>> thank you. don't go too far. i'll see you tomorrow. hello everyone. msnbc in new york city. summit surprise, north and south korea leaders meet just one day after the president hints the canceled event could be back on. add to it the white house confirms it is still sending the pre advanced team to singapore in case this does happen. plus, phone chatter. new concerns for donald trump jr. after a report claims they have wiretaps of a russian oh oligarch he met with. >> first, will the summit be saved? that's where we're going to start today. >> we're going to see what happens. we're talking to them now. it was a very nice statement they put out. we'll see what happens. we'll see what happens. it could be the 12th.

we're talking to them now. they'd very much like to do. we'd like to do it: everybody plays games. you know that better than anybody. >> everybody plays games. so you heard it. that was president trump resurrecting the possibility of a summit with north korea on june 12, as originally planned. meanwhile the north's kim jong-un meeting with south korea president. this for the second time in a month. white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders said in a statement today the white house has not canceled planneds to send an advance team. let's bring in our panel. charlie savage, washington correspondent for the "new york times" and nbc news and msnbc contributor and laura bassset.

thanks all three. we are seeing leaders react to the announcement it is off but now it appears to be back on. of how? working now especially as the leaders try to react? >> what's interesting to me is that it should be the united states and our allies south korea meeting to discuss the unpredictable sort of petulant child that has been north korea. unfortunately it's them meeting to discuss us. it's amazing to hear trump talk about this as a game. if in fact this situation escalates and there is nuclear war, up to 1 million people would die on the first day. it's not a game and it's alarming to hear the president of the united states talk about it that way. >> charlie, what's the perspective here? because as we go back and forth, as the president mentions, we all play games, who does this benefit more? it seems that for the president, who is used to undertaking the strategy in business, the way he

conducted business, at least, that he would like to do it here again with kim jong-un. and kim jong-un not necessarily built the same way. >> well, i think the whole thing is a very different approach to negotiation. certainly trump thinks that his real estate brinksmanship style deal cutting might be able to break through here in the way that traditional negotiations and diplomacy with north korea have failed, and it's certainly true they have not fared very well. on the other hand it's hard to see beyond the pageantry beyond him sitting down and getting photographs of what's going to come out of this. white house people telling us, as trump falsely denied today, that a huge delay had happened and all working level negotiations about exactly what each leader's expectations were and what the deal's framework

would be hasn't happened yet. and so, typically, that all happens before the leaders come in and bless what has been done. so, we're headed towards a very sort of unpredictable and shaky situation here. >> something that we're used to since 2016, as this president. kimberly, if you put it in perspective for us, what are you seeing here? because i was somewhat surprised, maybe you were too when the word from kim jong-un was well we still would like to meet, and in past years, past decades, we should say, when it comes to the kim family, had that message come from the white house, it would have been well, we're off this as well. >> clearly, kim jong-un has something to gain here by coming to the table, being able to sit with president trump and the united states in this summit. it is legitimizing if nothing

else, sets him up as a world leader, someone to be reckoned with. so that would be one aspect of this. also, seeking the sanctions that they want some relief from would be real. so there's clearly the incentive for kim jong-un to come to the table. but the one thing he is not going to be offering is full denuclearize. that's really the reason for this delay. there was a misunderstanding on the part of the united states. >> right. >> as to exactly what north korea was willing to give. and that's the reason behind it. rhetoric didn't help, the name calling of the vice president and things like that, but that was really the sticking point here. it seems that june 12th is a very short period of time to get to some meeting of the minds here that could make a summit like that worthwhile. >> there's always the message talking to the subject of

denuclearize that you bring up here is that what you leave with is maybe different than what the objective may be. it may be different than the ultimate outcomes that you as a team may be trying to achieve. laura, it's been said this president would love in this case to do what previous presidents have not been able to do. number 2, potentially get a nobel peace prize, that certainly is within the sites here. third, when you add to this back and forth, what's happening in the white house? you got a new secretary of state. what are you seeing in terms of that balance? >> i'm seeing absolute chaos in the white house. obviously, bolton is a war monger. white house can't seem to get its messaging together. they put senior officials on a

