barr hold his press conference about mueller without mueller or anybody on mueller's team, that's a huge red flag. i mean, barr's initial decision within 48 hours of receiving mueller's report in the first praise that he would release his own exculpatory summary of what he said are mueller's conclusions despite the fact that mueller prepared his own summary of his own work intended for public release. that was a red flag big enough to use as a bed sheet. but now on top of all of that, tonight the "new york times" reports this. ahead of whatever is going to happen tomorrow, the "new york times" reports that barr has already given the white house access to mueller's report before it has been shown to congress or before any version of it has been shown to the public. they've already been talking it through with the white house. the "new york times" reports tonight quote, justice department officials have had numerous conversations with white house lawyers about the conclusions made by robert mueller, the special counsel in recent days according to people with knowledge of the discussions. t

that's one reason we wanted the mueller report, we still want the mueller report in its entirety, and we want other evidence too. >> democrats are dismissing the evidence of attorney general barr and demanding to hear directly from the man who authored the report, bob mueller. already setting the wheels in motion, jerry nadler. >> i have formally requested that special counsel mueller testify before the house judiciary committee as soon as possible so we can get some answers to these critical questions. because we clearly can't believe what attorney general barr tells us. >> democrats are not stopping there as cnn's manu raju tells us, they're gearing up for a fight. >> reporter: good morning, christine and boris. house democrats are planning to pursue their investigations on multiple fronts. there will be a full-court press to demand the full mueller report, the unredacted mueller report, including the grand jury information that democrats have been asking for but the justice department so far not willing to turn over. expect subpoenas that could come out as soon as friday. at the sa

mueller, i was shocked at the possibly of leaks from the mueller investigation. congress leaks all the time. i'm sorry for my fellow citizens most of whom russia is not number one or 2 on their list of concerns, the russia investigation, they will be living with this except in a worse way. rob: six democratic teachers preparing to launch an investigation to determine whether the president obstructed justice. time for you to weigh in. what do you hope to see with this investigation going forward? send your comments on facebook, twitter, instagram, send us an email, everyone will share your responses in the next hour, we want to see what should congress do? jillian: 10 minutes until the top of the hour. the media melting down over the mueller report. >> i find william barr's behavior inappropriate. he is defending the president. >> we see a reduction. >> is this what i am seeing? rob: at the press conference and the decision to not charge obstruction. are those criticisms fair? we debate next. - in a crossfit gym, we're really engaged with who we are as people and

the evidence robert mueller uncovered, the report revealing the president wanted robert mueller fired. and who he wanted to do it. and tonight, why did robert mueller stop short on obstruction of justice? pierre thomas and dan abrams standing by. >>> president trump's response tonight. >> no collusion, no obstruction. >> this evening, what the mueller report reveals. was the president saved a number of times by members of his own team who refused to do what he asked? jon karl live at the white house. >>> and tonight, democrats erupting in anger, demanding robert mueller testify before the american people. mary bruce on the hill. >>> also badwa as ome on r. already a number of reported tornadoes. the severe storm threat from new orleans all the way east. tonight, tomorrow, good friday and passover. and rob marciano has the track and timing tonight. >>> what caused the fire at the notre dame cathedral? tonight, what we have just learned. >>> here in new york city, the scare inside st. patrick's cathedral. what authorities have now veale. >>> the major change tonight for anyone taking an

mueller marshals the evidence. and why trump's defenses don't stand up. >> do you think that's the only reason he didn't take the next step for recommending a charge on that was because of the olc guidelines? >> that was my read. my read is that if donald trump or the attorney general of the united states, rather than the president of the united states, he would have already been indicted. >> you also, max, in your "washington post" opinion column, you say the report does not absolve the trump campaign of collusion. >> right. >> that's, i mean, that's -- >> barr was being highly deceptive there because, in fact, he said no collusion repeatedly. when you actually read the report, mueller specifically says we did not consider the issue of collusion. >> right. it's conspiracy. >> in terms of collusion, the mueller report finds numerous contacts between the trump campaign and the russians. it finds that donald trump knew in advance about the release of wikileaks documents, and it shows that there was a -- there was, in

