it's a very carefully written statement from don mcgahn. i wonder if you would like to elaborate on it. >> well, i think it speaks for itself. as i said before, the words "to my knowledge" i think speak to nobody wanting to say as an absolute certainty that the president didn't try to find other avenues to influence the justice department. >> we also know that don mcgahn, as the white house counsel, spent hours, some 20 hours, talking to the special counsel, robert mueller and his team. is there any indication that this specific issue came up, that the president wanted to have the justice department prosecute hillary clinton and james comey? >> that i don't know the answer to. i do know he spent more than 30 hours with them and we also know that mueller has called a number of witnesses back if this did not get asked about. i imagine mcgahn could be called back in the future and asked about it. >> do we know if mcgahn actually wrote that memo he said he was going to write to the president explaining the negative consequences of potentially l

mcgahn, recommended that he not go down that road. >> it was seen, jackie, potentially by don mcgahn as abuse of power and could lead to impeachment. >> well, right. it seems like the former white house counsel was trying to save the president from his worst impulses, but, as we know, the president casts a wide net with who he was talking to and apparently he was talking to folks that were firing him up, pushing him to want to pursue comey and hillary clinton. and, you know, the white house counsel was doing his best to serve his client. >> and the article also says, susan, that the president is deeply disappointed in the fbi director, christopher wray, whom he now sees as weak because he wasn't assertive enough in launching an investigation of hillary clinton. >> yes, i think we should understand these other investigations are about throwing sand in the eyes. he is actually concerned about the excessive focus on the russia investigation, the obstruction investigation and he wants to distract using these other investigations. this is abuse, plain and simple. secretary clinton was inv

this, history is going to look favorably on mcgahn as trying to may be taken guardrails. >> don mcgahn is gone from the white house. jeff sessions is gone from the administration, and now the president has his own guy, matt whitaker as acting attorney general. again, the thrust of this piece you write is the president has tried to use the justice department as a tool to be wielded against his political enemies really like no other president has. with sessions gone -- >> for -- or at least not since richard nixon. >> my question is with whitaker in place, his own guy in place, is there concern maybe he'll feel emboldened to try this type of thing again? >> i think even if he did, it would be difficult with democrats holding subpoena power beginning in january. it's different when it was an entirely republican congress. i think there are things he could do in the next two months, but i think that would be very difficult to sort of go ahead with under cover of darkness. >> maggie haberman. a lot going on. thank you for your reporting and time. >> thank you. >>> just to expand a bit on the

and told him, let's do this, and don mcgahn put a stop to it. that's the recording. unless you have something other than "the new york times" -- >> no, no, i'm just hoping that the system worked enough that he was blocked or shut down -- the question will become not only his intent, was there actually any action taken which became an abuse of power? >> i'm only pushing you -- i'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt in life, but the facts of what they are unless you have something different from the times. >> no, i'm hoping mcgahn not only gave advice but stopped him short of an action which would have set this in motion and become an abusive power. it will be a question of, did he talk about it? did he attempt to do it? or was there actually an affirmative act that set this in motion? if there was, you are right, it is an abuse of power. what i think it really raises, i hope for those around donald trump, is, we have a president, right or wrong, who is the most inexperienced in the culture of the office, the laws of the country, the o

sources close to don mcgahn say don mcgahn did heroic thing. what is amazing about this "new york times" piece that is published tonight, though, is the whole first part of the story is about trump saying he wants to order these prosecutions, right. he wants to order the prosecution of comey and clinton, and mcgann heroically explains to the president and puts in writing that that would be a terrible idea. but then eight paragraphs into this story, there is this sort of parenthetical reference, oh, by the way, also some time last year mr. trump's lawyers did privately ask the justice department to investigate mr. comey. law enforcement officials declined their requests. okay. so here we have a superman story short of a cape in which white house counsel don mcgahn is stopping trump from doing this terrible thing, stopping trump from injecting himself into law enforcement matters to start an investigation into clinton and comey, but also we should also mention eight paragraphs in that don mcgahn did go to the justice department and tell them to s

don mcgahn is not in the white house anymore. i'm not sure he would have consider himself a champion of the resistance, exactly. for whatever check and balance force he imposed on the president, that is gone now. and in the same way that jeff sessions was the idea of a neutral person and yet he seems to have not done everything the white house wanted, now there's matt whitaker there. we're entering a new era -- >> you make an interesting point. no one has ever accused jeff sessions of being a liberal on any front nor don mcgahn. these are conservatives. the bigger question to elliot is we thought there were adults in the room who protected the president from his worst impulses. i think it's fair to say, i'm not stretching as a journalist to say, suggesting the department of justice prosecute your political rivals is one of the worst impulses a president can have. and it's not clear from what charlie said that we have people to protect the president and by extension the country from this. >> don mcgahn was the grownup in the room.