call. "new york times" reported about it and then trump went back and sat the official did not objection zist, although multiable reporters heard him say this on a call. meeting was coming up too fast. it seems like there's not a lot of communication. they can't figure out what they want to do with north korea nor how to get the message out to the press. so i'm really interested to see how this shakes out. >> how will this shake out here, charlie, when you have the pence bolton message soon to be echoing out there in terms of potentially tanking this meeting but on the flip side the president says we're back in. what is happening in the white house? >> well i'm interested. what you're referencing in pence and bolton is both of them are floating the so called libya model which is one of the reasons. because the country gives up its nuclear aspirations and the leader gets killed because he can't resist a foreign assisted

rebellion. it's certainly seems like tha tanking the deal. maybe team trump is leading with full denuclearize for north korea which is obviously a fantasy. maybe they can get something lesser, something like caps on production of what they already have and monitoring of where the stockpile is and maybe certain missiles get removed or a ban on further enrichment of ruranium something like the iran deal. which trump of course blew up. it's hard to see against that how a compromise comes out of this. >> it's a good point. what is actually the meat on the bone here? what is it that they will be

discussing? that is potentially the hey, hang on a second, june is next month. we need to lay out that plan fr first. i want to turn to this, this just happening. a u.s. prisoner released from venezuela. and that just coming to us, again, as i mentioned, within the last 24 hours, joshua holt, a utah man in caracas. we understand senator corker was down there. something good for utah, including senator orrin hatch. >> yes. i mean this is the culmination of a two-year process of trying to negotiate the release of joshua holt, an american who went to venezuela to marry someone who he met on line. or as senator orrin hatch gave

thanks to the trump administration and the obama administration for this, but at the same time, this is venezuela, a country whose recent elections were denounced as a sham by the united states, a country where there are hundreds of political prisoners. while this is a joyous occasion for joshua holt and his family, it's also a careful diplomatic walk that the united states has to make and not being -- in the praise. >> the president's clearly saying look what we were able to do and we will be watching it later here when joshua holt does land in the united states. what we guess to be around 7:00 p.m. eastern. we'll be covering that here. kimberly atkins, covering everything. thank you so much. all right. coming up, after we take a short break, battle at the border. president trump accuses democrats of separating immigrant families at the mexico

border. who's to blame? the world is full of different hair. that's why pantene has the perfect conditioners for everyone. from air-light foam, to nourishing 3 minute miracle, to the moisture-infusing gold series. we give more women great hair days - every day. pantene.

fthere's flonase sensimist.f up around pets. it relieves all your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. with tcalled audible.le app you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside. binge better. audible.

sure. mom,what's up son?alk? i can't be your it guy anymore. what? you guys have xfinity. you can do this. what's a good wifi password, mom? you still have to visit us. i will. no. make that the password: "you_stillóhave_toóvisit_us." that's a good one. [ chuckles ] download the xfinity my account app and set a password you can easily remember. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around.

the justice department may have set it sights on a new ally. yahoo! news's michael issy cough has reported the fbi has transcripts of secret wiretaps. it also involves alexander roman

nof. officials say the wiretaps captured in 2013 were handed over to the bureau a few months ago. this is the first clear sign that he may be a part of the russian investigation. he has ties with the nra and activists. one of the contacts is donald trump jr. the pair met at a nra convention in louisville kentucky. joining us benjamin and glen carl. ben, let's start with you on this. the one of the major takeaways right now is that donald trump jr. should be concerned. why is that? >> the spanish prosecutor basically said this. look, we don't know what's on these tapes. and i think as with all of these things, where we learn something

