We are live in singapore with the details including who may end up picking up kim jonguns hotel tab. We have john brennan joining me onset live to talk about it. And former president bill clinton, his take on the me too movement. 20 years after his own sex scandal involving monica lieu wince sky. Do you feel like you owe her an apology . I do not ive never talked to her. We have more of that interview coming up. You do not want to miss it. Were going to start with the current president and the new claims from his legal team. Rudy giuliani now saying publicly what a lot of folks have success inspected for a while, that if push comes to shove, the president s team is locked and loaded, ready toing for a broad definition of sec e executive power, so broad that giuliani now suggests the president might be above the law. Part of a memo first reported in the New York Times. The problem with the argument here might be giuliani. Had is not one of his more consistent legal views. Watch. What happens if Robert Mueller subpoenas the president . Will you comply . Well, we dont have to. Hes the president of the United States. As far as the criminal law is concerned, the president s a citizen. Theres nothing that limits the president ial power from a criminal its clear the president cant be subpoen sunaed to a criminal proceeding about him. All the watergate litigation resofltd the fact that the president is not above the law, is not able to avoid subpoenas. Nbcs Geoff Bennett is over at the white house. What way way to mark 500 days. I hope your phone battery is charged because the president certainly tweeting plenty today. Thats right. And, look, President Trump for the first time is now asserting his right to pardon himself while insisting that hes done nothing wrong to warrant one. So heres the tweet he sent in just the last hour. The president says this. As has been staby numerous legal scal lars i haholars to p. I have done nothing wrong. In the meantime, the never ending witch hunt continues into the midterms. The president is tro dietion new argument among the many that he and his allies have made to discredit the mueller probe. The president says this. Appointment of the special koun is totally unconstitutional despite that the with we play the because i unlike the democrats have done nothing wrong and that misspelling of counsel is his, not ours. We should say the office of special counsel is established under Justice Department regulations. This whole thing stems from the New York Times obtaining and publishing that 20page lem mow from the Trump Legal Team in which they argue that the president enjoys broad constitutional authorityit relates to the russia probe, including the power, if he so chooses, to end the investigation or pardon himself. But Rudy Giuliani, as you saw there, on the sunday show says the president is unlikely to elect do either of those things because do both would lead to impeachment. Now i asked kellyanne conway, the president s senior counselor about that if the president buys giulianis argument. Take a look at what she told me. Why is the president tweeting about pardoning himself . Whythe president thi ve the law kaelly ann . Excuse me. Why does the president think hes above the law. Why would he need to pardon himself when hes done nothing wrong . You engage in these hypothetical exercises constantly. I presume its easier speak of that, what did the letter say from kim jongun, kelly . I cant say is that that. S watt preside was the plerd with the mes age. Why did he tweet about it. He tweeted abo because youre talking about a hypothetical exercise which is what do you. I think we happen do it fairly well but thats where we begin the morning, hallie. Okay. Geoff bennett where are youre having a day. Thank you, sir. We want to play a little bit what Rudy Giuliani had to say over the weekend about something else. Listen to this. Do you believe the president could also pardon himself . Well, its not going to happen so its a hypothetical point. I think the president ial power theres nothing that limits the president ial power of pardon from a federal crime, not a state crime. President trump is not going to do that. Hes obviously not going to give up any of his pardon powers. The president of the United States pardoning himself would just be unthinkable. And it would it would lead to probably an immediate impeachment. All right, gang r lets get into it. In seattle is david kris. Onset we have White House Correspondent from Bloomberg News sharon petty piece, along with National Political reporter. That i out here, david. Account president pardon himself or not legally . Its an open kwquestion becae no president in history has been brazen enough to try it. On the one hand the pardon power is broad, on the other hand its easy to imagine the court saying know to this, the framers of our constitution did not have in mind the idea of a selfpardon anymore than selfjudging in a criminal case. One thing that is clear from the constitution, the president cannot pardon himself or anyone else in the case of impeachment rather than ordinary criminal prosecution. Do you believe that if this were to happen, you dawel a brazen move, this president has been known for brazen moved in the past, would this end up in the Supreme Court . Is that inevitable if this were to occur . It might end up in the Supreme Court after enough time had passed if traditional Legal Proceedings were to ensue. But i think its more likely as Rudy Giuliani himself said there would be a stark enough political reaction, giuliani actually mentions impeachment, that that would probably be the most rapidly. Not to get into the legal weeds here but lets do it for a second. Im not a lawyer so please lehmans terms. But you have this Legal Counsel memo that says under the jue in h own case, the may be a president cannot pardon him receive. Rudy giuliani appears to be looking more broadly at pardon powers. How firm is Rudy Giulianis legal footing here . Rudy giuliani is not known these days anyway for his firm legal footing. I id, i have severe doubts about whether somebody could pardon themselves. In some ways pardon is inherently a bilateral word. You pardon somebody else. And so i do think its quite possible that