tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News May 6, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
i may have to add a picture of dane. >> there is dane. where's claire being equally as loving and doting? >> thank you for joining us. >> have a great weekend. >>chris: i am chris wallace. new legal troubles for president trump. after rudy giuliani revealed president trump reimbursed his attorney that he paid to a pornography actress. >> that money was not campaign money. >>chris: new questions about whether the president will sit down with special counsel robert mueller. >> i would love to speak. i would love to go. nothing i want to do more because we did nothing wrong. >>chris: how strong is the case against the president. we will ask former u.s. attorney, joseph digenova. a strong supporter.
and lanny davis who served as special counsel to bill clinton. >> we really doing well with north korea. i want use the rhetoric, i am trying to calm it down a little bit. >>chris: we will discuss the summit between president trump and kim jong-un and the deadline whether to stay in the around nuclear deal. with mac thornberry, chairman of the house armed services committee. - - we will ask our sunday panel about where the economy is headed. and our power player of the week. >> their commitment to get things done. >>chris: the founder of a group working to veterans elected in hopes of breaking the gridlock on capitol hill. alright now on "fox news sunday". hello again from fox news in washington. this cannot be a bigger week for president trump's foreign
policy initiatives. the white house is expected to announce where and when he pulled his summit with north korean leader kim jong-un. the president faces a deadline of saturday whether to stay in the iran nuclear deal. in washington today, the spotlight is clearly on the president legal troubles. we've now seen the four dozen questions special counsel robert mueller wants to ask mr. trump. was present agree to sit down with mueller? a federal judge has challenged the scope of the special counsel's mandate and when did the president know about that payment to stormy daniels? 20 us to discuss all of this, former u.s. attorney joseph digenova. a key trump supporter. and lanny davis that serve as special counsel to bill clinton and has a new book out. gentlemen, welcome back.let's start with rudygiuliani's
statements this week. did they help or hurt the president legal case? >> i think they are irrelevant. what matters if is if the payment was legal. i think discussion of it serves really no useful purpose in terms of the facts. as far as i am concerned, it's a nothing burger. >>chris: we will get into that payment what i want to ask you because some trump advisors fear and on his comments this week about what the president knew and when, that would giuliani has waived his attorney-client privilege and that he can be honest about his discussions with donald trump in court. are they right? >> i think they are possibly right. he's a crisis manager by his own description and he committed three cardinal violations of crisis management which i also do. number one, don't make matters worse for a client. i think by what he has said on television, is exposed president trump to possible prosecution for two crimes. secondly, i believe he's way
better attorney-client privilege to the extent he mentioned conversations with a client. third, don't underestimate your adversary. i know bob mueller and i know ken starr. to paraphrase a famous expression, bob mueller is no ken starr. is not holdingthis covetous wit the cup of coffee every morning. you will get a much gift different conduct from bob mueller. >>chris: one of the issues we touched on in the beginning is why stormy daniels was paid that hush money. was it a campaign expenditure? i think it's fair to say that rudy giuliani was on both sides of the issue this week. take a look. >> it wasn't for the campaign. it was to save their marriage, not so much there but their reputation. imagine if that came on october 15 in the middle of the last debate with hillary clinton. >>chris: given the fact this payment to stormy daniels was finalized 11 days before the election, isn't it hard to argue this wasn't a campaign expenditure? >> i don't think it is.
in fact, the law is pretty clear. if it's a purely personal matter which this has to be, it doesn't matter what relationship is to the timetable of the campaign. a lawyer cannot waive the attorney-client privilege. only the client to waive the attorney-client privilege. whatever he may have said, he didn't waive the attorney-client privilege for the president of the united states. >>chris: is he right? >> the client owns the privilege but because 40 giuliani mentioned a conversation, he can be subpoenaed and forced to testify and he's a fact witness and has to recuse himself. the only good news for president trump is by his work on television, we giuliani has to be replaced because he will be a fact witness and has to respond to a subpoena for what he said to the president on the issue of factual dispute as to what themotive was . >>chris: you think rudy giuliani will already have to be replaced?
