journalism and in life that powerful people want to keep secret. he of course played a pivotal role human rights abuses from the supersonics area to the bush era. that does it for me. i'll be back tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. eastern. "hardball" starts. now. well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal. >> wow. let's play "hardball." >> good evening. i'm chris matthews. the art to defend the president from the special counsel's investigation, the president's attorneys are making a sweeping assertion of presidential power not unlike they heard from richard nixon. they claim trump's position gives him unrestrained authority over the justice department, effectively putting the president above the law. "the new york times" reported

this weekend that trump's lawyers delivered a 20-page letter to special counsel mueller in january intended to fend off a potential subpoena for the president's testimony. in that letter, they argue that the president's power over the justice system is so great that he can never be guilty of obstructing justice. quote, it remains our position that the president's actions here by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer could neither constitutional naturally nor legally cute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished terminate the query or even exercise his power to pardon if he so decides. in other words, he can get rid of the whole mueller thing if he wants right now or pardon himself on anything. in their assessment, the power to administer justice however he sees fit. they assert donald trump has the constitutional right to kill a federal investigation, even when it's an investigation of him.

well, this weekend trump lawyer rudy giuliani backed up that lawyer's legal claim to such expansive legal powers. however, he wasareful in describing the political risk of using that power. >> you say that he could determine nate the inquiry. does this mean he can tmite any federal investigation? is that the argument here? any federal investigation, he can terminate? . that is pretty clear. the power of the, he is a presidential appointee. it could lead to impeachment. if he terminated an investigation of himself, it could lead to all sorts of consequences. >> but constitutionally, you're making the argument that constitutionally, he could is what you're saying? >> i'm saying constitutionally it sure looks that way. >> well, joining me right now is eugene robinson, msnbc contributor, heidi przybyla, daniel goldman, former assistant attorney and professional of constitutional law at nyu.

rick, i want to start with you. i have never heard a president say he is king before, but the fact he is kill any investigation, pardon himself. how can he obstruct himself because he is basically legally and constituti god. it's an amazing assertion. what do you make? have you ever heard anybody claim this before? >> the combination of these positions is an incredible sweeping assertion of presidential power, and it's certainly inconsistent with the president's obligation under the u constitution to make sure that the laws be followed faithfully. if he terminated investigations of anybody who had given him campaign contribution, or he ordered the government to prosecute only people who had given to his opponent, the ident can obstruct justice. congress can make it a crime if he acts with a corrupt purpose. >> but, rick, where are they getting this from? where are these people, john dowd and a whole bunch of these lawyers that trump has found, this collection of fixer, or whatever they are, they've told

him he can't do anything wrong. >> well, even alan dershowitz, who i think was the originator of this expansive theory recognized limits that the president's lawyers don't. so alan dershowitz said of course the president can't bribe witnesses. of course the president can't tamp were witnesses. >> yeah. >> they've said he can do nothing that constitutes obstruction of justice. my view, and the view of many academics in this area and many criminal defense lawyers is he cannot act for a corrupt purpose. that violates his obligation to execute the laws faithfully. >> well, dan, i heard nixon. in my sleep i still hear him saying basically david frost, if i do it it's got to be legal. it sounds like rudy and a whole batch of these guys are saying now, john dowd, a whole bunch of them are saying on a written 20-page argument that the president is above the law. >> they do make that argument. they also make a lot of factual arguments. and i think the important thing for those of us who are concerned about these broad claims is to keep in mind that this letter was written in january.

we are now in june. and we're talking still about a potential interview. and that was really the tluts of the letter, was to try t avoid the special counsel either subpoenaing trump or making him come in voluntarily. so the fact that we're still talking about it is an indication that bob mueller does not buy the legal argument that the president can do anything nor does he buy the factual arguments underlying the letter. >> gene, the old argument in court i understands is if you don't have the facts on your side you go to the law. and if you don't have either, you start pounding the table. it sounds like they're pounding the table or they're saying they have a higher view of the constitution, meaning the nixonian view? >> yeah, it sounds like they think the facts are ptty bad, or they don't know all the facts and the president is not telling them all the fax, and so they're making this argument tryg to keep him out of the witness chair or out of the interview room with mueller. but, you know, this is why we have two other branches of government, right? because the president is given

