want to bring in cnn political analyst david gregory and send in david rode. i have to identify which david i'm talking to here. this $200 billion in tariffs is a big, new number. it is big. the market hates it and it shows where the president is heading here. who has more leverage? china or the u.s.? >> i think china does. the reason is this is, i think, more of a threat to president trump politically than anything else. his poll numbers have risen because of a growing economy in the united states. but all kinds of people from manufacturers to farmers are being hurt by these sanctions by this trade war that he's declared worldwide almost with china, with europe, with mexico. so, this is very dangerous for him politically. if the economy slows, he is in very serious trouble. this is, i think, the biggest threat to his standing and his popularity in the country. >> a big part of this, david gregory, is the calculation on how far china will go to respond. somehow he keeps pushing. $50 billion and another 200 and he hinted he might be going 200 billion beyond tha

is that a big number, david gregory? is that a number that will emboldened the president or when you see that is that a margin he's g to be concerned about? >> i think it does emboldened the president. the president doesn't have any shame. he can ride this out. he may not even like it, but he's cynical enough to use it as a shocking way to try to get whatever he wants out of an immigration bill and he is working on fertile ground in that both republicans and democrats have failed on this issue. i think david is right. people are smart enough to separate out these issues, to be able to look at what has merit and what doesn't but the failures do keep compounding themselves, the idea of catch and release is of itself a failure. i mention this had earlier this morning. jonah goldberg has wrote an interesting book in which he argues in part that political discourse has moved away from trying to persuade those who disagree with you to just riling up your base and that's what this is about. this is about fear of the other, it's

plus, david gregory's crucial point he wanted to make right there. what is it? >>> "new day" is talking about several lawmakers in that meeting with president trump and former cabinet officials about this policy of separating kids from their parents. what can be done? >> be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens ♪ ♪ bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens ♪ ♪ brown paper packages tied up with strings ♪ ♪ these are a few of my favorite things ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ these are a few of my favorite things ♪ if you have moderate to severe or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may c

we want to bring in david gregory and errol lewis. we're glad to have you here. the word of the morning is confusi confusion. really just mass confusion of what's happening at the border. what's happening with the families coming in, what's happening with the families already separated. what we are being told direct live conflicting. >> it is going to take a while to unwind the policy that wound up such a trail of confusion and tears and fear among these families that were coming in. so the administration was not speaking with one voice about this to begin with and now has the difficult of unwinding this, trying to reconnect families, trying to figure out what the policy actually is. what you hear from the president time and time again is his frustration. remember how pleased the president seemed to be that border crossings were down before he came into office. now they have returned to a level we have seen that is consistent for this time of year where you have a surge in migrants coming in. >> somewhere we have that. sit an important point to make. there is not

let's bring in john avlon and david gregory. great to see you guys. >> meatloaf and gary busey. >> what are we pardoning meatloaf for? people are saying, huh, i wonder if he is trying to send a message. it is a billboard. he is saying if you are loyal to me and have my back, i will pardon you. you don't have to worry about the consequences. is there any other connection between martha stewart and dinesh d'souza. >> if you look at what these people have been charged with, it is resonant to some of the problems the president and his larger party may be facing. obstruction of justice, perjury, lying to federal officials, corruption, fraud, extortion, campaign finance violations. i mean, this is the kitchen sink to redefine the new normal. this is criminalization of politics, people. >> it is also trolling the justice department. there is all the selective prosecution that the justice department for years has been kind of running amok. to me that's at one level more surprising. it is the message to people who could be testifying aga

let's discuss with john avlon and david gregory. john avlon, the president dictated the letter, we now know, as john so beautifully pointed out and walked us through all of that. so the fact that they are now lying about it, does that tell us someone was interviewed by robert mueller and now they have to tell the truth because robert mueller knows something? >> telling the truth is not the first instinct of this crew. were there enough interviews they were backed into it? it isn't just the denials by sarah sanders and sec low. but even in the admission they say it is a short but accurate statement which is itself a fundamental falsehood. they can't help themselves with this stuff. >> it's a lie. his lawyer lied repeatedly to the american people. unless the president flat-out lied to him, which is possible someone is lying there. i said forget for a moment it is about this meeting. this is dishonesty about something that is crucial to the entire investigation. the trump tower meeting where they were promised dirt on hillary clinton.

