tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN June 15, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT
i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network.
this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. 11:00 p.m. on the east coast. the justice department inspector general releasing a blockbuster 500-page report on former fbi director james comey's handling of the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mails. the report concludes that comey was what it calls extraordinary and insubordinate saying he flouted department norms and failed to coordinate his actions with his superiors at the justice department. but it also concludes that comey was not motivated by political bias. the white house dismissing that conclusion and putting its own spin on the report, claiming it points out the political bias that president trump has been talking about. the current director of the fbi saying he is disappointed by the report and hinting that some
heads may roll. a lot to discuss this hour. i want to bring in cnn legal analyst laura coates, a former federal prosecutor, jack quinn, and nelson cunningham, both former white house counsel. good evening. i appreciate all of you being on. laura, we're hearing the first reaction from president trump's legal team. his attorney, rudy giuliani, was on fox news tonight, and he is reacting to the i.g. report with a few interesting demands. >> mueller should suspend his investigation, and he should go see rod rosenstein, who created him, and the deputy attorney general and attorney general sessions, who should now step up big-time to save his department, should suspend that investigation. i believe that rod rosenstein and jeff sessions have a chance to redeem themselves, and that chance comes about tomorrow. it doesn't go beyond tomorrow. tomorrow, mueller should be suspended, and honest people
should be brought in, impartial people to investigate these people like strzok. strzok should be in jail by the end of next week. >> laura, do his demands make any sense given what the i.g. report actually concluding? >> well, they make sense to further his narrative that there are segments of the i.g. report that bolsters the president's assessment that there has been some sort of political bias. that is true with respect to the i.g.'s conclusion about peter strzok and how he did show some political bias. but the ultimate conclusion was lost in rudy giuliani's comments here, which said he did not actually take that bias, if there was any present, to the ultimate decision whether or not to prosecute. and that's the hook about all this. it's about what's not been found in the i.g. report, not about what the hypothetical would have led the president to bolster his own claim would be. but the other issue here is the idea that you're going to take the i.g. report that was focused on the hillary clinton e-mail probe and conflate it with what's happening right now with the mueller/russia/collusion
probe is one that's gratuitous and self-serving. you cannot conflate the two. christopher wray, the current director, was very cautious not to do so today in his press conference. >> mm-hmm. i want to tell our viewers that was nelson and not me. nelson, i'm suffering. i know how you feel, brother. i'm dealing with it right now. should i come back to you because i wanted to did you the next question. are you okay in. >> i think you can go ahead. >> okay. so, nelson, is he saying that sessions should unrecuse himself unilaterally now and put a stop to this entire investigation? >> well, you can't unrecuse yourself because you can't undo the facts that led to your recusal. jeff sessions recused himself because he said he didn't talk to any russians during the time that he was advising trump's campaign, and it turned out he did on multiple occasions. he can't take that back. so undoing that isn't going to happen. rudy, my old boss -- by the way,
jack quinn is also my old boss. i didn't have the same title he did. i worked for him, and i was proud to do that. but if you look at this, in 500 pages, this report is about the hillary clinton e-mail investigation. it ended months -- i think five or six months before mueller was even named. i don't know what this has to do with bob mueller. >> okay. so, jack, what do you say to this? he doesn't know what it has to do with bob mueller. do you agree with that? >> yeah. i mean, look, if there's an aggrieved person in this report, it's clearly mrs. clinton. it's quite clear that among other things that the inspector general found to criticize in the way mr. comey handled this was what he called -- he characterized as comey's trashing of candidate clinton.
