thank you. >> supervisor cohen: we'll hear from paula jones. paula jones is coming from -- what organization are you with? >> i'm chair of food security task force. since we have just our 5 minutes, i thought i would lead the presentation, but we're both available for questions. >> supervisor cohen: great. >> that should be on the screen and handouts in front of you as well. first, we want to thank everybody here for the opportunity to address one of the most basic needs, which is food. our slide today will start with food security and investment in nutrition, approved health and policy and priorities. we did try to follow the template that you offered. we have a policy. in 2013, our board of supervisors, some of you here, unanimously passed a resolution committing to a food-secure, hunger-free san francisco in 2020. the definition that we've been using is that all people at all times are able to obtain and consume enough nutritious food to support an active, healthy life. we're targeting who we think are highest risk. we're looking at the fede

i'm not going to sit before a grand jury or a paula jones matter. i'm not going to do it. what would have happened? >> i think, well, they would have compelled him to do so. >> how. >> well, >> i don't understand the mechanics. >> i don't know that i necessarily understand the mechanics either. i think that special counsel mueller can compel him to come and be questioned in an interview or before a grand jury. i think that could take place. i don't know that he can actually be tried as president. but if i could just add a little more color to these e-mails? so on june 3rd, he gets the e-mails from rob goldstone saying we've got you know, we've got dirt for you. on the 7th, the then candidate trump is accepting the win in new jersey in the primary and during his speech, he makes the statement, i am going to have a lot to tell you about the clintons. i'm going to give a major speech early next week. probably on monday. the meeting takes place on the 9th and they don't get the dirt they were looking for. i am absolutely convinced that then candidate trump was communicated wit

versus nixon and in the paula jones case. >> right. back where we were in the starr matter as you say with some different authorizing power but we are back to the fundamental questions of our constitution and what branch wins. i want to play now your very historic cross-examination of bill clinton there in that video deposition. take a look. >> would you please tell the grand jury what that oath means to you for today's testimony. >> i have sworn an oath to tell the grand jury the truth. and that's what i intend to did. >> mr. president, were you physically intimate with monica lewinsky? >> when i was alone with miss lewinsky on certain occasions i engaged in conduct that was wrong. >> parts of that are you and parts of that are your colleagues. of course there is a whole team that questions the president. but viewers can see there that was a president who was a careful lawyer a former state attorney general, reading from the piece of paper which was how he wanted to define what he did. contrast that to the potential witness you would

it was a civil case with paula jones, but the idea of a subpoena and asserting the executive privilege, so it has this specific question has never been answered, but there is a general view in court cases that no one is above the law, and so while they may be able to limit the scope of the questioning based on some executive privilege assertions, i think legal experts generally don't think that they would be able to avoid complying all together. >> and yet you mentioned he could invoke the fifth amendment. listen to what the president has said about that in the past. >> have you seen what's going on in front of congress? fifth amendment, fifth amendment, fifth amendment, horrible. horrible. the mob takes the fifth. if you're innocent, why are you taking the fifth amendment? when you have your staff taking the fifth amendment, taking the fifth, so they are not prosecuted, i think it's disgraceful. >> tim, could these words come back to haunt him? >> well, they wouldn't be the first words from the president to come back to haunt him. i want to add something to what daniel said. this very

then there was the paula jones civil case against bill clinton. again, the supreme court ruled that president clinton could not invoke presidential immunity to delay that case. and the monica lewinsky skas, ken starr did get a subpoena for clinton to testify, when the president agreed to the interview, that subpoena was withdrawn. so, it's true the president could fight any subpoena, argue executive privilege, but there is certainly no guarantee that fight would be successful and historical evidence to the contrary. now, giuliani showed up to this interview having already rocked the boat, admits the president reimbursed michael cohen for the hush money payment to porn star stormy daniels. that was after the president said on air force once he didn't know about the payment. and the new interview, giuliani dropped another doozy, what may be, if you forgive the oxymoron, the world's least surprising bombshell. >> and you said he, this was a regular arrangement he had with michael cohen. did michael cohen make other payments to other women for the pre

kennedy: did whitewater give us paula jones? >> it was a civil suit that was separate from it. >> i know obviously monica lewinsky followed from the paula jones deposition. the man panel is going to return with a lot to say. secretary of state, mike pompeo has strong word for iran with what he calls the toughest sanctions in american history. bryan suits joins me in a minute. it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray relieve

