>> neil: i don't know. i will leave it at that. you are the best. i appreciate it. all right. a wing and a prayer when it comes to traveling. "te" is next. >> i am jesse watters with kimberly guilfoyle, one william williams, dana perino, and greg gutfeld. it's 5:00 in new york city, and this is "the five" ." it's a big day at the white house. president trump marks 500 days in office by turning his compliments. the economy is booming. the north korea summit is back on and the president has rebuilt the military. but the dark cloud of the special counsel russia probe continues to hang over his head. this weekend, someone leaked a 20 page letter the psi legal team wrote back in january to mueller's lawyers. it argues that president trump
cannot possibly commit obstruction of justice and that he has a broad authority to pardon himself. this morning, trump tweeted he has the right to pardon himself but wouldn't because he's done nothing wrong. this comes after the president's lawyer rudy giuliani said in interviews the president might have the authority to pardon himself. >> do you and the presidents attorneys believe the president has the power to pardon himself. >> he's not but he probably does. he has no intention of pardoning himself but he probably does. it's an interesting constitution argument. can the president pardon himself? >> jesse: the white house also addressing the issue. >> the presidents had have an absolute right to pardon myself. why does he think that. does he agree with rudy giuliani that a pardon for himself would be unthinkable and lead to immediate impeachment? >> thankfully the president
hasn't done anything wrong and wouldn't need a pardon. >> does the president believe he is above the law? >> certainly not. the president hasn't done anything wrong. >> jesse: 500 days, greg. fair assessment, whether you agree with the policies are not. he has accomplished quite a bit. >> greg: i like to think of it as the fifth anniversary of his first 100 days. a lot of stuff has happened. i am not talking about the white house. i am talking about your life. the key is, life went on for everybody for this 500 days. if a trump critic has to admit your life either stayed the same or it got marginally to dramatically better. that's pretty much the options here. but it didn't implode. according to the predictions, by now would have had a civil war. we would have had a nuclear war. we would have had a depression, perhaps asteroids would have
hate. we have had peaceful prosperity. a people step outside their emotional bubble, they will see it's a pretty good age to be in right now. and youriggest problem you have is a president that drives you crazy because you don't like his personality. you have prosperity, low unemployment, a strong economy, no isis, perhaps north korea actually becoming part of the world. imagine if it was bad news. imagine how the media -- the media is in a constant meltdown with good news. imagine if things were actually bad. they would be -- we would have to institutionalize all of them. >> jesse: juan, are you sick of all the winning? >> juan: you are killing me. he is so popular. stunningly popular. he's not popular with the general populace, but he's very
popular with republicans. i think that's what's keeping him afloat. greg says everything is just great, so much accomplished. but i think this is our president who worries people. i think that's why people are concerned about him, and if y look at th accomplishment, his number one accomplishment i saw in the white house release was the tax cuts. of course republicans don't even think they can run on tax cuts in the fall because they haven't proven to be that popular. the second one is putting a conservative, neil gorsuch come on the supreme court. you won that one. i would give the credit to mitch mcconnell who saved that seat from merrick garland. even on their tax cut, the deficit continues to rise incredibly. no progress on infrastructure which was a key promise. i could go on. but i think if you want, it feels to me like you say 500 days. feels to me like wow, 500 years.
