it's not the practice of the department of justice to reveal the names of unindicted individuals for reasons that i hope are obvious to everyone but other than that we're going to see an awful lot of disclosure. which is what i have been advocating. if it helps the president, the more of it that comes out the better. >> we'll see. >> the part that the attorney general is going to hold the line is the issue on what are the declarations. what are the issues the spesh counsel investigated by decided not to bring charges on. he's going to hold firm to that. process and tradition. >> the difficulty is you have what comey did and you have how congress just proceeded after james comey said he was not going to bring charges against hillary clinton. up until a couple of months ago we have seen congressional committees hauling people in to continue to ask questions about hillary clinton and her e-mail server. they continue to ask the justice department to provide information about her e-mail server. so to say that was okay with hillary clinton even though she didn't face charges and now we're

and i understand why mueller, who is a creature of that department of justice, would want it to go to the regular channels at some point. and it seems like we're nearing that point. >> so, eric, that's the view from a former fed, and i want to you see another former fed who is of counsel to us. this is frank figluzzi earlier on this network, and as we listen to him, remember, he was running counterintelligence for a time for the bureau. >> i'm even more intrigued by the departure of david archey, because he's the counterintelligence lead here. that's the seminal russia question mueller was trying to answer. we should expect to report, it isn't so dramatic, but one that rolls out and spins cases everywhere. it diffuses targets for trump to aim at. >> do you concur based on your reporting, when are we going to find all of them? >> i think what is clear at this point is that much of the investigative work, including the central quote/unquote collusion question probably is complete. i think the question becomes, what bob mueller does with that information, how long it takes to produce som

department of justice bob muller's pro the has concluded and he filed his report it is now in the hands of the attorney general and the report which has not yet been released was a company with a letter in which bob muller made clear he did not call for any further indictments and it seems that trump is exonerated at nope no point was any collusion with russia discovered accompanying the report let's take a listen as the report states the investigation did not establish that the members of the trim come pain conspired who coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities were serious announced it was no good with the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard there was no collusion with the russian there was no ups truck here. and none whatsoever. and it was a complete and total exoneration now at this point however the democrats are determined to keep the story going they have been rallying around the montra of this is not over and they've been calling for the entire report from the bob muller probe the entire report that is now in the hands of the u.s. attorne

the department of justice has to go through it and determine what can be released and what cannot be released, which is why bill barr is owing to release his summary. it is going to be kind of a showdown. if they do not get everything they want, it is possible they could take this to court and it could end up being a legal fight. it could take a very long time. it is very interesting. democratsntime, house will continue what they are doing. they are investigating dozens of things in the trump administration. both at the white house level but also in the agencies and departments. they are pushing for documents. they are pushing for people to come testify. they could issue subpoenas. there is a lot of other avenues where they could get information about a variety of other things. host: we talked to sarah lynch in the first hour, i will ask you the same thing. what is your day going to be like, covering one of the most consequential reports of the administration? guest: my colleague is with the president in mar-a-lago. he is our main person with president trump today. i am here, standin

the department of justice. the press. the white house. this is the story set at one of the most powerful capitals in the world a political and judicial conflict. a battle that has pitted tromp against those who believe he was an accomplice. russia's interference is. a battle for the truth about the president of the united states and for the principles of american democracy. according to top u.s. intelligence chiefs the russians interfered in the two thousand and sixteen presidential election putin they say developed a clear preference for trump over clinton so russia's intelligence services stole and leaked thousands of clinton's e-mails to discredit her. two weeks before his inauguration they brief trump. trump rejects their conclusions he does not want his victory to be questioned. the intelligence agencies maintain their findings and partially release them to the public they say putin ordered an influence campaign to help trunk win the election. putin's role is immediately raised in congress which calls the chiefs of the intelligence c

that was the department of justice. the people have done this investigation and have been under enormous not only just pressure but all sorts of attacks. they're angry partisan democrats. they were trying to bring down the president and low and behold, they defended the president and found him basically not guilty on count one, and i think that shows that this was an impartial group. then we ought to show a lot of respect for their findings. whether we like it or not, and there are many, many people out there that are going to be extremely disappointed by this outcome. but this was a way, a good way a country settles significant disputes. we do it through the rule of law, and i think that's to be celebrated. >> it's clear, david, that the democrats on capitol hill are not happy with this conclusion that there was no collusion or conspiracy or cooperation between the trump campaign and the russians. >> well, i can understand why they're disappointed. they thought this was -- there have been so many things that have been