>> i think there's an argument about speaking publicly about a conversation with president he becomes a fact witness on a crucial question. was the personal loan that president trump admits that he gave to michael cohen and was reimbursing michael cohen. a word that rudy giuliani use. that's a fact that it be questioned in front of a grand jury on the issue of whether it was a political contribution. >>chris: do you think that's possible? >> i don't think 40 giuliani will get a subpoena from anybody. if they do, it's another example of how this process is completely out of control. that's not to say that a private lawyer might not try to do that. i think it will be remarkably unsuccessful.>>chris: wants to stay on this question of whether were not the payment was a campaign expenditure to try to protect candidate trump or a personal expenditure to protect donald trump from what he says was a completely
unfounded claim by stormy daniels. prosecutors brought a similar case against john edwards in 2012 saying, money that was spent to hide one of his affairs was a campaign expenditure. his defense argued it was a personal expenditure to hide in fear from his wife. the jury didn't buy the argument and john edwards lost. if it works for john edwards, why wouldn't that work for donald trump? >> the key word is jury. there's an indictment that juries have to decide. there could be two reasons. giuliani stated one reason on fox and friends. it said imagine if it happened during the debate and it would have heard the campaign and michael cohen did his job. that's one view. another view is it was about his marriage. that's up to a jury to decide. i think my friend joe would say there's enough probable cause for there to be an indictment. >> i don't know who would be
indicted but it wouldn't be the president. the bottom line is, when there's a history of crisis management inside of a business like there was in the trump enterprise. there was all sorts of crisis management going on. settlements all the time involving businesses, financial transactions and personal relationships. those predate any campaign. the allegations here are from 2006. the notion that this is somehow related to the campaign requires an unbelievable stretch of prosecutable authority. >>chris: let's get to the central case which is the special counsel's investigation of donald trump. in terms of collusion, in terms of possible obstruction of justice. this week, a federal judge in alexandria, virginia raised questions about whether the special counsel's case specifically against paul manafort, outside the special counsel's mandate. federal judge - - told
prosecutors, you don't really care about mr. manafort's bank fraud. what you really care about is what information mr. manafort could give you that would reflect on mr. trump only to his prosecution or impeachment. is it legitimate for the special counsel to go after manafort indicates that supposed to be about the election and actions after the election for what manafort allegedly did back in 2005? >> i don't know but i have my doubts. i think paul manafort's attorneys have a point that there is a limit towin the what independent counsel - - i don't know whether that line has been crossed. i think there's a question to be raised about what bank fraud has to do with russian collusion and that needs to be addressed by the court. >>chris: how damaging for the questions. we should make it clear that judge ellis did not rule on the case and did not say he's going
to throw out the manafort indictment.how damaging was it to special counsel mueller? >> judge ellis did something very important. he started a national civics lesson about what the constitution is about what the powers of the special counsel are. judge ellis may very well not dismiss the case but he can also exclude fromevidence anyth seized and in that outrageous raid of paul manafort house at 3:00 and one. taking mr. manafort and his wife out of bed in her nightclothes. handcuffing mrs. manafort. outrageous conduct in a case that is absolutely of no significance. bob mueller should be ashamed of himself to allow that to happen on his watch. the answer is the judge probably won't dismiss the case but he may very well exclude the evidence from that raid. >>chris: wants to get to the
central issue which is, whether or not the president is going to after all of the back-and-forth, and up sitting for an interview with the special counsel. here's what president trump said this week about that. >> i would love to speak. i would love to go. nothing i want to do more because we did nothing wrong. if i thought it was fair, i would override my lawyers. >>chris: after all of the negotiations are done, should the president sit for an interview with the special counsel team and if he refuses, can mueller subpoena the president? >> the president will not sit down for an interview because this investigation has now reached the level of that face. this is no longer a good faith investigation. the tactics, that mueller has used against michael cohen, against manafort, demonstrate a lack of good faith. >>chris: let's get to the second issue - - >> the president cannot be indicted. the answer is he cannot be
