is going to start cooperating with the fed? >> no. in fact, if he wants to cooperate, it is great. we've been through all his records. i know michael. there's no -- he has no evidence of, nor was he involved in anything untorred with the president. michael has been a victim here, like a lot of other people. >> you want michael cohen to cooperate with the feds? you think it is a good development for the president if he does? >> yes. it'll lead to nothing. mueller gave it away. if this had any chance of leading to president trump, don't you think mueller would have kept this? i have every indication there is nothing in this investigation that has any ability to touch the president. i think if michael testifies, or

cooperates, i don't know what's involved, but i'm hoping he'll be able to convince them that this was not a wise investigation to start with. >> the president is going to be sitting down with vladimir putin in just over a week. he's at the center of all of this, the senate report out there. i mean, he has been an influence to the campaign. apparently, it was approved by vladimir putin. as the president's lawyer, would you recommend your client sitting down with the person who is sort of at the center of this russian investigation by bob mueller? >> well, one thing as a lawyer, another as an american citizen. i'm interested in foreign policy and the safety of america and the world. he has to sit down with vladimir putin. vladimir putin happens to run one of the most powerful countries on earth. probably has the second or third biggest nuclear arsenal. >> right. >> has been very aggressive. on the other hand, has shown himself willing to negotiate. i don't think he has a choice. i think it is a sign of how confident the president is, that he did nothing wrong. he's not going to be stopped by

this. i mean, this is the reason the investigation -- >> you don't think he's ham strun hamstrung, if he capitulates with putin -- doesn't it put him in a box, that either way, it won't seem genuine? >> as his lawyer, i'd like to say yes. it is a good argument of executive privilege. they're interfering with the president and presidency. however, if you know donald trump, it's not going to stop him one bit. any more than it would stop him from doing any other thing. he's ready to try to regularize things with putin. putin has to meet him more than halfway. >> rudy giuliani, i have to leave there. >> thank you, chuck. >> thank you for sharing your views. much appreciated, sir. >> thank you. when we come back, our growing trade war with china. who wins? who wins? who gets hur us. who wins? who gets hur it's what this country is made of. but right now, our bond is fraying.

how do we get back to "us"? the y fills the gaps. and bridges our divides. donate to your local y today. because where there's a y, there's an us. ♪ traders -- they're always looking for advantages. the smart ones look to fidelity to find them. we give you research and data-visualization tools to help identify potential opportunities. so, you can do it this way... or get everything you need to help capture investment ideas and make smarter trading decisions with fidelity for just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. fidelity. open an account today. ♪

open an account today. and now you know.ed- jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill proven to both reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease... ...and lower a1c, with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. isn't it time to rethink your type 2 diabetes medication? ask your doctor about jardiance- and get to the heart of what matters.

another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. welcome back. data download time. president trump kicked his global trade war up a notch, targeting another 1,000 plus chinese products this week. the economy has been strong for mr. trump. a booming stock market and low unemployment. the impact of this trade war is going to start hitting american consumers in the coming months. you may also know these folks by

a different name. voters. look around your home. a good 20%, one in five, of the furniture and household items you see has a made in china label, according to a 2011 report from the san francisco fed. now, go inside your closet. the number is closer to 36% when you add clothes. tariffs being slapped on chinese goods by the administration will be passed on to the consumer. the company doesn't pay it. we do. it'll likely take a few months for consumers to feel the pain. here's some of the specific chinese products where you could see a price spike. remote controls, batteries, tool sets and usb drives have been targeted, though it is unclear what that dollar increase will be. remember, they're parts of other bigger products. imported solar panels could go up between $500 and $1,000 per installation. the price tags for home applianc appliances, like mini fridges, water coolers and thermostats, are predicted to go up as much

as 25%. notably, some consumer favorite items, like flat screen tvs, were taken off the tariff list after public outcry. if this trade war lingers on, tvs could be included in another round of tariffs on chinese products. on top of this, president trump is considering a 25% tariff on all foreign cars. that could cost consumers an average of $5,800 per vehicle. the impact of these cost bumps would be much broader than china's targeted tariff on soybeans that we talked about a few weeks ago. president trump's greate eest strength has been the free. according to a cnbc poll from last month, president trump's approval on the kpeconomy is 51. some american industries, like aluminum and steel, are expected to benefit from this trade war. it's consumers right now who are paying the price. the problem for president trump, as he pursues this strategy, he

risks damaging a strong economy in the short term which has kept his poll numbers afloat. when we come back, end game and president trump's meeting next week with vladimir putin. why that one-on-one has u.s. allies very concerned. (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything so we know how to cover almost anything. even a "cactus calamity". (man 1) i read that the saguaro can live to be two hundred years old. (woman) how old do you think that one is? (man 1) my guess would be, about... (man 2) i'd say about two hundred. (man 1) yeah... (burke) gives houseplant a whole new meaning. 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 ♪ ♪ 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 was able to turn the aircraft around, and the mission around,

and was able to save two men's lives that night. my first job helped me to grow up pretty quickly. that'll happen when you're asked to respond to a coup. in 2001, i signed up for the air force. two days later, 9/11 happened.