it doesn't ring true to department of justice practice. i think the more likely scenario is that he would have been briefed on the what was going to be in the report. over some period of days if not weeks. and this decision was formlated before the actual issue. >> you're saying that why? it's a comp will kated issue so he needs time to think about it? >> it's a substantial statutory issue. and take time to think about it. this is major investigation that was going on for two years. this was one of the two major pillars of the report that he's providing publicly and the congress. you want to get it right at least from his perspective. i just -- i'll be curious how this plays out and whether he's asked to explain about the discussion making process. when he's called before congress. sitting here tonight i find it hard to believe he would have made the decision in 48 hours. >> that doesn't -- neither here nor there? whether or not he got advance notice. he's attorney general. >> it's fine. >> go ahead. >> i agree normally it wouldn't make a

the department of justice. it's shameful. the president says he hopes no other president has to endure such harassment. >> they were in search of a crime because there was no crime. tonight you minds no evidence of that particular crime glass you was no evidence of it in the first place to investigate this thing. the only thing that this has shown me, that this report has shown me, there was collusion between the dnc, hillary clinton, obama administration, page, strzok, comey, we could reach a decision to go on, fusion gps, christopher steele. we could continue to go on and on. that's veal collusion. will they be calling in these individuals? we need some answers here after what's going on. what chuck schumer is doing, all they are trying to do is find some more crimes. it started with an underlying document and finding. they want that. so once we found out tonight that was no russia and trump collusion that interfered in the election, that's all i need to know. lou: the president said that from the very, very

stuff the department of justice doesn't give up. but everyone agrees and the house of representatives voted unanimously that the report on which that barr's letter is based, that short voshoub released. >> the attorney general has raised already in this four-page letter things we have already talked about previously. but now it's on paper. there's some grand jury secrecy issues. that can be overwrridden with ty seek to fwo to a court order. but that presents some concerns and questions. the precedent comes from the water gate era. but we're in a different world now. there was some belief then you could turn over something to congress and it wouldn't immediate ly go out to the public. i think that's just not going to. had. >> i'm already receiving some hate mail about it. people who hate the president are disappointed by the no collusion find iing because the were hoping this would bring down the president. but as an american, this is a good thing that our president, whether you like him or not, has not colluded. i get why democrats

there was never going to be an indictment of trump for obstruction of justice because the justice department decided going way back to nixon and reiterating it during clinton, that the constitution does not permit a sitting president to be charged. if anyone was guilty of obstruction of justice, it was trump here. therefore, the lack of further indictments doesn't tell us anything about what robert mueller found or concluded in his analysis about the obstruction of justice issue. that's only going to be a narrative report that goes to congress for them to decide what to do about it. it looks like representative swalwell is putting his eggs in that basket in light of no further indictments piece of the puzzle. >> i was asking tom in the commercial before land, if this is it. you say this is it. >> with respect to russia. >> here is the thing, and this is really important. it can be very hard to bring curveball charges and sustain criminal charges through convictions. it's a high burden. the question here or a question to be answered is, should the president have been engaging in this kind of

but what do we know about the delivery of these dcuments to the department of justice? >> just in theast two hours, congress received this letter. these are the four leaders of the hou and senate judiciary mmittees, we're notified by the attorney general there. one quote at the top herote, the special counsel has submitted to me today a confidential report explaining the prosecutio of deckly nation desions. then acting attorney general writes i may be in a position to adse you of the special counsel's principle conclusions as soon as this weekend. t also notre were no instances that the attorney general objected to conclions, methods or recommendations by mr. mueller. the attorney general has the right to review the report and declined to forward prosecutorial recommendation, those kinds of things. here the attorney general is saying i had no disagreements like that with mr. mueller. and that's very significant because already we're seeing is on firm ground in the justice department. >> woodruff: because there were questions about whether there could, might be interfere