and to make matters worse, you know, when he reopened the investigation and then closed the investigation, he brought all of these charges, which turned out to be baseless, in front of the public, which was about to cast ballots in the election. it is incredibly hard to imagine how donald trump suffered from comey's wrongdoing in these regards. >> mm-hmm. >> you know, again, hillary clinton was the victim of jim comey's arrogance, bad judgment, and failure to adhere to departmental policies. >> yeah. so, laura, i got to ask you something. i need to have a mission for you. do you have your phone with you? >> sure. >> i just e-mailed you. i want you to respond to this. i'm going to ask jack a question. >> okay. >> check your e-mail. read it. i'll come to you next. >> okay. >> we'll get back to laura. so, jack, what do you think is the end game here? was this giuliani interview
tonight -- was it just about performing, you know, on television for trump, for his base, or do you think it reveals any real legal strategy? >> no, i think this is more street theater than legal strategy. but it's remarkable coming from a lawyer who himself and with his client has been saying that they want this investigation to wrap up. these steps are calculated to prolong this. they are calculated to ensure that there is no interview with the president by mr. mueller and his associates and to really just stretch this out through the course of the campaign season. and all of this, you know, nonsense about wanting to get this over is just that. i mean you can't be making the statements that mr. giuliani made this evening and then argue that you really hope this investigation will be over soon. they want to bring in new
people. they want to start all over. they like this investigation. they like the street fighting that's involved here because they think that they are doing well in that format. >> okay. laura, you didn't get it, right? >> no. >> all right. so here it is. i'm going to ask you about it. then i'll ask nelson about it. apparently michael cohen has filed a restraining order or a gag order against stormy daniels' attorney, michael avenatti, at a court in california, seeking to bar him from talking to the press or the public about the case. i'm just wondering if this is likely to succeed. it says defendant, michael cohen, mr. cohen will hereby and dawes move ex parte for an order restraining plaintiff's counsel of record, michael avenatti, from communicating with the press and/or public regarding the merits of this case. >> mm-hmm. >> and it says, as the court has already surmised, mr. avenatti's actions are mainly driven by his seemingly unquenchable thirst for publicity and goes on after
that. >> two things, number one, ex parte is one of the reasons that michael avenatti initially took issue with the nondisclosure agreement. he was first made aware that they went to an arbitrator unbeknown it to stormy daniels to seek that signature to be validated. so that ex parte part probably ruffles the feather of michael avenatti. but the second part of it is that michael cohen might be relying on the statements made by the judge in the new york case where he tried to intervene after there was the fbi raid on michael cohen's home, his office, and his hotel room, trying to get a literal and figurative seat at the table. >> hold it right there. judge kimba wood, who is presiding over mr. cohen's actions in the southern district of new york, relating to materials seized during fbi raids of his home, office, and hotel room, the cohen sdny action already came to this
conclusion when she recently admonished mr. avenatti in connection with his failed attempt to be admitted pro hac vice. >> well, you're admitted pro hac vice, for the purpose of this matter only. the reason why it's different and why it's a little bit odd to use the logic of the new york court in this case is because the judge in new york said that you don't have standing really to be here. i don't see how the matter before the court today is directly related to your client, stormy daniels. now, avenatti's claim has always been i want to protect her interest in the disclosure of tapes statements or conversations that may have been made between her prior attorney and michael cohen, and that would serve to inure to her benefit in the california case. if the california case were to rely only on the judge's statements in new york, well, he does have standing in the california case. he would have a reason to speak. but michael avenatti does get himself into trouble when he uses the court of public opinion in many ways in lieu of the process in the court of law. and i think that the judge will take issue with that, but not
the same way for new york. >> okay. nelson, so this is michael avenatti's statement. this is via twitter. he says, the motion for a gag order is a complete joke and baseless. mr. cohen and brent blakeley can't deal with the truth, the facts, and the law. so they have to resort to unethical, meritless motions. this must be their birthday present to mr. trump, and then #basta. what do you think of that, nelson? >> i'd say that michael avenatti may have been watching too many thriller crime movies over the years. he's going a little over the top here. >> as simple as that? >> you know, there's nothing in what he's tweeting out there that has any basis in the law. by the way, i think he's done a great service by bringing facts forward, by making arguments in public. he is fearless. i grant him that. but i think when you start -- he's running out his string a bit. >> before i let you go, though, quickly, nelson, how do you think this is going to go over
in the court? do you think it will be granted? >> i don't know. laura knows a lot more about the facts of this than i do. i would think no. very rarely do you tell lawyers not to speak publicly. >> thank you, all. fascinating. breaking news right in the middle. i'm going to have to check your e-mail. >> i like the pop quiz. >> we'll do it on the break so the whole world doesn't get your e-mail. when we come back, president trump and his three eldest children facing a massive lawsuit. the latest in a growing number of lawsuits, this one alleging the trump family ran their foundation and charity like a personal slush fund. you won't see these folks at the post office they have businesses to run they have passions to pursue how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters ship packages all the amazing services of the post office right on your computer get a 4 week trial plus $100 in extras
including postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again go to stamps.com/tv from the moment you met you wantecomfort and protection that's why pampers swaddlers is the #1 choice of hospitals to wrap your baby in blanket-like softness so all they feel is love pampers swaddlers even when nothing else is. keep her receipts tidy, brand vo: snap and sort your expenses with quickbooks and find, on average, $4,340 in tax savings. quickbooks. backing you. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses.