is being investigated, it's very hard to know what that something is. that said, mr. torshin does seem to have a long relationship with the nra and his name has come up a number about of times in the context of the russia investigation, in connection with -- as a possible sort of conduit for money or influence or messaging to get into the campaign. and so you know, i think it's an interesting story just in terms of there being sort of another line in the water on this stuff. but it's very hard to know what it means. >> glen, what did you take away from the reporting? >> well, one coincidence is notable. two is something that you have to pay attention to. when there are hundreds of them, then a reasonable person will conclude something fishy is going on. so this is number 400 and

something or other of associations between russian people associated with the leadership money laundering and the russian intelligence service or vladimir putin, with members of trump's enduparty. >> i want to move on to another topic. this is again reinforcement, shall we say, coming from the white house. rudy jailian rudy giuliani saying they want a briefing on a classified data report. this on the idea that an informant had met with the campaign. what do you make of this demand, of this idea that the white house wants to get access to this at this moment? is this going to happen? >> well, you bet they want a briefing. i mean, a whole bunch of information relevant to the case

that's being built is disclosed to, you know, senior members of congress and of course they want the defense wants in on it. it's an awe day shus ask on their part and i can't imagine the justice department -- we know the justice department will not be eager to comply with that. that said, there are a lot -- bunch of people in the room who, you know, have their own relationships with the white house. so if they can't get it from the justice department, perhaps they can get it from somebody else. >> and this would be quite note worthy, no doubt, here, glenn, as we have information that would be shared potentially with the white house, the defense, as well as potentially members of congress. this would certainly be an issue

that would be -- the intelligence community would not necessarily like. >> oh, it wouldn't like it at all. it would be a terrible thing. i have the good fortune of not being a lawyer but i am an intelligence officer. and if there are indications of associations of foreign intelligence services, then you have to investigate them. this is classic standard counter intelligence work. it's not spying. calling that spying is stupid talk. also dangerous because it interferes with the procedure functions of the county intelligence and law enforcement authorities and intelligence authorities. of the united states. it would be a terrible thing for future operations and the security of the country were the trump representatives to succeed in breaking down yet another barrier in procedure functioning of national security organizations. >> traditional separations. i want to move on to a "new york times" story that you're very aware of here, benjamin.

that story on michael cohen, on a private meeting at trump tower with a russian oligarch to discuss the u.s./russia relations. reporter goes he had met with a putin ally at trump tower now 11 days before the inauguration. what do you read into that? >> i don't understand why everyone's making a big deal about that story. didn't you have a meeting at trump tower 11 days before the inauguration? >> mine was actually 12. >> sorry. give or take. 12 days, 13 days. and then get paid half a million dollars from a russian oligarch? as with the other torshin story, it's very hard to know, other than the point that glen just made, which is that when you have 1,000 of these things, you end up feeling like there's a pattern, and that pattern is of

enormous intelligence interest. enormous counter intelligence concern. that said, as a law enforcement matter, you know, bob mueller has to prove a violation of a criminal law, every element of that beyond a reasonable doubt using admissible evidence and how this fits into the broader investigation of michael cohen is kind of anybody's guess. it sure is suggestive, though. >> glen, what does it suggest to you? >> i think ben raises an important point that i've tried to make on other times that i don't think receives adequate attention or is understood by the general public. difference between the standards required for journalist who are -- responsible journalists like yourself or the "new york times" and law enforcement officials as opposed to how intelligence services proceed, if there are 1,000 coincidences, for us that, is sufficient to

reach a decision that leads to action we have to take. if we don't act upon 1,000 alarming notices, concerning national security issues, we are derelict. decision is clear to make. that's not the same standard that will reach a conviction in a court of law. but from an intelligence perspective, there's no question as to what's going on any longer. >> the question of responsibility and the numbness potentially that's also creeping in based on the number of reports that are coming through. we will watch that. hey, thank you both. have a good saturday. >> you too? >> coming up, the case against harvey weinstein, will the disgraced movie mogul take the stand in his own defense? insurance that won't replace

the full value of your new car? you're better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with new car replacement, if your brand new car gets totaled, liberty mutual will pay the entire value plus depreciation. liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

i no wondering, "what if?" uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who've have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b,

which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni.