he asked don mcgahn to do that. mcgahn rejected it. "the new york times" also reporting that trump wanted the justice department to investigate the man he had fired as the fbi director, jim comey. "outfront" now, the republican governor of ohio, 2016 presidential candidate john kasich. governor, i appreciate your time tonight. obviously this news, breaking just before we came on the air. >> erin, before we -- yeah, before we go any farther, first of all, congratulations on being back and god bless owen, your little baby boy. >> thank you. that is very kind. nice to hear his name on the air. >> there you go. >> what's your reaction to this development tonight? >> look, i am no longer sort of surprised by anything. in fact, i called my legal counsel and i said, how can a president tell the attorney general who to indict? i mean, it just doesn't work that way. so, i've got no idea what that was about. it's, you know, it's just another head shaking, head scratching move that we see, and then of course coupled today with this statement abou

who knows who's coming after him meaning don mcgahn when don mcgahn leaves. i think don mcgahn is just being careful and saying we're going to paper this, tell him exactly what he needs to know because we know he wanted to do the opposite, if you listened to what he was saying on those recordings. so mcgahn is just doing his job there. >> also from rudy giuliani, he said questions included what he knew about don jr.'s trump tower meeting. would those be easy for mueller to prove? >> well, they might be in a situation different from this. don jr. obviously discussed with his father what he said to the mueller investigators. so the president and his lawyers are completely aware of what don jr. said, and they ka tacan tai the responses to make sure they're not contradicting jr. and getting him in trouble and at the same time not incriminating the president. having a team of lawyers to craft your answers make it easy to skate by different areas. >> thank you so much. happy thanksgiving if i don't see you. >>> chief justice roberts pushing back against president t

he tried to get don mcgahn to intervene to recuse himself. these are all things that ended up being a problem for this investigation, for the president. and it caused don mcgahn to spend about 30 hours with robert mueller as part of this investigation. to towards the end there, we're told by sources that the president was tired of don mcgahn. he had a very, very successful tenure as the white house counsel, stacking the courts with conservative judges. >> he was so instrumental in that, just in all the federal court appointments. >> it was just a bad relationship towards the end, obviously. >> i wonder if he's going to hawaii or some tropical vacation. >>> no joking matter, this is bizarre. bob mueller is now asking the fbi to investigate what looks to be a coordinated smear campaign against him, paying women off to lie? >> right, exactly. the website, a conservative website, posted these documents that seemed to indicate there was these allegations against robert mueller of sexual assault. it was all apparently at least a hoax attempt agains

trump told this to his white house counsel at the time, don mcgahn. the times reports that don mcgahn, quote, rebuffed the president, telling trump that he had no authority to order a prosecution. mr. mcgahn said that while he could request an investigation, that, too, could prompt accusations of abuse of power. to underscore his point, macon, georgia began had a white house lawyers write a memo for mr. trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequence including possible impeachment. now, it's not clear if president trump read that memo, but according to the times, he has continued to privately suggest investigations of both comey and clinton, including the possible appointment of a second special counsel. to be clear, these ideas have been on the president's mind for a long time, since before the 2016 election. >> it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of donald trump is not in charge of the law in our country. >> because you'd be in jail. >> the times reports that trump h

