meeting. there was supposed to be a working session running ten minutes ago. we will see the extent to which this all runs on time or not. i look forward to seeing you at noon eastern time. but now stay tuned my good friend joy reed right now coming at you with "a.m. joy." russia should be in the meeting. it should be a part of it. you know, whether you like it or not and it may not be politically correct, but we have a world to run. and in the g-7, used to be the g-8 they threw russia out, but we should let russia back in because we should have russia that the negotiating table. >> we are waiting for donald trump to speak live before leaving the g-7 this morning. trump yesterday pined for the good old days when his friend russia was part of the exclusive global club of the world's top economies once known as the

group of eight once it was kicked out. that group now known as the g-7 is gathering today in canada. and despite the smiles for the camera it's being widely characterized as the g-6 plus one as trump and by extension the u.s. becomes increasingly isolated from everything from climate change to trade. trump just recently imposed steep tariff on imports from the european union, canada and japan. trump kicked off the morning by arriving late not just to the summit but olalalso to a breakf focused on equality of women. and he reportedly said, quote, he does not want to be lectured by his counter parts. which might explain why he's snubbing our allies by ducking out early. in just a few minutes he will take off to prep for the summit

he's really into, the one with north korean dictator kim jong-un. joining me now is david corn of mother jones, malcolm nance of the terror asymmetrics project, and john hardwood of cnbc. you wrote a piece for cnbc's website and it's entitled "trump is helping putin with a key goal when he spurns u.s. allies." please explain. >> since the fall of the soviet union russia has been looking to secure its place in the world. and vladimir putin has decided his status and russia's status and power and influence rests on weakening the rest of the world. so he's been trying to divide western allies and nato, the european union for some time now. and that was part of the motivation intelligence officials believe for his election interference in 2016.

now, whether or not there's ever proof or allegation that the trump campaign participated in that effort with russia, donald trump is doing right now precisely what vladimir putin wants done. he's fighting with our allies. he extended a hand to russia yesterday. saying that they should be let back in the g-7. he did that on the very same morning, joy, that he was impugning on twitter the honesty of canada, which is one of our closest allies. it is very difficult to explain, and yesterday we had some top obama national security officials essentially saying openly that he is doing vladimir putin's bidding. and as richard hoss who is a republican national security aide to both presidents bush told me, i simply can't explain what he's doing. >> yeah, it is bizarre.

malco malcolm, i'm going to come to you. we've been talking about donald trump and russia for 18 months now. to hear him say russia should be back in the g-7, after what russia did in our election it was odd. i want to play what the colonel said. >> these alliances that have sustained us both economically and now national security are now being called into question. and particularly with the russians it's just bizarre. the soviet evil empire came apart. the poor russians are still under the sway of mr. putin. he's essentially running a thug-ocracy, his neighbors are frightened by him. and russia interfered in our election and russia should be back in the g-8.

what did you make of that, malcolm? >> i make of it what we suspected all along on these, well, 23 months since we found out the trump campaign may have been involved with russia. donald trump is seemingly in debt, a horrible debt to vladimir putin. and we don't know what it is yet, but you can be pretty sure that he is doing russia's bidding at every turn. and to make the call to bring in russia after it invaded a nation, seized its territory and was put out of the g-7, for him to say, hey, russia should be in this club -- you know the former ambassador to russia put it simply, russia does not want to be in this club. russia doesn't believe in these clubs. russia is trying to break up these clubs. and donald trump is the hammer that russia is using to destroy the g-7. trump wants to be an isolationist. the united states is not really going to be involved in this thing.

you see he just doesn't take a seriously. and he goes around and insults all the allies, low the 74 years after the invasion of europe, which created the greatest alliance of power in the world. russia and donald trump wants to see those alliances destroyed. >> yeah, and sarah, you know, it was odd to hear donald trump, you know, offering without anyone knowing he was going to do it that he would love to see russia back in. the one ally that has seemed to forge something of a bond with donald trump has been emmanuel macron of france. and even he has had some pretty harsh words for the american president tweeting this on thursday. "the american president may not mind being isolated but neither do we mind signing a six-country agreement if need be because these six countries represent the countries that has history behind it and now a true economic force."

we're talking about a potential alignment with the west without the united states and donald trump continuing to sing the praises of russia. >> yeah, absolutely. and i think that macron's initial diplomatic moves towards trump had nothing to do with trump's character. but seeing the danger, trying to smooth it over, trying to see if he could appeal to trump's ego and avoid this situation. but this is preplanned. trump's moves on this is [ expletive extremely predictable. he's always looked for an isolationist position for the united states, especially on trade but on other issues. shortly after he returned from his first trip to the soviet union in july 1987. so i think now europe is trying to protect itself. it's trying to protect itself from russia which is trying to intervene in their election, which you've seen intervention in brexit, in france's own election and it's trying to protect itself, and this is the

unbelievable part, from the united states. we are a super power or were a super power. and when you have people like trump in charge, an aspiring autocrat, you will end up possibly with a supera ta autoc. >> you have donald trump accusing canada of burning down the white house in the war of 1812. canada didn't even become a country until 1867. it certainly did not burn down the white house. it was british troops that did that in 1814. but that's where we are now. >> apparently people are talking about what canada did in 1812. it's clear a couple of things, he doesn't want a g-7.

he wants a g-2 or maybe a g-3. him, putin, president of china, throw in kim jong-un. that seems to be who he's gravitating towards, towards the towards these autocracies. it was information warfare against the united states in the election mounted by putin directly, and malcolm's talked a lot about this. and just this past week at a conference in europe dan coats says that russian measures against the united states, active measures, secret measures against the united states are still going on. so while the top intelligence official in trump's own administration is saying russia is still finding way to attack us like it did in 2016, he's out there trying to get russia into a club that russia doesn't even

want to join. i don't want to sound too dire, but i don't think we can get much more dire on this particular issue than we are at the moment. >> john, and i do highly recommend people read your piece, but this idea of realignment, david said it could be g-3, but it could still be 7. perhaps erred wn of turkey, seems to admire china's president for life xi jinping and in italy the new italian minister who's another person of the quite far right, breaks with the rest of the eu and backs donald trump's call to readmit russia to group of 8. >> i will say i think there was a subsequent clarification from the italian delegation that he met readmit after they meet their obligations under the

menska courts which is concerning their post seizure of crimea. look, the division of western allies is something that i think russia wants to do that donald trump is helping them do. i don't think in the end it will be successful because i don't think that, in fact, americans and the american political system writ large wants to go in that direction. but it's going in that direction right now, and we'll see what happens in mid-term elections. we'll see what happens when bob mueller lays down his findings and how republicans react to that. but it does feel as if we are hurtling toward a moment of decision for the country on exactly what are we willing -- what is the country willing to accept? what direction do we want to

take? which side is donald trump on? and that will be clarified soon. >> sarah, i want to go to you then. you wrote a book. you know, there is a sense that at least in part of the republican base there is an openness to this kind of realignment in the world, right? >> i mean possibly. i think most people are more concerned with, you know, day to day needs and kind of getting by than they are with this realignment. i think trump has done so many horrible things on a domestic level or just shocking things on an international level that this is just one of them. i think if people want to take a pragmatic approach to the mid-terms we need to anticipate -- >> sarah, i'm going to interpret you for just a moment. donald trump is now taking the podium. and we'll let you finish when he is done talking. and i think he's going to take questions as well, so let's listen in.