the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any of these types of plans, they could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call unitedhealthcare insurance company today to request a free... ...[decision guide.] with these types of plans... you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan any time you want. so don't wait. call unitedhealthcare now to request your free [decision guide.] slonly remfresh useseep one in ion-powered melatoninght. to deliver up to seven hours of sleep support.
number one sleep doctor recommended remfresh. your nightly sleep companion. available in the natural sleep section at walmart. your hair is so soft! did you use head and shoulders two in one? i did mom. wanna try it? yes. it intensely moisturizes your hair and scalp and keeps you flake free. manolo? look at my soft hair. i should be in the shot now too. try head and shoulders two in one. tonight the white house is slamming a new lawsuit against the trump family foundation. the new york attorney general says the president and his three adult children broke state and federal laws for more than a decade. so let's discuss now.
cnn contributors michael d'antonio, the author of "the truth about trump." walter shaub, the former director of the office of government athletics. a perfect team to talk about this. good evening, gentlemen. so, michael, here's what the new york attorney general said. he said the trump foundation was little more than a checkbook. that's a quote, for payments from mr. trump. it says this illegal conduct has been going on for more than a decade. you've been covering trump for years. does that surprise you? >> not at all. this has been going on for many years. the board of directors for this foundation hasn't met in two decades. so what kind of operation is this that there's no staff. board of directors never meets. and a lot of its money goes to activities that benefit the founder of the foundation, donald trump. so this is not a surprise. it doesn't really seem political to me as the president alleges. it seems like a normal suit
brought against a foundation that's in trouble. >> they're saying that this is a crony of the former -- >> of course. >> eric schneiderman. >> who is not running for the office. she's not a politician. schneiderman is long gone. so that's just pixie dust that the president is throwing in the air. >> walter, let's talk more about the lawsuit because it alleges that the president used this foundation to settle legal obligations including a $100,000 payment to settle claims at his mar-a-lago resort. they even have a handwritten note apparently by trump authorizing this. what kind of legal trouble could the president be facing here? >> well, he's actually facing three different lines of attack. there's the state lawsuit, which is going to go the way litigation goes. it's going to be a bloody, knockdown, dragout fight. he's tweeting that he's not going to settle. i doubt that this new york attorney general is worried about that. she seems to think she's got a pretty strong case because that was a barn burner of a lawsuit
she's filed. she also referred this to both the irs and the fec. there's some potential trouble there because there are very strict rules on taking advantage of the tax exemption for nonprofits, and you have to file a number of government forms where you're attesting things are true subject to very severe criminal and civil penalties ier filing false statementsment then you've got the fec allegations that in some ways overlap the irs allegations because in both instances she claims that the nonprofit was coordinating with the campaign, write is not permitted under either irs law or federal election law. >> why did you call it a barn burner of a lawsuit? >> just because it makes some really strong allegations. as you said, it's got the note and i think it's packaged fairly aggressively. >> michael, i want you to remember that january 2016