left out of the mueller report. left out of the mueller report. so in this commercial we see two travelers at a comfort inn with a glow around them, so people watching will be like, "wow, maybe i'll glow too if i book direct at choicehotels.com". who glows? just say, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com i had nomine...ms of hepatitis c. ...caused liver damage. epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c. whatever your type, ask your doctor if epclusa is your kind of cure. i had the common type. mine was rare. epclusa has a 98% overall cure rate. i just found out about my hepatitis c. i knew for years. epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b other liver or kidney problems, hiv or other medical conditions... ...and all medicines you take, including herbal su

i want to go through this mueller cites mueller report. a series of unsuccessful actions that the president took to try to influence the election, including then-white house counsel don mcgahn telling him to have mueller removed in 2017. here's what the report says, mcgahn recalled that the president called him at home twice and on both occasions directed him to call rosenstein and say that he had conflicts that precluded him from serving as special counsel. mcgahn recalled him telling him, mueller has to go and call me back when you do it. in january of 2018, "the new york times" reported that the president had ordered mcgahn to fire mueller after the mueller report, it says after the story broke, the president threw his personal counsel deny that he had been directed to remove the special counsel. each time he was approached, mcgahn responded that he would not refute the accounts because they were accurate in reporting on the effort to have the special counsel removed. here's what the president said when asked whether he ever tried to fi

the full mueller report. release the full mueller report. >> senator richard blumenthal speaking in washington today at one of the several hundred protests that happened around the country today. this afternoon and this evening, protests calling for the release of the mueller report. 13 days now since it was completed by robert mueller and handed in to the office of trump's newly appointed attorney general, and it hasn't been seen since. there were protests today in washington, d.c. there were protests in new york city. good sized protests in new york city. there were protests in chicago and philadelphia and raleigh, north carolina, and albuquerque, new mexico, protests from denver to boston to st. paul, minnesota, to languahorn, pennsylvania. and it's interesting, these are not policy protests. this is not an interest group that is fighting for more attention to its cause which is sometimes what you see in coordinated nationwide protests, where people protest at hundreds of different sites. what these protes

mueller was appointed back in 2017. the report says this when then attorney general jeff sessions told the president that a special counsel had been appointed the president slumped back in his chair and said, oh, my god, this is terrible. this is the end of my presidency. i'm effed. >> leading democrats in the house not showing any new appetite for impeachment now that they have seen the redacted mueller report. house majority leader steny hoyer saying based on what we have seen to date, going forward on impeachment is not worthwhile at this point. very frankly there is an election in 18 months and the american people will make a judgment. conscious of just how hard it would be to persuade 2/3 of the republican controlled senate to vote to remove president trump. >> the evidence would have to be quite overwhelm and demonstratable and such that it would generate bipartisan support for the idea that it renders the president unfit for office. many of us think the president is unfit for office but unless there's a bipartisa

report and what we knew prior to the mueller report. but that fully needs to be exposed. and i think we can continue to do our oversight through the various committees. it doesn't have to be done through an investigation as part of an impeachment. so, again, my conclusion, consistent with what you're hearing from our leadership is, without the bipartisan consensus that would make it successful in the senate, there's little to be gained by putting the country through that wrenching experience. >> basically you agree with steny hoyer, the majority leader in the house of representatives, at least right now. don't start the house judiciary committee with impeachment proceedings. move on to some other issues but continue your overall investigation. >> wolf, i -- >> go ahead. >> i want to make one thing perfectly clear as well. and that is that it is not sufficient for the justice department to maintain that you can't indict a sitting president. and we're not going to share with you the grand jury material that may be necessary for you to con