kennedy: did whitewater give us paula jones? >> it was a civil suit that was separate from it. >> i know obviously monica lewinsky followed from the paula jones deposition. the man panel is going to return with a lot to say. secretary of state, mike pompeo has strong word for iran with what he calls the toughest sanctions in american history. sanctions in american history. bryan suits joins me in a mom? dad? hi! sanctions in american history. bryan suits joins me in a i had a very minor fender bender tonight in an unreasonably narrow fast food drive thru lane. but what a powerful life lesson. and don't worry i have everything handled. i already spoke to our allstate agent, and i know that we have accident forgiveness. which is so smart on your guy's part. like fact that they'll just... forgive you... four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it. ♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all

the paula jones case, so civil cases are lower in priority always than grand jury subpoenas. i think this is a pretty easy legal issue that he will be required to testify if the case winds up going to court. >> this is not a civil case. this is a criminal grand jury. >> in a normal universe, the issue here would actually be political. no politician would want to sit and deal with the potential embarrassment of having the supreme court weigh in. these are different times here. >> that is true. i was there in 1974 working in the white house when the supreme court ruled. and as i recall, it was unanimous, that president nixon had to answer to a subpoena to turn over documents. i don't understand why you can have a subpoena that is enforceable for the president to hand over documents and why they are so different. they are close together in their nature and i would be interested in the response from jeffrey. >> elizabeth, quickly. >> the rational, the subpoena -- a subpoena does require. a lot of hours with any client who going to be appear before a grand jury to give testimony.

case, kellyanne conway's husband, on the side of paula jones in that case. it's like a puppy dog eating its tail. >>> president trump noted the one year appointment of the special counsel with this tweet this morning. congratulations america we are now in the second year of the greatest witch hunt in american history. tonight politico is reporting more talk from rudy giuliani, which means it probably means absolutely nothing. giuliani is telling politico that, quote, donald trump's lawyers have gun planning a series of summer prep sessions for the president before a possible sit down for an interview with special counsel robert mueller. the planning meetings to be held during off hours at the white house and perhaps over rounds of golf at trump's private courses. giuliani said, will mirror the then gop nominee's 2016 debate preparation, in which aides briefed an impatient trump in several brief sessions over many weeks. giuliani said the briefings likely will begin after trump returns from a june 12th summit in singapore with north korean leader kim jong-un,

that's what clinton tried to say in respect to paula jones' request for a deposition. upheld her right to take that deposition. he went into that deposition. he lied. it gave rise to his lying in the grand jury and his impeachment. this is very dangerous territory for the president, because as kim says, the defense here is, i didn't have that acting, i didn't grope her. if he says it didn't happen, and she says it does happen, and she can prove that it happened, then he's lied. >> in that deposition in the paula jones case, that was part of the reason he was eventually impeached in the house of representatives. not convicted in the senate but impeached in the house. >> that's exactly right, wolf. >>> we're going to take another quick break. when we come back, we assume this press briefing will be getting under way. we'll have live coverage after this. liberty mutual saved us almost $800 when we switched our auto and home insurance. liberty did what? yeah, they saved us a ton, which gave us a little wiggle room in our budget. i wish our insurance did that. then we could

goldman sachs teaming up with paula jones, a way to attract big assets to socially

because that was an issue in paula jones, and just about anyone can file a civil case.ut i don't think it goes down just to the time and the golfing. i think it goes to the idea that a federal indictment of a sitting president would effectively knee cap their term and potentially their re-election, that you are taking the person charged with executing the laws and making them subject to other decisions within the executive branch that might detonate their presidency as a practical matter. >> that's absolutely right. very good point. there are two basic paths. one is to say, we have a principle that's more important, no one is above the law. and it arguably applies to criminal, and at least may apply to the indictment of a president. and maybe you say, you can't try him in office, that would knee cap him. the second and more funeral poin -- fundamental point, all the scholars who say, you can't indict a president while he's sitting, say, the remedy is impeachment, it's congress doing its job. you can't, if you're the president, say on the one hand, you can't indict me, a