department of justice is imprisoning me in retaliation for my human rights work and my journalism the corrupt judge gave me ten years for saving a young girl's life now the dia g. wants to put me in a communications management unit where they can restrict my journalism and stop the truth from getting out i am hoping that you hear me and that many many people will petition their us ambassador to stop the lice protect the kids and stop the d.-o. g. many things. this is the letter martin got spilled wrote to r.t. sitting in prison in danger of being silenced in solitary confinement the activist is pleading with the world to hear his story it's a tragedy that began back in two thousand and thirteen when a fourteen year old girl just. was checked in to boston children's hospital staff were moved just enough from her parents and claimed that they were interfering in her treatment although numerous other doctors said the girl had a genetic disease she was put in a mental ward and denied medication even more gruesome was the physical torment she endured it was so horrible that just dana was c

department of justice. he was an assistant in baltimore. we know a couple of things, that bob mueller is an icon in our department of justice. as ty said, and i know him as well, and i think he's a decent fellow, bob mueller is also a class act. and so ty is probably a little bit more free now to speak honestly than he was when he was employed by mr. trump. >> chuck, i also want to play this for you. this is separate from the same interview. this is ty cobb on his former client, the president, donald trump. >> he is a very direct, forceful presence. he wants to get stuff done. he hates obstacles and he reacts strongly in the face of obstacles to try to move them out of the way or find somebody who will move them out of the way for him so he can do things. it's a challenging environment and it's not for everybody. but it was a fascinating task. >> chuck, do you think the president's current legal team hears that and they are nodding yes? >> i'm sure it was a fascinating task. it seems to be damning with faint praise, brian. you know, what ty

they got all sorts of stuff the department of justice doesn't give out. but i think everyone agrees and the house of representatives voted unanimously that the report on which barr's letter is based that should be released. there's grand jury secrecy issues. that could be overridden if they seek to have a court order it's release. but that presents concerns and questions. the precedent for that comes from the watergate area where that essentially same procedure was employed. but there was at least some belief then that you could turnover something to congress and it wouldn't immediately go out to the public. >> i want to reiterate something that jeff and i talked about. i understand people that hate the president are disappointed by the no collusion finding because they were hoping this would i guess bring down the president but just as an american, this is a good thing that our president whether you like him or not -- i don't know -- i get why democrats are upset but overall big picture, everybody should pretty much be happy that the president did not co

the department of justice policy permits the disclosure of investigative materials and serves the interest to the american public, even as they pertain to unchurched third parties. while we recognize the department may be prohibited from classified and grand jury information that may be in the report, methods and sources from intelligence world, the department should release the mueller report to the maximum extent permitted by law and provide the report in full to congress. it is clear that the interest of the market public is served by transparency with respect to any investigation that could implicate or exonerate our president. this is especially true given the serious allegations of the center of the investigation paid no coincidence this resolution will be considered by sunshine week.alsten about of this resolution will send a clear vote to the american people in the department of justice the congress believes transparency is necessary to ensure that the government is accountable to its people. i urge the committee to adopt the technical amendment which clarifies the resolution calli

to have full the department of justice is transparent with the. failing to provide an account of the findings would undermine of the entire process and defeat the very purpose which the special couple was accounted. transparency is a critical aspect and releasing the report would be consistent with the overall intent of the special counsel regulations. they published regulation stressing to ensure public confidence and the integrity of the report. the report's release is repeated by past precedent. and concerning the 1993 confrontation in waco, texas, interim and final reports included by the special council were released. the need for transparency is more pronounced for investigations that involve our president. the department of justice policy permits disclosure of investigative materials if it serves the interest of the american public. while we recognize the department may be prohibited from disclosing classified or deprapped jury information that may be caped, methods and sources from intelligence world, the department should release the muel

the department of justice. attorney general barr has left home for the morning en route to work as we speak right now. but the process of scrubbing the mueller report has now begun. i'm told it could take some time. keep in mind it involves secret grand jury testimony. for everybody who has been indicted or found guilty or coped a plea deal there were many more people exonerated in grand jury proceedings and they need to be legally protected. that's why the scrubbing of the mueller report needs to happen. the action today, as you hinted, will likely be on capitol hill where democrats want the report to be released in full. they're honing in on barrs letter that found bar and deputy attorney general rod rosenstein have concluded the evidence developed during the special counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that this president committed an obstruction of justice offense. here is house judiciary committee chairman jerrold nadler. >> we'll ask the attorney general to testify before the house judic