>> i think it's been very, very successful. we've concluded a really tremendously successful g-7. and i would like to provide you with an update. as you know the gentlemen up are the legendry larry kudlow and john bolton. we had a good meeting on defense and tariffs which is what we're here for. personally i would like to thank prime minister trudeau for hosting this summit. it has worked out to be so wonderful. the people of canada are wonderful, and it's a great country and a very beautiful country, i might add. we tackled a variety of issues and opportunities facing our nations. at the top of the list was the issue of trade. very important subject because the united states has been taken advantage of for decades and decades. and we can't do that anymore. we had extremely productive

discussions on the need to have fair and reciprocal, meaning the same. people can't judge us 270% and we charge them nothing. that doesn't work anymore. i made a lot of statements having to do with clarity. we want other nations to provide fair market access to american exports and we will take whatever steps are necessary to protect american industry and workers from unfair foreign trading practices, of which really there are many. but we're getting them straightened out. slowly but surely. we also discussed the issue of uncontrolled migration and the threat that it poses to both national security and other -- other groups and countries and our citizens and quality of life. we are committed to addressing the migration challenge by helping migrants to remain and prosper in their own home

countries. and wide array of national security threats were addressed including the threat of iran. the g-7 nations remain committed to controlling iran's nuclear ambitions with or without them. those ambitions are going to be controlled along with efforts to combat terrorism and extremism and those who spread this deadly ideology. the nations of the g-7 are bound together by shared values and beliefs. that came out loud and clear. each of our nations is totally unique with our people and our own sovereign obligations, but we can coordinate together and achieve a common good, a good for all of our people, all of our nations. we're linked in the great effort to create a more just, peaceful and prosperous world. and from the standpoint of trade and jobs and being fair to

companies, we are really, i think, committed. i think they are started to be commit today a much more fair trade situation for the united states because it has been very, very unfairly. and i don't blame other leaders for that. i blame our past leaders. there was no reason that this should have happened. last year they lost 800 -- we as a nation over the years but the latest numbers is $817 billion on trade. that's ridiculous, and it's unacceptable. and everybody was told that. so i don't blame them. i blame our leaders. in fact, i congratulate the leaders of other countries for so crazily being able to make these trade deals that were so good for their country and so bad for the united states. but those days are over. in just a few minutes i'll be

leaving for singapore. i'll be on a mission of peace, and we will carry in -- really in my heart we're going to be carrying the hearts of millions of people, people from all over the world. we have to get denuclearization. we have to get something going. we really think that north korea will be a tremendous place in a very short period of time. and we appreciate everything that's going on. we appreciate the working together with north korea. they really working very well with us. so i say so far, so good. we're going to have to see what happens. and we're going to know very soon. so i'll be leaving as soon as we're finished with this conference. i'll be leaving, and i very much look forward to it. i think it's very important for north korea and south korea, japan, and the world and the united states. it's a great thing. and we'll see what happens. okay, any questions?

yes, yes. >> mr. president, we're about to embark on what may be the most important meeting you've ever had in your life. what's in your gut, steel nerds or butterflies? >> it's really everything. you know, this is probably rarely been done. it's unknown territory in the truest sense. but i really feel confident. i feel that kim jong-un wants to do something great for people, and he has that opportunity. and it's never going to be there again. so i really think he's going to do something very positive for his people, for himself, his family. he's got an opportunity the likes of which i think almost if you look into history very few people have ever had. he can take that nation with those great people and truly

make it great. so it's a one time -- it's a one time shot, and i think it's going to work out very well. that's why i feel positive because it makes so much sense. and we will watch over it, we'll protect and we'll do a lot of things. i can say that south korea, japan, china, many countries want to see it happen. and they'll help. they'll all help. so there's a great -- this is a great time. this has not happened in all of the years that they've been separated by a very artificial boundary. it's a great opportunity for peace and lasting peace and prosperity. yes, ma'am? >> mr. president, when have you last spoken to vladimir putin? do you expect to meet him in vienna this summer?

>> i have not spoken to vladimir putin for quite a while. it has been discussed. some people like the idea of bringing russia back in. this used to be the g-8 not the g-7. and something happened a while ago that russia is no longer in. i think it would be an asset for russia to be back in. i think it would be good for the united states, all the current countries of the g-7. i think the g-8 would be better. i think having russia back in would be a positive thing. we're looking for peace in the world. we're not looking to play games. okay, question? yes? >> you said this was a positive meeting, but from the outside it looked quite contentious. did you get any outside information that they were going to make concessions --

>> no tariffs, no barriers, that's the way it should be and no subsidies. i even said no tariffs. in other words, let's say canada where we have tremendous tariffs. the united states pays tremendous tariffs on dairy. as an example, 270%. nobody knows that. we don't want to pay anything. why should we pay? we have to -- ultimately, that's what you want. you want a tariff-free, no barriers and you want no subsidies. because you have some cases where countries are subsidizing industries and that's not fair. so you go tariff free, barrier free, subsidy free. that would be the ultimate thing. now, whether or not that works, but i did suggest that, and people were -- i guess they're going to go back to the drawing board and check it out.

but we can't have can example as the united states is paying 270%, can't have it. and when they're sending things to us, you can't have that. what's strong is the language this cannot go on. but the relationships are very good whether it be president macron or with justin. we had -- justin did a really good job. i think the relationships are outstanding. but because of the fact that the united states leaders of the past didn't do a good job on trade, and again i'm not blaming countries. i'm blaming our people that represented our past. it's going to change. it's not a question of i hope it changes. it's going to change 100%. and tariffs are going to come way down because people cannot continue to do that. we're like the piggy bank that everybody's robbing and that ends.

in fact, larry kudlow is a great expert on this, and he's a total free trader. but even larry's seen the ravages of what they've done with their tariffs. would you like to say something, larry, quickly? it might be interesting. >> one interesting point of the g-7 meeting, i don't know if they were surprised with president trump's free trade proclamation, but they certainly listened to it and we had lengthy discussions about that. reduce these barriers, in fact go to zero, zero nontariff barriers, zero subsidies. and along the way we're going to have to clean up the international trading system in which there was virtual consensus about that. i myself was particularly gratified to hear my president

talk about free trade. thank you, sir. >> thank you. and it's very unfair to our farmers. our farmers are essentially whether it's through a barrier, nonmonetary barrier or through very high tariffs that make it impossible. and this is all over the world. this isn't just g-7. we have some in india where some of the tariffs are 100%, and we charge nothing. you can't do that. so we are talking to many countries. we're talking to all countries and it's going to stop or we'll stop trading with them. and that's a very profitable answer if we have to do it. yes, sir? >> another question on trade. you said you think the tariffs are actually going to come down, but it does appear these various countries are moving forward with retaliatory tariffs on the u.s. did you get any agreement from those countries not to move

forward with those -- >> if they retaliate they're making a tremendous mistake. when we try to bring our piece up a little bit so it's not so bad, and then they go up, the difference is they do so much more business with us than we do with them that we can't lose that. you understand, we can't lose it. and as an example with one country we have $375 billion in trade deficits. we can't lose. you could make the case that they lost years ago, but when you're done $375 billion you can't lose. and wea have to bring them up. so there's a very bad spirit when we have a big trade imbalance and we want to bring it up to just balance, and they keep raising it so that you never catch -- that's not a good thing to do.

and we have very, very strong measures that take care of that. because we do so much -- the numbers are so astronomically against them as per anything your question. we win that war a thousand times out of a thousand. yes, sir? two things can happen on nafta. we'll either leave it the way it is as a threesome deal with canada, with the united states and mexico and change it very substantially, we're talking very big changes or we'll make a deal directly with canada, directly with mexico. both of those things could happen. if a deal isn't made that would be a very bad thing for canada and a very bad thing for mexico. for the united states, frankly, it would be a good thing. but i'm not looking to do that.