that he had to get involved in the paula jones civil suit?> mr. davis: the answer is yes, he was forced to testify in a civil suit. you don't have a test of whether he can be subpoenaed, but in the language of nixon versus united states, there is language that goes beyond documentary production and testimonial production that in a criminal case the president is "not about the law." i think you will have to testify. >> chris: i've got one and a half minutes left, i want to get to one final question and that is the question of credibility because president trump apparently misled the american people on air force one in april when he denied knowing anything about this payment to stormy daniels. take a look. >> did you know about the payment to stormy daniels? >> chris: how damaging is that the president trump and to his political support on this issue? >> mr. digenova: it's not damaging at all because in fact the people realize that this part of the investigation is why it's the whole thing is off track. under article two -- this relates to what

robert bennett is a former federal prosecutor who represented bill clinton when he was sued by paula jones. bob, as one of the few people any this world who have represented a president facing a high stakes interrogation ultimately, what do you make of these questions? >> well, it's very clear when you read the questions that they're trying to, mr. mueller is trying to get into the head of the president. he's trying to determine what was his intent and what was his knowledge. that's the thrust of all the questions. >> what do you see as the risks for the president as represented in these questions? >> well, i mean, the risk is that it shows that mueller has got a lot of evidence and i think the president would be very foolish to sit down and be interviewed on these questions because it's the follow through questions that could be so damaging to him. >> what do you mean by that? >> well, he'll answer a question and then they'll say but what about this? what about that? and my guess is there is not a person the president, who can be really prepared for an interrogation by very sophisticated

>> so their argument is that the paula jones case was about a civil matter. this is a criminal matter. and the nixon case was about evidence as opposed to testimony. at the end of the day, that will not persuade the supreme court. it may go all the way up there, which would take a long time you. think if they really want -- >> not as long -- three or four months. >> yeah. but at the end of the day, the supreme court is going to say you're president trump, not king trump. no man is above the law. >> let me ask you, senator, because this is a tricky question. i'm looking at it this way. people around here think jean-robert son in the end will say you have to honor the conservative. hey may be a conservative, but he is an institutionalist. you can never figure out kenn y kennedy. what do you think the court would do? >> i can't say it will be unanimous, but all of the legal reasoning and principles that led to the court unanimously saying to richard nixon you must provide those tapes will --. that was a more liberal court. >> it was a more liberal court. but rem

supreme court ruled that president clinton was not immune from sexual harassment lawsuit filed by paula jonesthe ruling said the president is subject to court orders in appropriate circumstances. now that was a civil case but the court said the need for evidence in a criminal case is even greater. so nobody can be sure how this would turn out but that doesn't seem like there is much reason for the white house to be optimistic it would win such a fight, lester. >> thanks for breaking it down. >>> a scare aboard a southwest airlines flight two weeks after the midair explosion pierced through the window on a plane, killing a passenger who was partially sucked outside the aircraft. this time it was a sudden crack in a window that led pilots to divert the flight. we get details from nbc's ron mott. >> reporter: the new mid-air scare happening this morning on southwest flight 957 from chicago to newark. frightened passengers took pictures, a cracked window from top to bottom, although it didn't completely break, leaving the cabin fully pressurized. >> i was two seats away. >> sounded like somebody

>> the paula jones in the deposition, which really started this whole thing. >> when he denied it. if you're in a hole, stop digging. is there a certain point you have to walk away from the deal? i'm not dealing here anymore. i'm going to drop his line. >> i think his little speech after it was a disaster. it wasn't in the right tone, and i'm not sure he should have done it. i'm not sure he shouldn't have just taken the fifth amendment, and said, look, i don't get along with this man starr. he is a republican. he's this, he is that and just taking the fifth amendment. it's a terrible thing for the president to take the fifth amendment, but he probably should have done it. i don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened. it's such an embarrassment to him. i see him walking around. it's a terrible embarrassment. >> where is he going? up or down? >> well, i think the best he can do is tread water two years. i really believe that. i think he can tread. maybe keep the office and just tread and get out as opposed to nixon who got out in a rather harsh manner. it may be wo