torshin tors mr. weinstein did not invept the casting couch in hollywood and to the extent there is bad behavior in that industry, that is not what this is about. bad behavior is not on trial in this case. it's only if you intentionally committed a criminal act and mr. weinstein vigorously denies that. >> that was harvey weinstein's attorney after prosecutors charged the disgraced movie mogul with two counts of felony

rape and one count of sexual act in the first-degree. charges are related to two alleged incidents involving two women. one accused him of rape. other claims he forced her to perform oral sex. weinstein maintains the sex was consensual and his lawyer says he plans to plead not guilty to all charges. weinstein became the central figure in hollywood's me too movement. rose mcgowan, one of his accusers weighed in on his first appearance in court. >> what is his punishment look like? >> shame. >> his punishment means the power of being stripped away. it's okay of having one day of this because it's going to get really ugly. and it's going to get hard. it's going to get harder. but right now for today, it's okay in this battle to have a moment of just like yeah. yeah. >> joining me now trial attorney

and legal analyst ann bremner. is it that day at least for the moment? >> yes. i mean when she said yes just for the moment, that's okay, but is that justice? i mean punishment is justice for the unjust. it has to be something more than this. but that day was a big day in this not so quiet revolution. >> what is next? >> what he's going to go through next is discovery and as his lawyer said, who's putting -- his whole thing about the casting couch is not on trial. he's putting out his public statements to try and defend his client, but what he's also saying is he says he's going to move to dismiss the case and on factual grounds and constitutional. both of which are very difficult to do. they'll be hearings and discovery and also they're trying to get information from

his company in the case. >> the idea of the casting couch, is that going to work? will that make it difficult for prosecutors? >> it does. and its ebasically because it comes down to consent. what he's trying to say is this culture goes back to 1910 or thereabouts and it was basically an agreement between two people which is i'll make you a star if you agree to have sexual relations with me. that is clearly consensual and he's putting it out there and saying you can't prove otherwise. i didn't invent it. he didn't invent it but this is what the case is about. it's bad behave but not criminal. according to him. >> you saw him walk in. from our own reporting, those who were there in the courtroom, he was a little bit surprised at all of the cameras and all the folks there in front of him. what did you make of his reaction? will he take the stand here? >> well, i think that his reaction, he was smirking,

looked surprised. he had his intellectual books with him trying to send a message of a martyr. when you look at a person like this, who basically got away with this for deck ades basical had people surrounding him that allowed this. he still tried to keep it under wraps and i think he's sill surprised when he saw people glaring at him, i think he will take the stand. there's no place for him to go except for up. frankly in terms of people's estimation of him. but i think his arrow gans and belief, true belief that he can get through this in some way like he thinks he could before will get him in the witness stand. he has a brilliant lawyer. remember, that case was dismissed pretrial. clarence said there's no justice inside or outside the court.

right now, outside this court this man is condemned. why is president trump blaming democrats for his own controversial policy of separating children from their parents who cross the border illegally? that next. - i love my grandma. - anncr: as you grow older, your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers.

- anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

uhp. i didn't believe it. again. ♪ ooh, baby, do you know what that's worth? ♪ i want to believe it. [ claps hands ] ♪ ooh

i'm not hearing the confidence. okay, hold the name your price tool. power of options based on your budget! and! ♪ we'll make heaven a place on earth ♪ yeah! oh, my angels! ♪ ooh, heaven is a place on earth ♪ [ sobs quietly ] . president trump taking aim at democrats and members of his own cabinet on immigration, this morning tweeting put pressure on the democrats to end the

horrible law that separates children from their parents once they cross the border into the united states. democrats are protecting ms-13 thugs. that follows yesterday's washington post report detailing -- over the rise in illegal crossings at the border. joining me now the democratic strategist. a republican separate gist, columnist at usa today. and a deputy director of american civil liberties union. the aclu recently filing a lawsuit over family separations. lee is a lead attorney on that case. okay. >> so bosul. with we're where at now, this certainly has wrinkles on both sides of the aisle. for republicans as well as for democrats. but the big issue i think is this policy we're looking at

that is on the border, that people are watching, and that is the question at the moment of what will happen with these families as they're crossing. for instance, yesterday when we were listening to a legal director expressing to chris about what was happening. i want to play that because i think it does stand out. let's play with laura st. john said. >> type of devastation we're talking about, what lee mentioned, where a family separated mother doesn't know where they are child is for four days, that's entirely common right now. in this administration. children and parents who are separated sometimes don't have any way to communicate with each other for days, for weeks. i've seen months where a parent had no idea where their child was after the u.s. government took the child away. >> she also expressed on the show that she had seen children as young as 53 weeks old comes to court without the parents sitting next to them.

>> i think it's viale. i'm glad to see the aclu taking the steps it's taking. it is a story repeated all over the country. just the other day in new york city, it was reported that i.c.e. arrests are up 65% or more since trump took offeice. this is delawavastating. r.s were equating gang members to immigration and tying that to democrats. it didn't work then. but my fear is that a lot of what you're seeing and a lot of this stress on these families is becoming normalized. that's what's so really delaw e devastating about these policies. >> lee, what is the aclu doing next? you were on the show as well last night discussing with chris what the case will be. give us details you are pushing

forth. >> right. we have brought a national class action in federal court in san diego, and we are waiting for the decision. we've had oral argument and we assume the judge will rule relatively quickly. obviously there's no timetable. what we are saying is very straightforward. we are saying you cannot separate parents and children, especially 2 or 3 or 4 years old or keep them separated unless there's a compelling reason to do so. what the law and constitution has traditionally said is the only compelling reason to ever separate a parent and child is if the parent presents a danger not child. that's not why they're occurring. children are being used as pawns in a larger immigration debate. and it's having devastating consequences. we have put in enormous medical testimony by well known doctors around the country saying that this will have permanent trauma

on these little children. i am seeing 2, 3, 4-year-old children begging not to be taken away from their parents, and they're just ripped apart, sent across the country. parent may not talk to them for days or months that go on. these children should not be pawns in a large immigration debate. people can debate -- on. >> on that issue. you heard what i read at the top. the president is saying the dates need to moor on this. can you respond to what he's saying. >> yeah. absolutely. let me be as clear as possible. there is no law, much less a democratic policy that says you must separate children. law the president is pointing to and the law the justice department is pointing to does not require sfrags separation. it if it did, prior add administrations would have had to separate kids but they did

not have this horrendous unprecedented policy. to the extent that the president is saying well we'll stop separating children if you give us a wall, children should not be pawns. negotiating pawns in a larger immigration debate. >> as we look at how both republicans -- i said this at the top. both republicans and democrats seem to have both issues and problems with regarding -- regarding immigration policy right now, for instance, a group of house republicans signing a discharge position in an effort to vote on daca itself. both sides seem to want to move forward in this very topic, but it's not easy. clearly. >> no. it's not easy. but there are people in both parties, the republican party, obviously starting to realize they are going to be vulnerable on this issue and want to get something done i think before election day, before the mid term so that they at least can have something to talk about to say they maybe have done something good. but i think what needs to p