subpoenaed.under article 2, on the executive power vested in the president of the united states. mr. mueller cannot subpoena the president because the only way apresident to be held accountable whether it's allegedly criminal or not is through impeachment . nothing else. >>chris: i want to bring lanny davis and because there's never been a case exactly like this. doing a quick history lesson this week, over the course of our history, thomas jefferson, richard nixon and your client, bill clinton have all been forced to submit to court orders. can president trump be subpoenaed to testify? >> first of all, mr. joseph digenova. who i've known for a great deal of years and have tremendous respect for. we don't know what the supreme court will do and it will ultimately be a supreme court question. presidentclinton decided to accept voluntary voluntarily
and nixon did dismiss but it was about documents and not testimony. in my opinion, president trump as the president, as a political elected official represented all of the american people, should not resist a subpoena but said voluntarily do exactly what president clinton did. >>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 too president trump and his political support on this issue? >> it's not damaging at all because in fact, the people realize this part of the investigation is why the whole thing is off-track. under article 2, this relates to what lanny davis was saying earlier. the reason mueller wants to talk to the president is not to investigate a crime, it's to send a report to the deputy attorney general for impeachment. the use of the grand jury subpoena to get testimony from a president about the official
act of firing the fbi director is unconstitutional, illegal and the president should fight it all the way to the supreme court. >>chris: the president clearly misled the american people. >> know he didn't. >>chris: he was asked, did you know anything about the payment and he said no. he did. >> we do not know the full context of when the president learned everything about this. first of all, that's on an airplane in the middle of an important trip. >>chris: there's an airplane exception? >> no, but there's an exception for goofy questions reporters ask at certain times. >>chris: lanny davis, you are not off the hook because the president you worked for light to the american people. >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. ms. lewinsky . >>chris: you love seeing that again. president clinton was able to
survive it. so will donald trump? >> we didn't have a lawyer contradicting a president basically calling him a liar. giuliani contradicted that statement. and said that's what the president told him. >>chris: the facts contradicted bill clinton and the dress. >> we have a situation where the lawyer contradicts the president and the president says he doesn't know what he's talking about. this is unusual and mr. joseph digenova may be right but the supreme court will uphold nixon versus the united states as it applies to testimony. mr. trump will have to defy a grand jury subpoena which is what we call a constitutional crisis. >> he wants the fire, he will take it to the supreme court. >> if he loses, he will say as andrew jackson once said, they issued the decision. let them enforce the. >>chris: thank you both.
this is not only entertaining, i learned some stuff so let's have you back. and we will continue to follow the twists and turns of this remarkable story. up next, we will bring in our sunday group to discuss the fallout of giuliani's media blitz and what the strategy is now. ♪ come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away. ♪ i'm very proud of the fact that i served. i was a c130 mechanic in the corps, so i'm not happy unless my hands are dirty. between running a business and four kids, we're busy. auto insurance, homeowner's insurance, life insurance policies. knowing that usaa will always have my back... that's just one less thing you have to worry about. i couldn't imagine going anywhere else. they're like a friend of the family. we are the cochran family, and we'll be usaa members for life. save by bundling usaa home and auto insurance. get a quote today.
this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪
(vo)is ahhhmazing!ful simple goodness meaty morsels. a tender texture. with real meat and a blend of peas and carrots i can see. a totally new kind of awesome going on here! (avo) new beneful simple goodness. tender, meaty morsels with real ingredients you can see. >> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace.
oh hi sweetie, i just want to show you something. xfinity mobile: find my phone. [ phone rings ] look at you. this tech stuff is easy. [ whirring sound ] you want a cookie? it's a drone! i know. find your phone easily with the xfinity voice remote. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around. >> rudy knows it's a witchhunt that he started yesterday. he will get his facts straight, he's a good guy. >>chris: president trump tried to walk back some of the comments made by his lawyer rudy giuliani about payments made to stormy daniels.