>> the paula jones in the deposition, which really started this. >> when he denied it. if you're in a hole, stop digging. at some point you walk away from the deal. i'm not dealing here anymore. i'm going to drop his line. >> i think his little speech after it was a disaster. it wasn't in the right tone, and i'm not sure he should have done it. i'm not sure he shouldn't have just taken the fifth amount and said look, i don't get along with this man, starr. he is a republican. he's this, he is that and just taking the fifth amendment. it's a terrible thing for the president to take the fifth amendment, but he probably should have done it. i don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened. it's such an embarrassment to him. i see him walking around. it's a terrible embarrassment. >> where is he going? up or down? >> well, i think the best he can do is tread water two years. i think he can tread. maybe keep the office and just tread and get out as opposed to nixon who got out in a rather harsh manner. it may be worse than that. i believe the best he can do is

civil action that there was you know discussed about the paula jones case and some other things and so you know it's pretty clear that you know probably some testimony could be taken but it was always difficult as the scope of these kind of things and how far the executive privilege goes for example you know things that happened before trump was president are going to be less protected then things that happened while he was president and conversations that have with senior advisers while he was president there are certainly glaciers that we need you need to be sorted out what's your reaction to the leaking of the questions that lola plans to ask well i mean. i'm not a big fan of leaking and any context but having read the questions i mean i think the questions are fairly broad and those questions are really just a skeletal outline each one of those questions is pretty open ended and would could probably have ten or twelve follow up questions to me if i read that outline of questions that looks like a day and a half of two or two days of questioning and if i were the president's lawyers

civil action that there was you know discussed about the paula jones case and some other things and so you know it's pretty clear that you know probably some testimony could be taken but what's always difficult is the scope of these kind of things and how far the executive privilege goes for example you know things that happened before trump was president are going to be less protected then things that happened while he was president and conversations that have with senior advisers while he was president there are certainly glaciers that we need you need to be sorted out what's your reaction to the leaking of the questions that lola plans to ask well i mean. i'm not a big fan of leaking and any context but having read the questions i mean i think the questions are fairly broad and those questions are really just a skeletal outline each one of those questions is pretty open ended and would probably have ten or twelve follow up questions to me if i read that outline of questions that looks like a day and a half of two or two days of questioning and if i were the president's lawyers i wou

so the second point about it is, if you go back to paula jones vs. clinton case, the argument made on behalf of the executive was he shouldn't be subject to , civil process because it would be distracting from his duties and the court rightfully rejected that and our republican colleagues roundly condemned that argument. they said, the president should be subject to civil process, to the rule of law, while in office. and of course that's right. and in the case of donald trump, far from distracting him, if he does the interview, he'll be able theoretically to get back to work. whatever that means in his case. because he spends all of his time on this stuff anyway. so why doesn't he go and do an actual interview and spill his guts and tell the truth? which he has an obligation to do as a citizen of the united states, as well as the president. and my final point is this. what happens if we allow president trump and the republicans to get away with this sabotage of a criminal investigation and prosecution? in the case involving the president and his men?

civil action that there was you know discussed about the paula jones case and some other things and so you know it's pretty clear that you know probably some testimony could be taken but what's always difficult is the scope of these kind of things and how far the executive privilege goes for example you know things that happened before trump was president are going to be less protected then things that happened while he was president in conversations they have with senior advisers while you as president there are certainly glaciers that we need you need to be sorted out what serious action to the leaking of the questions that mole of plans to ask well i mean. i'm not a big fan of leaking and any context but having read the questions i mean i think the questions are fairly broad and those questions are really just a skeletal outline each one of those questions is pretty open ended and would could probably have ten or twelve follow up questions to me if i read that outline of questions that looks like a day and a half of two or two days of questioning and if i were the president's lawyer

wall paula expwhroans was making her claim he said i was never alone in a hotel with paula jones.that's exactly what they are doing here. they are saying there was no spy placed in the campaign. we are saying spies were trying to get information. judge jeanine: what do you think of obama saying i didn't have any scandals. no one in my white house ever got in trouble for screwing up as long as there wasn't malicious intent behind it. >> it isn't a scandal if the democrats don't think it's scandal. how much time do we have. judge jeanine: 10 seconds. >> there were many scandals. i have no healthcare, thank you, obama. judge jeanine: got it. ann coulter. thank you. we'll be right judge jeanine: don't forget to friend me on facebook, follow me on twitter and instagram. you never have to miss justice. if you can't watch set your dvr and if you don't network your dvr ask your neighbor. plus, i just finished the final edits on my new book. it comes out in the end of june but you don't have to wait to buy it. order it on amazon or barnes & noble's. finally, tonight, on this memorial day w