happen and what i hope will happen -- i don't want to sound pollyanna-ish, but these children being ripped from the parents, i'd like to see this talked about at the pulpit in every single church tomorrow. i think that is the only way to get this going from a grass roots perspective so the president trying to blame the democrat the won't have an impact. our leaders in washington clearly are failing us. i want to note, if you remember back during the election when hillary clinton warned that under trump people would be hauled away in boxcars and she was excoriated for using that type of language and those sort of holocaust images and people thought she went too far. i think this is what's happening. we're getting used to it like a drip, drip, drip. it's being normalized. this is exactly what trump wants to happen. they want us to become so numb

we don't even notice this it happening. we become so used to it. at this point, i think it's going have to be -- i hope it's the pastors and ministers. >> i just say very quickly. where is the interfaith community on this issue? >> where is it. >> they're meeting with trump and trying to cut whatever deals they can with him on other issues, if it you look at the history of sanctuary cities, out of the 80's it was the interfaith community. where is that community now? if you look at what's happening in texas, they just signed a law that actually might hold police officers liable for not enforcing i.c.e. regulations. i mean we are at a place right now where we need the interfaith community among others to step in and push congress to do what it's supposed to do. >> thank you all three. kneel and pay. debate over the nfl's new national anthem policy. we'll speak with two former players who land on opposing

sides of the league's new rule. once there was an organism so small

no one thought much of it at all. 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. i don't think people should be standing in locker rooms, but still i think it's good. you have to stand proudly for the national anthem. you shouldn't be playing or

shouldn't be there or maybe shouldn't be in the country. >> president trump weighed in on the nfl's new policy. it allows players to stay in the locker room during the anthem but would have to stand if on the field. there's also a penalty found in violation. the league can find any team taking part in the protest during the anthem by one of its players. let's go to the writer for sb nation. former nfl punter for the minnesota vikings. jack brewer. thanks to all three. tile tyler i want to start with you. how was this voted upon? >> so so far, the reporting is shaky. it would seem the league has taken a compromised vote from all -- owners saying they abstained. reports coming out there was no official vote. virtually silence black players

and forms of black freedom to find a way to go back to football. problem with that and the simplicity of the act is that this was the worst possible thing. we don't know what the fines are. we don't know what the penalties actually will be. there's this cloud hanging over locker rooms in the nfl with players on one side who are afraid to do anything. players on another who are defeated and some who never wanted the rule at all who can feel very safe. it's lunasy and a disgrace. >> chris, what have you heard from fellow nfl either veterans, and/or current players? what's the reaction? >> well, i can't say that i've heard in any former or current players. but i know on my perspective, that i think this is ultimately a cowardly move by the owners, and frankly, it's un-american in that this country is built on a rich tradition of standing up against bullies and tyrants, and the owners essentially holed

ovholed -- rolled over and said we'll silence these voices in exchange for making more money. when you look at that through the lens of american history i don't think that's what we want to stand fore. >> what's your thought? >> couldn't disagree more. im a' black african-american and work in my community hard and tirelessly trying to help serve some of the poorest african-americans across the world. but the fact of the matter is i just received the e-mail from the national football league that said that they sport any of the social issue us i want to go out there and do. . they have put up more money to promote and to help support their employees that any country in america. and the fact that we don't, as black people don't stand behind that, this is a big feat. they should be kret dided for that and awarded for that. just think about this. these are guys that work.

this is a job. you can protest -- they're not saying the guys can't protest but just don't protest during the game. you're at work. and if you look at it, look at the the game, because you are at work. and if you are looking at it, look at the numbers the leagues numbers are down, and people are stopping to watch the game, and that not good for black people, and the national football league has made several millionaires to help the guys go into the community and to be able to do the social justice on the ground and the hands on work and let's talk about the solution, and not talking about pulling al the emotions and extreme liberal policies burk talk about real solutions, and th solutions, and that is what the national league football players are talk about now. >> and jack, when you are look at the ownerers themselves and the breakdown, and 70% of players are african-american and black, and what do you say about this? >> well, you can say that about