jillian: question first one involving department of justice, putting doubt in people's mind, divide in the country that people speak about. i want to get your take on that and why do you say they wouldn't investigate obama? >> because i think the president is removed from all of these things, i doubt that somebody camed up to him we have phoney ups doe but we will sneak into a fisa warrant because we want to have insurance policy to make sure donald trump wins the presidency, if there was such evidence, then perhaps you could look at barack obama but i would be shocked if such evidence existed. i think that this is all being done by people below the president. look, you know, we will now have to see what general barr releases in terms of the mueller, all of your guests are coming, he needs to release the whole thing, i actually think that the president would -- would like the whole thing to be released but general barr has other things to consider, he has to determine whether grand jury material which is supposed to be secret is contained in the report, he's already said that there's g

bill barr left the department of justice. i should receive guidance tomorrow on when we may get information about what barr is advising congress. we have had member of congress on the program. former attorney general sessions is telling fox news at this point that he won't comment on the release of the mueller report. quote/unquote, "at this time." there is so much more news to come on all of this. significant players like sessions and others are commenting or not commenting at this hour. but what we can tell you is that the process of robert mueller looking into whether or not the trump campaign colluded with russia has come to a conclusion in a report that is now in the hands of both the attorney general william barr and deputy attorney general rosenstein. rosenstein choosing to stay on for a few extra days. that decision this week. we are continuing here on fox news channel to cover all the breaking news with regard to this. it has been 675 days of investigation and wait. and now movement. that is "the story" on friday nig

mueller sort of presented the evidence of obstruction of justice to the department of justice, as i understand this, and then it was the attorney general and the deputy attorney general who decided that based on that evidence, there wasn't enough to prosecute. that is a -- it's still a vindication, but it's quite a different one from mueller's total vindication of the president on the issue of collusion with russia. >> and the important point also that was made in this letter, jeffrey, is that the decision not to go ahead and prosecute the president either in obstruction of justice or conspiracy or collusion, it had nothing to do with the sitting justice department guidelines that a sitting president can't be indicted. let me read that line one more time. our determination was made without regard to and is not based on the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of the sitting president. that's very significant, jeffrey. >> that is. but again, it's important to point out that that determination was not made by mueller. it was made by the president's

learn more at retire your risk dot org. >>> the department of justice departments to release to congress by mid-april if not sooner. let's go up on capitol hill for us this afternoon here. democrats threatened to go to work over the release of this report. will this two-page letter satisfy them? >> probably not. a lot depends how many redactions. they have been making the case the last several days there have been minimal to no redactions to get access to the grand jury information. this is pointing to the watergate which congress did have access grand jury information. they say that is a similar situation here. bill barr sited that as one of four areas of redactions they make to the report that he along with special counsel are looking at. that's a question of how they pursued as well as that last category. information that would infringe on the personal privacy of third parties. that's what barr told congress he would redact. what does that mean and who does that impact? members of congress want to look at this as their own investigations. they don't have that information. so still a b

after it arrived at the department of justice. >> former fbi director james comey has routinely criticized the president. >> basically encouraging voters

it is the policy of the department of justice that no sitting president should be indicted of course the process for removing a president from office is impeachment and remember that when it comes to any legal woes potentially facing the president well he's facing many other investigations including in the state of new york where investigations continue into alleged campaign financing violations as well as into hush money payments made to stormy daniels the adult film actress so that all the avenues ahead well what is very vocal president actually saying about all this he's been uncharacteristically quiet of late in fact we haven't seen him take to twitter to say anything about this at the moment we know that he's in florida his mar-a lago resort he was seen heading to the golf course in the back of the vehicle reading the newspapers this morning of course following the coverage but he hasn't tweeted about it yet we have seen some statements for example from his son donald trump jr on twitter who framed this is a vindication the fact that there were no further charges and indictment

the department of justice has to go through it and determine what can be released and what cannot be released. that is why bill barr is going to release a summary. it is going to be a showdown. if they don't get everything they want, it is possible they could take this to court, and there could be a legal fight. that could take a very long time. it is interesting. , the housetime democrats will continue what they are doing. dozens ofnvestigating things in the trump administration, both at the white house and in the agencies and departments. they are pushing for documents, pushing for people to testify. they could issue subpoenas. there are a lot of avenues where they could get information. host: we talked to sarah lynch in the first hour. what is your day going to be like on the white house beat? my colleague is with the president in mar-a-lago. he is our main person with president trump today. i am standing by. i expect to write a bigger picture story about the president, but i don't know because i am also waiting to find out what is in the mueller report. we have a lot of folks on