recall he had a conversation with don mcgahn. told don mcgahn to call up the doj and get something done. mcgahn said i'm not doing it. and you know what? if you order me to do it i'm leaving. >> what does that tell you about the president in terms of what he knows about how power is supposed to be used? is this about misfeasance or potential malfeasance? the difference for the people at home, is this him just not knowing you don't do this or is this him saying i know what my power is and i want to use it this way? >> i think what it tells you is that donald trump has no unexpressed thoughts, which is too bad because we all have unexpressed thoughts. we have -- >> what is that, unexpressed thought -- >> a thought you wish you could do that you don't then articulate because you know you can't do it. we all have thoughts like that and unfortunately with him, there's no monitor stopping it. however, he does have, whether it's the good sense or the good luck, to voice those thoughts to his lawyers. >> can you imagine -- >> to don mcga

now the question, john and alisyn, is whether the president read the memo that don mcgahn had outlined explaining why he couldn't do this, because trump continues to talk about it and continued to be frustrated with the fbi director and he continued to be frustrated with the attorney general, jeff sessions, for not doing what he believed he should do with regards to james comey and hillary clinton. james comey is a witness against the president in robert mueller's investigation, an investigation that includes whether or not the president thought to impede this investigation. >> among other things we know the president has been asking matt whitaker, his new acting attorney general about what the justice department was doing with hillary clinton, for the past year, which among other things proves the president was lying when he said he didn't know matt whitaker. >> and it sounds that matt whitaker played around, he had been briefed about it so when he went into the oval office, he played along, yeah, sure, i oppose he would look into it, and then didn't. >> to the issue of what the legal

but back to don mcgahn, he's gone. does it make it more interesting that he sat down for 30 hours of interviews with robert mueller and that investigation continues a pace? >> yeah. it is very interesting and it is probably going to keep the president up at night just a little bit. matt whitaker, any of the lawyers around the president, have got to be thinking at some point about themselves, that they will have to incur legal bills, they will have problems with their own reputation or legal standing. he is leading the white house. he is leading his administration into a really, really sticky situation. and those who remember watergate, you know, can't help but say we have been here before. you can't do this. nixon sicked the irs on his enemies. he ordered the justice department on his enemies. when it all came out, the house committee put it right into the articles of impeachment. >> everyone should look at article two of the articles of impeachment. it is interesting. talk to me about witness don mcgahn. he has testif

we also reached out to don mcgahn. no response from him. but he did say in part, through an attorney, to the "new york times," chris, that "mr. mcgahn would point out that the president never to his knowledge ordered that anyone prosecute hillary clinton or james comey." having said that, chris, this has been met with criticism. you have democrats and republicans expressing concerns about the fact that the president would float this idea, including former attorney general and white house counsel under former president george w. bush, alberto gonzales who said the very idea of this is inappropriate and potentially dangerous. remember the core of what that "new york times" piece says, which is that don mcgahn warned it could potentially open the president up to impeachment. now, all of this comes, chris, as we are tracking new developments in the mueller investigation. the president and his attorneys turned over written answers to questions from special counsel robert mueller. of course the president has indicated he's not likely to sit down

. >> frank, this is another instance of don mcgahn as one of the human guardrails around the president. does this article also kind of out mr. whitaker as a potential witness? you've got the president coming to the chief of staff at the justice department under sessions, saying in effect, hey, how we doing on that investigation of hillary? >> yeah. there's no question now in my mind that at some point mr. whitaker's going to find himself either testifying before congress, as to what transpired, who asked what when, what was the tone, what was the intention that he inferred or, and/or he's going to find himself being interviewed, if he hasn't already, by a member of the special counsel team. he has essentially made himself a fact witness by even engaming in these types of discussions. if the reporting's accurate, brian, that essentially the president went around the attorney general of the united states to his chief of staff and made inquiries about investigating political enemies, then, look, we've got even clearer evidence that the president is not intending to use proper channels but

don mcgahn was at ground zero. he's seen all these things first hand. he's an eyewitness. he will be mueller's most important witness. in this case, there's no privilege. he's not donald trump's personal lawyer. he's the white house lawyer. he's the government's lawyer. he's met with mueller many times for many hours. there's a good reason for that. if you go back to watergate, judge dean was a neophyte lawyer. when he realized he was going be scapegoated and the one that would be blamed for the cover up, he went to the prosecutors. richard nixon did his best to keep the prosecutors from hearing dean's testimony. he talked to assistant attorney general peterson who was the head of the criminal division and said do not give dean immunity. he thought he wouldn't talk. >> your point is other than the audio tapes, john dean, as white house counsel was one of the most incriminating things against nixon? >> his testimony was amazing. he had sump ch detail. the tapes came out and corroborated his version sometimes verbatim. >> mcgahn would be the new dean with the same job. here