>> dana: and juan had a week off. >> kimberly: so exhausted from winning. >> juan: the the thing that get me is the immigration stuff. >> jesse: we will get to that. kimberly, the pardon situation. legally that might've been some gamesmanship. looks like he got set up, rudy giuliani, on the question i didn't really know what to say. how do you see the pardon thing playing out? >> kimberly: you look at the nuance there. it poses an interesting constitutional question. can that president pardon himself? then he followed up with a tweet saying he can. maybe he spoke to someone at said you're safe to go ahead and tweet that. but you don't want to get to that point, right, you don't want to suggest that would be necessary. you would say okay, i have done nothing wrong so i don't even have to get to the question of whether or not i can pardon myself. because there will be nothing on the merits to suggest any kind of criminality on my part. that's the messaging i would
stick with. that is what he believes that he knows the facts and what transpired better than anybody in terms of what has gone on and that's probably the way to stick with it. you saw the press corps was saying does the president think he's above the law? you want to switch the discussion, give them the points to talk about and drive the messaging, talk about the economy, trump's golden age of th economy in terms of job numbers and things athat. >> jesse: to bring up the p word on prompted. >> dana: you mean pardon. >> jesse: that's what i meant, obviously. a day when everyone was talking about bill clinton and the lewinsky thing. he drove that out of the news cycle and now everyone is
talking about pardons. >> dana: the white house brings this on themselves little bit. the president's tweets are driving the new cycle. when he's tweeting about it, you can bet people are going to talk about it. if you only want people to talk about the good things, tweet only about the good things. that would be helpful. i think it's interesting that you have this republican congress for two years. five months from tomorrow is the midterm. right after that immediately you start the 2020 election. i think what is so interesting is that democrats -- >> kimberly: here we go again. >> dana: democrats are so befuddled at this point. what do you do? all these good news things, if all of these good news point that happened during the obama administration, they would've touted them. could be democrats are going to hav this time to step back and said. politics is timing. regroup. fill out the ranks it was depleted. figure out a way to try to get
through them in terms of if they could flip the house, we will see. i think it's, i guess it's 50/50 at this point. republicans are looking stronger. democrats have spent 500 days not figuring out how they lost in 2016 which means they are behind in figuring that out because 2020 is going to be here before you know it. and i don't see how the roaring economy changes. i don't see how the foreign policy position changes. unless there is some catastrophic event which hopefully there is not but we are better positioned to deal with. in the meantime, parties change. they evolve. obviously that's what's happening with the republican party but the republican party has done that. that is pretty much over, and so the democrats are the ones now that are in a position of figuring out, who are we and what are going to be? >> jesse: they might have to reinvent themselves. >> greg: let's hope so. thrats have the advantage in that they are out of power.
all the time in the world to get back into power. that's what you're supposed to do. that's why, you know, carter was a reaction to nixon. everyone is a reaction toion to. somebody else. they spent the last three years in a tantrum. they have blown all of this time. i don't even think they have found anyone. >> jesse: what would be the reaction to donald trump. could you imagine the opposite of donald trump? >> greg: good point. i am saying it would be somebody incredibly left-wing. you always see the pendulum shift. they might try -- he is undoing everything obama did. the next one is going to try to undo everything trump did. >> jesse: the opposite of trump is probably a female, hispanic, very polite librarian. >> juan: no, no.
the thing is. i think you're right. the pendulum swings. but if a democrat was doing what trump is doing, let's say this weekend, put this business about that in that letter it was acknowledged that he had dictated this letter about don trump, jr.'s meeting at trump tower with this russian lawyer. we had heard from trump officials that wasn't true, repeatedly, from sarah huckabee sanders, jay sekulow, and others. now it comes out we were lied to and i think if obama did something like that, jesse, i think you would be standing on this table, brother. he would be screaming about obama. >> greg: that light isn't even close to benghazi. blame it on a movie. >> jesse: he lied about a letter, not dead ambassadors. >> juan: we have a situation where the republican party has
consolidated around trump. he has made the republican party into the trump party. that is what has changed in 500 days. >> greg: the democrat party became the obama party. >> juan: i don't think that's the case. >> jesse: as you said, they were decimated on the state and local level. >> kimberly: in terms of the accomplishments of the first 500 days, the economy. people having a difficult time going against bill clinton when the economy and the numbers were good. what's the antithesis of that? undo the economic numbers, jobs? hey, isis, they need a candidate to try to bring something forward. >> juan: i think it is the opposite. it's the polar political. that's bernie sanders. >> kimberly: they already tried that. >> greg: old white guy.