guy benson and host of benson and - - which debuts tomorrow on fox news radio. i'll be listening. columnist for the hill, juan williams. and foxnews correspondent, gillian turner. there's reporting about how president trump feels about rudy giuliani after his media blitz. what are your sources telling you about giuliani's standing with his boss? >> it's a bit of a black box inside the west wing. the one certain fact is whatever president trump and rudy giuliani have conducted, it's been entirely without any coordination with anyone in the white house. they've been watching like us, like spectators. i wonder what people say now? that's including the white house press secretary sarah sanders.they have no earthly idea.
a lot of people in the west wing were comparing it to the days of anthony scaramucci. where again, it was these wild ride watching statements made on tv and not knowing if there was a grand strategy behind it or not. there were a lot of people who were relieved when they saw president trump come out and review rudy giuliani and suggest he had to pull him back. there were people in the west wing that found a source of relief. >>chris: are you hearing anything about whether the president at the end of the week is pleased or displeased with giuliani and what are you hearing about this question, did he help or hurt the president's case this week? >> on the latter point, i have to say you heard. when your job is to come in and get your arms around the problem and put out a news story with new information to the american people. within 24-48 hours, you were doing damage control of your own damage control, that is not
good. putting out a memo to say this is what i meant to say. now he's back on television this morning and last night. i don't think you can give him in an a+. ii'm not sure how the president feels based on his public comment. my suspicion is he is happy to have someone in his corner is a fighter pushing back against the mueller team then some of his other lawyers have been willing to do in the recent past. but because of his smirking comment about getting the faxed straight. he probably understands that rudy overstepped, hence the clarification memo. >>chris: wants to pick up on the new strategy. it seemed clear to me this week that the president along with giuliani has decided on a new strategy which is to go after special counsel robert mueller more aggressively and make this more of a political issue. watch president trump. >> this country is right now running so smooth and to be
bringing up that kind of crap and to bring up witchhunt on what time that that's all you want to talk about. we are all fighting battles but i love fighting these battles. [applause] >>chris: jillian, clearly hiring rudy giuliani can be a pitbull and basically letting him off the leash is a dramatic change of strategy for this president. >> it is. i agree with you. he was going in one direction for several months. as much as he may have disagreed with mueller and the premise of the investigation, he was going to let it play out. now with the hiring of giuliani, he sent a signal and doubling down on the witchhunt theme. indicates, he is going to go political on the investigation. a cautionary note they are, in the hiring of emmett flood. he is one of the folks that came in at the end of the george w. bush administration to clean up the mess with the
congress in the wake of the iraq war. he joined the president's staff on the white house counsel back then to help deal with the overwhelming number of subpoenas that were crushing the administration in its waning days. he's more of a professional visor.maybe sending mixed signals this week. >>chris: the president seems to have decided, the reason for this change is that mueller is coming after him. and whether it ends up in court or it ends up in congress with an impeachment proceeding, that he needs to discredit whatever mueller finds and to rally his political base. do you agree with that? >> absolutely. that's why you see the president talking about witchhunt.what you see rudy giuliani saying this is a garbage investigation.i think the hiring of emmett flood with someone that helps president clinton with his impeachment issues suggest he's looking for
that skill set. the skill set is now i am not about cooperating. what i am seeing is the possibly of subpoena. the possibility of this going to the supreme court or if the democrats are to win congress and the midterms, the democrats might try to impeachment so here comes emmett flood. i think the absence of people like ty cobb, john dowd, maybe we can measure in those times. those were people who thought if you cooperate, you could limit the investigation.get it to end more quickly. that's why they were making promises to the president but never came through. >> i think this is just going to play out exactly as it would have. ty cobb and john dowd didn't want president to sit down with robert mueller. neither does emmett flood and nobody in their right mind does. they have a very competent lawyer behind the scenes and a bunch of people like rudy giuliani were very good at muddying the waters and performing political attacks on an investigation. so you have a dual track strategy. discredit the investigation, make it partisan in the same