i think don mcgahn did his job. i would like to believe any white house counsel in that position would have done the same thing. that's your job as white house counsel, to protect those kind of communications between the white house and the department of justice. >> you said any white house counsel in that position would have done the same thing. can you ever imagine you being in that position with george w. bush? >> president bush was sometimes frustrated with the performance of a cabinet official and might have expressed that frustration privately. i think what we have seen differently from this president is he appears to have no calms about voicing his frustration. from my perspective it would make my job more challenging, and certainly more interesting. >> that's one way to look at it. let me read you the second article of impeachment for richard nixon. karl was saying just think of the similarities between what was being discussed to impeach richard nixon and now. in disregard of the rule of law he knowingly mi

two people tell the times that president trump told then white house counsel don mcgahn in the spring that he wanted to order the justice department to investigate james comey and hillary clinton. he told the president he didn't have the authority and while he could request an investigation, that could prompt abuse of power accusations. he had lawyers write a several page document in which they strongly caution trump against asking the justice department to investigate anyone. while it is unclear whether trump lead to memo. doj lawyers could refuse to follow olawyers, congressional investigation and possible impeachment and public back lash, leading to being voted out of office. two people say the president has continued to privately discuss the matter. >> comey is a leaker and he's a liar and not only on this stuff, he's been leaking for years. he is guilty of crimes and if we had a justice department that was doing their job instead of o -- >> it's your justice department. mr. president -- >> because of the fact they have this witch hunt going on with people in the justice departmen

the lawyer, don mcgahn, rebuffed the president saying he had no authority to order a prosecution. mr. mcbegan said while he could request an investigation, that too could prompt accusations of abuse of power. to underscore his point, mr. mcgahn had white house lawyers right write a memo for mr. trump, warning if he ask law enforcement to investigate his rivals he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment." now both "the times" and cnn also report that trump repeatedly pressed officials at the justice department, including matt whitaker, when he was chief of staff to jeff sessions about the status of clinton-related investigations. trump's desire to use federal law enforcement to go after his rival is not new. we take you back now to the second presidential debate in st. louis. >> if i win, i am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. >> it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of donald trump is not in charge of the law in our country. >> because you'd be in jail. >> secretary clinton -

among them, don mcgahn has testified to get a great personal incentive. we know that obstruction of justice is a line of inquiry. do you look at the incident as something that beyond being politically troublesome could be legally troublesome in the special counsel's investigation? >> as you point out don mcgahn has been cooperative with robert mueller. you don't spend 30 hours. i think everything he knows mueller knows. i think it is absolutely the case that this is one of the things that mueller is going to be looking at when he is looking to try to prove whether or not the president had corrupt intent. when i say the word corrupt, that's actually in the statute. that's what robert mueller would have to prove to show that the president -- this is something that i would think that mueller would look at because it goes to show that the president's intent is to try to go after his enemies and help his friends. >> his financial disclosures, took some redactions and time to get this out but now we know based on cnn's reporting and others a conservative group

that might have a different take than what don mcgahn was. don mcgahn was saying don't do this, cautioning against this. matt whitaker might have a completely different take. >> also saying apparently at one point if you want to do it, mr. president this could lead to impeachment. i know you communicated with giuliani by text, what did he tell you about the answers to bob mueller? >> so far what we do know is the president didn't want to talk about anything having to do with obstruction of justice and they really focused on russia's connections and things that russia might have done, but the president's lawyers and the president himself don't want anything to do with the obstruction of justice investigation. i think that i've talked to -- i've talked to rudy giuliani several times, and every single time he's repeated over and over again that it's a witch hunt, that it's a hoax, echoing the language we hear from the president, and he's essentially saying there's nothing to see here, but if you want to talk to us about what russia could have do