of justice and fbi happily it independently watching as you will be. >> the nice around you obviously in the spotlight your husband has been in the spotlight been outspoken critic of president trump, for a while. last year and a half, speaking out against him on twitter the president responded outside of the white house yesterday, here is what he said got to get your reaction. >> i don't know if he is a whack job there is no question about it but i really don't know him, he -- i think doing a tremendous disservice to a wonderful wife, kellyanne is a wonderful woman i call him mr. kellyanne. >> your boss calling your husband a whack job what is going on. >> my husband also has been very critical of the president publicly, unlike him traditional a very private person in 2016, known as year of the tweet george conway sent zero tweets this is new also what is new not supporting the agenda. of the president. and my work there, because when george took himself out of contention for a top job in the department of justice, almost two years ago now put out a public statement that in many media

and rather you know that the department of justice does not recommend indicting a president's the fact that there is there are no further indictments doesn't necessarily mean much at this stage we have to wait and see what more we learn in that report but certainly the president does have further legal woes of course further investigations are underway into all sorts of other issues when it's whether it's campaign financing for example also allegations of an alleged hush money payment scheme in relation to stormy daniels remember of course that the molar investigation was limited in its scope it was looking at russia and collusion and potentially the obstruction of the course of justice so there are many more avenues in the months and well potentially years ahead well helena have we heard from donald trump himself in connection to this miller or being completed he's been uncharacteristically quiet i would say we haven't heard a tweet from the president we know that he's in florida but he was seen heading to his goals of course there in the back of the vehicle reading the newspaper so p

of course, like everybody else, i'm curious about mueller's decision to defer to the department of justice on a determination about exoneration. clearly the white house and president already are spiking the ball in the end zone. i guess with some justification. >> well, they're making the point that there was no collusion, and in the mueller report, there clearly is evidence there was no collusion, that no one from the trump campaign conspired or colluded or cooperated with the russians to interfere in the u.s. election. that's pretty significant. forget about the obstruction of justice for a moment. >> it is significant. you know, i think in a way, even if you're an opponent of trump, that is reassuring. that's a good thing for the country a country in any event. >> i'll read another line that makes that point. bill barr, the attorney general, in his letter to congress, he quotes from the mueller report saying, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. what's also sig

the correspondent department of just -- corrupt department of justice. corrupt ta tax tax tactics of t. tonight, rnc chairwoman, ronna mcdaniel, great to have you with us. your reaction first of all, to the vindication of this president. after more than two years of uninterrupted relentless attacks and claims by the radical dimms who orchestrated this assault on the presidency and the republic. >> well, i think you are right, i don't think that many people could have withstood what the president and his family have. it is really shameful for two years, this cloud has been upon his presidency, it was precipitated by a fake dossier paid for 3 hillary clinton and dnc that justice department ran with, democrats for two years accused our president of being an agent for a foreign country, they put that narrative forward over and over with the media, being complicit. 93% of the negative in stories from the media have been negative on this president, mead crmedia has been shameful, there needs to be a reckoning. i am glad that president is found to not colluded

. >> reporter: press secretary sarah sanders saying the findings of the department of justice are a total and complete

i have been authorized by the department of justice to confirm that the f.b.i. as part of our counterintelligence mission is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the two thousand and sixteen presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the trump campaign and the russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and russia's efforts and early may two thousand and seventeen as she is grilled over the involvement of trani and komi himself gets into a minefield and have you ruled out the president out of state but i don't. i don't people over interpret his answer i'm not going to comment on anyone in particular so potentially the president ited states could be a target of your ongoing investigation. i just worry i don't want to answer that that that's seems to me unfair speculation we will follow the evidence will try and find as much as we can we'll follow the evidence wherever it leads by refusing to say publicly that trump is not under inves