>> juan: the tax cut benefited the rich. bernie sanders would say tax cuts that benefit working-class people. education for young people. >> kimberly: you are looking at someone like a kamala harris, strong candidate. >> juan: a woman. >> kimberly: absolutely. in terms of what she's stands for and somebody who isn't the same candidate run through the rinse cycle one more time. >> jesse: juan is still feelinhe burn after 500 days. speculation about the first lady's whereabouts hits over drives. greg has that next (vo) at pro plan, we believe nutrition is full of possibilities to improve your pet's life. we are redefining what nutrition can do. because the possibility of a longer life and a better life is the greatest possibility of all. purina pro plan. nutrition that performs.
>> greg: yesterday as cnn became nosy, detestable neighbor from "bewitched." jamming up phony concern only to spread malicious gossip. check out this tweet from our nations hall monitor. "if any first lady disappeared, you would want to know where she is." to justify the odious premise, he first had to create the premise. if any first lady disappeared, and so begins a trojan horse for
a ghoulish game all to push a phony cnn segment. instead of saying is melania missing? ed their segment as how the media is covering melania's absence. so they are cing how t e covering it. i guess we should cover how they are covering how they are covering it. >> the white house has been quiet about melania trump and her status. we saw her tweet the other day. the first time we caught a glimpse of her, the last time we caught a glimpse of her was on may 10. i wonder if somebody is guiding that kind of tweet from her. it doesn't seem like her, at least the image she has had in her engagement with the press. >> if the first lady or the person standing in for the first lady disappeared, you want to know where she is. >> greg: they even had a chart. how sophisticated. the speculation fueled and less guessing games. the pleasure many found and hoping someone was wrong -- something was wrong with the first lady and cloaking it in some kind of concern.
n, "newsweek" ," the ghouls barely have any humanity left. just when you think you hit the bottom of the cesspool, more cesspool. some even suggested trump beat melania. trappen their own prison of pain since 2016, their misery only six company. jeff zucker must be spinning in his grave, if he wasn't alive and well. or is he? has anyone seen him? see what i did there? dana, this is what people do on sundays. there are people sitting around tweeting about if trump, has trump beat melania. >> dana: it's really gross. number one the media was upset about any questions about hillary clinton's health during the campaign command that that was out of fans. but she did faint. she wanted to be the president
of the united states. she is not an elected person, the first lady, she can do whatever she wan i hope she is wel it would be more bel if they really cared how she was. >> greg: i don't think they care. the thing that gets me is that camouflage, just worried about her. no, you are not. you't even like her. >> jesse: last week they were making all sorts of disgusting commentary now they are so concerned about her health. wondering where melania is an not wondering where isis is. don't you think they would spill some ink over that? trump made isis disappear. melania hasn't gone anywhere. peter strzok went missing. they haven't shoved a camera in his face, seems like the media might want answers about his whereabouts. she had kidney surgery three weeks ago. an invasive and delicate procedure. i'm sure she wants to come back on her own terms at her own time, and that's fine. trump's marriages have always
been subject to tabloid fodder. it is good ink. people profit off it. she is not the most, she doesn't speak a lot publicly. there is a vacuum there and she doesn't have a robust p.r. machine. they fill the void with these speculations and narratives that have no connection to reality. i think it shows a disrespect of the first family. last time it was ivanka, then melania. they don't respect them like they used to. >> greg: >> greg: juan, is thisr example, because this is so much good news, you have to go after the first lady because she might be recuperating or maybe she just likes to do whatever the hell she wants. >> juan: i don't follow twitter the way you do but i don't know that there's any antipathy toward her. i haven't seen that. >> greg: you haven't seen anyone making fun of her accent? >> juan: people have said that. people question her health because they didn't know much