fund-raiser that was for the veterans that trump held instead of attending the gop debate. remember that? this lawsuit says the foundation raised more than $2.8 million that night, but it was really a trump campaign event. and you can't do that with a charitable foundation, right? >> it quite obviously was a campaign event. even at the time that it occurred, this was opposite a debate that the president, then-candidate trump decided to skip. so he was broadcast almost in tandem with the debate. news programs were cutting back and forth. the fact that this was a foundation engaged in politics is quite evident to everybody who is observing this, especially the attorney general of the state of new york. >> excuse me. >> i feel for you, don. >> i think as walter was talking, one of the things that came to mind for me was this quote from corey lewandowski's e-mail, where he's asking can this donation, this series of
donations to $500,000 total to five different groups in iowa be made at a key moment in the campaign. so this is the campaign manager asking for these favors to be done by the foundation. i think as walter observed, this is a really difficult, sticky situation the president has found himself in. >> the new york attorney general sent letters to the irs and the fec. you want to talk to me about that, walter? >> yeah. so the irs has the authority to, for instance, revoke their status as a nonprofit, to ban the president and two of his kids -- or three of his kids, rather, from having any involvement in nonprofits for ten years. there's significant penalties under both the irs and the fec angles. the irs complaint has two components. it alleges that he just simply used this as a personal piggy bank for himself, settling
claims and buying himself a gigantic portrait to decorate one of his clubs with, and also this allegation of coordinating with a presidential campaign. the fec allegation also includes two different components. there's coordinating with the campaign and trying to influence an election. they've got some very good circumstantial evidence of both. i think the stronger complaint is the irs one and the aspect of the fec one that alleges coordinating. it's a higher standard to prove that they intended to influence the election. but, again, certainly laid out a case for it, and we'll see what the fec and the irs do. >> michael, hopefully i can get through this. here's what the president tweeted today. the sleazy new york democrats and their now disgraced and run out of town ag eric schneider man, who we talked about before, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took
in $18.8 million and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19.2 million. i won't settle this case. but he always settles, right? >> he has settled hundreds of times. the big trump university lawsuit that he settled for $25 million in california and new york indicated that this ba ravado h expresses, i'm not going to settle anything -- he told that to me. he said don't slip and fall in my lobby because if you sue me, i'm not going to settle. it's kind of preposterous, but if anyone knows sleazy, it's donald trump. just about everything he touches involves self-dealing. look at the trump hotel in washington, d.c. and the possible violation of the emoluments clause of the constitution. look at the fact that this foundation paid mar-a-lago to hold an event that was a charitable event. so it's just -- it goes on and
on and on. and if there is a sleazy way to capitalize on any institution, he's going to find a way to do it. >> i'm going to cut this a little short. i'm not dying. i'm okay. i'm just got a crazy tickle. >> you'll get better. >> thank you, all. we'll be right back. [ male announcer ] introducing worx pegasus, a next-generation, all-in-one work table and clamping system. ordinary work tables can't compete. pegasus has integrated clamps that hold materials tight at any angle. steel reinforcement makes pegasus superstrong.
i we worked with pg&eof to save energy because wenie. wanted to help the school. they would put these signs on the door to let the teacher know you didn't cut off the light. the teachers, they would call us the energy patrol. so they would be like, here they come, turn off your lights! those three young ladies were teaching the whole school about energy efficiency. we actually saved $50,000. and that's just one school, two semesters, three girls. together, we're building a better california.