that's what mueller is. mueller is back with the test. whether this is about collusion or indictable crimes and whether the president will or should be impeached, it's a picture of presidency. it's bob woodruff's book with quotes, right? any american should look at that and say, is this behavior, whatever threshold is reaches that i'm comfortable with, or that says, conveys a picture of a presidency. that's what disturbs me the most. so much of the media, so much of certainly conservative right wing media is just change the subject. move on. we've been through too much to simply change the subject and move on, regardless of where you come from on the political spectrum. >> one other observation. maggie haberman said this in a tweet. philip bump wrote a great piece making the same observation. we saw so much of this story unfold, is that when it finally landed, we knew a lot of the story. but up that haberman tweet, if you guys would. and the point is, what if -- no, not that one either -- what if it had come out -- there it is -- in one t

you can see from mueller's report, who cares what word we use, mueller was investigating the president of the united states personally and he had a lot, a lot of evidence about all these obstruckive episodes. so clearly rosenstein is trying to calm the president by getting him attached to this bureaucratic jargon that at the end of the day doesn't mean much. i'm sure defenders would say that's so he would lay off the probe. his detractors would say he knew this was the way it was going to go and it was rigged in some way. >> jeremy bash joins us by phone. if you take matt's excellent reporting and mash it up against the result, the word he just used, rigged, you can't help but ask the question. we're not making that allegation, nobody is. it certainly calls into question, if rod rosenstein assured the president at the end of september 2018, that he, as the man -- the one man overseeing the plumueller probe his office was the one office at main doj through which any information from robert mueller flowed. and that went on for days and weeks before robert mueller finished interviewing wi

that's not what the mueller report shows, is it, pete? >> well, you know, first of all, we have to say olc is office of legal counsel. this is a long standing opinion of the justice department under both republicans and democrats that for various constitutional reasons, a president cannot be indicted. i always put it simply by saying that you basically can't run the country from jail is the legal theory. so that's the way barr explained it. i think you're right in the way you set this up that the report is not really clear about this for a couple of reasons. on the one hand, it says, yes, a president can be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. it rejects a legal theory of the white house lawyers that because the president's basically in charge of everybody, no matter what he tells them to do, he has the right to do that. they reject that theory. secondly, they do say several times in the report, the mueller team that the evidence on specific obstruction, potentially obstructive actions is ambiguous. it points in both directions. but at

mueller's investigators say, mueller's investigators have told. when is the last time you saw reporting like that? you haven't seen reporting like that before. one of the other implications of this reporting tonight is that whatever william barr is trying to do with mueller's report, it appears to be rubbing robert mueller and his team the wrong way. and for the first time in this whole two-year process, they appear to be willing to squawk to make some public noise to make sure their findings are not abused or mischaracterized or submarined. maybe there will be now a new voice in this whole process from mueller and his team themselves. they've been silent throughout this entire process. now we're starting to hear from them. joining us now is neal katyal, former acting solicitor general in the obama administration. he is the author of the justice department regulations that define the office of special counsel. neal, it's great to have you here tonight. thanks for joining us on short notice. >> thanks, rachel. >> let me just ask you, i know you've

ten actions that mueller says the president took to hurt and end the mueller probe. sara murray is outfront. >> attorney general william barr mafd li pave cleared the president of the obstruction. >> i concluded that the evidence developed by the special counsel is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction of justice offense. >> but special counsel robert mueller, he clearly refused to do so writing in his more than 400 page report, the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. mueller's report covers in pains taking detail a potentially dachling list of at least ten ways trump repeatedly tried to curtail the investigation. mueller writes that the president was only unsuccessful because the people around him declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests. like june 17th, 2017 when trump directed don mcgahn to have to have mueller fired. mcgahn declined to do so saying he would resign rather than trigger what he would regarded as a pote

the first post-mueller report subpoena of a major mueller witness, this is mueller's star witness, don mcgahn. jerry nadler calling him to testify before the house. mcgahn's interviews with the special counsel cited 157 times in the mueller report as mcgahn detailed some of the most damning efforts of trump's efforts to crack down on the probe. he is now being compared with nixon's famous white house counsel who famously broke with nixon during watergate. mueller recounts mcgahn was afraid that trump's demands to fire mueller would be a massacre like nixon when the special prosecutor was ousted. that was the beginning of the end of nixon's presidency. to discuss this white house counsel's unique role in the mueller probe and beyond, i turn to kathy ruemmler, white house council to president obama. she also in all of this represented a mueller witness, george nader. thank you so much for being here. >> thanks, ari. it's great to be here. >> when you read the account of don mcgahn's time in the white house, was that similar, normal like your time? >> absolutely not, no. >> do you ever re