way the democrats it with the bill clinton situation. and we will have the same thing again here. and their bet is that bob mueller will not issue a subpoena. that he won't have the guts because it will be a long drawn out legal process. even if he does, they will but their forces. >> he might not have cause to issue subpoenas. it's not about guts. >> why wouldn't he have the cause? there are a lot of questions. just take on obstruction of justice. what was in your mind when you did x? >> we are all talking about them as if they were mueller's questions. they were written by trump's legal team after a conversation with someone in mueller's office. it's an extrapolation of what the team might want to ask the president. >>chris: do you agree with
jonathan that in the end, donald trump will refuse to sit down? >> i do and i think the president saying i want to sit down, that's his way of signaling rhetorically to the american people. i am not afraid of mueller because i'vedone nothing wrong . >>chris: but mueller is unfair, it's a witchhunt. >> i think the president genuinely does want to sit down. i think he believes so fervently in his personal skills and his ability to sway people. he's doing it with kim jong-un at the moment. >>chris: you don't think that mueller will have the guts to subpoena him but if mueller does decide to subpoena him, that's high risk for mueller. it's also risk for the president. if the supreme court goes and decides, you know what, you are liable. you are open to this subpoena. does he refuse? >> that was my point to you.
even as a political issue, he wants to be able to say i did nothing wrong. i'm glad to talk about he defied john dowd on this point which i is why i think he was difficult with ty cobb. trump believes in himself. that if he sits down, his backers will believe him. >> - - shoot him with the tranquilizer dart. >>chris: we have to take a break.panel, see you later. up next, we turn to big news on the president's foreign policy. we will sit down with the chair of the house armed services, mac thornberry, to discuss the upcoming trump-kim jong-un summit and whether iran will pull out of the nuclear deal. crunch inside a flavorful crunch.
historic meeting between president trump and north korea's kim jong-un, president trump self-imposed deadline to decide whether to stay in the iran nuclear deal is also fast approaching. joining me in washington, the chair of the house armed services committee, mac thornberry. welcome to "fox news sunday". >> thanks for having me. >>chris: here was president trump talking very positively about what seems like an certain summit with kim
jong-un. >> were having a sensitive talk with north korea and something has a buddy happened with the hostages. it is being scheduled. we have a date and a location we will be announcing. >>chris: you have expressed serious reservations about the possibility of this summit. how concerned are you that the north koreans may be trying to play donald trump the way they have played previous they met presidents? >> i think the history of these negotiations through several administrations shows that they try to manipulate world opinion for their benefit. it may also be they have conducted enough nuclear tests, enough missile tests that they are pretty confident with their capabilities. but at the same time, because
of sanctions, because of chinese pressure, because of the president'sunconventional rhetoric, they may feel a need to have a pr offensive . i have no doubt their hope is to divide us from our allies in south korea. to ease some of the sanctions. to ease the pressure coming from china. so that they are not so isolated in the world. so there's a military aspect and then there's a world opinion aspect of what's going on here.>>chris: so when there's talk about complete denuclearization and according to the trump camp, we had john bolton on last sunday. that would mean shipping all of the nuclear bombs out. all of the fuel, all of the missiles. you don't think they're going to do that. >> i am very skeptical. but it also means is inspections to make sure they don't restart the program. i think you can hope for the best. but we have to prepare for the
worst. and that means, beefing up our ability to defend against nuclear attacks. increasing our defense for ships and other military capabilities in that region. so we have to go into this clear eyed, but also understand this other battlefield of world public opinion. which is one of the things the president has his eye on. >>chris: the new york times reports the present has asked the pentagon for options on eliminating but reducing the 28,000 troops that are in south korea. while the u.s. denies that as part of any negotiation as part of a summit, if you were to get a peace deal between the two careers, wouldn't a reduction in troops naturally follow? >> at the end of the day, maybe. and the president may be dangling a carrot out there to entice the north koreans.