extraordinary powers, but we have two other branches of government to constrain, define those powers. and so if mueller subpoas the president, ultimately, it could be the supreme court that could decide whether he has to answer that subpoena if he refuses. if mueller decides -- >> the silence of the lambs continues. the republicans in the congress who lead the congress, the majority leadership in the senate have not said a word against this president in what he has been saying. they're not challenging his total claim to total power. remember lord acton saying power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. that was republican doctrine when you and i were growing up. they believed in a very limited power of the executive. >> look, congress is the -- of the equals, of the three equals, it's really first among equals according to many constitutional lawyers in our constitution. but congress certainly has the power, the ultimate power of

impeachment, if it chooses to do so. and if mueller decides that the president has done something that cutes a crime and reports that to congress, then they'll have a decision to make, and they have not covered themselves with glory so far. they're mum. >> they're mum. heidi, your thought on that. what good is a constitution if the courts and the congress don't stand up for their piece of the action, they let the president insist on his total absolute immunity from investigation or certainly indictment or certainly even any kind of action against him, any kind of probe they're saying, they have no right. the president said today they have no right that this is unconstitutional. this very probe being run by robert mueller is unconstitutional, he is claiming. isn't anybody going to speak up in this regard? >> well, that's what they're depending on, chris. this is the entire if you make the argument that the president's executive powers are so expansive as to knock out the authority of the justice department, you are saying that the only branch of our government that has authority

over him is the u.s. congress. the u.s. congress, then, would make a call on impeachment. and this campaign, because it is part of a campaign to discredit the investigation, then would mean everything. because congress would decide whether they act or wth they don't and i h tt you notice tha over the weekend, there was an interesting poll showing just how effective this campaign has been, that 73% now of fox news viewers think that this investigation is a bad investigation. that's why you're seeing people like kevin mccarthy even refusing to address the issue of whether the president is lying and now saying going along with this argument that we shouldn't be looking at obstruction or the president's lying, and that this is about collusion. >> he says no collusion. he is reading the lines he is given by the white house. anyway, they all become the nunes characters up there. every one is in the midnight ride of paul revere now, back and forth to the white house getting their words to speak.

also appears to say that trump's lawyers are asserting that the president can pardon himself for potential crimes he may have committed. here is what a trump attorney rudy giuliani said when asked directly than. can the president pardon the president. >> do you and the president's attorneys believe the president has the power to pardon himself? >> he's no but he probably does. he has no intention of pardoning himself. but he probably does. that's not say he can't. that's another really interesting institutional question, can the president pardon himself. 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. >> well, it's not an open question with mr. big. president trump went further today and asserted publicly he does have the ability to pardon himself. quote, this is in a tweet. i have the absolute right to pardon myself, but why would i do that when i have done nothing

wrong? and here is what republican senator chuck grassley, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee said about that today. >> if i were president of the united states and i had a lawyer that told me i could pardon myself, i think i'd hire a new y >> he is not going the hire a new lawyer. what do you think, dan? you start on this. can he pardonelf? is this imaginable even inhe original intent of the first purposes whatever those guys, the scalia guys believe every word shod be taken literally of the constitution. >> no. >> originalists. >> one of the founding principles of our constitutional democracy is no one can be the judge of himself. and ultimately, if the president were to pardon himself, he would be judging himself. so this runs cpletely counter. >> who told him he could? because he said it today. who is telling trump this stuff. >> i didn't watch "fox & friends" this morning so sure. >> where is he getting this stuff from? >> i think maybe he got it from rudy giuliani who seemed to be doing it spontaneously in that

interview. >> give us the implications. >> yes, exactly. you can do anything you want. >> the implications of that position would be that the entire structure of the entire constitution would be thrown out. the separation of powers wouldn't mean anything. congress's laws could be ignored by the presiden the courts could be igfwhoyrd the president. >> how about the fifth street, i canhootom on f avenue and pardon myself? >> this position is inconsistent with the rule of law. it's inconsistent with everything about limited government under the constitution. >> are you scared of this president, his view of the constitution? does it scare you that a president believes that he is godly? >> you know what i think part of the problem is here? i think the president and his lawyers are mutually reinforcing each other. i think he didn't know much about these boundaries when he comes in. he hears giuliani say this. it emboldens him to go even further, and they may be walking him into problems. he may act on some of these understandings. >> dan, i mean, excuse , he is a lawyer, i know. but how many times has he practiced law in the last 50 years? >> from my understanding, i