joining us now we have cnn political analyst david gregory and cnn global affairs analyst tony blanken. tony, from where you sit watching what happened today after all the efforts of past president, including president obama for whom you worked. what do you make of it? >> you know, alisyn, we have to put this in perspective. just a few months ago leading into the olympic games, it looked like we were heading to war on the korean peninsula. now we're talking peace. now we're talking denuclearization. that's a good thing. and president trump should be applauded for the efforts he's making in diplomacy. the other perspective is this, we've been there before. time and again north korea made commitments to denuclearize and did the opposite. in 2005 and 2012, much more detailed commitments than what we've seen the last 24 hours. the proof really is in the pudding. we won't know for a long time whether this is real or serious. meanwhile, all the pressure that president trump effectively built up against north korea is starting to dissipate. so far i have to give a win to kim jong-un getting a

we have jeffrey toobin and david gregory. the memo that the trump team seems to be hinging their argument on, that the president cannot be indicted is from 2000 from the department of justice. let me read it to you. the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting president would be unconstitutional because it would impermissibly interfere with the president's ability to carry out his constitutionally assigned functions and thus would be inconsistent with the constitutional structure. so that i understand. that's not settled law. but that is -- that spells it out. from 2000. in other words, they didn't invent this. this is 18 years ago when they said a president can't be indicted. >> that's right. there is an earlier department of justice opinion from the 70s with the same conclusion. that's not the shocking part of what the memo says and what rudy guiliani has been saying is. to me the shocking part is the argument that he can do whatever he wants without impugnity for anyone. he can fire anyone. he can pardon himself. th

joining us to discuss cnn analyst david gregory and former republican congressman charlie den. i want to start with you because you were right in the middle of this. you've seen things like this play out. will the president win here? do you think? >> i don't think the president is winning on this issue. i have to be completely candid about it. look, separating children from their families is not a political winner. to hear what jonathan martin had to say. simply driving the base out is not a solution. people want solutions on this issue. if you are a republican member in a suburban district that is new jersey, minnesota or texas, this is not a winning issue for you. we have, you know, excellent members like will hurd and leading the charge on the daca issue, this can't help in their district. sure, in ruby red district in the deep south this plays just fine, politically. but i tell you, where the rest of us live, where we have to persuade people and crossover voters, this is a disaster as a policy and the politics of this is, i think, just terrible. they're voting on two immigr

joining us to discuss all of it we have cnn analyst david gregory and bobby ghosh. bobby, where are we today with whatever decision tkpwraepltd was made agreement was made with north korea? >> we are in the second block of ch chutes and ladders. mike pompeo will us toward the end. hopefully there will be some ladders but there will be lots of chutes. it is much, much more complex. there is a lot of minute knew that to go through. >> and that's obviously more on the negotiation side. and on the international side. domestically at home, there is a fair amount of skepticism politically. here's a little bit of what we heard from senator corker. take a listen. >> i think sometimes the president has a tendency to stand up and say things that are ad hoc that haven't been vetted. sometimes those things are walked back after he's had conversations with people that are relevant to what he said. agn, i thi that's really important to get ppe in. >> important to get pompeo in. david, we know it's important at some point to get folks in washington on board. the president said not

. >> let's bring in cnn political analyst and author of "how's your faith," david gregory. great to have you weigh in here. when jeff sessions said to obey the laws of the government because god has ordained the government for his purposes. in other words, the government is all powerful and beyond reproach? what are we to make of our attorney general saying this? >> if he is talking about protection of the weak, i don't know how you defend a practice that separates parents and their children after they have made this perilous journey, illegal though it may be, trying to find a different life in the united states. secondly, i just think the bible is rich and fertile territory for those who want to use it for a broader argument. and if the attorney general wants to cite romans, maybe he would like to cite hebrews, we were once strangers in the land of egypt. the pope reminds us today, quoting ddeuteronomy, protectin the stranger, loving them as ourselves. this is so unfortunate to try to inject this into the political domain particularly on this issue. to say nothing of the f