i think the wisest thing i've ever heard on this topic came from former senator bill graham where he said if the lion and the lamb are to lie down together, we have to make sure that america is the lion. maybe everything, history is wrong. maybe everything will come together. they will voluntarily, permanently, verifiably give up their whole nuclear program point i am a skeptic. if that happens, we can talk about troop reductions but in the meantime, we have to be militarily strong. >>chris: i want to switch to another hot topic. the present has a deadline next saturday as to whether or not to reimpose economic sanctions on iran and pull out of the nuclear deal. israeli prime minister netanyahu and jim mattis had different takes this week on the merits of the deal. >> the iran deal, the nuclear
deal, is based on lies. it's based on iranian lies and it ran in deception. >> it is written almost with an assumption that iran would try to cheat. so the veryverification, it's actually pretty robust. >>chris: should president trump pull out of the iran nuclear deal next saturday, by next saturday, even if the europeans decide to stay in and continue to do business with tehran? >> i would counsel against it. i was opposed to the iran deal. i thought it was a bad deal. iran got most of the benefit of with relief of sanctions and a planeload of cash that president obama sent over there. so we lost a lot of our leverage. but the key question is okay, now we are where we are, what happens next is the u.s. pulls out?
secretary mattis talked about the inspectors. does iran kick those inspectors out so we lose what visibility we have there. the europeans won't reimpose sanctions so where does that leave us and if ron? i'm not necessarily opposed to sticking with this deal forever. what you need to have a clear idea about next steps. if we are going to pull out. and especially given the larger context of iran's aggressive activity in the middle east. >>chris: let's pick up on that because the french and the germans and the british are all basically pleading with the president, stay in the iran deal and we will add toughening side agreements that we will agree on unilaterally without going to the iranians. these side agreements would be to limit the missile program, sanction regional aggression and end the 2025 clause when
enron can resume some of its program. i guess the question is, is the iran deal fixable and if so, should the president stay in it if he can get these add-ons with his european allies? >> i think these add-ons would be very important is it possible, it's hard to say until you try. maybe the best thing is for the president to delay a bit more his deadline of this month and put the french and the british up to the test about whether it's possible to get this other agreement. i think one of the key things going on here and prime minister netanyahu is exactly right, the iranians always cheat and lie. one of the things they are doing is they are shipping in arms to hezbollah right on israel's doorstep. the temperature is being turned up there. the possibility of conflict is probably greater than it's been in quite some time. it will be very important for
the international community to be united to prevent that conflict. which is another reason staying with our allies and trying to curtail all these aggressive actions from iran is important right now. >>chris: i want to get into one last issue with you. a delegation of top u.s. officials has just returned from trade talks in beijing and the chinese at the end of the talks", big differences remain. how concerned are you about a possible trade war with china? >> a lot of countries are concerned about chinese trade practices and working with them i think we have the best chance of pushing back against a lot of what china is doing. one example in the defense world is china is stealing and obtaining all sorts of ways, critical intellectual property that they are going to use for their defense purposes. we have to close the door on that. what i worry about is the steel and aluminum tariffs have alienated some of our friends
that we need to work with to push back against the chinese trade tactics. again, to be more effective, we've got to have allies. and we need to not alienate allies to push back on china. >>chris: so briefly, i want to pick up on that because the president is talking about imposing tariffs. not just on china but other countries including the european union. how concerned are you about the fact the president has apparently decided to use tariffs in general as part of his trade policy? >> i believe we are better off with free and fair trade. i also have seen firsthand what china is doing around the world. i was in east africa not long ago as they are extending their tentacles out to all sorts of places. we have to have a group of allies working together to push back against what china is doing. so that comes from having folks
on the same page. not alienating our friends. i hope the president follows through and his statement that he would like to consider getting back into the transpacific partnership. because those sorts of trade agreements are the most effective way we can push back. >>chris: chairman mac thornberry, thank you. always good to talk with you. up next, more on the president moves this coming week on north korea and iran. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the summit between president trump and kim jong-un? just go to facebook or twitter, @foxnewssunday. we may use your question on the air. great question. that's tough to do. schwab does it. next question. do you offer a satisfaction guarantee? a what now? a satisfaction guarantee. like schwab does. what are you teaching these kids? ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service