think since he became mayor, he i think had one case that went to court in the last ten years ago or something. >> he is a rainmaker. >> he was never an expert in the presidential powers in the constitution or the separation of powers. 's not what he did. >> not only that, but he said he ran the pardon office andhas no idea. >> gene, i know this is well, we're getting into summer now, the doldrums. but aren't you amazed? you're chuckling. aren't you amazed? it is nce of the lambs where. is the outrage? is there anything trump can say about his powers that wil shake up those people in the hill and they'll say wait a minute, cool it, mr. president? >> no, it will not shake them up, it will not make the republican leadership on the hill say significant anythianyt they're l looking at the midtm election that don't want to cross trump. they don't want to cause trouble for him because he might cause trouble for them and for their attempt to hold on the their majorities. and so they're with him. and i don't anticipate that we're going to hear courage

coming from the hill. >> heidi? >> this president has great power over these members right now because at any moment we could go back to last year whether where it was unclear whether he was going to go out and actually campaign against them. i talked just today, chris, some senate republican rainmakers who said it's really amazing how much coordination there is now between the white house and the republicans in the senate in terms of 2018 mid terms. there is no way they're going to go down on a sinking ship by firi on tr >> what about guys like kevin mccarthy? because i heard from somebody who is leading the congress, those are the only one yos can you hear from, the republican member who is leaving, one of the top members in judiciary said he is the strongest political force we've ever come across. you can't challenge, you can't challenge this president in the republican party, gene. you can't. it's pretty scary. it is close to napoleonic law here. one guy calling the shots.

>> well, also, kevin mccarthy is not exactly seneca on the house floor, right? he is not great wordsmith or anything like that. and to me, when he was being asked over the weekend again and again to comment on some of this ridiculousness, he seemed like a deer in the headlights. >> yeah. >> he kind of didn't know what to say except the white house talking points. he is running for speaker of the house. i don't think he covered himself with glory even within his own caucus this weekend. >> i got to get back to the attorneys here. where are we going to end up with a president who believes that he can pardon himself, a president who believes that he is the law and he cannot obstruct himself? where is this going to end up? in the trash can of history or where? >> i think it depends on what robert mueller's investigation ends up revealing, and if it does reveal serious crimes, then what congress does in response to that. >> who wins this fight?mueller ? under under the constitution as

you view it? who wins the fight? i want to interview you, if you lie, i want to prosecute you for perjury. i already got you on obstruction and the president says screw you. who wins the battle of the argument here? >> first of all, the president probably has to comply with a subpoena at the end of the day. i think a supreme court precedent establishes that. >> right. >> i think it's also very unlikely that mueller will develop any criminal indictment has said for many decades ment presidents can't be indicted when they're in office. so it ultimately will go to congress. >> last word. who win, mueller or trump? >> well, mueller win, but i don't think he is going to indict the president. so it's going to go to congress. >> thank you. for impeachment? >> yeah. >> thank you. coming up, rudy giuliani's admitting the reason why. rudy says it's because our recollection keeps changing. in other words, trump can't keep his story straight. this is amazing how he changes these stories. i did help my son.

well, i may have done, no. i really did write it for him. i took the test for him. that's ahead. plus, "hardball" round table is here tonight. plus bill clinton insisted on doing everything right during the monica lewinsky affair even thoueever apod her personally. and 50 years ago robert f. kennedy was shot after winning the california presidential. john lewis, an icon of the civil rights movement joins us tonight. finally, let me finish with what's missing in american leadership tonight. i think you all know, and this is "hardball," where the action.

your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. at fidelity, our online u.s. equity trades are just $4.95. so no matter what you trade, or where you trade, you'll only pay $4.95. fidelity. open an account today. well, the supreme court todarud in favor of a colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. we all know about that case. in a 7-2 decision, the state commission had shown anti-religious bias when it ruled against the baker. the opinion written by justice anthony kennedy was aarrow one meaning it applied to the

specific facts of this case only. it strongly reaffirmed protections for gay marriage and made it clear thatim cases might be decided differently based upon their merits. elena kagan joined the conservatives. ruth bader ginsburg was in the dissent. we'll be right back. and a baseb. ...a mythical castle ...and a grand banquet hall. this is not just a yard. it's where memories are made. the john deere x350 select series with the exclusive one-touch mulchcontrol system. nothing runs like a deere™ save $300 on the x350 select series™ tractors with the purchase of a mulchcontrol™ kit.

save $300 on the x350 select series™ hey, i'm curious about your social security alerts. oh! we'll alert you if we find your social security number on any one of thousands of risky sites, so you'll be in the know. ewww! being in the know is very good. don't shake! ahhh! sign up online for free. discover social security alerts.

welcome back to "hardball." there is a stunning admission buried in the letter president trump's legal team submitted to robert mueller. it's acknowledgment that president trump's team publicly misrepresented the facts on a key aspect regarding the trump tower meeting with a russian lawyer who offered donald trump . dirt on hillary clinton. for the first time now, trump's lawyers conceded that the president did in fact dictate a short but accurate response to "the new york times" abouthat meeting. this represents a complete reversal from what one of trump's lawyer and spokesman said last year. let's watch.