even though the pardon powers quite broad, a court could say, no, this is too much of a conflict of interest, its not what the framers of our constitution had in m i think its important for everyone to remember, Rudy Giuliani is now acting as the president s attorney. He is not acting as some sort of legal scholar. Is he the president s attorney. He is the president s attorney so hes going to defend his client and say whatever needs to be said to defend his client and keep his client out of legal jeopardy. If he says my client cant be subpoenaed, well fight a subpoena, hes going to make that argument. Hes not the legal scholar we should be listening to at this moment. Doesnt it go t the 90 reporters were trying to ask conway, if the pre nothing wrong, if he didnt obstruct justice, if he didnt do anything illegal, what does he need to talk about pardons for and potential indictments . Rudy giuliani gets asked about it, but the president of the United States tweets about it on his own. It invites the continued questions. The other thing, i dont know how you read this, but i think Rudy Giuliani is making the argument to prerump about why he should not pardon himself. When hes on Television Talk about how impeachment could ensue, i dont think thats because necessarily Rudy Giuliani needs to tell us that. I think hes making the argument to the president who might want to just pardon himself and get rid of all of this. M not entirely sure impeachment would ensue. I think that question is entirely dependent upon whether the president s base abandons house republicans. A lot of this discussion started when the New York Times broke the story about the memo they obtained. One of the people who was on the by line of that report was washington correspondent Charlie Savage who is joining me now. Charlie, take us behind the scentle bit. Your team gets their hands on this memo. Whats the first thing do you in reporting it out . Reporter after we confirm its real, we dct it. Were trying toerstand what it is. Its making these sweeping arguments from top to bottom, not only did trump not violate the obstruction laws as a matter of these technical parsing of the statute or their arguments about the facts, but it also is backing all that up with this sweeping view that the president yields wields exclusive authority over the Justice Department from top to bot to, n he order any case opened, any case shut downed. He can pardon anybody and shut down any case and that means cant obstruct himself as a matter of constitutional power. Its a breathtaking view, its clearly what theyre throwing at the mueller team to say you better not subpoena this president or go much further because youre going face a teng amount of fupushback from the constitution to politics. And heres what were seeing is the president and Rudy Giuliani publicly make the points that he that memo made despite it was made months ago. Theres also something thats ht folkss attention that they dictate tated that infamous statement about the june 2016 tower meeting between donald trump jooun juror and a rush lawyer even after months of denials that that actually happened from the president s lawyers and his aids. Heres a little bit of a look at that. The president did not draft the response. The response was came from donald trump jr. And im suren consultationith his lawyer. The president didnt sign off on anything. He was coming back from the g20. The statement that was released on saturday was released by donald trump jr. And im sure in consultation with his lawyers. Thent wasnved in that. He certainly didnt dictate but, you know, like i said, he weighed in, offered suggestion like any father would do. So charlie, those were lies, right . Well, if theye lies, if Sara Huckabee sanders and jay sekulow knew that wasnt true when they said that. We dont know whether they were led by the president in his inner circle too. We do know that since jay signed this letter to mueller in january, at the very least he has known since january what he publicly said was faults a false and he let that record go uncorrected. That goes against his credibility as someone that makes statement in public all the time. The broader thing about that is that the suspicion that trump dictated that statement were accurate notwithstanding the umpegal is saying, that the look, its not a crime to lie to the New York Times. Its not a crime to lie to the public. The politician dos that as do t time, what business is that, bob mueller . Its aligning the point of why bob mueller would be interested in the fact that the president was personally seeking to cover up what happened with his Campaign Contacts with russia in that trump tower meeting if the president displayed a motivatio to cover that up in this instance, he may have had the same intention when he did other things that are under legal scrutiny which would turn on whether his intent was corrupt when he did those actions. David, quickly before i let you go, your reaction to what charlies laying out here, its not a crime to lie to the immediate yand media and the public, but hes lying about this. I think charliest righ write. Theres no need for bob mueller to interview President Trump about these various statements of actions in the past. As a claim that he is innocent and pure as the driven snow, i think these arguments are pretty difficult to maintain. As an argument against even talking to the president and asking him about what he did with don junior and in the other settings, the arguments strike me as pretty y. Kris, Charlie Savage, thank you both. President trump has been slamming the former head of the cia who has not held back of his criticism of the occupant of the oval office. John brennan is here with me next to talk about the president s twitter attacks. Plus, bill clinton back in the hot seat 20 years after his impeachment trial. If you were president now in 2018 with everything thats going on with the me too movement, how youd have approached the accusations differently . Well, i dont think it would be an issue because people would be using the facts instead of the imagined facts. Well have more on what former president is saying about monica lieu wince sky and whether she ever get a direct apology. That new