do you know why mueller didn't take it? >> i don't know why mueller didn't take it. certainly the way the process would work is it's the attorney general's kind of decision on what to tell congress and maybe mueller as we've talked ability. he's so by the book. he's so chain of command. he figures bill barr is my friends, a justice department veteran. he will handle this, it's handled in a way mueller feels is the wrong way. he has to interject. i'm speculating. i don't know why mueller declines that opportunity. >> one final question, matt. when he takes issue, do you know any specifics of the specific things he felt were mischaracterized? was it all obstruction? on how collusion was characterized or do you know any of those specifics? >> yeah. so for him personally, we don't know what's beyond the lettered and what we've reported in our story. before this, we had reporteding that members of his team were frustrated. particularly with the characterization on obstruction. they felt the case they laid out there was so much more damaging and compelling than mueller cou

did mueller want congress to decide this? did mueller know the a.g. was going to clear the president himself? and you heard the a.g. say that mueller didn't indicate the purpose was to leave this to congress, but he added, i hope that wasn't his view, but he acknowledged he didn't know what the view was. >> reporter: kind of amazing that the two of them had not coordinated this coming into it. i think it is also clear, though, that there is a divide between robert mueller and the attorney general on the issue of obstruction of justice. and you even heard william barr talk about the fact that he did not agree with some of the legal theories that robert mueller was using. clear when up read the report that mueller thinks that there was evidence of obstruction, specifically on particular instances. barr made it clear he looks at it all, he does not think there's obstruction. >> that was the first view of a potential break between the two. >> reporter: absolutely. >> dan, thank you. >>> the president and his legal team tonight calling it a total victory f

mueller testify? he sent that tweet out from wanda -- rwanda earlier today. >> he's been saying that for a while now. that win bill barr went through the confirmation process, this was a huge issue. how transparent is he going to be? what attorney general barr said today is, i didn't have to release any of this information. i am being as transparent as possible. reductions,l particularly the obstruction of justice part. i am going to be working with congress to show them what's behind some of these reductions. we still have yet to see how he responds to a subpoena that house judiciary committee chairman jerrold nadler said he is going to issue for some of the underlying material that went into this report. for the most part, you have lindsey graham on the senate side, a republican who has been a donald trump's corner saying, i trust mr. barr, a longtime conservative lawyer. to give us the information. if there is something in there that i don't like, i will as mr. barr for more information. at this po

mueller did say to barr that he thought that was not, it did not accurately convey all the sense of the report and suggested later in the follow-up call that mueller should release the executive summaries of the report. what justice officials tell me is what is similar to what the attorney general said publicly about this. number one, he could not release the executive summaries because at the top of every page and you see it if you look in the mueller report, this may contain grand jury information which can't be disclosed legally. he said to the special counsel staff, i can't tell what the grand jury material is and secondly, his concern was that he didn't want to release the report piece meal. that was his response and of course we know now that we have all seen the report and we can judge for ourselves whether the attorney general accurately characterized it in the letter or not. he didn't think his letter was accurate. >> what about the argument that he's thought the context was delivered wr

according to a senior law enforcement official who has spoken to members of mueller's team, mueller team members say the mueller report includes detailed accounts of trump campaign contacts with russian while mueller found no coordination or criminal conspiracy the official said, some on the special counsel's team say his findings paint a picture of a campaign whose members were manipulated by a sophisticated russian intelligence operation and so when the full mueller report comes out, will the trump defense be no collusion, just manipulation? russian manipulation of the trump campaign. house judiciary chairman jerry nadler his letter to the attorney general today begins this way. i write to you regarding troubling press reports relating to your handling of special counsel mueller's report and to your knowledge that you immediately release to the public nel summaries contained in the report that may have been prepared by the special counsel, "the new york times" and the "washington post" both report that some in the special counsel's office have raised concerns about your letter summariz