>> the statement that was released on saturday was released by donald trump jr., i'm snow flurry consultation with his lawyers. the president wasn't involved in that i do want to be clear that the president was not involved in the drafting of the statement and did not issue the statement. it came from donald trump jr. so that's what i can tell you. >> he certainly didn't take dyck tate, but like i said, he weighed in, offered suggestion like any father would do. >> in other words, he didn't do anything. he was helicopter dad and here is one. at no point did president trump, jay sekulow, his lawyer, or sarah sanders ever publicly correct the record. yesterday the president's newest lawyer, rudy giuliani, was asked about the change in position. here is what he said. >> jay would have to answer that. i've talked to him about it. i think jay was wrong. this is the reason you don't let the president testify. all recollection keeps changing or we're not even asked a question and somebody makes an assumption. >> i'm joined by matt apuzzo

with "the new york times" who helped break the story about the memo, and carolyn polissi. let's start with the journalism here. it comes out now that trump really did design the cover-up. he said the whole meeting at trump tower was about adoption of russian babies and all that. fine. that's not what they were saying before. why did they change the story, do you know? >> well, let's be clear. they didn't change the story. we had to get the legal memo and publish it for anybody to figure it out. >> right. >> if you go back to last year -- >> they didn't intentionally let the word out that they had changed their story? >> no. nobody was going to correct the record force. if you go back to last year in july when the times first broke this story, we reported that the president had personally signed off on this statement. and you ran the clips. no, no, no, that's wrong. "the new york times" is wrong. and "the washington post" goes even further. no, he didn't just sign off on that, he personally dictated that. and the response was, no no, no, that's wrong, that's wrong. only now in black and white do we say they're publicly

aggressively pushing this one story while they're privately acknowledging the exact opposite story. and this has been the problem of working as a journalist in washington, chris, you know this. you say to them this is what we've got. this is what we're working on. oh, we hear you're considering firing rex tillerson and replacing with mike pompeo. no, that's fake news. that's a lie, that's a lie, that's a lie. and then of course that's exactly what happen. >> then it becomes a presidential announcement. caroline, he is thquestion. it seems to me, if you admit that you covered described something differently than you believe it was, if you tell the papers, go out plan publically and say you know what? that was just a meeting about adoption. we all know people who have adopted kids from russia, and it was a tricky thing. then it turns out they were getting dirt on hillary clinton. lying publicly like that and then to come out and say no, we really were covering up the story. well were really were changing to it look good. how does that put you in a position with regard to perjury, with lying to agents, whatever?

>> team trump stance on. this it'sed that we have gotten to this point. it is not a crime to lie to "the new york times." it's not a crime to lie to the public. it's not a crime to lie on twitter. it'sed that that's the level we're getting to. >> is it a lie for the president to admit that he designed a cover up to cover up his son, that he came up with a nice explanation, a nice alibi why he is meeting with the russians and why jared was with him, is that a lie when he puts that in a letter to the public? >> it certainly is a lie. >> to the prosecutors? >> yes. it's evidence of his stooimt state of mi state of mind. mueller is going to use that in the background of that case. >> can that be a felony perjury case to put a 20-page memo to the prosecutor and say this is the truth? >> if he lies in the memo. >> if he admits in memo that he covered up? >> no, no. he is telling the truth in the memo, presumably, that he lied to "the new york times," which in and of itself is not a crime. so there are layers upon layers here. i think what you can glean from this 20-page letter that was

just released is that the trump legal team is really not so focused on legality. in fact, that cited the wrong obstruction statute in that letter. they just got it wrong. it was an outdated statute. they are more focused point on impeachable offenses. if you draw then diagram of criminal offenses versus -- they're focused on the pr aspect. >> let me start as matt as a journalist and then we'll get back to the law here. i'm sorry, you're the defense lawyer. it seems to me if they admit that they came up with an alibi for meeting, the meeting at trump tower, the most egregious, the father had to corp for the son. okay mix, son screwed up. he shouldn't have had the meeting. id was about getting dirt on hillary. but i'm going to say it was about russian adoptions. that -- and then send that information to the prosecutor. that a crime, admitting a cr is that admitting a crime? a cover-up, an alibi, a lie? >> i wish that we had some way