interview with craig melvin who will be joining us next. She believes in research. It can take more than 10 years to develop a single medication. And only 1 in 10,000 ever make it to market. But what if ai could find connections faster. To help this researcher discover new treatments. Thats why shes working with watson. Its a smart way to find new hope, which really cant wait. Until her laptop crashed this her salon wasmorning. For weeks, 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. We have breaking news from the Supreme Court where the court has just ruled now on a major case. Masterpiece cake shop. This is the case where a colorado baker refused to bake a cake for a samesex couple. This case had gone to court. It was one of two big cases that were watching for, that we had been watching for from the nine justices. The decision has now come down in favor of the baker. Heres Pete Williams. Reporter it has, but in the narrowest possible way. This is really a ticket good for one ride only. This is a victory for the baker, but what the Supreme Court says here is because of the peculiarities of his specific case, he wins but the court doesnt answer the larger questions here, which is what about some other baker or florist or person who prints wedding invitations or is a dj at a wedding, do they have a First Amendment righto refuse to serve samesex couples because it would violate their religious principles . That was the issue here, this was Jack Phillips, a baker in denver who refused to bake a cake for a samesex couples wedding celebration. He said that would violate his religious principles and would violate his right of Free Expression because the state wouldnt in essence under its human rights law be forcing him to express a view he didnt agree with. He argued that his cake baking as was was a matter of Free Expression. I want to bring in danny. Danny, pete talked about is, one and done. What kind of broader National Implications from any, does this decision have . This decision isnt a surprise. The they arged that it might be leaning towards the baker in this case. In a way, this is a narrow decision in the sense that the baker is not compelled to speak, hes not compelled to create a cake. It was clear that the couple could have bought any of the premade cakes, any of the things that were already in the store. So the bakers argument was always that as an artist this is compelled speech, im being compelled to create a product for someone even if it is a cake. So this does not conclusively answer the question about whether or not antiDiscrimination Laws that address samesex marriage can be categorically used to compel speech in the case of a baker or somebody in some other quasi Artistic Community or Artistic Community who is forced to make something for a samesex couple. And thats the question i had r you here, what does this is a now about those and the tie Discrimination Laws more broadly . Does it seem like there may have to be another perhaps more definitive ruling from the Supreme Court down the road to sell that once and for all . That may be case. Remember back in the same Supreme Court case that established a right to samesex marriage, the court went out of its way to state in its opinion that good and decent people c still oppose the concept of samesex marriage, those are not my words. Those are the words of the extreme court opinion. So, going forward, we are going to have to strike a balance at least at the federal court level between antiDiscrimination Laws, which ostensibly have some good and noble purpose, and on the other hand the free speech rights of those people who own businesses that involve creative creations like cakes or what have you. Let me pull up that graphic again just to lay out the nuts d bolts of this case here because, remember, this all went wn in colorado. A cake shop owner, lake wood Baker Jack Philips was asked to make a cake for this couple Charlie Craig and david mullins. He declined. He basically said doing so would go against his christianity, his religious beliefs that marriage is just between a man and a wab. So this case escalated all the way to the Supreme Court and we now have that decision today that danny, as you noted, is narrow. Thats something thats been noted by nbc justice correspondent Pete Williams whos joining us live again now outside the court. We were just having a conversation with our legal analyst who said this was not a particular surprise given how oral arguments seem to have gone. Reporter it was a 72 ruling. Only justices ginsberg and soto mayo dissented from the Courts Holding here. Theyve dodged the larger question. What hes talking about is that the oral argument there was a question from Justice Kennedy who wrote the opinion here about a comment made by a member of the colorado human rights mmison. Co iofhose states thats have has that has hey human rights law and on that basis they said the baker has to bake the cake for the samesex couple. What Justice Kennedy says is that comment by that member of the Colorado Human Rights Commission is evidence of hostility to his religious views. So for that reason, and that reason only, the baker gets a win here. But it doesnt say anything about the larger issue. And let me just read briefly from the conclusion of the opinion. Great. Reporter he says. The outcome of cases like this in other circumstances has to wait for further elaboration in ourts and then heres the key part, all in the context of recognizing that these disputes must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market. So there are no there nothing in this opinion to guide lower courts who are now struggling with these issues or the Supreme Court if it comes back to this issue. Theres already a case sitting here idling waiting for the Supreme Court to decide what do from a florist in Washington State who refused to provide flowers for a samesex wedding. There have been similar cases involving photographers, people who print wedding invitations, other people whoreroviding wedding services. So until we get into the reading the whole opinion here, there doesnt appear to be anything to guide those lower courts on how to resolve these questions. And bear in mind there are was an unusual case. Yes, First Amendment. Remember the first amend meant has two components. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression. This was primarily a freedom of expression case. What the baker said is, my cakes are works of art. They express a view. And by forcing know bakeme to be for something i disagree with youre vile violating my freedom of expression. So there, arguments about is a cake expression. All the weddings ive been to a cake never says anything and the couple never got into discussing how this cake would look. As soon as they said what they wanted it for the baker said, sorry, i cant do that. So thats a question here. Are flowers expressive . Is a wedding invitation expressive . Thats a big question to be resolved in addition to the case here. So its the narrowest possible victory and it doesnt say anything about how cases like this which are sure to come back are going to be resolved. This is the newest front in what religious groups are using as opposition to the Supreme Court samesex marriage ruling and its not going to go away. So then, pete, the likelihood that one of these other cases for example about the florist or some of these wedding invitation folks, the likelihood that that comes back in front of the Supreme Court or comes to the Supreme Court is fairly high . You can predict . Reporter yes. And of course heres the big question. Justice kennedy talked a lot in this decision about dignity for the samesex couple here. And of course thats the word that appears the most often or one of the most often used words in his decision upholding the rightor samesex couples to get married. Is is Justice Kennedy going to retire or not . Because if he does retire and President Trump gets to appoint his successor, then the next time one of these cases comes before the court it could have a very different outcome. So thats another reason why the question of whether Justice Kennedy is going to stay or not is important. We havent gotten any clues to that. We know that he came pretty close to stepping down last term, but he has hired his clerks, hes got the usual summer schedule of teaching overseas that he usually does when hebeen on the scourt. So we just have no idea. Well probably have to wait till the end of the month to find out for sure. And were also continuing to wait on reaction from either the baker, his attorneys, or the samesex couple that was involved in this a well. I presume that we will be hearing from those lawyers at some point throughout the morning. I want to bring in tom goldstein. Pete, thank you for that. Im going to let you get back to reading that ruling. Tom, this is a case that is one of the marquis occasions this term for the Supreme Court. We have a decision upcoming perhaps in the next couple of mondays in the president s travel ban. This is the other one we had been waiting and watching for. Are you surprised by what the court has found here . No, because think the court was trying to find a middle ground here. Justice kennedy has played a really leading role in creating a majority for the rights of samesex couples at the Supreme Court. But on the other hand, clearly believes in the sincere religious views of people who are uncomfortable with samesex marriage. So he was looking for a middle ground and the middle ground that he found was to say that in this one case the colorado government was hostile to the religious views of the baker, but that he can clearly see plenty of case wheres there wouldnt be hostility. It would just be a neutral attempt to protect samesex couples. And so it gives a lot of guidance, i think, while giving both sides something that they want, religious groups get a lot of protection from the Supreme Court saying that you cant be hostile to religion. Gay Rights Groups get the same pro section youd get from other protected groups, including say for example african americans. We know two justices dissented in what was a 72 decision. We have seen other cases that have had a much closer decision point, 54 for example. What do you make of the way that the justices side on this one . I think probably what happened is you had the center of the court, you menoned weve been talking about Justice Kennedy, but justices briar, cag began, the chief justice and kennedy said we came together and find a centrist decision and that made it unnecesry for the case to be 54. They didnt have to break it down on strict ideological grounds as if to say you can always prohibit bakers from revie reviews refusing to provide these services. They said compromise. And followup to you, danny, again, we are waiting for reaction from the bakers attorneys, from this samesex couples attorneys as well. Do you believe that religious liberties advocates will try to run a victory lap here . It is a victory. Appearance a narrow victory for religious liberty, but it still doesnt answer the question whether or not when they come head to head do the antiDiscrimination Laws and the modern trend of extending that to samesex couples, whe that comes hep head to adhreedom of expression and religion, which should give. This case is fascinating for exactly that reason. It pits these two forces against each other and one of them must give as a rule of law. That may not be today but certainly will be in the future. Pete williams, final thoughts to you, sir. Reporter i would just say that the dissenters say that the court pays too much attention to the off the courts comments made by members of the Colorado Human Rights Commission. They say the court should have stuck to the facts. Its clear that the court did sort of reach beyond what it usual zli to latch on to that to find an offramp here. But i can tell you having talked to the lawyers for both sides in this case, i can tell what you theyre going to say. The lawyers for Jack Phillips will say its a big victory, he gets to go back and make wedding cakes against which hurt his business. And the aclu and the groups that supported the samesex couple will say its a very limited ruling and it only applies t him and no big d petwilliams with the prediction. Well find out very soon. Thank you for joining us live from the steps of the Supreme Court here. Danny, tom, thank you for being with us as well. Were going to turn back