everything that don mcgahn knows, bob mueller knows. he has an obligation to disclose, he's a lawyer. i'm not doing primary reporting on this, i imagine he has it wrapped up to be the elements of obstruction. an angry statement there is different than a prolonged pattern to try to black ball, destroy the liberty of individuals or key witnesses involved in the obstruction probe. i think the "new york times" today has one of the biggest stories we've seen in the entire mueller probe. >> the "new york times" -- the president has not shied away from publicly speaking out on james comey. >> comey is a leaker and he's a liar. and not only on this stuff, he's been leaking for years. no collusion, no obstruction. he's a leaker. he gave it to a friend to leak classified information. it's all classified. it was totally classified. so illegally he did an illegal act. look, he's a showboat, he's a grandstander. the fbi has been in turmoil. you know that, i know that, everybody knows that. >> and likewise as we mentioned ament a meninute ago and as

. >> trump's doj pursuits were ultimately scuttled by white house counsel don mcgahn. in a memo mcgahn warned the president that targeting clinton and comey could be considered an abuse of power. he suggested following through with the idea could prompt calls for donald trump's impeachment. the new york times provides fresh ammunition to opponents of matt whittaker's opponents. when he appeared as a cable pundit, the mueller investigation wausn't the only target. he raises the prospect of prosecuting hillary clinton. >> there's plenty of evidence to support a criminal charge. i think anything under the espionage act which is section 793f of 18 united states code could be justified. >> a trump administration could open this case and relook at these charges. however petty that might seem to some. >> with whittaker in and mcgahn out, our big question is what happens when there's no one else left to tell the president no? joining me kelly o' donell who joins us from west palm beach and kimberly atkins and chuck rosenburg. kelly, has the white house commented on this report

as don mcgahn pointed out, the fbi could have simply refused by saying there's insufficient evidence even to conduct an investigation. but again, it shows this incredible sense of self-entitlement, of being able to lash out at will, be able to ignore the facts and the law. making a statement in that letter regarding the crown prince that he may or may not have ordered the killing, what does it mean? that is a stunning sort of statement by a president of the united states that the reality is unimportant if a leader of a foreign country orders an assassination? that's the type of behavior that people are becoming more and more uncomfortable with. >> senator jack reed of rhode island. we really appreciate you being with us. >> thank you very much brianna. >>> just ahead, the president asked about keeping troops on the border during the holiday despite the fact there is no caravan emergency. hear his response it's really interesting. >>> a rare rebuke by chief justice john roberts about president trump. hear what roberts just said. makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else

don mcgahn felt that he had to act. they had to write a memo. they had to talk the president out of it. so clearly when you study the facts, this was a signal of an abuse of a very grave kind. >> michael zeldin, don mcgahn is a nervous nellie. he writes memos all the time. i'm just throwing out a suggestion as president. and, yeah, i'm angry at them. yeah, i think they had it in for me. and, yeah, i think that laws were broken. and as president, i am the ultimate executive. the doj is under me. i can suggest that they look at things. who says i ordered it? prove it. there's no proof of that, but i'm suggesting you go look at t. i don't like what they did. where's the abuse? >> it's not illegal. i think that the president, acting under his constitutional prerogatives as head of the executive branch, can order the justice department to institute an investigation. the justice department should then exercise its independent judgment to determine whether or not that prosecution is worthy. so in a pure criminal justice sense, i think the president was

president trump telling then white house counsel don mcgahn that he wanted the justice department to prosecute hillary clinton and former fbi director james comey. the newspaper cites two people familiar with the conversation. the "times" says mcgahn told the president he had no authority to order that and that white house lawyers drafted a memo for the president, that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment. even as a presidential candidate, mr. trump hinted at ordering an investigation into clinton. >> but if i win, i am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. >> reporter: and the new report raising more questions about the president's tense relationship with his justice department, including firing attorney general jeff sessions to new fears from democrats that his replacement, matt whitaker, might curtail the mueller investigation. >> it's going to be up to him. i think he's very well aware politically. i really believe he's going to do what'

david, there is no comment from the white house tonight on this story, and don mcgahn's attorney said simply that he would not comment on what legal advice he offered the president. >> all right, our chief white house correspondent jonathan karl. >>> we're turning to other news now, and to the urgent manhunt under way in st. louis at this hour, after a deadly attack inside a catholic goods store. a woman was killed inside. and here's abc's linsey davis. >> reporter: an active manhunt in st. louis tonight, after a woman was killed monday afternoon at a catholic supply store. >> gunshot wound. scene not secure, catholic supplies. >> reporter: authorities say 53-year-old jamie schmidt was a customer in the store when a man came in and sexually assaulted at least one woman and fired at schmidt. >> he already shot one female, so he's armed and dangerous. >> reporter: schmidt, a mother of three who sang in the church choir, later died at the hospital. the victim's sister-in-law told kmov -- >> i kind of feel like she resisted and that's why he shot her. and that's true to nature for jamie.