to hold people in the public square accountable for lying to "the new york times." >> no, but lying to the prosecutor. >> no. >> i should say admitting to the prosecutor that you cooked up an alibi for that meeting. >> no. look, i haven't seen any evidence that that in and of itself is a crime. i think what mueller wants to know why were you cooking up story and why were you pushing so hard that the president wasn't involved? and is that part of something bigger? is that one piece of a larger obstruction thing? it wouldn't be an element of a crime, but it could speak to as we're talking about, it could speak to the president's mind or his intention. >> well, back to you, caroline, because the president of the united states is now admitting in a letter to the prosecutors that he basically came up with an alibi for his son when his son was actually dealing with getting dirt from the russians to use in the campaign. >> right. we've known that for a while now. this could be more appropriate when you look at donald trump and the context of who can be

indicted in this whole russia investigation. we know -- >> junior. >> that's what i'm saying. we know trump and mueller are both operating under this office of legal counsel idea that you can't indict a sitting president which is in i why in a lot of cases meeting the elements of an obstruction of justice claim aren't necessarily that important at this time. but it could definitely be important when it comes to don jr. and then who knows, maybe trump will pardon him. >> well, nixon wasn't, he was kicked out the back door. thank you, matt apuzzo, great reporting as always. thank you, carolyn palissi. claiming he has the absolute right to pardon himself. his snub at the champion philadelphia eagles, they're not coming to see him. the eagles are not come doing see this president. apparently he doesn't want to see them unless he sees them all. as well as that exclusive nbc interview this morning with craig melvin in when clinton,

mr. bill responds to the monica lewinsky comment. this is "hardball," where the action. spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. everything. and that 2% cash back adds up to thousands of dollars each year... so i can keep growing my business in big leaps! what's in your wallet?

this one's below market price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value. the first survivor of ais out there.sease and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. visit alz.org to join the fight.

i needthat's whenvice foi remembered that my ex-ex- ex-boyfriend actually went to law school, so i called him. he didn't call me back! if your ex-ex- ex-boyfriend isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal.

they say i have the most loyal people. did you ever see that? where i could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot somebody, and i wouldn't lose any voters, okay? it's like incredible. >> shoot somebody. how do you talk like that? welcome back to "hardball." president trump famously said he could shoot someone on the streets of new york, fifth avenue specifically, and not lose votes.

yesterday his lawyer rudy giuliani made the astonishing claim that even if trump had shot his former fbi director james comey, he couldn't be indicted for it. and today president trump tweeted, as has been stated by numerous legal scholars, have the absolute right to pardon myself. that's the president of the united states talking. it's a view the presidency imbued with absolute power with constitutional question or crisis even. for more let's bring in john holliman, executive producer of the circus on showtime. former aide to george w. bush and contributor to "time" magazine, and nicholas confe confessori. why is the president flipping out and going all the way with this i can do anything i want, i can pardon myself and by the way, i can kill this investigation at any time if i want to. it's my game. >> it's a question of strategy, it's a question of the visceral emotion of it. i think for the last month as you've watched the president's behavior and the people around

him's behavior, there is an increasing sense of panic setting in. there may be a strategy and there may be tactics and there are things they are trying to do to missouri this out of the legal realm into the political realm and try to make it a politic argument, but everything that trump is doing, just the kind of essence of it suggests not just projection of guilt but that he feels the net is closing in around him. >> that's what i believe. >> on the mueller side and the michael cohen side there are two fronts to this battle now that are intertwining and he knows they are getting close. >> i agree. back 100 years ago when i began following some of this stuff, when reagan lost that first debate with mondale and everybody thought he had lost it, lee atwood, this brilliant genius said if we lose the second debate, turn on the fog machine. forget all the fax, whose side you on? it sounds like that's the strategy that john just laid out. >> well, because for different periods, trump would show a modicum of self-control. not a ton, but a teensy bit. and now that has really gone out

the window. the impulsivity level of tweeting that yes, i could pardon -- >> are there any real lawyers left or they just flak? >> it doesn't matter because he doesn't listen to them and he doesn'nt to. >> i said before the show, silence of the lambs. mitch mcconnell is not complaining. the speaker is constitutional officer. he is not questioning this guy's right to basically run the country like george iii. >> look, president trump is daring congress and daring his own party to cold him accountable. he is saying if you don't like it, y can impeach me. that's it. that's all you can do. i have all the power. that's basically his proposition in these tweets and in the long memo his lawyers have written. >> here is tuncomfortable thing about it for a lot of democrats. you watch a couple of stories intertwine today. you have bill clinton who is making this argument, reminding us of his impeachment battle by saying basically i won because