to whats going on mere here in th white house. You may have seen it this weekend, President Trump hitting twitter to blast out quotes from a conservative commentator on fox news who called former cia director john brennan a liar and said brennan had disgraced himself and the entire ge intelligence community. Brennan has not held his tongue and said will continue to speak out that integrity and wisdom return to the white house. Thank you for being with us here. Let me start with the tweets from the president this weekend quoting a conservative commentator who called a lying liar and im paraphrasing here. What wt through your mind when you saw those twitter alertor donald trump popping up attacking you . I thought it was rather hypocritical for donald trump to call someone else a liar since he was demonstrated time and time again that he has no real compunction about telling fal falsehoods to the American People of. It shows his instinct to lash out and criticize others who have taken issue with him. The preds president tweeted this morning that he has the power to pardon himself unequivocally. Does he have in your view . I think as chris said, the constitutional powers granted to the president are quite broad. It doesnt exclude explicitly the president s pardoning of himself. But i think common sense would indicate that the Founding Fathers would not want the president to pardon himself for misdemeanors, high crimes or whatever. Hes calling the special counsel unconstitutional in the say year and a half avenue called for a special douns investigate a political opponent. Is there any universe in which the president might be right here in your view . I dont think so. I think its certainly within the powers of the department of justice, in in case the Department Attorney general, rod rosenstein, to call for a special counsel to investigate what i think was an egregious assault upon our democratic foundations, the electoral process. So rosenstein, bob mueller and others are now looking into this and for the president at this point to say its unconstitutional, i think it just shows how worried is he, how fearful he is about what the special counsel is uncovering. And his tweets are not the tweets of an innocent individual. So i think it really demonstrates just how desperate he is get, grasping at straws and Rudy Giuliani as well. Theether rudy nor his boss feel comfortable with facts and common sense and thats why theyre throwing these things out now to try to get whatever traction among their base as possible. You do feel unencumbered it seems to speak very freely about donald trump and his attorneys. Why is that . Do you feel its your moral obligation . I feel its my responsible as somebody who served in this government for 33 years, who served directly for president s, i served under six president s, and i saw the wisdom, the decency, the intellect as well as the ethical standards that those president s as imperfect as they all were, really tried to live by. I think donald trump has been the an thinga sis of what the president of the United States should be. Youve been accused of some commentators of having selective outage in this instance. But as ive told people, im not a partisan, im not a democrat or republican. I have been roundly condemned by the left and right. But im not going to hesitate when i think that the president of the United States takes full advantage of his oval office perch to tell the American People lies and also to try to protect himself and those around him who may, in fact, be liable to some type of actions on the part of the department of justice. You brought up Rudy Giuliani and some of his comments, weenin which he said the r the president could and he was clearly making a hypothetical comparison, but he said the president could shoot james comey and not in fact end up charged for it, still could not be indicd fort. Can a president get away with murder . Well, it just shows how absurd these comments are of Rudy Giuliani and others using those types of examples. And just underscores how surreal the 16 months have been under donald trump in the oval office. And for Rudy Giuliani to Say Something like that i think should outrage all americans and really should worry us that mr. Trump and mr. Giuliani are going to resort to whatever tactics, techniques, and constitutional powers that the president might have to stop this special counsels investigation. You talk about people being outraged, but there are americans who will come to the president s defense here, who will come to Rudy Giulianis defense here when he makes these comments, when he talks about these pexds the what you can say to those americans to convince them in the truth of your argument . Or do you believe thats a lost cause . I dont. D in my oped that i published this weekend, i said there are millions of americans who have legit may concerns about what their future holds as far as this globalized world is concern. They see the factories that they were employed in and their grandparents and parents employed in closing. So there are significant challenges that our government has to address. Unfortunately i think our politicians and Political Parties of both stripes have failed to fulfill those responsibilities. So i think a lot of people believe that donald trump is, you know, a new and fresh face to washington, is going to do things differently. But i do think hes really selling false promises to these people who arerasping on to these hopes. Before i let you go i want to talk about where we will be next week in singapore for the summit between maybe. Do you think its not going to happen . I dont know. We go back and forth and well see what happens on the 12. Kim yongchol at the white house, we saw him walking up steps. What did you make of this man and what hes capable of . I think it demonstrate much kim jongun wants to have this summit so he can share the global stage one on one with the president of the United States. Thats a tremendous political coupe on the part of the political leader. I think by sending kim yongchol here is a way for kim jongun to say i want that meeting to happen and using flattery with mr. Trump, i think it wins them a lot of points. Was tay mistake for donald trump to pose