about this. subsequently, anyone who is sick, you have to have some sympathy for them. the big question here is, she is supposed to have an event today forold star fs. they closed it to the press. at some point, when you are in power and you start to keep the press out, the press is like, what's going on? i think that's what you're getting. you want to attack the press for this? i think at the white house was transparent and said you know what, she is 48. she had surgery. she wants to have a rest. maximizing everybody in america would say god bless her. i hope she is recovering well. >> greg: you haven't looked at the tweets. they talked about her getting beaten up. >> juan: why is anybody saying that? >> greg: because they are awful people and i won't mention their names. they will not be mentioned on "the five," but you can look them up. >> kimberly: it's really disrespectful. it's a serious medical condition. she had to get the kidney
embolization, visited walter reed. perhaps she needs time to recover and get back on her feet. she has a very stressful job because she is not treated well in the press to begin with. there is an emotional, psychological strain in our physical toll on her body. she's a mother of a young son, and so she's going to spend time as well with him, quite worried about his mom. s the point, they acted like she was like a missing person. >> greg: this white house is the most desperate thing in the history of history. we know everything. >> dana: they make fun of it for being a reality show but they think this is part of the act. they are hiding melania from you so you can't see her. it has to become part of the story line or something. >> kimberly: and feign concern. when they aren't actually concerned. if they cared, they would respect privacy and let her get better instead of making a mockery of ike she is a missing persons alert on a milk carton. >> greg: coming up, bill clinton. he could have been the
first lady. creating new controversies with his comments on monica, the media, and more. next. her salon was booked for weeks, until her laptop crashed this morning. having it problems? ask a business advisor how to get on demand tech support for as little as $15 a month. get your coupon for 20% off supplies, technology and furniture at office depot office max.
who's already won three cars, two motorcycles, a boat, and an r.v. i would not want to pay that insurance bill. [ ding ] -oh, i have progressive, so i just bundled everything with my home insurance. saved me a ton of money. -love you, gary! -you don't have to buzz in. it's not a question, gary. on march 1, 1810 -- [ ding ] -frédéric chopin. -collapsing in 226 -- [ ding ] -the colossus of rhodes. -[ sighs ] louise dustmann -- [ ding ] -brahms' "lullaby," or "wiegenlied." -when will it end? [ ding ] -not today, ron.
♪ >> dana: 20 years after the scandal that led to his impeachment, bill clinton ignites a new controversy. while responding to questions about his affair with monica lewinsky, the former president makes a surprising revelation during the contentious interview on "the today show." >> did you ever apologize? >> nobody believes i got of that debt free. i left the white house $16 million in debt. but you typically have ignored gaping facts. i bet you don't even know them. i asked if you apologize. >> i apologize to everybody in
the world. >> dana: 20 years and not a day has gone by that you have not thought about the clintons. not just you. all of us. >> greg: what did het on this book tour? the questions are going to be about his breezy beach read? his writer's process? if anthony weiner came out with a cookbook, do you think the questions are going to be about the risotto? i would love to move on. everybody would love to move on but you can't move on if the clintons don't move on. if the clintons are still in the public consciousness, then we have every reason to go remember that's 20 years ago. i agree with him on one point. he got away with a lot of things, a lot of things. i don't think he got away with monica. he will be known forever for that thing, it's a scar on his life. and the lies he told after. there were other things he got away with that the media doesn't question.