one of the interesting parts is a strict reading of the and the department of justice under janet reno said we have to figure out what is being investigated in a proper and right format. and this resolution simply restates that and would protect that in going forward, what was public conversations with the new york attorney general whose confirmation hearings confirmed that as well. that is why i believe this is simply a restatement of law, that a nonbinding resolution from congress is not going to change. thank you both for your answer. i just thought that these -- i read and from 1999 when it was a visit under the clinton presidency. from reno and eric holder what i read it, it seemed like before, all these reports were released to the public and then they recommended that just a summary be given to the attorney general for two reasons. one was because i thought of everything is released to the overc, they would be investigations, because investigators would worry that they would be criticized if they didn't turn over every stone. the other reason is that it would identify people tha

we will hear testimony from the department of justice, the department of the interior, and the day. i invited the department of justice because it is responsible for ensuring that federal agencies are complying with foia. opinion, they need to do a much, much, much, much better job, because we are seeing far too much information being delayed and even withheld. i invited the department of the interior, because they just proposed a rule that we make it repressor's of information in foia. in fact, last week, i sent a letter to the department raising concerns about their proposal and i was heartened to be joined by senators leahy, senator grassley, in senator cornyn, and i want to thank them for being so supportive. as you notice, it is bipartisan. epa because our committee conducted an investigation last year of former administrator scott course, his of senior staff, and we uncovered troubling issues with the way epa was responding to foia. the administrators chief of the refer us that "politically charged" foia requests to political appointees for review. did you hear that? that's de

lynch was attorney general and control the department of justice. heather: on that note let's bring up some of this, lisa page in an interview with the house judiciary committee. representative ratcliff says when you say advice you got from the department, you make it sound like the department told you you are not going to charge gross negligence because we are the prosecutors and we are telling you we're not going to. page answered that's correct. we want to fill in the blanks. this is a previous text message peter heather nauert he, another fbi agent, released previously, where it says i want to believe the path you throughout, there is no way he gets elected but there is no way we can take that risk. it is like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you are 40. this fills in the blank of what many people suspected and that is this insurance policy had to do with hillary clinton and perhaps that tarmac meeting wasn't just dealing with grandchildren and golf. >> that is correct and that was their explanation. it was innocuous meet

i am someone who believes in the integrity of the department of justice. i'm an institutionalist as many are who appeared on your show. and it's important for people to have faith in those decisions that are made at the department of justice. i don't see how anyone can have faith in what bill barr has done he. because -- not just because he's a political appointee but because of that memo that he wrote and it was questionable that he ever -- shouldn't have rekuds himself in the first place. i will say one thing, though. we're talking about mueller why did he do this, why did he leave it to barr. we don't know that he left it to barr. we just don't know. what we know is he didn't make the decision himself. he may very well have intended for this to go to congress. and you can debate if that was right or wrong. but that is very different from saying i'm going to now leave this to bill barr. and in fact i think that mueller -- all signs point to the idea that he wanted to leave it to congress and not to bill barr. and it is very plausible that barr inserted h

theft to the department of the justice to determine there because they are part of the department of justice unlike independent counsel, and what happened was that the department of justice made the conclusion that there was no obstruction, because there was no underlying crime. and that the actions that were taken as they noted publicly, the report identifies no actions in our sdwlauchjudgment that co obstruction. >> can you tell us what robert mueller asked donald trump at least on paper? >> i cannot discuss that with you at this point. that would be not appropriate for me to do. we did answer a series of questions in writing that they asked for and the president did respond to those. >> if congress continues this and at some point tries to talk to you or talk to anybody involved in this investigation, how do you expect to handle those requests? >> i'm the president's lawyer. communications that i have are attorney/client privilege. >> in terms of the report, and what will be released to the public, are you expecting to request that anything is privileged in the report, or will you

bill: our producer at the department of justice sent this in. gibson confirms attorney general bill barr and deputy attorney general rod rosenstein are at the department of justice reviewing the report. it's likely we'll get the letter today about the principal conclusions. we know more now than we knew an hour ago. i will live that with you if the report does release principal conclusions. maybe it's 10 pages, 20 pages. how much will be revealed in this summary? >> it's going to be a top line. it won't be into the details. it will be headlines. that's it. bill: thank you so much for your time. andy biggs is the republic cab from arizona. just to let our viewers known. john radcliffe said they talked about a holding pattern. he said it's just speculation out there. congress is on break. but radcliffe and others are coming back late tonight sandra: william barr said he would seek the counsel of the special counsel himself about how to release the details within the limit of the law. bill: we are waiting on the summary report. we expect spit would