went all the way to the supreme court to having to try to avoid testifying in the civil case of paula jones. he lost that, even if you're president, you must sit down and have a civil deposition. you must go to trial. it was in that deposition he made the statements about monica lewinsky that led ken starr to impeach him. in that case, bill clinton spent six hours testifying before the grand jury. in my mind it's clear as a legal principle. that even a president can be called before the criminal investigation. what we're seeing now is a long debate over the terms of that. will he have his lawyers there. right now we're having an argument over the scope and scale of the interview. at the end of the day, robert mueller has something called the grand jury subpoena. you are commanded to appear at the district court at the time and date below, and to remain there until a district judge of this court relieves you. that applies to donald trump as much as anyone else. >> you say all signs point to paul manafort pleading guilty in the coming weeks. why now? >> manafort is in the most difficult place

wall paula expwhroans was making her claim he said i was never alone in a hotel with paula jones.exactly what they are doing here. they are saying there was no spy placed in the campaign. we are saying spies were trying to get information. judge jeanine: what do you think of obama saying i didn't have any scandals. no one in my white house ever got in trouble for screwing up as long as there wasn't malicious intent behind it. >> it isn't a scandal if the democrats don't think it's scandal. how much time do we have. judge jeanine: 10 seconds. >> there were many scandals. i have no healthcare, thank you, obama. judge jeanine: got it. ann coulter. thank you. we'll be right (vo) i was born during the winter of '77. i first met james in 5th grade. we got married after college. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester, neither did our story. and that's why we'll always drive a subaru. ♪ most people come to la with big dreams. ♪ we came with big appetites. with expedia, you can book a flight, hotel, car, and activity... ...all in one place. ♪

and i would like to thank paula jones from the department of public health. and ann quinton from the meals on wheels who continue advocacy and leadership on this issue. the second item i'm introducing is for the appropriation and expenditures of district 7, 8 and 10, participatory budgeting projects. this is actually the fifth year of implementing the participatory program. they secured 550,000 for projects, 250,000 related to vision zero, improving the safety of these seven streets. these projects include pedestrian safety improvements. the reason i'm introducing this is the appropriation of 800,000 in which 300,000 is for the quality of life projects in my district. this year more than 2200 district 7 residents cast more than 24,000 votes. i will not go through all the projects, but wanted to highlight a few. things like sunnyside elementary will install updated play structure that will be accessible also to children with special needs. the park will receive funding for beautification. the rehabilitation center will be hosting a music and dance performance

it had been brought by paula jones who alleged he had sexually harassed her when he was governor of arkansas. the supreme court said, no, this should not distract from your duties, that you should have to undergo this civil lawsuit. this was not a subpoena, brooke, as we had in u.s. v. nixon and as we might have today against president trump, but just so you know, related ken starr, the independent counsel at the time, actually did get a subpoena against president clinton to try to get him to testify in the monica lewinsky matter. president clinton then agreed to testify voluntarily and ken starr withdraw that subpoena. >> so there's two examples of the precedent. what about we know president trump, flashing forward just on the opposite side here, he talked about article 2 of the constitution which defines of office of the president. how does that play in all of this? >> well, article 2 is the part of the constitution that gives the president all of his powers, just like article 1 covers the congress, article 3 covers the federal judiciary. and what president trump supporters seem to be sugg

the paula jones went all the way to the supreme court.rt said even a sitting president must give testimony in a civil trial and must go to civil trial if the judge requires. a criminal case is even stronger. i don't see how donald trump avoids a subpoena, and i see every reason why mueller would want to bring him to the table with a subpoena. >> you don't think he's going to do it. >> i don't think so. i think he'll find a variety of p pretext to delay, delay, delay and obfiscate, find other reasons to point fingers at the investigators rather than comply. everybody knows by now that he's afraid to testify. we could see that. >> can mueller conclude his investigation without interviewing the president? >> i don't think he can in a comprehensive way. you know, the whole purpose of the investigation is to look at ties to a campaign. else the person who the campaign centered around, he is the lying candidate. not to have anything, especially if you have charges or allegations of obstruction, you have what his role would have been in that inf