and low costs, backed by a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. and low costs, backed by a satisfaction guarantee. this is the story of green mountain coffee roasters dark magic told in the time it takes to brew your cup. first, we head to vermont. and go to our coffee shop. and meet dave. hey. why is dark magic so spell-bindingly good, he asks? let me show you. let's go. so we climb. hike. see a bear. woah. reach the top. dave says dark magic is 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 packed with goodness. >> there is something i like
about it because you are there. you are actually there. where if things work out, there's a great celebration to be had on the site. not in a third-party country >>chris: president trump suggesting the dmz between north and south korea would be a good spot for his landmark summit with kim jong-un and we are back with the panel. gentlemen, what's the latest about where and when the summit will be held and for all of the presidents talk about if kim jong-un isn't serious, i will walk right out of that summit. do get the sense he's getting swept up in the excitement and hype over the fact the summit is taking place? >> thefirst thing i should say we do not know the location and exact day. what i've been told about sources is it will have happen after moon jae-in visits. likely late may or early june. it looks like they are signaling it could be on the demilitarized zone between the two careers.the momentum is
with it, trump wants to do it. even though john bolton never thought meeting and talking is a good idea. trump wants to do it so that's driving the momentum. >>chris: do you think he's getting swept up in this? >> i'm told the idea of a. [indiscernible]a no go prize ha occurred to him. >>chris: we asked you for questions and on reports the president is at least considering the idea at some point of drawing down the number of u.s. troops in south korea, we got this on this tweet who writes, are we preparing to pull troops and weapons out of south korea? how do you answer? >> i answer the question by saying, it's not news.
it's not news that the pentagon, state department policy planning office would have contingency plans for any eventuality where if some kind of peace deal is struck between the north and south, we draw down our troop presence from the border region. that is not news. i think what happened this week is that john bolton didn't like the fact this was leaked prior and being made a - - making a deal of this in the media. it's timing. is this administration putting this on the table in advance of the meeting with kim jong-un. the answer is straight up no. no reporter would tell you this is something the president is considering offering this to kim jong-un in advance. >>chris: could that be part of the negotiation?>> it's part of a contingency deal if a deal is struck. it's not something he will bring up. it violates - - [indiscernible]
>>chris: very good economic news.the unemployment rate for april fell to 3.9 percent. the first time it has fallen below fourpercent since late in the year, 2000. president trump not surprisingly was celebrating it . >> i thought the jobs report was very good. that hasn't been done in a long time. you will tell me how long. we are full employment. >>chris: republicans are counting on a strong economy and jobs numbers like this to help them keep control of congress in november. >> absolutely, they would hope. you don't hear president trump reiterating this point. one of reagan and maybe you too chris, - - trump is attempting
i think to push hot buttons like trade and immigration instead of staying on the message about the value of economic progress and the value of his tax cuts. i must say, marco rubio didn't help when he said the tax cuts really haven't done much for the american people in america. has not bumped up wages, haven't stirred the economy the way we had hoped. but the polls backup marco rubio on this. what we saw is when the tax cuts and the economy were used by the republican candidates, it didn't move the needle. the democrat won the race. when you ask the american people, even republicans concerned about the deficit. it's only half of republicans that say this was a great thing. 36 percent say it's a bad thing. i think he may be right in saying the midterms are going to be a referendum on donald trump. donald trump will start his
base by pushing these hot button issues in addition to occasionally coming back on message and talking about the tax cut and the good of the economy. >>chris: the strong economic numbers, can they be used to mobilize voters and persuade voters? i guess the question i have, why on earth does president trump talk about anything else except the tax cut and these good numbers? 3.9 percent. that's an astonishingly low number. >> that's a great number. the gdp came in beating expectations. part of me thinks it might be a great idea for the president to spend most of his time at mar-a-lago. do some golfing. watch fox. tweet a little bit. come out once a month with a giant billboard of economic numbers and say look at these terrific numbers and then go back inside. the economy is booming under president trump and his policies. the counterpoint that goes back to the other subject which is north korea.