don mcgahn rebuffed the president saying he had no authority to order an investigation. mr. mcgahn said while he could request an investigation, that could prompt accusations of abuse of power. mr. mcgahn had white house lawyers write a memo for mr. trump warning if he asked law enforcement to invest gaigate h rivals he could face impeachment. joining mike and aaron here in the studio, yamiche alcindor. joyce and chuck are still here as well. take us through whitaker's role not just as a whitaker skeptic, but also as an enthussist for what you report donald trump is keen to do. >> this is the justice department who obviously is open to these ideas that the president would like. the president would like a second special counsel to look into hillary, to look into comey. he had talked with whitaker. i don't know if it was specifically about that but about this matter before he came on to do this. and you know, the president feels that a second special counsel would sort of even things out. if i have to have a special counsel, why can't you have a special counsel? and he thinks

and don mcgahn through the attorney did tell "the new york times" this, that he would point out that the president to his knowledge never ordered that anyone prosecute hillary clinton or james comey, but it is raising difficult questions for the president today, andrea. >> and as we say that from mcgahn is a denial, denial, denial, because he is not saying that he did not do it, but to his knowledge he did not. and do you have any doubt that robert mueller knows this already, because mcgahn has been cooperating, and this is part of the mueller investigation, and they have to decide what to do with it. >> i am sure they knew it, and mcgahn is an open book, and for mueller and everybody at the doj as you say, andrea, it is breaking all norms. you have in the papers today, these sort of the sputtering protests from the ex-doj officials, and you almost cannot articulate how off of the chart something like this is, but the president is seeming unaware at a what is on the charts at all. this is going all of the way to the end of what you could think of as kruptive u-- corruptive ue of powe

we don't know that about don mcgahn but he wrote a memo to the president stating what tom just said and may have told him in person and then he wrote a memo saying you can't do this. you cannot ask for a prosecution. you might be able to ask for an investigation but you will face blowback that could go as far as impeach. if you try to prosecute a political rival. put it in context. how serious is this? >> well, it is not a huge surprise given in the campaign that mr. trump was shouting lock her up suggesting he would go after hillary clinton and it is absolutely astonishing and mind blowing as a matter of democratic principles. the notion that a president, someone with the immense power of the executive branch to zero in on political rivals, pick and choose people regardless of the facts and the law and the american public needs to wake up on both sides of the aisle. this is -- we are on a slippery slope to tyranny. there's no question about it. and the issue then becomes what's the accountability? and was mentioned, sure, if something actually got before a court, the courts are functio

the lawyer don mcgahn rebuffed the president saying he had no authority to order a prosecution. mcgahn said he could request an investigation, that, too, could prompt accusations of abuse of power. to underscore the point, he had white house lawyers write a memo warning if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment. so we talk about impeachment as a possible end point in the mueller investigation. it looks like the white house counsel don mcgahn thought the president could end up impeached for wanting to prosecute his political rivals. >> yeah, that was an extraordinary story. and it just speaks to how much trump has wanted throughout this presidency to make the justice department his own personal legal affairs shop. he wants his roy cohn as attorney general. the reason he was so steaming mad with jeff session overs all these months is that sessions wouldn't act unilaterally to protect him. >> wourecused. >> that's not how the government worked. how america was set up as a country. that's not how a de