tonight some republican leaders urging the white house to reconsider its policy of separating parents and children at the border. their fear, this divisive issue could hurt the gop in the upcoming midterms and the administration's hard-line tactics are not just happening at the border. jose luis garcia who emigrated from mexico and has been a permanent resident of the u.s. for nearly 50 years was detained at his california home this week for a misdemeanor from nearly 20 years ago. i'm going to bring in now his daughter and an attorney representing mr. garcia. so good to have both of you on. natalie, are you doing okay? >> i mean i'm trying to hang in there right now with all this
stress and pretty exhausted. >> so let's tell your story a little bit. it's sunday morning. your father is watering his lawn. he's sipping a cup of coffee. so take us through what happens next. >> i was awakened by him screaming out my name in distress. i could hear him pretty distressed, so i ran out, looked through my window, and saw that there was, you know, eight officers arresting him. he was in handcuffs. so i ran out to see what was going on. the first thing i asked was, you know, what's going on? and they said, we had a warrant for his arrest. so i asked for the warrant. they did not show the warrant to me because they said it was an administrative warrant, not a criminal warrant. i still asked. i'm like, i don't care what it is. i want to see it. they did not show. they refused to tell me. >> do you know why he might be being arrested? >> they actually did say it was
due to a conviction, a misdemeanor conviction he had in 2001. >> do you know where your father is now? are you able to communicate with him? >> i saw him monday. he's at the lac facility in orange. >> mm-hmm. so, mckenzie, you're the attorney here. i want to read this statement. it's from i.c.e. databases reveal mr. garcia has past criminal convictions that make him amenable to removal from the united states. mr. garcia is currently in i.c.e. custody pending removal proceedings. so he was convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor charge. it's 18 years ago. but if he completed his sentence, how is his status in this country at risk? >> good evening, don. so basically what's happening now to mr. garcia and across the country is the trump administration is enforcing these hateful policies to target individuals who have past criminal records, and they're taking them into custody even if they're not considered dangerous
to the community. and they're enforcing these hateful policies, and that's what it comes down to. >> here's what people are going to be asking here. was it domestic violence? was that indeed true that he did -- >> so, listen, what happened is there was a domestic dispute between mr. garcia and his wife over 18 years ago. that has since been resolved with the criminal courts, and now immigration is trying to enforce that conviction, that old conviction, to remove mr. garcia from the united states and take away his green card. and it's really just insanity to pluck these individuals off the streets who are in our communities, in our homes, in our jobs, and separate them from their families with no purpose. i don't understand why now mr. garcia was picked up. >> and that's the only -- that's the only thing that they're citing is that one from 18 years ago? they're not citing any other
offenses, nothing else but this one? >> that's exactly right. >> if he's made restitution, that's what i asked. then what's the problem? why would they be removing him from his home? >> right. so under immigration laws, if someone has a conviction, they could be removable or inadmissible to the united states. so now what immigration is doing and what's new to mr. garcia's case and many others is that immigration is going through their databases, finding these people even with old convictions like mr. garcia, picking them up, putting them in detention facilities where they're sitting there not for days like people think, but weeks and months before they can see a judge and ask to be released on bond to fight their case to stay in the united states. so it's really this huge scheme to pick up immigrants and try to remove them from the country. >> so, natalie, you rely on your father, i understand, to care for your daughter. you said that enabled you to
have a full-time job. what are you going to do now? >> i mean at this point i'm -- my fight is for my father right now. you know, anything i can -- i can't work. my fight is for my father. i want to focus on him and getting him out and, you know, this was so unexpected for my family that i -- i can't even explain it to my own daughter. i can't even explain it to myself. so i -- you know, my focus right now is getting my father out. and if i have to knock every door from the senator to the governor's office, i will. >> and, don, i think it's important to also note mr. garcia is a grandfather and a father. he works three jobs. he supports his family. he has a grandson in active military duty, and i.c.e. is still targeting people like him in the community. >> i want to ask you, natalie, because we've been talking about
this issue and the one that's happening on the borders. how do you feel when you see little kids separated from their parents at the border right now? >> i think it's devastating. i think it's -- i mean i'm 32 years old, and i'm devastated to have my dad being torn apart from me. i can't even imagine these little kids, how it ruins their life because it ruined my life. and i'm of age, you know. and i can't really imagine how this can affect their life, you know, beyond this. it's devastating. >> well, natalie, thank you for coming on. mackenzie as well. will you please keep us updated with this case. >> absolutely. thank you so much. and i'll be on anytime to update you. >> thank you. we appreciate your time. when we come back, did you ever think you would see a u.s. president saluting a north korean general? well, you have. what the white house is saying about it and is it a propaganda win for kim jong-un? ahh... summer is coming.