according to mueller quote, the

coming up, mueller mystery. the special counsel referred 14 different investigations to other federal prosecutors. 12 are fully redacted in the report. we will read between the lines next. ♪ here i go again on my own ♪ goin' down the only road i've ever known ♪ ♪ like a drifter i was-- ♪ born to walk alone! keep goin' man! you got it! if you ride, you get it. ♪ here i go again geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. i never thought i'd say this but i found bladder leak underwear that's actually pretty. always discreet boutique. hidden inside is a super absorbent core that quickly turns liquid to gel. so i feel protected and pretty. always discreet boutique. 98% of us don't get enough omega-3s. which is why megared advanced 4in1 packs more omega-3 power into one small softgel. it supports your heart... brain... eyes... and joints. megared. [outdoor♪ambiance] hi, mrs. gorman. hey, theo. police radio: i have the stolen vehicle in sight. [police siren] ♪ [police siren] ♪ [police si

this is the mueller report by the numbers. first, more than 30, that's the number of times president trump used phrases like i don't recall or i don't remember of i have no recollection in his official responses to the special counsel's questions to the russia probe. next, 36, that's how many pages all of the mueller report redactions would fill, 8% of the 448 page report. next, at least five, that's the number of times the report says president trump asked senior aides to lie either for him or for the administration. also five, that's the number of hours it took russian hackers to target hillary clinton after they heard trump say this after the trump campaign. 203. that's how many times the report mentions cnn, "the new york times," "the washington post," and nbc. the implication, robert mueller was leaning pretty hard on what trump likes to call the take news media for his definitive report. eleven, that's the number of instances of possible obstruction of justice allegedly perpetrated by trump and his associates, as examine

mueller. mcgahn refused to do that. how much weight does it carry? >> right. it's not surprising that mcgahn was such a central figure especially in the obstruction section of the report, which is volume 2. we've known a lot of this from public reporting over the last couple of years. what was surprising to me was the fact that, one, mcgahn actually spoke publicly about it and defended what was in the report and we saw this evolution from, you know, the president and his allies claiming this was a complete and total exoneration, that he was vindicated, so on and so forth. we've seen reporting and i've were the most iple white house concerned about what this report was going to say as far as his conversations with don mcgahn. it's not surprising that the president would go from it's a complete and total exoneration to calling it, quote, the crazy mueller report and appearing to target mcgahn and saying that people who take notes only do so when it's convenient for them. we saw in the report it

the mueller report? >> well, i think first of all, we want to give the special counsel mueller the opportunity to state what i think is completely pervasive in his report which is that the ball is in congress's court. it's up to congress to decide. he didn't kick it upstairs to the attorney general to declare there was no obstruction. on the contrary, he laid out ten episodes of attempted obstruction or obstruction by the president and basically said the congress, you go and do your job right now. so we'd like to hear him say that. i think. look, the global backdrop here is important. there is rising authoritarianism around the world, lots of efforts to interfere where people's democratic elections and human rights and russia interfered in our election and we can't have countries interfering in each other's elections. we need some kind of international treaty on that and also need to fortify our own state electoral systems. we have a very vulnerable and decentralized system with 51 different election pro

mueller said that's not dispositive. just because it's in public view doesn't mean that it couldn't still be harmful in an obstruction context. so that fact wasn't dispositive for mueller. it wasn't weighted the same was as it appears to have been for the attorney general. >> interestingly, the attorney general at the time, jeff sessions recused himself on the advice of the department of ethics lawyers in the justice department, but the special counsel basically says that his meetings, jeff sessions' meetings with russian officials, were nondescript and benign and nothing really substantive happened in those meetings. >> that's right, but it's interesting the special counsel still took note of all the pressure he was putting on sessions to unrecuse, and of course, the big question there is why. why was it so important to have an attorney general that he thought had his back, and clearly, he wasn't successful in those efforts, but they do outline all of the different pressures he put on a whole host of other people, even