don mcgahn met him at the time and liked him. and later, in july of 2017, don mcgahn brings whitaker to the white house and has a chat with him and thinks he can be a type of attack dog directed at mueller. for whatever reason, the white house goes a different way and hours a ty cobb but he keeps his eye on whitaker and then installs him as jeff sessions' chief of staff in october of 2017. >> one of the things that mcgann and others in the white house would have seen, if they were keeping their eye on whitaker is all the television appearances when he worked for cnn, some of which were critical, some very critical of the mueller probe and some which even suggested ways the mueller probe may be brought to an end. i want to read some reporting from bloomberg today and then we'll show a piece of the sound from cnn. acting attorney general whitaker has told associates that the justice department will not cut the budget for special counsel robert mueller's investigation into election interferences said a person familiar with the matte

there's no abuse of power contrary to when nixon set these investigations on his enemy. >> don mcgahn who was at the center of the reporting saying that mr. mcgahn will not comment on his legal advice. the president is entitled to confidentiality. mr. mcgahn said the president never to his knowledge order that anyone prosecute hillary clinton or james comey. shep? >> shepard: i reported earlier that president trump's lawyers said he turned in his written answers to the questions from mueller. >> that's right. the president's legal team issued a brief stayed not long after your show yesterday confirming that the president's written responses are now with republican. they dealt with russian-related questions. he said -- >> president has nonetheless provided unprecedented cooperation. shortly before the confirmation from the legal team, the president fielded questions on the white house lawn. >> the written answers to the witch hunt that's been going on forever, no collusion, no nothing, they've been finished, finished them yesterday. the lawyers have them. i assume they'll turn them in

i can guarantee no one ever asked don mcgahn the campaign's lawyers and white house counsel, is this a good idea? there was no process in that campaign to do that normal type of vetting and that's how you wind up with people making decisions like this without good legal counsel to tell them are you crazy? you're meeting with a foreign national, representative of form nationals in the midst of a campaign with information on other candidate? you can't do that, that's not good. can't do that. all right, you need a lawyer to grab these people by the lapels, you know that sometimes people, you know, sometimes family members are very intense in the campaign and winning is everything, and advocating for your guy is the mo he is important thing or your woman and i get that. but that's why we have lawyers in campaigns who can make everybody step back, wait a second, i know you'd love to get dirt on hillary clinton, but we can't take any dirt from the russians on hillary clinton or the chinese, or the turks, or whoever is walking in the door so i'll go as the lawyer and meet with those people

the source says don mcgahn quashed the idea. warning the president that if you do something like this, bad things can happen to you. the news raises more red flags. cuomo's court in session. gentlemen, thank you for joining me just before thanksgiving, i am thankful for both of you h d handsome lads. i am the president of the united states. i am in charge of the doj. you work for me. go figure it out. what did i do wrong? >> well, chris, what you have done there is send a signal about abuse of power. o one of the grossest signals of such an abuse in the american history. i had the privilege of talking to the president sitting in the oval office and when a president says that he is thinking that he wants to order the prosecution of someone, that's taken serious. and that is intent. the proof that this was taken seriously and this was extremely close to action, don mcgahn felt like he had to act and talk the president out of it. when you study the facts, this was a signal of abuse of a very grave time. micha michael zeldon. i thin

>> it wasn't trump interviewing whitaker for that job, it was don mcgahn, the white house counsel, who thought he might be a good fit for the in-house guy, and trump sdidecided to go with cobb instead. so we don't know if he knew anything about whitaker that early. although saying he didn't know him is ludicrous given how much he would have been in meetings. >> there's at least a dozen that we can count. >> i would like to say, i do not think -- i disagree that mueller will indict president trump or even that he thinks he does have that authority. clearly the justice department says he does not and there is no sign that he or rod rosenstein or matt whitaker would try to challenge that longstanding rule within the justice department. >> interestingly, charlie, because the democrats have written to the justice department ethics officer. they want to get whitaker out. but trump was really angry with sessions for recusing himself and he never let that go. does whitaker have any choice but to do what the president asks? >> i don't think president trump would have put whitaker in there if he

clinton and, you know, don mcgahn pushed back on it and said you don't do that. you can't ask them to prosecute and you might get impeached. rudy giuliani is now talking about this. he told the hill he thinks hillary clinton should be investigated. he told the hill hillary clinton should be investigated for possible obstruction of justice. of course she should be investigated giuliani said for obstructing justice in a gross and massive way. >> it's just more red meat being thrown to the base. it doesn't do the country any favors to misalign people and give them false explanations for the way our government is supposed to work. on the one hand it's just absolutely improper for a president to direct the justice department to prosecute his political enemies. i don't think that that needs a lot of explanation. we all get that's what separates us from banana republics. on the other hand, hillary clinton has already been thoroughly investigated, maybe more thoroughly than anyone in recent history in this country. she's already been given a clean bill of health by law e