and it's time to get outside. pack in even more adventure with audible. with the largest selection of audiobooks. audible lets you follow plot twists off the beaten track. or discover magic when you hit the open road. with the free audible app, your stories go wherever you do. and for just $14.95 a month you get a credit, good for any audiobook. if you don't like it exchange it any time. no questions asked.
you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. so take audible with you this summer... on the road... on the trail... or to the beach. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. no matter where you go this summer make it better with audible. text summer5 to 500500 to start listening today.
the white house the president's decision to salute a north korean general at the summit even though he was briefed that saluting military officers from other countries is not protocol. i want to bring in a professor from columbia university law school and the author of "the attention merchants" and cnn political commentator matt lewis. hello, gentlemen. welcome to the program. tim, the video of the president saluting the north korean general is being used as a propaganda tool in north korea. here's what the press secretary said about it today. >> can you tell us why the president saluted the koreans when he was over in singapore? >> it's a common courtesy when a military official from another government salutes that you return that. >> they had to have known that it would be used as propaganda, correct? >> yeah, i agree. it's not a courtesy. it's a common courtesy for our allies. it's not a common courtesy for enemy nations. so, you know, for some reason trump has got this whole thing where he's doing a lot of
propaganda work for our enemies much he's doing russia's propaganda. he's doing north korea's propaganda. i don't know how he sees that within the mandate of the presidency. >> the image, matt, is especially jarring because no u.s. media organizations were given access to the meeting. do you think it was a mistake for the president here? >> yeah, definitely. i don't know if it was -- so like he was alleged briefed that this is not protocol. donald trump, does he pay attention to the briefing? does he realize the implications? have you ever had a homeless person try to hand you something? there's a tendency to take it. if someone tries to shake your hand, not shaking their hand back would be weird. it looks like donald trump was essentially being played here, you know, that he was set up for their propaganda purposes. he fell for it. but then again, i don't know that he even cares that much, right, because why does he care about propaganda in north korea? he doesn't care about human
rights over there. i don't think he cares about the regime being toppled or anything like that. he doesn't think that's going to happen or else he wouldn't be having this meeting anyway. so this is a guy who either is being played, who is just unprepared or just doesn't care about theimplications. >> i'm just wondering why the white house would spin it that way? remember obama is bowing to leaders of other countries? >> this fits into the category but now it's like a three-ring binder full of -- binders full of -- >> inappropriateness. of hypocrisy. >> if obama had done this, what would i be saying this right now? >> it would be binders of full of hypocrisy. you would be saying, i think he should not have done that. tim, there were also were the flattering images of trump and
kim. did kim get a propaganda boost from this as well, you think? >> absolutely. i think the whole thing ended up being this incredible propaganda gift to the north korean government. that's what i was saying. i think it's strange that trump is doing so much propaganda work for other nations right now. you know, if he wasn't working for the united states, you'd think he was working for them. you know, i think they saw it as a win, win, win. nothing to lose here. they got to be on a co-equal standing with the united states. we even paid for their hotel rooms as far as i can tell. >> this is why other administrations and other presidents chose not to do this? >> exactly. it's a big reward. you get to stand on an equal stage. the weird thing is everyone said this, but, you know, nothing actually happened. there's some possibility we'll look back in six months and be like what was that? was that just like a prime time special? nothing really happened. >> it was a great photo opp, i guess. standing there with the north korean flag and then kim jong-un and shaking hands and them -- i don't know. i mean is that good?