and then paula jones and i think anne q -- >> quitenze. >> supervisor cohen: for the food security task force. [please stand by]

clinton should have just let that paula jones case go by the way of default, in this case, all he should do is say this is an illegitimate investigation from the get-go, i'm not cooperating. tell them to go sound panned, but he's not listening. > >> thanks so much to all of you, i appreciate it. we'll be right back. flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. why is dark magic so spell-bindingly good? it's a bold blend of coffee with rich flavors of uganda, sumatra, colombia and other parts of south america. like these mountains, each amazing on their own. but together? magical. all, for a smoother tasting cup of coffee. green mountain coffee roasters. -i think it'll look really: good without the stripes. whatever your home may hand you, behr through it, in one coat. behr marquee, #1 rated interior paint. find it exclusively at the home depot. the digital divide is splitting this country. we have parents who are trying to get their kids off of too much socia

in 1997 the supreme court said bill clinton had to give a deposition in the paula jones case, the civil case. so the idea that the president can't be subpoenaed that's pretty much been discredited as a germ proposition. >> in all the politics, you know who agrees with your position? rudy guiliani. >> 1998 talking to charlie rose. >> if the president is asked to testify, subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury and says no, not going to do it. >> you have to do it. you don't have a choice. >> there. it started. there you go. >> when rudy guiliani makes a statement, all they get to do is write a report. they acknowledged that to us. he made it sound like a report app exercise in futility. that would be getting the facts out to the public, trying to get to the truth. he's making it sound like let's just end this thing because all you get is a report. >> i report is a big deal. both in the watergate context and the starr/whitewater context, it was turned over to congress as a basis for impeachment. yet another reason why the need to write a report is a very considerable one. >> michael, we

. >> greg: look at clinton and paula jones.here are parallels. >> jesse: he was impeached over sex. if so what? he's had the best ratings he'd ever had. >> juan: i'm listening to you and i am struck that the president lied, appearing on air force one, saying not so. it doesn't bother you, as americans? [all speaking] you're going for conspiracy theories. this is what the president is doing to himself. >> greg: is not a conspiracy when someone says it's going to end the presidency. >> juan: avenatti is not robert mueller. >> greg: he said he it has information to unseat the president. >> juan: that is silly. >> greg: that's what he said! >> juan: rudy giuliani saying that jeff sessions should get involved, and end this thing. he should throw mueller out the door. meanwhile giuliani saying don't go after ivanka. you can go after jared. >> jesse: there is no evidence of a crime. there is no evidence of obstruction. that's when you look at the questions that they leaked. there is no evidence. elicit the president for saying somethi

president clinton had to testify in a civil suit, the paula jones sexual harassment suit. as important as that litigation might have been, civil suits in the scheme of things are not important as enforcement of the criminal laws. this case is about enforcing the criminal laws. there's no possible way the president would be free from providing evidence in proceeding like that. >> so, the question is jack, why not cooperate for now under better circumstances? >> well, why not cooperate, i'm, to me, look i've published an article in "the washington pos"" a couple months ago saying it would be not only in the interest of the country and the proceeding, but in the president's own interest to cooperate and submit to an interview. now, i have seen him go off on a few of the issues involved here and i understand that he might be in temper at times. on the other hand, people who may have been parties to his depositions assert that he can't keep control of himself. look, it does seem to me that there's a good argument for him to cooperate, if he really has something to hide, and wan

. >> not in materials, but in 1997, the supreme court said in the paula jones case, bill clinton madey, i have national security concerns, the supreme court said, too bad, you have to give a deposition. now, the courts always say the grand jury investigations are more important than civil cases, the idea that they would say oh, you don't have to submit to a grand jury subpoena seems extremely unlikely. >> we have to take a break there, thanks, everybody, to be sure, join van for the van jones show, at a special day and time tomorrow night. he'll talk to actress and activist tracey ellis ross, tomorrow night 10:00 p.m. eastern on cnn. >>> a story we really want you to see, a child slapped on camera as officials try to hield child workers from cnn cameras. where it's happening. and how it's connected to batteries for electric vehicles in a car you maybe driving. when we continue. now. ewww! being in the know is very good. don't shake! ahhh! sign up online for free. discover social security alerts. real milk has eight times more protein than almond milk. real milk has naturally occurring