two-thirds of the country was with me. two-thirds of the country is not with donald trump, but his argument was an appeal politics. forget whether i perjured myself. the country was with me because they thought this was illegitimate. >> we'll get to that that moment. >> he took the lesson ande is not buying it now. >> in one minute. we have to stick to our plan here at least. >> sorry. >> you're entitled to be wrong. in a statement a short time ago, the president said the super bowl champion philadelphia eagles, quote, are unable to come to white house with their full team to be celebrated tomorrow. they disagree with their president, their president because he insists that they proudly stand for the national anthem hand on heart in honor of the great men and women of our military and the people of our country. the eagles wants to send a smaller delegation, but the thousand of fans planning to attend deserve better. these fans are still invited for a different ceremony, that what that will honor our country, pay tribute to the great heros who fight to protect it and loudly and proudly play the national anthem.

a large number of the eagles said they were not going to attend and the white house decided no one from the team will be attending, but fans are still welcome. elise, again, it's a question of the flag. the last resort of a scoundrel? well, maybe he is a scoundrel, but here we go. >> donald trump will never pass up the opportunity for a good culture war. that's what it is. right now he feels the russia investigation news closing. in so why not talk about football, ut the national anthem, talk about standing up. that's a better argument for him right now. >> why would anybody want to live in a country where you have to put your hand on your -- i do it. most of us do it. i think we should do it. but when you required to do it, what could it possibly mean if it's required? >> zero. but the whole point of this is to engage in an act of political theater. he is saying it's not me they are rejecting, it is america when in fact these players don't like president trump and they're not going to the white house because they disagree with him

personally. the president is shifting it and saying it's an offense to the country. >> it's the same strategy again as the first one, us versus them, which side are you on. are you on my side or the country's side? patriotism or you with me or with them. >> and lebron are all watching this. they're watching television and they're going wait a minute, we're fighting for a championship. and at the end of it all, wee going to be voted on whether the president decided we showed up the right way. any way, bill clinton has been making the rounds today, in a tense interview with nbc's craig melvin this morning, the former president said he would not have changed how he handled the monica lewinsky matter,ven in light of the me too movement. let's watch the former president. >> looking back on what happened then, through the lens of me too now, do you think differently or feel more responsibility? >> no. i felt terrible then, and i came to grips with it. >> did you ever apologize to her?

>> yes. and nobody believes that i got out of that for free. i left the white house $16 million in debt. >> but you didn't apologize to her? >> i have not talked to her. >> do you feel you owe her an apology? >> i do -- i do not. i've never talked to her, but i did say publicly on more than one occasion that i was sorry. that's very different. the apology was public. i dealt with it 20 years ago plus, and the american people, two-thirds of them stayed with me, and i've tried to do a good job since then with my life and with my work. that's all i have to say to you. >> you know, elise, i don't know if it's fair or not, but it was a question, he was asked and it just lingered on. it took a long time to get an answer. >> it is absolutely fair. it's shocking that it took over two decades for him to be asked this question. and if that is his response, his

angry response -- >> what was the response cogently stated? what was the bottom line? it cost me $16 million? >> i was the victim. i was the one who was put in this horrible position in this unfair investigation that went too far, and this was so unfair, but the american public didn't care because they liked me. >> to put that in commercial terms does put him in that racket, sort of the trump racket. 130,000. why would he bring in money in regard to a very unpleasant affair that nobody really was proud of? >> look, i think based on his statement there, the president is conflating and can't really separate the politics of the impeachment from his own behavior. he wasn't asked a question about if it was okay to impeach him for this. he was asked a question by craig melvin about his behavior. and the proper response was it was wrong and i apologized to her and i'll apologize to her again right now. but instead, he made it a political argument that the american public sided with him

on the impeachment battle. >> what would you have done? >> i would apologize. i would apologize. >> he should have just done it over again. >> he should have apologized publicly at the time. he went on national television and said i'm a sinner. i apologize to the country. i apologize to monica lewinsky and her family. he said it. it would have been the easiest thing in the world 20 years ago i said exactly this, and i'll say it again. i haven't talked to her personally, bud i'd be happy to talk to her in person and tell her what i say now. she has borne terrible consequences for this and i apologize. >> it definitely has legislation. i think it's going to permanently impact how bill clinton is perceived in public life in the years going forward. and i think it's long overdue that the democratic party had a reckoning for how the party behave and how they protected bill clinton's predatory behavior 20 years ago. >> he's got a multimillion-dollar book deal with james patterson right now. he has plans for the future. he wants to campaign again.