>> well, kim jong-un, it's great for kim jong-un, i think. he's gotten this -- i mean he's probably better known to a lot of people in the world than half the democratic field right now. he's gotten more media attention, more propaganda value. everyone is saying how great he is, you know, the peace maker. it's an extraordinary gift by the united states. >> i want to ask you about "the washington post" tonight, reporting that trump was antsy and bored. those are quotes. after arriving early and he wanted his aides to demand that the summit be moved up to monday. the secretary of state mike pompeo and sarah sanders had to talk him out of it, quoting two people familiar with the preparations for the event. here's what it says. we're here now, the president said according to the people. why can't we just do it? trump's impatience coupled with a tense staff level meeting between the two sides on sunday left some aides fearful that the entire summit might be in peril. matt, can you imagine how that would have played out on the world stage? >> yeah, it's bizarre, and i wonder if there's going to be more -- if this is an accurate
story. but it totally could be. it probably is. look, i mean i think this is a guy who in many ways is childlike. in many ways he lacks impulse control, and i think that the salute is like a microcosm of that, you know? not having the discipline to stick to a plan, to go in there and say, this is what they're going to try to do. we're not going to give them that coup. i think the fact that he wanted to move up the thing, spur of the moment, very capricious. look, you can argue that this entire thing was a p.r. coup for north korea, but i'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, okay? so maybe i probably wouldn't have decided to go and sort of elevate the dictator to co-equal with the president. but you can make an arrangemegu talking to our adversaries is always good. but trump didn't have to go out
of his way to talk about what a great guy kim was. >> matt, i kind of thought you would say that, but you could have done that and not had a photo opp. you could have met and there could have been no cameras. trump went a lot further than kim jong-un. >> i know, which makes you thing once again it was about him. you know, it was almost -- a lot of what he does is basically fundamentally about ratings. it's so weird to run a presidency that way, but, you know, season two is getting a little slow. why don't we have a meeting? it's not going to mean anything, but it's a great ratings hit and you go on to the next show, whatever that is. >> there are people out there who believe it's a win and that they denuclearize. >> i think six months from now, they're like, whatever happened to that meeting? what did that lead to? nothing. so many things lead to nothing. >> because nothing matters. >> because it's just a show. >> thank you. when we come back, there aren't enough white kids to go around. i'm quoting that. that's an exact quote from an arizona lawmaker. why he said it and how he's
defending himself, next. if you have medicare parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round.
they have businesses to run they have passions to pursue how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters ship packages all the amazing services of the post office right on your computer get a 4 week trial plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again the arizona republican party
calling on a republican state lawmaker to resign for saying immigration is an existential threat to the u.s. and for saying this. >> 60% of public schoolchildren in the state of arizona today are minorities. that complicates racial integration because there aren't enough white kids to go around. >> i want to bring in now cnn political commentator charles blow and sher michael singleton. gentlemen, good evening. welcome. what do you make of this representative saying there aren't enough white kids to go around, charles? >> this idea that the -- >> discussing interegration at schools. >> the idea that it is an existential threat that whiteness will one day be overcome is at the root of pretty much all of the racial tension we've experienced in america. right after the civil war, i think it was three or four
states in the south, a majority of people in the state were now free and were black. it created an existential threat, and they responded with the utmost amount of terror, conflict, and oppression. that is how -- because whiteness has been defined in this very fragile way, meaning anything that has any bit of something else in it is no longer white. >> mm-hmm. >> when you define it and make it fragile, it is fragile. and all of the changes in society threaten it. and when it feels threatened in america, the history of america is that when whiteness feels threatened, it responds in a vicious way. and this is part of this. so he is not necessarily an anomaly. he's an anomaly because he's saying it. >> yeah. >> there are a lot of people who are putting pressure on immigrants, putting pressure on minorities not to be able to get to the ballot because they feel that threat. >> but i hear people -- and you said he's not an anomaly.