we have david gregory and "new york times" nicholas christoph. so, nick, now the heavy lifting is up to mike pompeo and jim mattis. if things go south, if things are not as president trump sees them, can't they just turn the war games back on for august? can't president trump say, okay, we're back on to joint military exercises? >> yeah. they can turn their war games back on. they can't take back the legitimacy they gave kim jong-un in terms of the senate and the lavish praise given to kim jong-un. it is probably also impossible to turn the pressure of sanctions back on. >> why? >> we don't really have trade with north korea that we control ourselves. what matters is the trade with china and opportunities for trade with south korea. it is pretty clear that both china and south korea are ed med for more economic upbt tkpwraeugz with tphoer integration with north korea. i don't think we can start that leverage. >> we just heard from barbara mattis was consulted, in her words, but he was told he didn't necessarily agree with the decision, david. how

back with us, john avalon and david gregory. kaitlan collins raised the question. >> or is it a big neon sign. >> one of the president's big political advisers roger stone says, yes, it's a signal and we're getting it. let me read what he wrote overnight. indict people for crimes that don't pertain to russian collusion and this is what could happen. internal counsel has awesome powers, as you know, but the president has even more awesome powers. that's roger stone, who by the way, could end up being the focus of this investigation saying i got the signal loud and clear. >> he's going to be called to testify in front of the senate intelligence committee. and he's just laying it all out there. this is not worth debating. it is being read that way by people who could be caught up in the investigation. it is not subtle. it is a dangerous precedent. president's have pardoning power. we have seen bad pardons before, favors to donors and things that are shady, pursuing political agendas. this is something different. this is about part

let's talk about it with our cnn political analyst david gregory and chris cillizza. that one is just really affecting, david. >> and she's the lucky one. >> she's the lucky one. so now we know there was an update this morning that 500 have been reunited, but 1,800 don't know where their kids are. it's the not knowing. they don't know anything about what's happening with them right now. they're hoping that they're being treated well. but guess what, we have stories from previous detention centers where some kids are not being treated well. >> and what governor cuomo was saying was they don't know. you have a lot of children being sent because of how big the foster system is here in new york, but then they're not being told where they are. so the process then that the government has to go through at the state and local level to then track down and reunify these families is going to be so difficult. at the same time they have to figure out the chaos in the administration about whether they're really stopping this practice, where they're going to house families. >> somet

let's bring in our panel, cnn political analyst david gregory is with us, and white house reporter for "the new york times" julie davis is here, as well. i want you to listen to this exchange that paul ryan had just a little while ag >> south carolina voters told mark sanford to take a hike last night. is that because he opposed to the president? >> i would ask the voters of south carolina. some of our members have lost primaries. that's just what happens. [ inaudible ] >> every cycle we lose people, this happens. >> so he's trying to be diplomatic, clearly there. but how much of a role do you think support or opposition to the president of the united states played in these republican primaries? >> i think the evidence is that it played quite a bit of a role, and these races are won on the margins, and people seem to want a person who was an ally of president trump who endorsed or somehow associated himself or herself with president trump instead of the opposite. on paper, mark sanford would look like perfect candidate. paul ryan was alluding to these are races to specific areas. but h

he's now a political analyst at cnn and the host of a david gregory podcast. he also wrote a critically acclaimed and quite beautiful memoir about his journal to faith in a pretty secular world called "how's your faith." so i'll kind of set the next question to you. i feel like the image of this week for those of us paying attention was this image of the split screen that we saw. on the one hand, we saw the picture of netanyahu and ivanka trump unveiling the jerusalem embassy and very intentionally on a split screen we also saw the smoke and people dying in gaza. and this was very, i think, intentional e thateally, like, goes viral, and it doesn't really have a lot of nuance to it or complexity or historical background and context. as someone who has been in media your whole life are, what is the responsibility of the media to give us a little bit more than just sort of the convenient image where we kind of split screen and cast people sort of into villain and victim very easily? >> so i'm going to answer that a couple of ways. first of all, i i think to direc