>> dana: do you think this book, the book is a collaboration with james patterson. he had to do and after the show show taping after "the briefing." james patterson has sold world.llion books around the this would have been a best seller even if bill clinton didn't do any interviews but they decided to do it. you probably can't be surprised by the questions. >> juan: i'm not sure if he is surprised. i think the interviews. it's been in the news and there's so much sexual scandal. i don't see how you get away from the question. the question was quite direct. i felt james patterson looked like he was a hostage there. >> dana: i'm just the author. >> juan: clinton goes on to add, he says if this was a
democrat in the oval office right now, impeachment proceedings would already be underway. he fires back and says don't forget i did pay a price. even greg says that's the case. if it was today, he thinks that somehow trump is not paying that price. >> dana: jesse, is part of that the decision the democrats made in the 1990s for how to deal with bill clinton? >> jesse: i can't believe you have one president comparing his affair with another presidents affair or alleged affair. it's ridiculous. he is playing the victim the whole time. i've got a lot of debt with lawyers after that after that escapade. typical bill clinton. he gets defensive. the deference, he didn't receive the deference he expected. most took him by surprise. i don't think bill clinton could have survived if this had happened in 2018. the clinton war room, the way it went into overdrive against fluency on a personal level. they never would've gotten away with that. >> dana: part of that,
kimberly, don't you think one of the reasons 2018 is created is because of the story line that kicked off in 1998. 20 years later, the me too movement as part of it. i think been one long story building to this moment. the other thing i wanted to ask, kreg melvin asked bill clinton, did you apologize to monica lewinsky. he said i apologized to everyone. the issue still is a sticking point. >> kimberly: without listing them all. i want to apologize. i want to thank you for the question. he was excited about doing this book and from what everyone is saying, it should be an interesting book. besides that, he is put on the spot. you can tell he's resentful even about being asked the question, being put in that situation. he still views himself psychologically as the victim in this case. probably still standing by the
narrative he gave years ago. thinking okay, why are they coming out on me. i am being unfairly persecute it's a typical narcissistic sentiment that he is engagin in. it's not particularly charming. don't know if it sells any more books for him or poor james patterson who looked like he wanted to crawl inside the book and hide. nevertheless, if you're going to got there, they are going to ask you the question. >> juan: did you say narcissism? >> greg: i hope patterson doesn't do another book with weinstein. one of hillary had been elected president? would bill have been a problem every day? maybe not. there might not have been a me too movement if hillary had been elected because weinstein might have been protected because he was very close to hillary. that story never would've come out.
no me too. bill would have been fine. you should think trump. the >> dana: go to twitter. it's a good interview. he talks about the book and cyber terrorism. it's a political thriller. democratic lawmaker film some stuff getting turned away from a texas immigration detention center but there is a lot more to this story next.
>> my team contacted the facility and asked for permission for me to come and see what's going on inside with these children. >> we don't have any permission. i'm going to have to ask you to go away. >> kimberly: senator merkley was notified in advance he would not be allowed in. is it a publicity stunt? welcome back, juan. >> juan: thanks. i don't know if it's a publicity stunt or not. i think it's a legitimate purpose for an american senator from our legally elected representative, to say what's going on here? i want to see how these children are being treated. the big story to m is one that i find difficult even took control which as you are separating children from their mothers and fathers. it's not that these people are sneaking in. these are people seeking legitimate asylum as refugees. we have never done this as americans. you get a letter from the democrats saying it's antithetical to american values
but also to just plain basic decency and humanity. i was stunned. i thought than't be right and then i read that john kelly, chief of staff, said it's a deterrent that's going to stop people from doing this. wow. these people are seeking asylum. separating children? i think that's not good. >> kimberly: this isn't something unique to the trump administration. in terms of how people are processed and handled when people come in the country illegally. >> jesse: it has been on the book since the clinton administration. it's a zero tolerance policy if you get caught crossing the southern border. thon't do catch and release as much as they used to. juan, if you're a family and you shall put a legal port of entry for me will not be separated. these are for people who are coming across southern border in a very dangerous situation you are saying the other day you don't know if these children are being traffic.