>>chris: in the paula jones case, didn't the court ruled that the president wasn't above the law and he had to get involved in the civil suit? >> the answer is yes. he was forced to testify in the civil suit. we don't have a test as to whether he can be subpoenaed, but in the language in the nixon versus the united states, there is language that goes beyond documentary production and testimonial production that the president is cool, not above the law.i think he will have to testify. >>chris: i want to get to one final question and that is the question of credibility. because president trump apparently misled the american people on air force one in april when he denied knowing anything about this payment to stormy daniels point take a look. >> did you know about the payment to stormy daniels? >> no. >>reporter: why did michael cohen make that payment if there is no truth to the allegations? >> you have to ask michael cohen. he is my attorney. and you'llhave to ask michael . >>reporter: do you know where he got the money for that payment? >> no i don't. >>chris: how damaging is that t

he had to talk about what happened with monica lewinsky as part of the paula jones lawsuit and that got >> the "access hollywood" video tape and audio tape among his base, among his supporters didn't change anything so let's say there are more tapes from the apprentice, and you think among his base that will make much of a difference. >> not among his base. but there is a reason his approval rating is around 40% when unemployment is around 4%. there is -- there are doubts about him personally that are inhibiting his ability to grow -- to the extent you would expect given the good news in the economy. having said that, i think more democrats recognize that the share of voters who will pull away from trump because they view him as personally unfit is close to being maxed out and in the end, they would be more -- they have better opportunities in the 2018 election if they could fight it on the grounds of health care and the tax cut and whether he is delivered on his core promise that he would be a champion of average people. and i think -- it is not that they -- the personal doubts haven't

whitewater started as a failed real estate deal and ended up with a paula jones deposition and now bill clinton is impeached. you never know with these things. that's why that guliani is on to something. i think the president will ultimately be forced to testify. it's disagree with the doj official that was on prior to me. i think ultimately he will be forced to as richard nixon was forced to turn over the tapes. he didn't testify. he resigned. it was a bad precedent. if the president can answer in writing, that would be great. probably not. let's have a very hard time limit. they do it in civil lawsuits all the time. all right. it's three hours. you get 20 questions. you don't have to tell me the questions ahead of time. if you did, i could be better prepared to answer. show me your good faith that you don't really want to trick me. you're not looking to trap me. >> neil: good luck on that. >> yeah. >> neil: reading your book. what an amazing life you've had. we've been friends for years. i can remember, especially when you came here, why is he coming here? he has all this money. i rea

bill clinton attempted to refuse a subpoena under the paula jones lawsuit. he lost that in the supreme court. so we already have a court precedent. there is no question that we have a president, not a king, the president is not above the law. he will need to supply -- he will need to respond to a subpoena and comply with it. and the courts have already settled this matter. >> doesn't stop anybody from fighting out to, though, in court. >> he can, he will lose, but he can, yes. >> you're on foreign affairs, as i said. you poked fun at republicans who say the president deserves a nobel prize pofor what he's don. south korea's president is giving him credit. >> i'm glad the idea that donald trump will get a nobel prize after all the talk he's had about bombing various countries and even committing war crimes, talking about committing war crimes is a bit of a joke. that said, i'm an american first -- >> president obama, before he really had done anything on the hope and prayer that he would bring peace to the world, won the nobel prize. >> and i think that presi

supreme court in saying, i don't have time, as president, to, you know, give a deposition in the paula jones look at all the things i'm doing. and presidents are busy on very important matters. and the supreme court said, too bad! and there's every reason to believe that a court today would say, too bad, you're not above the law. >> can i just make a point that he is quoting -- he is quoting john dowd, who left -- >> who quit. >> who quit because the president, partly because the president wasn't taking his advice. he is quoting john dowd, who actually said this to the special counsel, the president is very busy. but here is the very busy president, who spends his time, you know, tweeting about how very busy he is with all of these other things, instead of being busy with all of these other things. >> and at the oral argument of the clinton v. jones case, justice scalia said, how come the president is playing golf if he's so busy? donald trump play s more golf than bill clinton, that's for sure. >> we also know there was a major meeting at the white house on north korea today and the preside