any industry, and soon, you be seeing the african-americans owning the teams. and that not the subject, because that subject has nothing to do with what we are talking about. and we are talking about people who are protesting at work. you name me one other job in america, and name a job in america that people can go out and politically express their views and it affects the bottom line of the business and makes them lose millions of dollars, and why are you putting the national football league front and center. >> well, there is some bad conflations toss ed out here. and the bottom line of the nfl is affected by a multitude of things and not just protest, and people should be able to the use their first american rights wherever they works and this vibe and feel is corny, right? we can't sit here, and say that black people can't protest in the place they are working at because they are afforded the d additional right, and black

people are pressed all over the country, and are not free, and so to actually sit here and believe and think that the nfl is going to allow players on off time to be out there to fund raise or philanthropy is directly positive when they can't protest in the field does not matter, and the nfl wants to find the ways to the protest regardless of the policy especially -- >> and they should. >> and especially that we don't know what the policy and to yus the fearmongering in the face fof white president who wants the shut up and play, it is the most ludicrous in pushing for, that and it does not make you better, but a false contrarian. >> and that is what i don't understand. that is not the question. the protest -- >> this is -- >> if you can't understand it, i can't help you. >> unbelievable. >> and chris, can you get in there hearing both sides of argument? >> as i stated clearly it is

un-american, because it is a first amendment violation. people get the first amendment confused thinking of the government interfering and actually the government is not, it because it is private business doing what they can do and in this situation, the literal president of the united states has stated that if players are protesting they should lose their jobs and now be deport and the owners then made a rule in order to the prevent the players from protesting, and colin kaepernick still does not have a job. this is a first amendment violation, and government official cannot do something like that, and to go out to say that players should shut up and play. no, they shouldn't, because we are american citizens and human beings in the country, and if our society is not stable, then there is not going to be football. >> who is saying that the players should shut up and play, and they should talk loud and

put the fists loud in the air, and help the young black men. there is things in the world call rules, and the young black men need discipline more than anything else, and look across -- >> wait. >> and so, look, if you want to bring in the far left liberals ta talking points and talk tact president. the president makes outlandish way that are disgusting, but it has nothing to do with to a fact that the national football league has donated billions of dollars to go out into the community to push issue norse black people, and this is a fact. >> and they are restricting them from doing anything at all. >> you are being restricted on? >> currently the nfl is not allowing anybody to do anything with anything that has to do with the same freedoms that you think they are pushing. >> they are funding our efforts. they are funding our efforts to

do that >> it is fearmonger ing ing in white supremist state. >> what you are saying is not true. >> no, what you are saying is not true. >> i got and letter that says that and they write checks ash and what other business does that to support your causes and you cannot name one. >> and the mlb and the nhl, and everybody else does the same. >> and the mlb and the nba and the rest of the leagues have not lost millions of dollars because of the kneeling of the flags -- >> neither has the nfl. >> well, look at the tv ratings. >> it does not make you right. >> you are pushing the liberal policies, man. terrible. >> and i appreciate the energy that you have brought to the conversation, and i am sure that once another day comes upon us, we will have more items to discuss on this very topic. thank you for all of your time jack brewer, chris kluwe.

>> and now a surprise meet iing with north and south korea, and can the summit can salvaged? we will discuss that next. fter. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester, neither did our story. and that's why we'll always drive a subaru.

i'm richard lui in new york, and we begin the summit in north korea, and back on track this afternoon, and leaders of two koreas held a meeting today in an effort to revive the talks

and that talk is after president trump canceled june's summit, and sending a letter to kim jong-un saying let this letter represent the singapore summit for the good of both parties, but the detriment of the world will not take place. but then, yesterday, the president suggest ed thed that june 12th meeting could still be on on. >> and we have been talking to them, and they would very like to look at resuming things. >> and thank you for being with us, ambassador, and so i will start with that statement, and everybody plays games and the gamefication of what you have never seen certainly in your long and esteemed career in this long and difficult process, and the gamefication, does it help to do something