don mcgahn is gone. you have a trump loyalist serving as the top law enforcement in the land. >> the guard rails are always under threat. the rule of law is a construct. it's not an absolute. it's not like the law of gravity. if the people who are tending to the rule of law, people who are tending to the guardrails don't take it seriously, it's always under threat. i wouldn't over index on what mr. whittaker may have said when hef he was a television analyst. while i think we know what we're talking about, we don't have all the facts. what he says as attorney general matters mump moch more. if he can put aside the views he formed as a pundit or as an analyst and do the job he took the oath to do, maybe the guardrails hold. we got to wait and see. >> michael, let me ask you about robert mueller. yesterday marked a major milestone. the president about 18 months of complaining about it, turned over the written responses. they are pre-presidency. they don't deal with obstruction of justice. we have new repor

jeff sessions and don mcgahn. neither of them are some great figure, but boy, compared to their replacements, i mean, these guys look like legal giants. the two new people are put in there for one reason, and one reason only, they're lackeys. they are nobodies that will do the president's bidding, and that is a dangerous thing. >> so let's remove the personalities and get your legal analysis of -- if you have a report that a president tried to abuse the powers this way, is that alone a high crime? >> 100%, it doesn't matter whether the president is a democrat or a republican, the word begins with i and it ends with t. >> and that's where we are, and this should not be lost because of the timing around the holiday or anything else. it seems to me, it's bigger than firing comey. >> this is not about politics. this is about the rule of law and its most central essence, which is are we going to be governed by standard principles or let a president corrupt it and say i can go after my enemies and go after someone who m

don mcgahn is not there. and i'm sure he was probably a firewall for these kinds of things that trump wanted to do before where he probably said, uh, no, mr. president, that's not a great idea. that position is vacant also. so who is advising him, other than jared on these things? >> also, how about google, right? google -- >> they stopped at the youtube searches. >> truly. this is easily accessible information. it wasn't like you had to hire a private detective to dig this information up. >> everybody stick around. coming up, but wait, there's more. a new cnn investigation into matthew whitaker's days as a u.s. attorney and his big embarrassment after investigating a political opponent. you will see this first on "the lead," next. stay with us. booking a flight at the last minute doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights, go to priceline. be right back. with mo

>> i constantly ask myself what it must be like to be don mcgahn in the white house. you get these queries does he understand what he's saying. the truth is i don't think he does. what consistently comes up the president doesn't understand how the functions of government worker and that the judiciary is supposed to be nonpartisan, somewhat separate and should be no undue command influence. no leadership pressure on where the investigations go. he does not understand natural. and consistently even after firing comey you would think he would sort of pull back and say okay i'm pushing too far. he continues to pursue which is just striking that he puts himself in that danger which tells me he doesn't understand even to this day that those aren't really his people that are there, authors the servants of the united states and the american people and that he's the one who selected them. it's just confusing why he would continue to put himself in that danger. i'm sure don mcgahn was alarmed when he had the question and to don't write me bhos the same reasons why this is a bad

a source telling cnn, president trump wanted now ex white house counsel don mcgahn to ask the justice department to prosecute hillary clinton on multiple occasions. mcgahn, according to the source, refused. the "new york times" first broke the story of president trump's request to prosecute not only clinton but also former fbi director james comey. cnn's kaitlan collins has more. >> reporter: nearly 1,000 miles from washington, president trump's troubles have followed him here to southern florida. as he hit the links with famed golfer jack nicklaus today, trump faced growing criticism back home from republicans and democrats alike after he pledged his loyalty to saudi arabia, despite the grisly killing of a journalist. >> it's not too much to ask an ally not to butcher a guy in a consulate. >> reporter: that criticism coming from one of the president's closest allies on capitol hill. trump responding to the backlash by thanking the saudis. tweeting, oil prices getting lower, like a big tax cut for america. thank you to saudi arabia. the president making clear, he is standing by his ex