you don't know if the father is actually the real father of the son or daughter that you think may be related. you don't know that.unthey makee determination determination, they separate you. the point the other day, you are not allowed to put miners and federal penitentiaries. you can't be mixing people of all ages and holding facilities. you put minors in a temporary shelter and then you find sponsors for them within the united states, usually with family members. and then their case can be adjudicated and usually takes years. the point is the trump administration is trying to deter and treat these children with their outermost safety and welfare in mind. >> juan: absolutely not. i don't want to dominate the conversation but to me it's offensive. i don't think you treat children that way. you can deter people. you can say we want to change the refugee policy, fine. but to take a child away from its mother. >> kimberly: the problem is
that you are assuming facts not in evidence which is that in fact this child is from this parent. we don't know that. when i was in court prosecuting cases, you couldn't get any one's true name or identity. 17 aliases. you have a difficult time trying to find out who is who. give unaccompanied minors coming over with gang affiliations. you've got to sort it out. you have an obligation for public safety to do so. you have someone coming over pretending to be a minor, getting fostered by family, turns out he was 22 years old. it's crazy. >> dana: senator feinstein is in a tough reelection fight. she wants a new law, to revise one she sponsored years ago to try to deal with it. i think it should be dealt with certainly. i feel like the senators, i understand they want answers and they represent constituents that want answers, and a proper way to do that would be to contact the department of homeland security legislative affairs team. they will respond and make them answer to you, rather than try
to exacerbate it. >> kimberly: perfect. greg. >> greg: is happening because the prison bus for babies did not work last week. they are trying to do prison for babies. last week they showed a picture a boss with baby seats and a uncalled at the prison bus for babies. it turns out it was for a field trip. this is desperation. starting to lie about 1500 kids going missing because of donald trump. no. those children arrived without their parents. their parents, okay. america is trying to do the good thing and place these kids with families and what not to keep them safe, and then they "lost track." who lost track of who? that's a good question. maybe they didn't want to be found depending on the agent whatever but they separated themselves. all lenses, what jesse is talking about, is about safety and deterrence. if you have to remove the free lunch, so that's a deterrent but
you have to make sure the kids are safe. you can't leave the kids with adults in a prison or detention facility. it boggles the mind. >> jesse: and there was one crime -- >> greg: the senator. donald trump can destroy the tender craddick party, if he presents donald daca, his own path to citizenship. you play by the rules, you are in. >> juan: the republicans wouldn't by the plan. >> kimberly: maybe they are going to line up and buy it. >> juan: they didn't buy it when he put it out. the key point here is the assumption should always be that a child belongs with his mom or her mom, their parents.
>> greg: the missing 1500. >> juan: i think you are missing the idea that something so essential and so part of family values. a >> kimberly: it has nothing to do with family value. it has to do with public safety. why are children coming over unaccompanied? where are the parents? >> juan: you think these kids ers? >> kimberly: i n that that. >> juan: let them be with their mother. a >> greg: they are in a different facility. >> kimberly: q the pictures from 2014. >> juan: in a minute, they are all going to be members of ms-13, according to you. i find is terrible. >> kimberly: supreme court sides with a colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. what it means for religious freedom, next. insurance that won't replace
the full value of your new car? you're better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with new car replacement, if your brand new car gets totaled, liberty mutual will pay the entire value plus depreciation. liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance. booking a flight doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline.
why people everywhere are upgrading their water filter to zerowater. start with water that has a lot of dissolved solids. pour it through brita's two-stage filter. dissolved solids remain? what if we filter it over and over? (sighing) oh dear. thank goodness zerowater's five-stage filter gets to all zeroes the first time. so, maybe it's time to upgrade. get more out of your water. get zerowater.
phillips, finding that the colorado civil rights commission failed to respect his right to freedom of religion. the high court stopped short of a decision on the broader issue of whether a business can outright refuse to serve gay and lesbianeople. justice anthony knedy said this denial is not based on public accommodations because under public accommodation laws, you would have to serve these folks. it is based solely on this specific baker's religious objections. >> kimberly: i think that you nailed it. if that's what it's based on. if it was public accommodation, you have to make allowances for it. this is strictly a religious freedom case in terms of applying it specifically to the facts of this case and sang some additional be infringed upon or discriminated against pursuant to their religious beliefs. in this case, the way it was laid out demonstrated that that person had a religious objection
to being able to do this. and that religion should be respected and not infringed upon. it was pretty specifically tailored in the direction, so it's not as broad as perhaps people mightially thought. >> juan: jesse, the question becomes, if jesse is sitting there and says i don't want to deal with women on the basis of my religion, jesse can say no women allowed in here. >> jesse: sounds like a terrible religion. [laughs] i would bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding. it would probably taste terrible and it woulde mad out of duncan hines. this guy can do what he wants. it's terrible business decision. more gays are getting married and there is more wedding cake money coming in. why turn it down?
it's his liberty to do, that's fine. they just kicked the cake down the road because this is such a narrow decision only just slapped on the colorado commission of civil rights. they haven't really adjudicated the whole decision about religious freedom versus gay civil rights. that will come later. >> juan: justices kagan and breyer siding with the conservatives. >> dana: justice kennedy said it's about tolerance having to go both ways. colorado civil rights commission did not do the right thing initially. what i wish the supreme court have done is gone ahead and done the full thing on rule on the issue of religious liberty that the country is hungry for them to decide on. we are so polarized wean't figure it out on our own. so the supreme court is trusted. i think now we are going to have to go through it again. other cases going to have to come up to the court and will be three years before we get a final decision.