with kim yongchol holding that letter smiling . I think thats something we shouldnt be surprised at. This whole affair has demonstrated how inexperienced and inept donald trump is in handling these very, very serious matters of state. John brennan, thank you for coming on set and joining me to talk through all of those topics. I appreciate . It we want to stay talking about north korea because it is just over a week until that sitdown with President Trump and north korean dictator kim jongun with several new developments were following this morning. You had this staff shooik shakeup, north koreas top three officials have been removed from their positions according to a senior suxt official. Now clear what kim jonguns motive is there. You also got with russia from love, Vladimir Putin today inviting to meeit h in russia in just a few months, in september. And guess whols might be coming to dinner . Syrias strong man Bashar Al Assad in what would be the first time he hosted a meeting. Lets start with the shakeup in morn military. What could that possibly mean . Its not so much then were removed, but they were replace and replaced by a younger generation. It gives you a sense that kim jongun could potentially have some domestic dynamics in place before he leaves his country. Remember the first trip he took out of his country a couple months apology when he took that dream train to china, it wasnt announced until he was safely back insidhis own country. There maybe some domestic concerns about how strong his power structure is. What we do know here from the singapore authorities is they are planning on a multiday summit. Theyve done a special area designation here. Thats going to be five days. So clearly the singapore side is planning for kim jongun to be here potentially through the 14th. That means you could have a threeday summit or at least that is what theyre planning for. And then to tie it back to his other meetings, namely with assad and putin in russia, its a signal they want to deal with kim jongun, that they think kim jongun is the head of state. When you see an official invite coming from putin to kim jongun, its a sign that the russians think that hes the man in charge. Hallie. Hans nichols, if youre still in singapore next week, i will see you there my friend. Thank you very much. After. After the break, well talk about whether bill clinton has any regrets about his own behavior and what he has told Monica Lewsinsky . You didnt apologize to her . I have not talked to her. Do you feel you owe her a apology . No. I i do not i have never talked to her. If you have for some reason shut down your twitter this morning and missed this, you will not want to miss Craig Mueller talk about this interview coming up with former president bill clinton. Well have if in jut in just a. But how do you work with it . Ask this farmer. Hes using satellite data to help increase crop yields. Thats smart for the food we eat. At this port, supply chains are becoming more transparent with blockchain. Thats smart for millions of shipmes. In this lab, researchers are working with watson to help them find new treatments. Thats smart for medicine. At this bank, the worlds most encrypted mainframe is helping prevent cybercrime. Thats smart for everyone. And in africa, iot sensors and the ibm cloud are protecting endangered animals. Ats smart for rhinos. Yeah. Rhinos. Because smart only really matters, when we put it to work not just for a few of us, but for all of us. Lets put smart to work. So this morning former president bill clinton is back in the headlines in a big way, but maybe not the way he wants to be. Hes out pitching his new book and facing tough questions about the me too movement and Monica Lewsinsky. Heres the deal. He and best selling author James Patterson sat down with craig melvin to talk about a new political thriller the two of them wrote, its called the president is missing thats out in stores today. They talked about that and other things too including donald trump, but then the conversation turned to me too. And the recentuggestions by some clinton critics that the former president should have resigned during the lewsinsky scandal. One of the thapings that thi me too movement has done is force aids lot of women to speak out. One of those women Monica Lewsinsky. She wrote that the me too movement changed her history of Sexual Harassment. He was my boss, the most powerful man on the planet, 25 years my senior with enough experience to know better. He was at the pinnacle of his career while i was in my first job out of college. Looking back at what happened through the lens of me too now, do you think differently or feel more responsibility . No, i felt terrible then. And i came to grips with. Did you ever apologize to her . Yes. And nobody believes that i got out of that for free. I left the white house 16 million in debt. But, you typically have ignored gaping facts in discovering this and i bet you dont even know them. This was litigated 20 years ago, twothirds of the American People sided with me. They were not insensitive to that. I had a Sexual Harassment policy when i was governor in the 80s. I had two women chief of staff when i was governor. Women were overrepresented in the Attorney Generals Office in the 70s. For their percentage in the bar. Ive in nothing but Women Leaders in my office since i left. You are giving one side and omitting facts. Mr. President , im not im not trying to present a side. Im not you asked me if i agreed, the answer is no, i dont. I asked if youd ever apologized and you said have you. I have. You apologized to her. Ive apologized to everybody in the world. It is important to me that whorve h everybody who has been hurt know the sorrow i feel is genuine. First and most important, my family. Monica lewsinsky and her family. But you didnt apologize to her . I did not talk to her. Do you feel like you owe her an apology . I do not i have never talked to her. But i did say publicly on more than one occasion that i was sorry. Thats veryfent. The was public. And you dont think a private apologys owed . I think this thing has been its 20 years ago, come on. Lets talk about jfk, lets talk about, you know, lgb, stop already. You think president kennedy