and so donald trump fired robert mueller. and robert mueller stayed on the job. william barr knew that that passage was in the mueller report when he told us yesterday that donald trump cooperated fully with the mueller investigation. today it was congress' turn to be directly insulted by william barr. democratic congressional leaders immediately turned down barr's offer to them that they alone be able to see some of the redacted material in the mueller report. the chairman of the house judiciary committee which has jurisdiction over impeachment immediately and correctly according to all congressional precedent refused. >> i've been invited to read the less redacted version of the report on condition that we take no notes and tell nobody about what we read. what's the point of that? congress is a collective body. and if i read something and i can't tell the other committee members about it or the other members of congress, it's useless. that's frankly it's insulting to congress. we will work to have an accommodation with the attorney general. but in terms of seei

>> well, i think we want to hear from mueller. he has to come before congress, lay it all out as this report has. take back and forth questioning from members of congress. but i certainly don't think this report takes us farther away from impeachment. >> so you're not ruling it out? >> no, absolutely not. again, it's a conversation we have to have. and what we do today will set the standard of conduct for future presidents, and that's how i look at this. you know, not whether it's popular or not. of course i think we need to seek bipartisan buy in, but we set the future conduct of future presidents because they're going to look at how we acted right now. but what i would like to hear, don, i would like to hear a single republican who's elected to congress, who's in the senate at least say this is wrong, russia attacked us. the president should never act the way that he did, and i'm not hearing that right now and that really bothers me. >> congressman swalwell, thank you. appreciate it. >> of course my pleasure, don. >> let's talk

because the reality is, the mueller report, not just the mueller report for the mueller investigation, destroyed all of the predictions and hopes about what it would result in an what it would find. and that is why there is now the is this almost monomaniacal focus on the obstruction part of this story at the expense of the collusion part. let me set couple of things. this six nation on his legalistic -- this fixation on the report and cleaning a finding we did not establish something does not mean it did not happen or doesn't mean there is the evidence for it. irrational.ibly let me give you an example. i can conduct an investigation and come back and they, my investigation did not establish that there are martians who are controlling all of our thoughts and all of our actions using mind control methods. that would be true. i would conduct an investigation, the evidence would not establish that, but he would be true. i would add just because i did not find evidence to establish that does not meet a did not happen. that is because you cannot prove a negative. that is what mueller sayi

they now want mueller himself to testify. >> we'll probablyind it useful to ask mueller to testify and i assume we may ask members of his ifteam to test >> reporter: democrats want to see the full report wh no redactions. to rguing i had to adhere grand jury secrecy rules and protect witnesses including intelligence informants and timocrats want to investigate possible obstrucon by the president further. his reaction on twitter, presidential harassment as the president continues to claim total exoneration. jennifer johnson, nbc news, washington. >>> and there is still so much to unpack from what we just heard from the attorney general william barr and some critics immediately questioning barr and whetr or not he showed enough independence from the president who appointed him. >> matthew miller served as the director of pubc affairs at the justice department when eric holder was attorney general. here is what he had to say right after the news conference. >> i really thought it was an astonishing performance by e attorney general. i've never seen a attorney general or any u.s. attorney

mueller interviewed about 500 witnesses, except for one they wanted. they didn't get to talk to the president in person, and that hampered mueller's ability to prove intent. first and foremost, we urge everyone to read the report, as much as you can of it. it lays out in granular detail the russian interference in our 2016 presidential election, the many contacts made with many members of the trump campaign, it presents evidence the president repeatedly tried to disrupt the mueller investigation. the report lists ten different episodes of potential obstruction, but ultimately it concludes it was not mueller's role to determine whether trump broke the law. this morning, about 90 minutes before the report came out, attorney general william barr with deputy attorney general rod rosenstein at his side explained why they decided to make the call that the president committed no crime. >> after carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report and in consultation with the office of legal counsel and other department lawyers, the deputy a