>> juan: gran, as a libertarian. >> greg: we have a new c-word. cake. it's so complicated it is decided by the supreme court and not by us. you have to think about the baker, the state being biased against religious rites. then you have to think about respecting customers. if you are open to the public, the public comes in. but then again, my feeling is you shouldn't have to do anything you don't want to do. i don't like all people. if i had a place open to the public, i might not serve you because i don't like the color of your shirt. if i don't like plaid, you are out of here. the law shouldn't compel you to do something, so maybe you don't do it and you pay the price of losing business, as jesse would say, you become known as being kind of a jerk. >> jesse: he wouldn't make cakes that criticized god or contain alcohol. he was really strict.
>> greg: i wouldn't go to that bakery. that's a good point. i don't practice religion. so he wouldn't make me a cake? i drink. so he wouldn't make me a cake? >> juan: "one more thing" up next. we are going to change the mood around here. once there was an organism so small no one thought much of it at all. people said it just made a mess until exxonmobil scientists put it to the test.
"one more thing." summer is finally here, and what better way to kick off summer then go swimming in the pool. here is how one kid got started. oh! >> dana: jesse. why do you do this? >> kimberly: so mean. he could be totally -- >> jesse: he is fine. >> kimberly: why are you showing it so many times? >> jesse: everything is fine. >> kimberly: it is like you are weird slapping video. >> jesse: the way to not slip off the board. >> kimberly: i could see greg doing something like that in poor taste. >> jesse: i couldn't stop watching it. >> greg: no one was hurt. except for this video. roll it. rule lite. clearly disturbing tape. there is a dog excited. there is something going on. maybe the houses on fire. the cat is clearly indifferent.
maybe got tickets to a concert. the goober is outside. the cat is indifferent. >> jesse: that is like me when you are talking in the commercial break. >> kimberly: oh, my god. it is like you, greg, outside my window. >> dana: podcast is quite good. i liked it. they let me participate. tomorrow you're going to hear an interview with former federal judge kevin sharp. he did the original review of th case of matthew charles, the rs i have been talking about, who had to return to prison because of a decision by the government that i think was the wrong one. he explains that. also his decision to leave the bench and help others who are in the same position as matthew charles. it airs at 6:00 a.m.
you can download it. i will explain it. you can -- i will explain it to you. have alexei turn it on free. to >> kimberly: i have a book recommendation. i started reading "lincoln's last trial." i find this book fascinating. it is by abcs chief media analyst. the book tells the story of the lincoln's last murder trial when he argued on behalf of a man claiming self-defense and in 1859 murder trial that was highly publicized. served as a springboard for the presidency of abraham lincoln. what's interesting about it is it centers around the only transcript that's available that exists about lincoln's legal career. get it on amazon. >> juan: we are about out of time but i want to say hats off to jamie foxx who attended an
event for children of military families with specialee. his sister has down syndrome and he was there to dance with the guests and says he will do it every. >> jesse: very nice. greg igoing to take this. >> greg: fair and balanced is your dam. make way for shannon bream. >> what can i say? thank you. president trump says he absolutely has the right to pardon himself but there is no need to. the supreme court sides with a colorado baker who refused to make a custom wedding cake for a same-sex couple. bill clinton speaks on the lewinsky scandal, whether he was right to stay in office, and the me too movement. this is "special report" ." good evening. welcome to washington. i'm shannon bream in for bret baier. would begin with a hypothetical that is causing some very real concern about the president, the special counsel, and the tu