should have resigned . Do you believe president johnson should have resigned . Someone should ask you these questions because of the way you formulate the questions. I dealt with it 20ears ago plus and the American People twothirds of them stayed with me. And ive tried to do a good job since then with my life and with my work. Thats all i have to say to you. Craig melvin is joining me now. Shannon and jonathan are here too. You do the interview, the camera is shut off, then what . The president really wanted to make sure that i understood that he felt like the standards had changed in our Society Since 1998, the way that we view power , the y that we even view sexual relationships in the workplace. Those are standards that have changed. Those are standards that should have changed, he said. But he said he wanted to make sure that i understand the facts of his case were such that they made it it makes it very different from a lot of the highprofile cases that we have been covering here over the last year as a result of the me too movement. Those are two points that the president really wanted to make sure that i understood. We should also note that the lewsinsky question that we asked, we asked about that oped that she pinned in vanity fair just a couple months ago. In that oped she indicated that she had ptsd as a result of being aus tra sized and being outed. That was sort of thinking behind the questioning. And, again, you saw the president s response there. Yeah. Okay. Craig, i know youre going to be showing more of this discussion coming up in ce of hours right here on msnbc on your show at 1 00 eastern. I will be looking forward to that in a few hours right here on msnbc. Its always a pleasure to have you on. I want to go to jonathan and shannon who were watching that interview here on set. I know had you seen pieces of it before. On nan were youve cover jona covered the clintons for a long time. This was combative there . A very tense moment watching it, watching the former president of the United States try to make craig feel ashamed about the question that he asked rather than the former president feeling ashamed for the affair that he had or for the power dynamic between him and Monica Lewsinsky, now the fact that he went out and lied to the American Public about it. If you remember or releasing clips of it, him wagging his fingers at the cameras finger at the cameras and saying i did not have sexual relations with that woman ms. Lewsinsky. This imee pren life that certainly and he even said it there, hes ashamed of and yet he turned that on craig melvin and turned it on his interviewer. And if you watch bill clintons political strategy, throughout his history its always been when theres a controversy or somebody attacking him turn into that person he feels like is attack bei attacking him and start punching. I thought this was a trumpian response becoming the vic, i le victim, why am i still being questioned about this 20 years later . I thought it was that trump school of defense of dont back down, fight, fight, fight, make yourself the victim, and dont give what could have been a moment to give a real genuine response of i made a mistake, ive learned a lot, im glad this conversations happening right now, i hope other people are listening. It could have been an opportunity to make this about a movement and about a message other women or people who might besing their own em pl employees. President trump, like him, hed like people to look at the totality of his life and work and say, the sexual indiscretions are a piece of it, but only a piece. You heard it from president clinton, when he was saying, should jfk have resigned . Should Lyndon Johnson have resigned . Go through the president s and their infill dinfidelities. There were the moment in which they talked about the apology, in which former president clinton was asked, should he apologize personally to Monica Lewinsky . In the clip, they played the public apology thenpresident clinton made at the time. We talked about the vanity fair piece. Lewinsky wrote about this chance encounter with the former clinton special prosecutor. Though i wish i had made different choices back then, lewinsky, she stammered, i wish you and your office had made different choices, too. In hindsight, i later realized i was paving the way for him to apologize, but he didnt. He nearly said, with the same inscrutable smile, i know. It was unfortunate. Right. Seems like someone, after all these years, would like an apology. There is a difference between an apologize on a television appearance, where youre reading off the teleprompter, than a handwritten note for them. Should bill Clinton Campaign for the democrats . If they want him to, i think hell get out there. One quick thing on Monica Lewinsky. She obviously hwas a 24yearol in washington. Ken starr used her. Bill clinton did. She was a political an spt bbat. Shes a victim of the 24hour cable news juggernaut weve helped build. Thank you for coming on this busy morning. You have the dems blue wave looking a little less likely than it did before. This new cbs Battleground Tracker finds if they were held today, democrats would win 219, just one more needed to win back the majority. It is shown in a california district set to vote tomorrow. It is a district Hillary Clinton won in 2016, but where republicans are feeling more and more confident. Jacob soboroff is live in huntington beach, california, in the states 48th district. You get the good gigs in california. Saw you at the beach earlier this morning, right . Reporter wasnt that bad. Democrats out here are facing what could be caulled resistanc to the reksistancresistance. It was the most vulnerable seat. Californias sanctuary state law that, in this district, could backfire, and have two republicans show up in the general election. Watch this. Those must be your tenants. All the inmates within the Orange County jail. Reporter some of the inmates could be critical to who wins the primary on tuesday in californias 48th congressional district. Before the sanctuary state law was passed, you had eight de deputies asking, are you a u. S. Citizen . Deputies would do the job on behalf of ice. Reporter not anymore. After the sanctuary state law went