if not for all of the tweeting and things that were seen as crazy that he shouldn't have been doing. i'm not sure kim jong-un is paying attention to president trump or fearing him and we may not be in this position with north korea. i would still recommend president talk about tax reform, these economic numbers because even as we all talk about stormy daniels and robert mueller and all of those things.the president's numbers have been ticking up slowly but surely because most americans are looking at their bottom lines and smiling. >>chris: and how much frustration among republican candidates that the president doesn't stick to these numbers. >> a good amount of frustration but at this point it surprises zero people. this is how he is and how he operates.
to think there's going to be some disciplined messenger, if that is still your hope for president trump, you've been in a coma. >>chris: do you agree with that? >> i agree with what he said. trump doesn't stay on message but that's not his style or the way he operates. >>chris: ivthank you panel. up next, our power player of the week. how one group is trying to fix washington by sending more of our nation's veterans here. from capital one . technology this helpful... could make history. what's in your wallet? >> partisanship in congress may
be added all-time high while the presence of military veterans is at an all-time low. one man thinks that is no coincidence and he is our power player of the week >> we want to change the paradigm which is a record high level of polarization in congress. we think the way to do that is through veterans. >>chris: rye barcott is the founder of with honor.
- - why veterans? >> when i served in the marine corps, i had no idea what the political party was of the person serving to my right or left. we had a common mission and the focus was on the mission and doing it well. i knew i would never stop searching for a way to serve my country and make an impact and do what's right for texans and the american people. >>chris: ben crenshaw is one of the republicans that with honor is backing. he spent two tours in iraq and afghanistan where he was almost blinded by an ied. >> whether you have a democrat or republican veteran, at least we both know that the first thing we did was serve our country selflessly. >>chris: - - hopes to support 35 candidates running for congress, split evenly between
the two parties.younger vets were enlisted after 9/11 and are willing to take what's called, the pledge. >> - - meetingwith someone once a month from the other party . >> this doesn't sound so remarkable. >> it sounds absurd that that is necessary. but when you talk to members, they say it's necessary.>> i'm a mother, veteran, and i'm running for congress in district 31. >>chris: - - served as a helicopter pilot including three tours in afghanistan. she is a democrat. >> instead of seeing me as an m&a that's why i'm going there. >>chris: back in the 60s, veterans made up more than three quarters of congress. now it's less than 20 percent. rye barcott hopes to raise $30 million in this cycle. they have about $10 million so far. to support candidates they screen for character, more than policies. >> we interview veterans that served with them. how did they act?
how do they act when they were under fire? >> serving in uniform was one of the greatest honors of my life. >>chris: tim kaine was an air force and intelligence officer. he's in a republican runoff in ohio on tuesday. >> democrat-republican is what too many people see first. i want to see american first. >>chris: by 2020, he wants to back 100 candidates running from the house as well as in state and local races. >> you you want to join the marine corps when something is happening around the world. your initial reaction is let's run toward that. we support candidates regardless of their specific policy items but their commitment to get things done but the country's interest
first. >>chris: with honor as a distinguished group of advisers including robert gates and secretary of state, george schultz. that's it for today. have a great week. and we will see you next "fox news sunday". ♪ ♪ ♪ paul: welcome to the journal editorial report i'm paul gigot. big changes this week to the trump legal team and legal strategies as the president faces possible sit-down with special counsel mueller, white house lawyer ty cobb replaced by emmet flood, this as attorney giuliani revealed president made reimbursement for money paid to adult film star stormy daniels and leak of potential questions that special counsel robert mueller might ask mr. trump in an interview, something the