i'm not looking to play that game. so we're either going to have nafta in a better negotiated form or two deals. >> will it have a sunset clause in it? >> it'll have a sunset. you have two sunsets, concepts of sunset. we're pretty close on the sunset division. >> is it five years? >> you have one group that likes to have five years and then a renegotiation of five years and then you have group that wants longer because of the investments but we're pretty close. yes, sir? >> mr. president, just to come back to russia for a second there's something that happened that got them kicked out of the g-8. that's the invasion and annexation of crimea. >> you have to ask president

obama. that was during his administration, and he was the one that let russia go and spend a lot of money on crimea. i guess they have their submarine port there, et cetera. but crimea was let go during the obama administration. he allowed russia to take crimea. i may have had a much different attitude. so you really have to ask that question to president obama. you know, why did he do that? why did he do that? but with that being said it's been done a long time. >> you would allow russia back in the g-8 still? >> i would rather see russia in with the g-8 rather than the g-7. >> how persuasive did you find the europeans and canadians when they made the case to you that you shouldn't use national security as a justification for tariffs? >> they virtually didn't even

make that case. my case is the fact it is national security. it's our balance strengheet, ou strength. just take a look at our balance sheet. we're going to have a very strong balance sheet soon because of what i'm doing. we've had the strongest economy we've ever had in the united states. in the history of the united states we've had the best unemployment numbers, black unemployment the lowest in history. hispanic unemployment the lowest in history. black unemployment is doing the best its ever done, hispanic doing the best. women are now up to 21 years. soon it's going to be the best ervin its history, in the country's history. we have to -- we have to have deals that are fair and deals that are economic. otherwise, that does in fact affect our military. >> how do you make that case for

autos specifically? >> it's the balance sheet. to have a great military you need a great balance sheet. yes, sir, go ahead. >> as you were heading into these g-7 talks there was a sense that america's closest allies were sfrus freighted and angry with you and you were angry with them and you were leaving here to go meet early for talks in singapore. i'm wondering if you view it the same way -- >> who are you with out of curiosity? >> cnn. >> i figured, fake news, cnn, the worst. i had no idea you were with cnn after the question. i would say the level of the relationship was a ten. we have a great relationship. angela and emmanuel and justin,

i would say the relationship is a ten. and i don't blame them. as i said i blame our past leaders. there's no reason this should happen. there's no reason we should have big trade deficits with every country in the world. i'm going well beyond the g-7. there's no reason for this. it's the fault of the people that preceded me. and i'm not just saying president obama. i'm going back a long way. you can go back 50 years, frankly. it just got worse and worse and worse. you know, we used to be a nation that was unbelievably cash flow oriented, had no debt of any consequence and that built a highway system -- we built the interstate system out of virtually cash flow. and it was a lot different. no, we have a very good relationship and i don't blame these people. but i will blame them if they don't act smart and do what they have do do.

because they have no choice. they're either going to make the trades fair because our farmers have been hurt. you look at our farmers for 15 years the graph is going just like this, down. our farmers have been hurt. our workers have been hurt. our companies have moved out and moved to mexico and other countries including canada. now, we are going to fix that situation. and if it's not fixed we're not going to deal with these countries. but the relationship that i've had is great, so you can tell that to your fake friends at cnn. the relationship that i've had with the people -- the leaders of these countries has been, i would really rate it on a scale of zero to ten, i would rate it a ten. that doesn't mean i agree with their doing. so we're negotiating very hard tariffs and barriers. as an example the european union is brutal to the united states.

they don't take -- and they understand that. they know it. when i'm telling them they're smiling at me. it's like the gig is up. it's like the gig is up. they're not trying to -- there's nothing they can say. they didn't believe they got away with it. canada can't believe it got away with it, mexico. we have $100 million trade deficit with mexico and that doesn't include all the drugs that are pouring in because we have no wall. but we are, we started building the wall as you know, $1.6 million and we're going to keep it going. but a lot of these countries actually smile at me when i'm talking, and the smile is we couldn't believe we got away with it. that's the smile. it's going to change. if it's not going to change, we're not going to trade with them. okay, how about a couple of more? go ahead in the back. >> going into these talks with kim jong-un, do you have a clear

objective what you want to get out of them? >> i have a clear objective, but i have to say iliana, that it's going to be something that will always be spur-of-the-moment. you don't know -- you know this has not been done before at this level. this is leader who really is an unknown personality. people don't know much about him. i think that he's going to surprise on the upside, very much on the upside. we'll see. but never been done, never been tested. i'm talking about world leaders that have been right next to him have never met him. so we're going in with a positive spirit, i think very well prepared. and by the way we have worked very well with their people. our people have been in singapore. our people have been working very, very well with the representatives of north korea. so we're going in with a very positive attitude, and i think

we're going come out fine. but i've said it many times, who knows. who knows? it may not work out. there's a good chance it may not work out. there's probably an even better chance it'll take a period of time. it'll be a process. >> -- that you look for this initial talk to judge whether you think things are going well? >> well, i think the minimum would be relationship, you'd start at least a dialogue. as a deal person i've done very well with deals. now, i'd like to accomplish more than that. but at the minimum i do believe at least we'll have met each other, we'll have seen each other. hopefully we will have liked each other and we'll start that process. i would say that would be had minimal. and the maximum i think you know the answer to that. but i think it'll take a bit of time. yeah? >> how long would it take you to figure out he's serious about --

>> that's a good question, how long it'll take. i think within the first minute i'll know. >> how? >> just my touch, my feel, that's what i do. how long it'll take to figure out whether or not they're serious. i said maybe in the first minute. you know the way they say you know you're going to like somebody within the first five seconds. you ever hear that? well, i think i'll know very quickly i'll know whether or not something good is going to happen. i also think i'll know whether or not it will happen fast. may not, but i think i'll know pretty quickly whether or not, in my opinion, something positive will happen. and if i think it won't happen, i'm not going to waste my time. i don't want to waste his time. >> are you concerned at all just by giving kim the meeting he's getting a win as a deal? >> no, no, no. that's only the -- only the fake news says that. look, we just got three hostages

back. we paid nothing. they came back. they're hopefully ensconced in their homes with their families. they're the happiest people in the world right now. we have gotten -- you know, we haven't done anything. everyone says -- the haters they say, oh, you're giving him a meeting. give me a break, okay? there's nothing -- i think if i didn't do this it would be -- and it's never been done before. you know, it's never been done before. and obviously what has been done before hasn't worked. and this is something, i can't stress this strong enough. i talked about tariffs, that previous people -- and i'm not looking to criticize people that were preceding me, but on tariffs it should have never happened. well, the same thing on north korea. we shouldn't be in this position. we shouldn't be in this position on tariffs. we were hundreds of billions of dollars down to other countries that frankly were never even

negotiated with, they never even got spoken to. i asked a top person in china how did it get so bad, he looked at me and he said nobody ever talked to us. they were missing in action, our leaders. well, a very similar thing if you think about it took place with north korea. this should not be done now. this should have been done five years ago and ten years ago and 25 years ago. it shouldn't be done now. i can't comment on that. >> sir, you've got a plane to catch. >> one more question. >> what are you going to raise on the issues -- >> we're going to raise every issue. >> i guess i'd like to ask you why you do that -- >> because the u.s. press is very dishonest, not all of it.

i have some folks in our profession that are proud reporters. these are some of the most outstanding people i know. but there are many people in the press that are unbelievably dishonest. they don't cover stories the way they're supposed to be. they don't even report them in many cases. so this tremendous -- you know, i came up wh a term, fake news. it's a lot of fake news. but at the same time i have great respect for many of the people in the press. thank you all very much. i appreciate it. thank you. >> wow, okay. we're back and not really sure where to even begin with that. that's donald trump's first press conference since february 16, 2017, which is why we let you hear what he had to say. he's being questioned by reporters for the first time i think 478 days i believe my producers have told me. it was not on his original schedule so we let you hear it. i'm going to let my panel react

to it. still with me and joining me now economist and senior contributor for oil price.com dan dicker and linda yu. we were saying maybe we should have a camera in on our faces as we were sort of reacting. relationship with europe, a ten. he realizes everything is fine with allies because they smile at him when he's talking. >> that's my favorite. >> and apparently he's had a great, successful summit. he's concluded a successful summit, he's leaving early. i'm going to come to you first, linda. your reaction to all of that. >> of course to say the summit isn't over yet. >> no. >> are we on these tariffs, where are we on the taxes he's so focused on? he said in the press conference, no taxes no barriers. but i think the question we all want to know is has that been agreed by the g-7? should we be looking for a clear

path to economy? i'm going to speculate here, probably not. >> right. and that is the problem, dan, is that there's no way to know if anything he said is connected to actual policy being made or if he was just freestyling. >> i love the idea the relationship everybody has with him is a ten. he walks out on a conference with the allies after proposing enormous tariffs and everybody in that room is promising reciprocal tariffs against him, and everybody is miling at him and his relationship is a ten. how do you get it to 11, you know? and he's got a major problem if he goes through with these tariffs. and i'm telling you i don't think the markets believe it. because when he originally proposed these tariff ins march the markets took a tremendous dive down. all the major aerospace stocks,