>> announcer: "end game" brought by boeing. continuing our mission to connect, protect, explore, and inspire. back now with "end game." okay. as i promised you, danielle, north korea. 26 days later. the president told us we had nothing to worry about from nuclear weapons from north korea. there are a lot of people this morning thinking, i told you so. >> yeah, well, i think those people are right. the president came into office campaigning on the fact that the obama administration signed an iran deal that was the worst deal ever done. it was flawed. the iranians were cheating. the president pulled out of that deal this year. now, he is talking the way barack obama did. even more liberally, i would say, about north korea, without any facts to back him up. the problem here is very

straight forward. the president says denuclear liedenuclearize, and he means one thing, and kim jong-un means another. >> he thinks we should denucl r denuclearize, right? >> he doesn't mean, i'm going to take apart the plans i am working on, the missile centers, nuclear plants. they have been expanding and working on those in the last week, as secretary pompeo was winging his way over to pyongyang. >> just to note, in the iran deal, obama did get virtually all the material removed from iran. take it out of the country, the bomb material. it's gone. whereas, in north korea, they continue with the development of their nuclear program. their missiles, you know -- this was never going to work. they talked, at least, which is something they hadn't done in many years. i think it is probably a good thing. >> the surprising headline in

the world, north korea talks not come to fruition. i think you see after a year and a half in office, president trump's foreign policy coming to fruition. you see less concern about our traditional alliances with the nato summit coming up. you see a friendlier attitude toward russia. this is a president who has left his mark on the u.s. role in the world. >> all right. as george said, the north korea summit was a disaster, i think. what do we think is going to happen with vlad mimir putin? let me play president trump's greatest hits when it comes to putin. >> he's been a leader far more than our president has been. it is better to get along with russia than not. president putin really feels strongly that he did not meddle in our election. you know what? putin is fine. he's fine. we're all fine. we're people. >> nato allies are already nervous about this meeting. they're already offended that the meeting got planned after

the nato summit, which is exactly the way vlad mimir puti would have wanted it. >> contrast that rhetoric with the rhetoric about trump on the nato allies. you need to pay up. you're killing us on trade. there is the split and contrast that has a lot of people, at least, pause. the least with trump meeting putin in helsinki is his continued denial of the interference in the election. despite other members of his team, pompeo, other people in the national intelligence community, said, yes, they did meddle. the president still doesn't admit it. >> is he going to hand them crimea? >> i hope not. i really do. >> doesn't it look like they're setting that up? >> i don't know that they're setting that up. i don't think there's anybody on the president's national security team who is going to recommend this. i think they're explicitly going

to say, mr. president, you cannot be okay with this. agree to disagree. >> do not congratulate. will they write it? >> first of all, let's be fair. one thing, we expect more of our nato allies than we do of the russians. it is important to acknowledge that, in fact, our nato allies don't spend enough on defense, and they deserve a lot of criticism for this. i'm not going to disagree with the president on that, although i don't like his tone and i don't like the contrast. but the crimea thing highlights something much more important, this is this awful meeting of the bernie bros and the trump people, on this question of eating away at other country's sovereign. oh, it's fine. what do we care? crimea, they have a lot of russians anyway. bernie sanders took that position. president trump takes that position. i don't understand why it is that the center and the center left are not more forceful on the issue. >> putin comes into the meeting having already succeeded, right? he has a situation where there is less pressure on crimea and

syria, behavior in both places. he comes out of a nato meeting that is divided, and a president who is friendlier to him than any u.s. president has been to a russian since world war ii. >> it'll make for quite a week. starts with the supreme court. ends with putin. unbelievable. thank you all. thank you for watching. we'll be back next week. as we said, it is a busy week coming up. if it's sunday it's "meet the press." >> announcer: you can see more "end game" and "post game" sponsored by boeing on the "meet the press" facebook page.

part by barracuda networks, cloud-connected securityd in and storage solutions that simplify it. scott mcgrew: this week, we delve into car technology. what safety device makes your car the most valuable on trade-in? we'll ask the guy who literally writes the "kelley blue book." plus, christy wyatt tries to find some good in all that data that corporations collect. all that, and venture capitalist hemant taneja, with reporters laura mandaro of "usa today," and joe menn from "reuters," this week on "press:here." ♪ scott: good morning, everyone, i'm scott mcgrew. we're gonna start with the story of a close call.