into effect, cops can no longer communicate with federal immigration agents. The department fought back, deciding to go around the law by publishing the release information of all inmates online, so anybody, including i. C. E. , could see them. Without talking to i. C. E. , you gave the option to find the folks. I never talked to them. If they want to take advantage of the provision in the law that we posted online, they can do that. Reporter i. C. E. Didnt want us to see them picking up somebody outside the jail, but this guy is getting out june 13th, 2018. One minute after midnight. At that time, they pick him up as they walk out the gates right there. First time doing an interview as a congressional candidate outside the jail . Exactly. Reporter hes challenging his republican in the 48th. They think they can both win the primary and advance to the general election. How big of a Campaign Issue is whats going on here . Immigration. For the majority of voters, it is a determinative issue, on the sanctuary city. There are a lot of democrats nervous about it, and theyre avoiding the topic. Reporter before you got into the ra, folks were talking about how this is going to be one of the most flipable districts in the country. Thats right. Reporter doesnt seem like it is now. Numbers are changing, and it makes the democrats job difficult, if not impossible. Reporter you give the issue that much credit. Absolutely. Reporter since 1993, the 48th district has been represented always by a republican. Hillary clinton beat donald trump here in 2016. It is partially why it is considered flipable. Turns out, it might have been overly optimistic. Come here, man. This is scott, running for congress. Whats your name . Robert. Reporter where do you live . Costa mesa. Constituent, yes. Reporter tell this guy why we should vote for you. Because im going to protect the people of costa mesa from the sanctuary city laws. They want to release undocumented immigrants who committed crimes back into the community, before i. C. E. Can take them and make them subject to deportation. Now, they have to wait out here. Thats a creative solution the sheriff has brought to Orange County, and it is working. Reporter youve seen i. C. E. Do it, right, here on the sidewalk . Right on the sidewalk. Reporter if you are an undocumented iigrant in the country and committed a crime, you should be deported. Reporter youre a resident of costa mesa. Think that message would get him elected to congress . Why not . You have my vote. Reporter all right, man. Things you dont expect to see outside a county jail. Hallie, the reason im off the beach is i am now at the Campaign Headquarters of rharle, one of the democrats running. Good to see you. Thank you. Reporter you were saying there is a tight threeway race for the second slot. Could be a republican. The sanctuary state issue, scott says, is going to propel him into the election. Do you support it . If scott is talking about the sanctuary state law, she should be running for state assembly. We should be talking about comprehensive immigration reform. Thats why im going to congress. Reporter youve been on the mayor red to blue list. Youve been enlisted implicitly on the list here in the district. You think it is appropriate for the National Democratic party to be endorsing in the democratic primaries . I do. In this case, we had massive support from indivisible and many volunteers. The groundgod. Ccc behind us. Were the only candidacy in the u. S. That has been endorsed by invi diseadivisible and the dcc. Reporter rohrabacher wants better relations with moscow. Is that an issue people about in the district . It is an issue. Depends where they are on the political spectrum. If you ask, what is his desire to have better relations with russia going to make your life be, addressing health care, jobs . People say, what is he doing . He needs to be focused on my issues here. Reporter good luck tomorrow. Itll be a tight one, hallie. Well watch it closely here in california. We will be covering it closely. Jacob so jacob soboroff, thank you. If you live somewhere swingy, tell him the issues that matter to you. Were going to North Carolina for the big picture. Youre looking at christian harris. Little christian here. His dad, chris, was killed in afghanistan last august. Just one week after he found out his wife was pregnant with their first child. Chris could not be there, obviously, to celebrate his babys wife. His wife decided his fellow soldiers, brothers, could stand in his place. When they all came home, on the day christian was born, they came to meet with the family and stand in for their fallen brother. Unbelievable photo. Really grabs you. Courtesy op pinehurst photograp photography, who took this picture of christian and the brothers of chris, his dad. Thinking of the Harris Family today and every day. Wed love to hear your thoughts on facebook, twitter, snapchat, and instagram. I will see you tonight on nbc nightly news with lester holt, covering much more about the president s pardon power, and whether that extends to donald trump himself. Rudy giuliani making the controversial comments over the weekend. The question now, what happens over on capitol hill just down the street from the view behind me. You know lawmakers will be asked. Thats it for this hour of msnbc live. Now, more news with ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. Ali shelvey, is that you . Its me. Im bad. Welcome back. I have missed you both. Nice to see you, hallie. Ditto. Well catch up later on. Sounds good. It is National Unity day. I came back for that. We are reunited. Were not even a minute in, so i wont go with the, feels so good. Great to see you. I held dow the fort. Things were okay. I heard you did. Good morning. Raise it up. Im ali velshi. Im a grateful and thrilled stephanie ruhle. Monday, june 4th. Lets get a little smarter. Breaking news from the Supreme Court, where the court ruled on a major case. This is the case in which a colorado baker refused to bake a cake for a samesex couple. This is a victory for the baker. What the Supreme Court says here is because of the particularities of his specific case, he wins, but the court doesnt answer the larger questions here. This morning,