car, automotive stocks got hit. but notice last week and a half and included our allies the stock market has been moving pretty steadily higher. john harwood would agree with me on this. and i think most of the markets and a lot of serious people surrounding this don't think he's going to go through with this at all. you get sort of the sense from that from the statements he made in that sort of semi-press conference where oh, i don't want to do all of this. they're forcing me to do these tariffs. so he's leaving himself border again to back off on these tariffs. >> i remember him being very much a free trader. you're over there on cnbc, and you pretty much remember him the

same way. at one point he turned the mic over to mr. kudlow to support this idea of either tariffs or no tariffs. >> i don't think the up shot of this press conference was about tariffs. i'll be honest as a citizen i'm concerned about the president's state of mind. he did not look well to me in that press conference. he was mnot speaking logically r rationally. i don't think those things are true, and there's something about his affect which was oddly kind of languid from him. i don't know what it means, but he did not look well to me. >> yeah, and you know, malcolm, you have donald trump saying north korea would be a

tremendous place in a very short period of time. that's an odd thing to say about north korea which is a completely closed dictatorship. he seems very eager to go and talk to kim jong-un. to john harwood's point very little of what he was saying made sense. >> well, john has hit the nail on the head. i think steve schmidt said this the other day, that donald trump comes off as a moron. i think he came off like an idiot today. i was almost shocked at the way that he spoke with utter contempt of every president that preceded him. he does not fundamentally appear to believe in the processes and systems that put him in the office. he doesn't appear to believe in the alliances that bind us together, that make us stronger as a nation. it is all about his narcissism. and the view from a national security perspective, this man wouldn't qualify for the nuclear

weapons control system, to allow him to be anywhere near the nuclear control -- the nuclear control keys or even guarding them. i mean, i'm really shocked at the way that he speaks because it is all donald trump centric. he came off like mad king donald not president of the united states. >> sarah, there used to be a thing where republicans sharply criticized even the dixie chicks for being on foreign soil and criticizing the american president. you now have an american president trashing all of his predecessors congratulating world leaders on tricking u.s. leaders, american presidents. seeming to have more respect in many ways for the leader of north korea than for his own predecessors, blaming president obama for russia invading crimea and annexing it. it is pretty stunning to hear an american president speak that way about his own country, his own country's former leaders.

>> yeah, absolutely. whatever way you look at it donald trump is not working for the united states. he's not working for the interests of the united states. he's not working for the interests of u.s. workers. you can see the affects of these tariff policies in states like mine, missouri, that voted for him in terms of what's happening to soybean farmers, the harley davidson plant in kansas city. trump's relationships are basically set on what can a leader for a country do for trump. so he's favorable now to china, favorable now to kim because he think he's getting this ego boost. it's enormously destructive and shameful. whatever short-term view they have, in the raung rlong run th going to devastate america. they may think they're fine. their kids won't be, their grandkids might not be and there might not be a country for them

to inherit. so they need to take this seriously and act now. >> and basically everyone in the gop has been recruited. yeah, everyone's been -- he's recruited the entire party. >> you know, picking up on john's point, if, joy, you were talking to me this morning the way we heard donald trump talk, i would ask if you were taking any medication and advise you not to operate any heavy machinery. >> wow. >> he has taken the art of lying, some people calling it s bsing to a new level. even his fans and supporters cheer him on when he gets away with his b.s.

those reporters in the room missed a major opportunity. they pressed him on nothing. they asked him nothing about the russia attack on the u.s. election. they asked him nothing about letting millions of americans go unprotected from health care, if they get rid of the pre-existing conditions clause. they just gave him a platform to give this performance in which nothing made sense or connected to anything real. and the press keeps doing that, he's going to keep surviving. >> yeah, john? >> i just want to connect what we saw just now what was reported earlier in the week by our colleague of "the washington post." president trump went to fema to have a session that was ostensibly about planning for hurricane season. melania trump appeared with him, they let cameras in. that was the first time she'd stepped before cameras since

she'd been gone for a while. and then they had a private meeting. during that meeting jeff dossy obtained an audiotape of the discussion. the president rambled on about everything but hurricane preparation. he talked about his political influence, california elections. he talked about all sorts of things. that is not what you expect from a president with his mind on task. the hurricane preparation, as we've seen from the poor response in puerto rico that was so devastating to thousands of americans who lost their lives, i know that people will dispute what the numbers are. in any case it was a horrendous situation trying to plan for new season. and this president was not able to focus on that task. this was a very unfocused performance. he said i have a clear objective for my summit, and it's going to be a spur-of-the-moment thing

and i'll know w within a couple of seconds. >> and he said his feel is how he's going to know if it's going well. malcolm, when foreign intelligence services watch what we just saw intelligence services watch that, what are they seeing and what do you think they are taking from it? you know, i just wrote a whole book on this. it's funny. i'm almost afraid to say what a professional intelligence officer would think about someone who was potentially recruitable, an asset, or a person who becomes a useful idiot. and the word is he is a fool. and tools are easily manipulated. if it's about their ego, you massage their ego. if it's about money you give them money. if it's about ideology you bring them an ideology and if you need to coerce them, you coerce them by finding something you have compromised their integrity

with. donald trump is all of those, he is a dream for a foreign intelligence or case officer, but he is being handled right now by a former kgb human intelligence officer who has him by the puppet strings. you know, north korea, on the other hand, understands that you want to manipulate donald trump, you give donald trump something for his ego. china will give, you know, licenses to his daughter. the saudis and the emirates will try to buy him outright. no president has ever been like this. this is why foreign nations didn't like obama. his integrity level was so high there was no getting at the man. and that was pretty much the same from george washington to obama. now we've got a completely different president. the man is vulnerable everywhere. >> dan. >> to malcolm's point, he is, in fact, being manipulated by all of our enemies, but now on the opposite side he's being ignored by all of our allies, by all of our friends. we saw that tweet from macron

who said if trump doesn't want to play nice in our sandbox we will get rid of the sandbox. ignoring this threat trade war with our allies and inside the global economic chain, completely ignoring what kind of disaster can come from this, i think that's what's happening. our allies are completely ignoring what he says for now, you know, from these kind of -- these kinds of press conferences for obvious reasons. it doesn't make much sense. >> you wrote in your book what would a great economist do. i wonder what this means for the u.s. economy if the u.s., which up to very recently was considered the preeminent super power on earth, we still have militarily obviously great superiority, but if the markets and if our close allies are ignoring us, if foreign intelligence services see our president asth manipulateable wt

happens next? >> he is very worried about the trade deficit, but, joy, it's better to reduce your trade deficit by selling more instead of taxing what you import, or to sell more overseas you have to have good relationships with the major markets in the world. >> but, linda, you are talking about that from the point of view of sort of a normal sort of president the way they would operate, that they would take advice like that, they would be getting advice like that from inside their cabinet. this is not a normal situation. what we just saw there is not a normal sort of president working out policy that he has gone with his advisers and worked out. he is just freelancing. if he is just freelancing does this mean that are we looking at china being able to race forward and take a preeminent position? who benefits if we are losing? >> i would say the chinese and the europeans. we got a sense of that from emanuel macron who says if the g southeast 6 as if minus the united states really banded together they could be the

preeminent international force. so i think the real economic damage from what's happening now is an escalation not just in terms of taxes, we know this from from our allies, they are targeting pork, targeting farmers, targeting the rust belt to put pressure on congress to bring back the president. that probably won't be enough. the next level of escalation is that there are already restrictions, we are talking about restrictions of investment into the united states. he's talking about this vis-a-vis china, but easily extended to others. so once you start to disrupt supply chains, that's what investment is, apple producing its phones in other parts of the world, that is economically hugely damaging all along the supply chain, plus you cannot just reverse that. it's not like a tax where you say i'm going to oppose it and tomorrow i change my mind. once a supply chain investment is taken the u.s. could be cut out of major supply chains around the world.