i will bet you every dollar in your pocket right now that you will not see bill clinton on live television again whatever they're planning. >> will stephen colbert ask the same questions? >> i don't know. but i think why be foolish not to. >> nick, is this going to be a predictable question for his book tour? >> he is already cleaning up a bit tonight. he was asked about this at a different book event and he gave a better answer, in my opinion. but i think if you were sorry before, it's easy to say you're sorry again. if you're asked about impeachment, answer a question about impeachment. if you're asked about did i act properly and you think you acted improp improperly. just say that i'm sorry. two easiest words in the english language. >> i tell you, the normal reaction is not what you guys have describing. what happened with roger mudd asked teddy kennedy why you were running for president, and he didn't have the answer. the kennedy people are mad at roger mudd for asking the question. that's the way it works inside,

right? >> they knew also that this question was coming that. >> did? >> it wasn't like president clinton was ambushed. >> they did know. >> he was -- i believe that it was covered in the preinterview. >> well, the round taking is sticking with us. up next easy these people tell me something i didn't know. stick with us. you're watching "hardball." it's pretty amazing out there. the world is full of more possibilities than ever before. and american express has your back every step of the way- whether it's the comfort of knowing help is just a call away with global assist. or getting financing to fund your business. no one has your back like american express.

so where ever you go. we're right there with you. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. don't live life without it. 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.

we're back with the round table. john, tell me something i don't know. by the way, thank you for being on the round table. >> thrilled to be here. my great pleasure. everybody is freaking out about how democrats are going to do well in california. it's all just a bunch of complete mullarkey. democrats are going to do fine in california, and gavin newsom is the next governor. >> today 14 clerics died in a suicide bombing in kabul where they had been meeting to declare a religious degree. >> that they were not islamic? >> that it was unislamic to be a suicide bomber. >> which paper? >> "the new york times." >> and facebook had these data partnerships with dozens of hardware makers, and they

allowed these hardware makers to access all the data of your friends. so if you, chris, had 400 friends on facebook, and i'm sure you more, these devices can get access to 300,000 or 400,000 all told, and it may violate. >> sow sorry, mr. zuckerberg, i'm not on facebook. thank you, elise jordan, thank you, john holman, thank you r, nick confessore ray. we'll be right back. when it comes to snacking. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ that's why he uses the chase mobile app, to pay practically anyone, at any bank. life, lived victor's way. chase. make more of what's yours. wwow, this is quite the busyo. place. right? this is the product for you. (vo) the new bissell crosswave pet pro vacuums and washes at the same time. it's better than ever for homes with pets.

and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation best and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide. ♪ ♪ i love you baby applebee's 2 for $20, now with steak. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. up next, it's been 50 years today since robert f. kennedy

was gunned down and killed after winning the california primary. what would bobby kennedy think about the direction of the country right now? think about it. i'll speak with civil rights icon congressman john lewis, next. bster and shrimp you crave, together in so many new ways. there's new cedar plank seafood bake. tender maine lobster ap, cedar roasted to perfection. or new caribbean lobster and shrimp. sweet pineapple salsa on grilled rock lobster, paired with jumbo coconut shrimp. and wait. there's lobster & shrimp overboard! it's a seafood party on a plate. so hurry in. 'cause lobster & shrimp summerfest won't last. at fidelity, our online u.s. equity trades are just $4.95. so no matter what u ade, or where you trade, you'll only pay $4.95. fidelity. open an account today.

what i think is quite c is that we can work together in the last analysis, and that what has been going on in the united states over the period of the last three years, the division, the violence, the disenchantment with our society, the divisions whether it's between blacks and whites, between the poor and the more affluent or between age groups and the war in vietnam, that we can start to work together. we are a great country and a selfish country and a compassionate country. and i intend to make that my basis for running over the period of the next year. >> welcome back to "hardball" that was robert f. kennedy's victory speech after winning the 1968 california presidential democratic primary 50 years ago tonight. kennedy thanked his supporters,

as you saw in the assembled crowd at the l.a. ambassador hotel for the crucial victory on his path to the democratic nomination just months before the party convention that came in august of that year. of course, bobby kennedy never made it to chicago. just a few moments later as he exited through the hotel kitchen, kennedy was shot and wounded, mortally wounded. aye joined by john lewis of georgia, civil rights icon i believe and supported kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. he was at the ambassador hotel the night that bobby kennedy was shot. congressman lewis, i had to have you on tonight, and i want to know here we are 50 years later, just what john lewis feels and thinks tonight is important for me to hear. >> well, chris, i must tell you that i've been thinking a great deal about what happened and how it happened 50 years ago. bobby kennedy, i tell you, was a man of hope, faith, and love.