i hear people in everyday life saying the public schools are mostly hispanic. the white kids are not here and on and on. i always wonder what's at the bottom of that? why are they saying it because we're going to become a minority/majority country fairly soon, so things are going to change. shermichael, he's responded. strun springer has responded. he says my political opponents have taken 51 seconds out of a 16-minute speech to try to distort my message and mislead voters. what do you think of that statement? >> look, i think, don, just to sort of piggyback off of some of charles' statements, i think what we're seeing here is driven by a sense of alienation and you're starting to see a change of modernity in the country as it relates to growing demographic groups. and you have a population that has for the most part enjoyed a significant amount of privilege by being the majority. so as a conservative, what i see
is, what, 35% to 40% of the country that are demanding a radical change, essentially, i.e., the result donald trump. they want to see the system. they want to see government. they want to see the way things are governed in our country, the process as a whole flipped upside down and turned over. why? because they fear if that does not occur, then whatever authority, if you will, whatever influence that they have, that they have previously maintained is at risk, is in jeopardy. i think by virtue of his comments, it's a prime example of that right at face value. >> wanting to keep the status quo and wanting to keep things the way they are, the schools, the neighborhoods and all that, is that wrong? >> go ahead, charles. >> i think it absolutely is wrong if your motivation is that you are -- you don't want the other. >> got it. >> to have the advantage. >> also today, the gop senate nominees, north dakota's kevin cramer, virginia's corey stewart, they received support
from an anti-lgbt group that links homosexuality to pedophilia and defends conversion therapy. is this a type of group the republican party wants to align itself with? shermichael. that's for you. you're a republican. >> no, no, don. it's not. i think we have to respect the intrinsic value of all human beings. we're all different, and we don't have the right, if you will, to sort of judge people. in this uncan, we do believe that people have the right, the freedom of choice to be who they want to be as long as they're paying their taxes, they're respecting the law, they're not pushing their values on other people. it's not my responsibility to influence my beliefs or push my beliefs, i should say, on someone else. and i think the republican party has to distance itself from this type of rhetoric. the country, again, is becoming more and more diverse, and you cannot continue to isolate and ostracize people who are different because what will end up happening is we'll find ourselves essentially in a box, don, unable to outreach and target anybody else. >> i have a short time left.
i want to get this statement in. this is from a spokesman for congressman kramer responded saying, let's be clear, congressman kramer doesn't support the teaching of history with any special emphasis on any particular group. history is history and should be taught. adishlgly, kevin does not think transgender people are at all comparable to pedophiles. representatives for stewart have not returned a request for comment. is this what you think the republican has now become? >> if they are this, they're in trouble because it is a kind of a caveman away to approach society. listen, we're people have been in civilization for as long as there have been civilizations, and if you look at the polling data for as far back as we can find it, there's just a clear march of social issues towards more openness, more freedom, more acceptance. you can think of it like the stock market. there are times when it goes down. it can even crash. but if you look at the long history, the arc of it is up. and the arc of acceptance on issues like this is always
towards the better. >> thank you, gentlemen. i appreciate it. >> thanks so much, don. >> that is it for us tonight. before we leave, here is a preview of a special series cnn is running all next week. >> announcer: all next week, a special cnn series. our anchors profile champions for change. >> we travel the globe telling stories of change makers. >> this time we're joining their mission to make a difference. >> giving time to the causes that are dear to our hearts. >> and sharing the stories of the champions leading the charge. >> it's for a great cause. that's motivating. >> help them in a way that lets them see this is not how your life has to be. >> this is an opportunity to pay it forward. >> to do something that is going to be meaningful. >> they are the kinds of students any community would be blessed to have. >> that you can help someone with food.
certainly there are a lot of things in this report that not only worry those of us in the administration, but should worry a lot of americans. >> president trump's allies seizing on the report about the hillary clinton e-mail investigation. james comey's actions under scrutiny. is buias in question? and president trump approves tariffs on $50 billion of goods from china. this move is likely to provoke a strong reaction from