that is what trade s trade is actually mostly supply chains. it's not selling cups for bowls, it is actually assembly, it's high tech, it's innovation and that i think is why this particular president's approach is potentially much more damaging than if you just look at the impact of tariffs on a particular product or anything like that. >> we are already out of tpp. if we are cut out then what? >> but one point politically about this is that this is really a frog that's being boiled. it's not something that's felt by individuals very quickly, it takes a long time for these things to sort of build and really hurt an economy. so it's not something that's going to impact voters going into the midterms in 2018 or maybe each the voters going into 2020. so although these are incredibly destructive ideas and destructive policies it may not matter all that much politically at least in the short term. >> ultimately even if donald trump mansiages to make money,

long-term it's disastrous economically. >> the next stage of escalation where the trade war really gets fully blown is if he wants to come out of the world trade organization. rerelinquish leadership. others set the rules. they are be outside. >> very quick last word, john harwood, because we are losing you. >> look, i think the world is trying to adjust to the question that we've been discussing all hour, which is how seriously is the president about these policies. we know the president is not particularly committed to ideas. often when he gets push back he backs away from things that are controversial. he does not seem to be doing that now. it is possible that the markets conclude that he is not going to follow through, but i don't think we see evidence that that's happening. in fact, the decision to go ahead with the eu, canada and mexico on those tariffs, i don't know what's going to happen with china, but it does appear that we are getting closer and closer to the kind of negative consequences that economists

fear. >> this is something else. malcolm nance, david will be back. thank you all. all right. that was a lot. we will get more -- we will get to more news after the break. hi.i just wanted to tell you that chevy won a j.d.power dependability award for its midsize car-the chevy malibu. i forgot. chevy also won a j.d. power dependability award for its light-duty truck the chevy silverado. oh, and since the chevy equinox and traverse also won chevy is the only brand to earn the j.d. power dependability award across cars, trucks and suvs-three years in a row. phew. third time's the charm...

i don't even think there is a slight suspicion that when you -- excuse me, but when you look at stormy daniels. i know donald trump and -- look

at his three wives, right? beautiful women, classy women, women of great substance. stormy daniels? >> donald trump's tv lawyer is using his client's trademark strategy for undermining women who accuse him of inappropriate behavior. attack their looks. in this case giuliani who announced his divorce from wife number two while dating soon to be ex-wife number three was referring to adult film star stormy daniels. giuliani went on to say that he has no respect for porn stars prompting this response from trump on friday. >> rudy is great, but rudy is rudy, but rudy is doing a very good job, actually. doing a very good job. [ inaudible question ] >> he said what? [ inaudible question ] >> i'm not going to disagree with him on that. >> joining me now is jill wine-banks, lisa bloom and michael avenatti.

michael, i will go to you first because it was your client who was being disparaged. a journalist had a tweet that he did back on may 30th that showed the trump vodka launch party on -- in january of 2007 and at that party were kim kardashian, your client and donald trump. so obviously donald trump had a certain amount of respect for your client at one point because he obviously had in her allegation is sexual liaison with her. he has been known to hang around or hang out with women who were -- even with his daughter, there is another picture here and this is from cnn, this was an apprentice release party for playboy mansion -- at the playboy mansion. he hangs around a lot of different kinds of women. maybe he has more respect for women who have various professions than giuliani does. what did you make of rudy giuliani's tactic of attacking your client? >> well, joy, i find the tactic to be disgusting.

i find the comments to be disgusting and i find mr. trump's support of mr. giuliani yesterday to be even more disgusting. you know, if this was a fortune 500 company mr. giuliani would have been immediately fired as general counsel or outside counsel to the company, and the ceo certainly would not have appeared on television in support of these outrageous comments. you know, mr. trump hasn't seemed to have a problem over the years having sex with adult film stars. he seems to like them in his bed. so, you know, it's ironic to me that now this man would come out and basically state that because my client is an adult film star that she doesn't deserve respect and that she's not credible. i mean, this is outrageous and every woman and man in the united states should be outraged by these comments and this behavior and the fact that rudy giuliani has not been fired yet

is a disgrace. >> you know, i have to come to the table just for a moment, lisa, because you represent a lot of women who are stepping forward to make claims, you know, against powerful men and then having their lives kind of shredded and scrutinized and their voices, career choices and life choices scrutinized. it is ironic. donald trump was in a soft core porn film. he was in it. >> yes. >> but no one is supposed to criticize him, right, for that, but these women who are stepping forward are taking a huge risk of reputational attack. >> well, you know, i'm just so appreciative of mr. giuliani that he tells us silly girls, you know, what our sexual choices should be, what our career choices should be. i mean, this is so offensive. the man splaining. they are trying to deter other women from coming out. they are trying to send a message you will be shamed, you will be demeaned by rudy

giuliani or by trump himself. that's what's really going on here. and i salute stormy daniels and michael avenatti for having none of it and continuing to percent video err in the face of these attacks. >> donald trump has been in the fast before he was a political figure somebody who had the opposite attitude, he wasn't a judgmental person towards women's choices. he literally felt it appropriate to have his wife and his daughter at the same party with karen mcdougal with whom he later had an affair, we don't know what the timeline was, but he felt fine being in those environments with his daughter present, but now these women -- you know, now you have stormy daniels who he a lerjdly had an affair with being disparaged for doing -- it really does seem quite hypocritical. >> it is hypocritical and hypocrisy seems to be a very big part of what donald trump is and giuliani. i mean, giuliani had an affair before he got married to his second wife with whom he was having the affair and then had an affair with his third wife

before he was done with his second wife and now he is divorced from his third wife. the hypocrisy of attacking women and i will say this, michael avenatti and stormy daniels look so much better than donald trump and his lawyer. she has credibility in my mind and i'm proud of her for being willing to do this. so many women are not willing to bring rape charges or to bring harassment charges because it will ruin their careers, it will ruin their reputation, it will hurt them, and being attacked like this is just not fair. >> it's got to be difficult, but she has, you know, because she is not willing to be shamed really. >> yes. >> she's proud of herself. she's so comfortable in her own skin and that is something to be really proud of. >> absolutely. so let me come back to you, michael, because i think the more relevant point here is whether or not she was well represented the first time around when she made that deal to be silent about her alleged affair with donald trump. there is now a new lawsuit that has been filed that you guys are

filing against the former attorney, keith davidson, who made that deal who your side is saying was elected to be a puppet for michael cohen and donald trump in order to advance their interests at the expense of stephanie clifford, which is stormy daniels' real time. keith caved son has now sued you and stormy daniels and michael cohen. your thoughts. >> well, keith davidson is an absolute scumbag and a disgrace to the profession of law. i think when this case is said and done he's going to be disbarred and rightfully so. we still don't have all of his documents and the text messages between him and michael cohen. it's clear they were conspiring in march and april of this year against my client, which as lisa will tell you an attorney even a discharged attorney should never be working against that attorney's former client, but i want to go back to what we were talking about moments ago because i think this is a very

important point, joy. you know, when donald trump was trying to get in the pants of my client, he didn't tell my client that he disrespected her, or that she wasn't credible or she wasn't intelligent. when mr. trump was trying to get in the pants of ms. mick do you goel he didn't tell her that he disrespected her, that she wasn't intelligent or entitled to credibility. i'd like to know the last time mr. giuliani viewed pornography. something tells me it wasn't years or decades something. so if there's anyone in the united states that could help me answer that question, please provide that information to me because i'd like to make it known. >> there is a lot of hypocrisy going on. they are going to have the opportunity to depose donald trump, a former apprentice contestant. she will get that deposition. do you believe with this new lawsuit alleging that donald

trump -- that the deal made with donald trump was made with the lawyers collusion, does that provide -- afford an additional opportunity for you to get to depose donald trump. >> i think it does in light of the allegations in our complaint and in light of the allegations relating to what mr. trump knew earlier this year and what he knew about the effort to silence my client. one way or the other, joy, i'm going to get a chance to depose this president and ask the tough questions and i'm going to actually demand and get answers. >> lisa, let me ask you about that because you have now keith davidson who was involved in multiple instances of doing these ndas, they seemed to be cookie cutter ndas that don't seem favorable to the women. how strong was the case that he was colluding essentially with michael cohen? >> well, i don't know all of the evidence. i don't know what the text messages are. i have seen what's been made public which is the agreement itself. i don't know whether, for example, this cookie cutter agreement did that come from cohen? did that come from keith

davidson? these do tend to be templates, in this case it's very unusual with the pp and the dd. >> david dennison. >> and peggy peterson. and that is unusual. i don't know enough. we don't have enough evidence for me to make that determination. >> from a standpoint of legal ethics, if a client comes to an attorney and multiple clients come to this attorney and the same result keeps happening, meaning that the woman has to be quiet she gets a certain amount of money -- >> until about six months ago almost all of these things ended with ndas and women being silenced and being paid an amount of money. i have done a lot of work in the last few works to get deals without ndas and i have had to push hard and i have gotten some of them. merely if there is an nda i don't think is sufficient. if he is colluding, if there are text messages to show that especially if he got over the case and if he hasn't turned over the files that is clearly an ethical obligation.