he inspired the best in all of us. he had the capacity to bring people together and lead us to greater heights. he wanted to be a builder of bridges. i w with him in indianapolis, indiana when we heard that dr. king had been assassinated. and i heard to myself we still have bobby. and that's why i went on to oregon and on to california to campaign with him, to team. and if he had lived -- i'm convinced, if he had lived whoerks have received the democrat nomination and he would have been elected the next president of the united states of america. he lad the capacity. he had the ability to bring people together the way he did in indiana, bringing whites and blacks together.

some people who had supported george wallace supported bobby. and our country would be a better country. we would be a better people, and we wouldn't have the division that we have today in america. >> congressman, i think, and you've spoken about it before, but i'd love you to do it tonight. talk about the train ride from new york down to washington in june of 50 years ago, and we're looking at them now on the screen, these people. tell us than crowd and what you saw in that crowd? >> well, i was on that train ride from new york to washington. and unbelievable crowd -- older people, young people, young children, i saw mothers and fathers holding their children, having them to wave. and there were people carrying sign saying "we love you, bob

bobby," "goodbye, bobby." i didn't want the train to stop. i wanted to continue on that train dreaming and hoping some way and somehow that we could have someone like bobby kennedy again. he gave people hope. he inspired the best of us. >> what i love about that, and i remember watching on tv. what grips me about it today is what's lost. the african american people in philadelphia where i grew up with 20,000 people at 30 street station singing spontaneously the battle hymn of the republic. and then those poor whites and people who live along train tracks tend to be poor people. and poor whites, they were poor as dirt some of them, saluting him almost religiously. that combination, that coalition seems to be in tatters right now. >> if somehow we can restore the

dreams, the hopes and aspiration of bobby kennedy, we can make america what america should be again. the capacity to live together as brothers and sisters. can we all live in the same house, the american house? >> don't go anywhere, congressman. please stay with us forever. you're great. thanks for coming on "hardball" tonight to talk about the history that you were part of. you were part of it all from the freedom riders on, through indianapolis to california you. were there. you were part of the greatness. when we return, let me finish tonight with what's missing in american leadership today. you're watching "hardball." well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms...again. and online equity trades are only $4.95... i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too. ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab.

schwab, a modern approach to wealth management. with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were very saggy. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with new sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. introducing more sizes for better comfort. new depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. kyle, we talked about this. there's no monsters. but you said they'd be watching us all the time. no, no. no, honey,

we meant that progressive would be protecting us 24/7. we just bundled home and auto and saved money. that's nothing to be afraid of. -but -- -good night, kyle. [ switch clicks, door closes ] ♪ i told you i was just checking the wiring in here, kyle. he's never like this. i think something's going on at school. -[ sighs ] -he's not engaging. i think something's going on at school. a hilton getaway means you get more because... you get another day in paradise. get a sunset on a sunday. get more stories to share. get more from your summer getaway with exclusive hilton offers. book yours, only at hilton.com

let me finish tonight with this. i've just read an interview with juan ramiro. he is the young boy whoraed the head of robert f. kennedy after he was fatally shot 50 years ago tonight. he is now 67 years old, and romero, who was a busboy back then remembers the first time he met the famous kennedy brother. he was delivering room service to him at the ambassador hotel where kennedy was killed. he recounted the experience. you could tell when he was looking at you that he is not looking through you. he is take you into account. and i remember walking out of there, that room like was 10 feet tall. romero recalled having the same feeling when he visited kennedy's grave site at arlington national cemetery later. when i wore this suit and stood

in front of his grave, i felt a little like that first day i met him. i felt important, i felt american. i felt good. the national leader who had a real interest in the people, many of the people of kennedy's stature day after day overlook. and that's "ha thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. tonight on "all in" -- >> simply put, does the president believe he is above the law? >> the president claims absolute power. >> the claim in the letter is i am the law. i'm a king. >> tonight the fallout from the president's claims on pardoning himself. >> he has no intention of pardoning himself. but he -- it doesn't say he can't. >> and the astounding parallels to richard nixon. >> when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal. then -- >> you said that he did not dictate. but said you did. >> the white house caught in massive l