to washington now where house democrats are awaiting details from the justice department of want special counsel robert muller has found in his probe into russian interference in the twenty six thousand presidential election miller spent almost two years investigating that and possible collusion with president donald trump's campaign team trump has repeatedly condemned the mother inquiry as baseless which. let's go straight to washington where the w.'s helena humphrey joins us now so helena as we know the u.s. attorney general is now reviewing the moeller report a lot of people have been waiting with a great deal of suspense for a very long time to find out what's in it so when can we expect to hear. the short answer is not today we've just heard from the department of justice who says that william barr will not be handing over his principal conclusions to congress today one would imagine of course that he has got a big task ahead of him reading through that investigation of course it took two years to complete but once he has finished that summary he will hand it over to congress and th

but perhaps the southern district is saying, look, it's department of justice policy. we can't prosecute a president. so, i don't know how much more of an investigation they're going to pursue. >> i want to can you about that, again, representative connolly said, i think, wednesday or thursday, he was talking about the optics of hearing from the family. of course, now, the committee wants to hear from ivanka and don junior. and he was saying two subjects of the criminal probe of these people in the southern district of new york, and he says it may be better to let that play out before the committee and talk to them afterwards. what is your thought process? >> that make sense. i think normally, and they've done this so far, congress is trying to keep their investigation on one track and not interfere with criminal investigations. because at the end of the day if they do anything, if congress does anything to upset, interfere, i wouldn't say obstruct, but in some way affect the criminal investigation before it's completed, it could jeopardize that investigation. these pe

he works for the department of justice. their conclusion, which was then reviewed by the office of legal counsel which is the ones who look at these theories of law and fact, the deputy attorney general of the united states, rod rosenstein and the attorney general of the united states, bill barr, came to that conclusion that there was no basis for obstruction as there was also no basis for collusion. there was nothing in that sense to obstruct. they're parsing a word out of context without understanding the internal operating principles within which a special counsel operates under the department of justice guidelines and regulations. what bill barr did was follow the law. >> sean: let me ask you one last question. going forward is a big part of my opening monologue tonight. we know now there was never a real investigation into hillary clinton as it relates to the espionage act and obstruction of justice. i say if we're going to get this right, we've got to go back there. not only did they rig a primary, they tried to rig a

bob mueller may have concluded that the department of justice policies have to be followed.

of justice and attorney general to do everything they can to release

it then goes to the justice department -- department of justice for review in accordance with the law. >> i'm not trying to get you. >> ari, listen, with do respect, and i do watch your show, you are conflating. you conflated the independent counsel with the special counsel and you conveniently leave off where it says the president -- we're not accusing the president of a crime. a minor thing you leaf off. >> jay, jay, jay, save the media criticism for when we're not doing the interview. >> no media criticism. i'm asking you one. >> you want to get into it. >> we already did. >> tell the president this. the full screen up on the screen that we prepared for this interview has the entire quote. so what you just said was inaccurate. >> no, when you -- let's play the tape back. play the tape back. >> i will play the tape back, but i'm not going to do it during this interview. i've been reporting that all weekend, sir. i've got it back up on the screen. i'm not doing that to undercut you. just the fact is we have the entire quote. we deal with context here. jay, before i let you go, and vi

he loves the country and loves the department of justice. he loves the department of justice and the fbi. bill barr will be exceptional. it has to be cleaned out. what has gone on there for years has been terrible. you look at ohr and ohr's wife who worked for fusion gps and did this phoney report, the fake dossier. boy, it's a hornet's nest. i think that bill will do a great job. >> sean: one last question. the immigration. you saw the vote in the house. you might lose some republicans. you will veto it and it won't be overwritten. about 23 million with all of the other things. >> that's a lot. >> sean: how much will you have? >> well, first we will build over 200 miles of wall. i will call it a wall as opposed to barriers or slats. we need border security. you can't have border security watt a wall. if you didn't have it in ty hensley tijuana, you would have thousands coming across. -- you look at the number of people. if we had a wall we would not have to apprehend. people and drugs would not come into our country. the human trafficking i