>> it is that evidence of communication between michael cohen and mr. davidson. >> you are absolutely right. after mr. davidson no longer represented my client he should not have been having any communications with michael cohen about my client and yet we know that he has and we have been demanding these text messages for months repeatedly, four, five, six times and they refuse to provide the text messages because they know they are very, very damaging. we are going to get our hands on them sooner rather than later. >> jill, what's fascinating here is the way in which the stormy daniels case has kind of dove-tailed or run into the robert mueller case. how is that -- i mean, how does this case ultimately reflect on the bigger russia-gate case? >> i think it's all part of the kind of people that donald trump surrounds himself with. you have cohen at the center of this who is his lawyer and not an ethical great lawyer, who is the one who supposedly wrote

these ndas which all included things about paternity. well, michael avenatti has denied that there is any paternity issue involved in stormy daniels. why is it in there? because he was too lazy to take it out, and her lawyer, keith davidson didn't even think to take it out. so there is a lot of bad things based on he has giuliani now as his lawyer. this is not doing him any good in any respect and his attack on stormy, his praise of melania who says i never talked to him about this, why is he speaking for me? >> right. >> so this is not helping donald trump at all. >> and you do have also this sense, lisa, in which, you know, everyone -- we talked in the last hour about how sort of everyone is implicated, the entire republican party is recruited into the way that donald trump speaks, the way that his policy -- even if they don't agree with him everyone is recruited. you have people using donald trump's tactic of pushing back

these women. there was a people magazine writer who alleged trump pushed her against the wall, tried to force his tongue down her throat and physically attacked her during a tour at mar-a-lago in 2005. this is how trump reacted. >> she said i made inappropriate advances. and, by the way, the area was a public area. people all over the place. take a look. you take a look. look at her, look at her words. you tell me what you think. i don't think so. i don't think so. >> take a look at her, i don't think so. >> it's so offensive. that all -- all that matters about a woman is what she looks like. that you have to reach a certain level of attractiveness for trump to sexually harass or grope you. it's so offensive. but that's the mindset of these guys. that's how we get judged, our appearance that's all that matters. by the way, stormy daniels is a career woman. stormy daniels is fully in control of her career, her acting her directing, her producing. who is more in control of her professional life than stormy

daniels? >> and very smart. you listen to her, great communication skills because she is out there battling trolls and everything on at which timer >> and the 18 women who also accused him there are many professional women. >> four of whom i represented and they are still standing strong. >> one of whom just won an elected office or won her primary. michael, last question, where is this going from here? there's battles back and forth with ms. daniels' former attorney, that's happening, you have active cases involving mike answer cohen. where does this go from here? >> we will continue to march forward and acquire the evidence and facts and documents to show exactly what happened here and we are going to disclose that to the american people so they can make their own judgment as to what happened and, you know, this isn't about the sex, it's about the -- it's about the cover up that took place at the hands of mr. trump and mr. cohen. look, i want to go back to something because i think this is really important. mr. trump fired mr. cohen and used him for over a decade as

his personal attorney. if that doesn't reflect a tremendous lack of judgment, i don't know what does. mr. trump then turned around and hired most recently mr. giuliani to represent him and has now doubled down on his comments. if that doesn't reflect an absolute lack of judgment, i don't know what does. i mean, this president has no judgment when it comes to picking people. he promised the best and the brightest and we got these two guys. >> well, your client did quite a good job of finding somebody who could represent her, you're obviously doing so ably. thank you. have a wonderful weekend. >> thank you. >> up next, the imperial president. stay with us. kyle: mom! mom! 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. that's confident. but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flight for me. so i'm more than confident. how's your family? kayak. search one and done.

this is not just a yard. it's where memories are made. and you have the best seat in the house. the john deere x350 select series with the exclusive mulchcontrol™ system. nothing runs like a deere™

i never want anybody to be above the law, but the pardons are a very positive thing for a president. i think you see the way i'm using them. and, yes, i do have an absolute right to pardon myself, but i will never have to do it because i didn't do anything wrong. >> donald trump never misses an opportunity to insist he hasn't done anything wrong or to assert over and over again his powers as president. trump's recent fixation with the virtually unchanged pardon power

that the institution gives the president could be read as a sign he's worried about the mueller probe, but it also shines a spotlight on one of trump's authoritarian tendencies. trump seems to revel in the ability the presidency has given him to dispense fear, separating my grant children from their families or demanding the justice department prosecute those who he sees as his enemies, but also to distribute favor, individual pardons to political allies like joe arpaio or the clemency to a woman facing a draconian sentence. you put it together the message seems to be be nice to me and i will use my power to do nice for you. but if you are not nice, well -- >> the latest display of the trump as king gambit, the proposition he made to nfl players who has been relentlessly attacking for their kneeling protests against police brutality. >> you shouldn't go in a locker room when our national anthem is

played. i'm going to ask them to recommend to me people that were unfairly treated, friends of theirs or people that they know about and i'm going to take a look at those applications and if i find and my committee finds that they are unfairly treated, then we will pardon them or at least let them out. >> back with me jill wine-banks and joining me now maya wiley and rob reiner. rob, the founders obviously deliberately wanted to steer the united states away from having a king but they did give the president one monarchel power which is the power of the pardon. "time magazine" you look at that on the screen, this is the new cover of "time magazine," king me, in which they are making the case that donald trump styles himself a king. >> yes. >> what do you make of that? >> he is -- you know, he has got oligarch envy, this guy. he basically wants to be one of

those guys. he wants to be bputin. he would love nothing more than to be able to -- because every deal he does is transactional. he will make a deal with china so he can get $500 million for a theme park in indonesia. everything he looks at is through that prism. he would love to be in a position where every deal that comes through the united states he takes his cut. that's what he wants. and he is doing everything to make that happen. has diminished the press, he is attacking justice department, he is attacking the fbi, he is attacking the intelligence community. he is doing everything to position himself as an ougtocra and we are pushing up against a hardened base that he has and very hard to penetrate and he is positioning himself as one of those strong men.

that's what he wants to be. >> i was telling the team that it kind of reminds me of lord denathor in "lord of rings." that trump wants both, he wants absolute power, wants to be able to strike fear into the hearts of people that he and his base have distaste for, but he also wants to say if you are nice i can give you favor. if you ever a celebrity and you pose with me i will give you this person, you can have her. then he came in week and said he was going -- he may pardon m&a who doesn't need a pardon. there is nothing -- this is donald trump saying he would potentially pardon mohammed ali. >> i'm thinking about muhammad ali. we are doing recommendations on -- we are doing recommendations on muhammad ali. we are looking at literally thousands of names of people that have come to our attention that have been treated unfairly or where their sentence is far too long. >> and he also made this offer to the nfl players, hey, just

tell me who your friends are that you need pardoned and i will pardon them. >> so, you know, tim snyder wrote a great week on tyranny, you know, historian from yale university, and trump is checking off all the boxes. the first is fake news, right? press -- independent media as opposition. to your point i need agreement. i will talk to you if i get agreement. i will talk to you if i get reinforcement. i will talk to you if you tell me i'm right and you support me. remember that kim kardashian is not just a celebrity, she's kanye west's wife. >> right. >> and kanye west came out and made positive statements about donald trump. >> yeah. >> it's now even the subject of a rap debate, actually, between he and t.i. i just say all this because it's kind of astounding when he was giving pardons he was not just -- he was giving pardons to people he could signal that he

would actually undermine the mueller investigation and potentially indictments and convictions that he might get by signaling i will just pardon you so keep your mouth shut and don't cooperate. so what we have here is a pattern of agree with me, protect me and tell me i'm wonderful and great. i just want to -- because this is really important -- what he did to the nfl players, remember first of all he agreed with the nfl's position of saying, just keep it in the locker room. >> yeah. >> just don't come out during the national anthem. then he came out -- which i don't agree with, by the way, i think it's a first amendment right and they had every right to come out of the locker room and peacefully protest and demonstrate and not disrupting anyone else's ability to participate in the national anthem. then he said actually i didn't agree with that. in his revocation -- remember the players were actually asking for a meeting with him. michael bennett from the seahawks who is moving to the eagles who is a friend, i just want to read what he said because he said he would have

gone to the white house. and the reason he would have gone is because he want ad dialogue with the president. he is willing to dialogue with the president. and the thing that he said that was so beautiful and i want to read it because the president also stereotypes folks like these players and dehumanizes them and what michael bennett says, we have to shed our fears on race, religion, sexuality and immigration. and that's what he wants to talk to the president about. this is a president who stokes those fears, stokes the stereotypes, reinforces them rather than draws us into a discussion. even when we have disagreement because that's fundamentally what democracy is about. >> jill, that aspect of it, which has so many people destabilized and afraid is here in one bucket, in the other is donald trump's essential assertion of absolute power. he is essentially saying i have all the power, i can do whatever i want including pardon myself if i want to. so that i can -- rudy giuliani his tv lawyer said he could shoot the former fbi director

and then pardon himself for killing a person. the literal i could shoot one on fifth avenue. here is paul ryan -- no, here is paul ryan finally being forced to answer the question and confronted because the republican party hasn't done much to respond to what trump does. >> mr. speaker, do you believe that the president has the power to pardon himself? >> i don't know the technical answer to that question, but i think obviously the answer is he shouldn't and no one is above the law. >> jill? >> okay. i know the technical answer and it's no. he can't do it. the department of justice even has said you can't do it. it just can't done. but i will say that the office of legal counsel added a little addenda to that which said, well, he could invoke the 25th amendment, say he had some disability. he would be out, the acting president, the vice president would pardon him prospectively

which happened in the nixon case, he was prospectively pardoned, he had not been indicted after he was pardoned. then after he get pardoned he could say my disability is gone and i'm president again. he could do it that way. it's sort of self pardon but you would have to have pence agree to that. it's ridiculous. >> the temporary insanity defense. >> although i don't think it's temporary. >> your new film "shock and awe" is specifically about the press and run up to the iraq war. i remember there was a lot of talk about george w. bush styling himself a king and whether or not the press was tough enough on the bush administration in the lead up and asked enough questions, was skeptical enough. we just watched the press, you know, interview -- or having a press conference with donald trump after 478 days of not having a press conference. you know, having made this film and really sat and thought through these issues of the way that the press is relating to

somebody who styles himself perhaps an autocrat, have we learned anything? >> i don't know. it wasn't that the press wasn't tough enough in the run up to the war, they were nonexistent. there were only three four journalists who we made the movie about who got it all right. most people just bought the company line. it was a different time, people were swept up in patriotism because of 9/11 and they just bought the company line. but there is a line in the film and it's the most important line in the film which says, you know, the editor was talking to his journalists and he said if the government says something you have only one question to ask, is it true? that's it. the press owes it to the american public to try to get to the truth. it was difficult then, it is even more difficult now when you have the president of the united states saying that the press is the enemy of the people and

calling it fake news and for the first time in american history we have essentially state run media backing up the president. fox and sinclair and alex jones and all these crazy ideas. it's incumbent now on the press more than ever to really hone in and to have that press conference and not pin him down is -- it's incredible. i mean, our democracy is hanging in the balance. 241 years of self-rule is hanging in the balance. we open the film with a line from bill moyer who used to be lbj's press secretary who basically says that a democracy cannot exist unless we have a free and independent press as you talked about. well, we need that press now more than ever. they need to hold this guy accountable and they need to keep pressing and pin him down. >> i want to play one example of

i think somebody who did do a good job, our own peter alexander, on this question of whether or not donald trump believes he is above the law. this is questioning not trump but sarah huckabee sanders, his spokesperson. >> does the president believe that he is above the law? >> certainly not. the president hasn't done anything wrong. >> the question isn't has he done anything wrong. the question is the framers envisioned a system where the pardon could pardon himself, where the president could be above the law. >> the constitution very clearly lays out the law and once again the president hasn't done anything wrong and we feel comfortable in that front. >> you just a moment said it's not that clear. simply put, does the president believe he is above the law? >> certainly no one is above the law. >> except that the president said he was. so my only complaint about that exchange is it didn't say, the president said x, y and z, how, then, is it possible, what is

the rationale for that statement and how is it consistent with the statement that he is not above the law? i think one of the other things we have to remember is that we don't have a diversity of voices in the press because when we look at 40% of those who support donald trump, his kind of firm base, gets their news from one source. the fact that we are only getting our news from a few sources is also one of the problems that we have and i think to rob's point, this conglomeration of the media, but certainly access and the feeling of needing to hold on to that president who will punish you for disagreement is something the press has to stay vigilant. >> hollywood is having to come in and be a part of the response. >> yeah, we are all -- we are all a part of it. you know, interestingly enough, this whole last year and a half, two years i have become very good friends with very principled and thoughtful republicans. >> absolutely. >> there are a lot of people out

there that don't care about party, but they care about this country. unfortunately not elected officials, only the ones on the way out will say anything. nobody that is running for office or is in office now will actually stand up and tell the truth. and you see these respective republicans who are thoughtful and they will tell the truth because we care about this country and make no mistake about it, as jon meachum points out, the sole of democracy, we're fighting for it right now and 2018 this november i'm telling you, a lot is going to go -- everybody says this every time, it's the most important election. this really is. if we don't have a democratic congress that can at least start the hearings to shine some light on what's going going on, this is the most corrupt presidency in american history. i don't care tea pot dome and watergate and iran-contra, these are child's play compared to selling our country out to a foreign enemy power. it doesn't get any worse than

that. >> it is pretty frightening. thank you all for being here to try to parse through it because it's tough stuff. jill, maya and rob, thank you very much. don't miss the new movie "shock and awe" it's fwiquite good. in theaters on july 13th. coming up the latest attempt to destroy obamacare and bishop william barber will be here.

booking a flight at the last minute

doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. can make you feel unstoppable. ♪ but mania, such as unusual changes in your mood, activity or energy levels, can leave you on shaky ground. help take control by talking to your doctor. ask about vraylar. vraylar is approved for the acute treatment of manic or mixed episodes of bipolar i disorder in adults. clinical studies showed that vraylar reduced overall manic symptoms. vraylar should not be used in elderly patients with dementia due to increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. high cholesterol and weight gain; high blood sugar,

which can lead to coma or death; decreased white blood cells, which can be fatal; dizziness upon standing; falls; seizures; impaired judgment; heat sensitivity; and trouble swallowing may occur. you're more than just your bipolar i. ask about vraylar.

well, donald trump has left the g7 summit early on his way to singapore for his summit with north korean dictator kim jong-un, but first he held a surprise news conference this morning and it was a doozy. we will have more on that when we come back. gary: i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. i bet i'm the first blade maker you've ever met. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making our thinnest longest lasting blades on the market. precision machinery and high quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. it's about delivering a more comfortable shave, every time. invented in boston. made and sold around the world. order now at gilletteondemand.com.

gillette, the best a man can get.

and do you think that crimea should be recognized with russia at this point? >> i have to ask president obama because he was the one that let crimea get away, that was during his administration and he was the one that let russia go and spend a lot of money on crimea because they have spent a lot of money on rebuilding it, i guess they have their submarine port there, et cetera, but crimea was let go during the obama administration and, you know, obama can say all he wants, but he allowed russia to take crimea. i may have had a much different attitude, so you would really have to ask that request he to president obama. you know, why did he do that? why did he do that? but with that being said, it's been done a long time. >> wow. well, donald trump is headed to sing support from canada after leaving the g7 summit early this morning in an unplanned press

conference his first solo press conference since february 16, 2017, he blamed previous u.s. presidents for everything from the trade deals he hates to north korea's belligerence to russia's illegal annexation of crimea in 2014. malcolm, the annexation of crimea is what triggered the sanctions that unleashed catastrophic damage to russia's economy, it ended this $500 billion exxonmobil deal they were going to do with russia's second largest oil company. the obama administration and europe came down on russia pretty hard, which is one of the reasons that one might argue that they preferred not to have hillary clinton be president. what do you make of this idea that donald trump is essentially blaming his predecessor for russia's illegal actions rather than blaming vladimir putin? >> well, first let's start with the correct terms if they are going to have this conversation.

russia used military force and invaded a sovereign nation, seized an entire section of its territory, occupied it with military forces, then started a military insurgency in the ukraine. one of the reasons that this was able to happen, not because barack obama let it happen, because donald trump's campaign manager, paul manafort, worked for a pro ukrainian president and literally had protests organized in crimea that attacked nato and including u.s. marine corps service members when they were trying to practice exercises to defend the ukraine a few years before. so, you know, all of this talk about the ukraine, obama let them take it, what was the united states supposed to do? physically interject military forces there? that wasn't going to happen. when we did actually have training exercises with nato to do it trump's campaign manager was back there subverting u.s.

forces. that being said, okay, donald trump is practically said that russia owns the ukraine and you actually heard him say in there that ukraine spent a lot of money. that's a talking point from the kremlin that the oligarchs gave to trump and he almost gave the game away. >> he also seemed to be willing to drop the sanctions that were put on russia for taking ukraine. i mean, that doesn't say that you are tough on the idea of russia seizing a foreign country and making it their own. >> let me expand on malcolm's point because when putin was invading and seizing parts of the ukraine through military means, donald trump was negotiating a deal to build a trump tower in moscow with a russian oligarch, a deal that was being financed by a state-owned bank, a deal that could only go forward if donald trump was speaking kindly about

putin, which he was at the time, tweeting and saying positive things about him. so donald trump when putin invaded ukraine didn't pull his deal, didn't criticize putin and walk away. he was -- cared about one thing, donald trump. i know it's hard to believe. and so, yeah, then the sanctions came on after that and ended up killing the deal and trump ever since has had a very negative attitude towards the sanctions. when asked about it during the campaign he said i don't think we need the sanctions. so he has been so light on putin and to let him get away with any of these talking points in the last two days about how hard he is on putin and russia, that's something that the american press should -- has messed up on. >> and let me play, sara, donald trump talking about russia just today in this press conference, having walked out of the g7 early. >> i would rather see russia in the g8 as opposed to the g7.

i would say that the g8 is a more meaningful group than the g7. absolutely. >> your thoughts, sara? >> i mean, the reason that russia is not in the g8 is because russia invaded ukraine, because they took crimea, so obviously trump's previous comments about him being offended by that, he would have taken a different line than obama is a total lie. so he's saying thighs contradictory statements. i think it's very clear that basically every policy that trump has put forward has been to benefit russia, whether it's first refusing to sign the sanctions, then refuse to go enact the sanctions, refuse to go investigate russia's interference in our elections. their hacking of the dod, of the state department, of nuclear plants, the various financial deals that are going through. all of this benefits putin. as we were talking about earlier, the destruction of the alliances like nato on the g8 itself. yeah, he is working in the interest of himself primarily and russia as a backer and a

benefactor of this arrangement. >> and one wonders why. it is the $50 million question. david corn, sara, malcolm, thank you all. >> sure thing. >> coming up at the top of the hour, former obama adviser ben rhodes reacts to donald trump's surprise solo press conference and up next your moral moment with bishop william barber. ♪[upbeat music]

♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun transitions™ light under control™ transitions™ ♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all in one place. ♪

>> we will repeal and replace obamacare. >> high risk pools will also help to ensure those with preexisting conditions will always get the quality coverage they need. >> well, that turned out to be untrue. this week, donald trump's justice department said it would no longer defend key parts of obamacare in court including those of guaranteed access to health insurance for those with preexisting conditions. one of the most popular parts of the law and one that trump promised repeatedly to protect. joining me now bishop william barber. beneficiary top barber, your thoughts, you've been traveling around the country, particularly to rural areas where people

desperately need health care. what do eyou make of the trump administration that says they will not defend the preexisting conditions. >> it's for me and thousands of other organizers, this is exactly why we organize. think about it what kind of commitment to greed and injustice allows a politician to get up in the morning and work to destroy the affordable health care, to vote to defund children's health care, and to allow insurance companies to deny people with preexisting condition? i mean, it's just mean. imimmoral. in a country that life expectancy is increasing with 31 million people don't have health care. where thousands of people are unemployed or underemployed, who can't afford it. the bible calls it sin. the evil, legislative evil. when you rob the poor, it's

regressive and politics of rejection. and now we have the attorney general saying i'm not going to defend voting rights and i'm not going to defend health scare. >> and what kind of politician, wul 20 states run by government legislatures to fund the lawsuit. they didn't want the medicaid expansion. they didn't want the rules about preexisting condition. 24% of voters in our nbc/"wall street journal" poll say they're enthusiastic about repealing obamacare. 1915% said they're comfortable with taking away health care potential from themselves and other people. so what kind of people, people in this country, a lot of them? >> that's right. well, it says something about our moral politics and what has happened. there's a lot of factor in this, number one, it's closing gaps to be aggressive with triple-down tax cuts. they've named obamacare as a racial code word, when you hear

people not working those are racialized code word that fools to have people think it's not helping black people. women abused considered a preexisting condition. they would be denied. children would be denied, veterans. you have to go all the way back to 1868 to see this kind of attack on health care when the friedman bill hospitals were killed. and all the way back to franklin delano roosevelt proposing social security. and it was called socialism. and what's sad, the so-called preachers who say they care about life. but they don't say anything about this. it's part of a tragedy. that's why people are organizing, going to jail and standing up in this moment. >> we had ben carson the hud secretary first saying he was going to raise the rates. newt gingrich bringing back the culture war now that low

unemployment. people there able-bodied need to go to work. you recently in kentucky were denied access to the capitol, trying to come in and rally on behalf of the poor. where do we go from here? this is a fight for medicaid that apparently people still don't want to see, where do we go here, bishop barber? >> of all the reforms of inequality, health care was the most shocking in 1966. then he said i see no alternative. we believe we're organizing in 40 states over 2,000 people have done nonviolence civil disobedience. in kentucky, the government there blocked coal miners and african-americans and people hurting. we have to have massive nonviolence resistance and massive voter registration. >> bishop, thank you for all you do, and thank you for being here. >> thank you, take care. >> more "am joy" after the break. of steel ♪

♪ he eats a bowl of hammers at every meal ♪ ♪ he holds your house in the palm of his hand ♪ ♪ he's your home and auto man ♪ big jim, he's got you covered ♪ ♪ great big jim, there ain't no other ♪ -so, this is covered, right? -yes, ma'am. take care of it for you right now. giddyup! hi! this is jamie. we need some help. 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. you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed?m let's get someone to say it with a really low voice. carl? lowest price guaranteed. what about the world's lowest limbo stick? how low can you go? nice one, carl.

hey i've got an idea. just say, badda book. badda boom. badda book. badda boom. nice. always the lowest price, guaranteed. book now at choicehotels.com burning, pins-and-needles of beforediabetic nerve pain, these feet... grew into a free-wheeling a kid... loved every step of fatherhood... and made old cars good as new. but i couldn't bear my diabetic nerve pain any longer, so i talked to my doctor and he prescribed lyrica. nerve damage from diabetes causes diabetic nerve pain. lyrica is fda approved to treat this pain, from moderate to even severe diabetic nerve pain. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these,

new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, swelling of hands, legs, and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. now i have less diabetic nerve pain. and i love smoothing the road ahead for others. ask your doctor about lyrica.

that is our show for today, "am joy" will be back tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. up next, alex witt has the latest and i'm sure i'll be following up alex on the press conference. >> i can't say what i enjoyed better, your show, the conversation with it or the conversation within the last three minutes. >> yeah. good day to all of you, i'm alex witt at msnbc