it is one reason we wanted the mueller rorpt and still want the mueller report in entirety and other evidence too. >> congressman, will congress proceed with their own obstruction inquiries? >> we will proceed with our inquiries. the first thing we will do is make sure we get the rest of the report and the underlying evidence. we'll have attorney general barr testify may 2nd and i anticipate that mr. mueller will testify sometime in the next couple of weeks after that. and we'll probably hold a series of hearings on other aspects and we'll see where we go from there. >> did you choose to go toward impeachment, how important would this report be? do you think -- is it a road map? >> well, it is too early to talk about that. because we will have to go follow the evidence where it leads. and i don't know exactly where it will lead. if i did know, i wouldn't need all of this information. but certainly i think from the structure of the report, but i'm tentative because i've only skimmed it, haven't had it very long, i think it was written with the intent of providing congress a road map a

>> rudy: are not got about mueller. >> chris: who made mueller god, now you're declaring whether she was guilty or not. >> rudy: i'm saying there's a difference -- i'm just saying there's a difference -- i'm not saying she's guilty. the differences there is overwhelming evidence that you actually obstructed justice. she denied the investigators the information. nothing was denied to them. by the way, in the report they say they didn't have to question him because they had the answers to all the questions. write in the report. >> chris: they also see the answers were inadequate and they also said that to go through a subpoena was going to take a prolonged period of time. >> rudy: if my client has an unclear recollection, i'm not going to go stretch out for the prosecutor so the prosecutor can mail them -- >> chris: mayor giuliani -- >> rudy: like the one after that great general and ruin his life and bankrupted him. they should be ashamed of them selves. >> chris: mayor julie article thank you, thanks for sharing your holiday weekend with us. >> rudy: happy passover. >> chris: if you

to follow mueller. he didn't know what to do the next time he would get pressure from president trump. mcgahn decides to resign. this is the environment we're in in this white house with a very conservative, very loyal republican white house counsel. he then has to call his personal lawyer. mueller says he calls his personal lawyer and then his chief of staff. then he drives to the white house and quote packs his belongings to submit his resignation all to try to avoid in what he thought might be a crime of obstructing and firing mueller. mcgahn spoke with the president and he talks about he understood this direct ef and mcgahn says he has to quit because this would be akin to the saturday night massacre that contributed to the end of the nixon presiden presidency. he calls his lawyer. i'll read on more of this. mcgahn says he call and demanded they contact the department of justice and he avoids telling, this is very interesting. he avoids telling every one what donald trump asked him to do which is ev

mueller did a great job. now it's up to us and that committee judiciary to do our job which is to look into the report. i want to hear from mueller himself, what happened, what he found out. i want to find out from mr. barr what is it that led him to come up with that four page conclusion. you know why? the american public needs to know what actually happened, what these folks came up with. >> what would make you support -- i could ask it either way, what would make you support a resolution for impeachment to begin the proceedings, the house has to vote for a resolution to begin the proceedings, not to vote on whether he's guilty or not or to impeach him or not but to begin the proceedings, what would get you to do that, what in this story line that would develop that would say to you, okay, i'm for resolution to beginning the proceeding? >> i think the mueller report was a road map to get there. we just have to make sure that we look at the facts and that the facts are there to to substantiate an impeachment

this is a summary of what mueller said and no, you can't see what mueller actually said. i'm going to hold a press conference telling you what to think about it. you can't see for yourself what it is so you can come to your own conclusions. he likes how this is going to be portrayed down the line when he's written about attorney general in a long line of them. presumably the only person he's writing for is the president himself and why he feels like that's the man he needs to please here, that's for him to say. >> we are now less than 12 hours from hearing from the attorney general. so where does the investigation of the president of the united states stand tonight? tonight? as the breaking news about the release of the redacted version of the mueller report has been cascading this evening, news upon news. that's the question i answer at the end of this hour. the question of where do we stand tonight after we deal with all this breaking news happening earlier in the hour. now, it may seem like the end of a story because it appears to be the end of the mueller investigatio

let me repeat, mueller has to go. this is the kind of evidence that may be of more interest to congress than attorney general barr. this is the thing that every one remembers from nixon in the saturday night massacre because it happened. when you remember what we heard this morning and what i think is going to be an issue going forward, did donald trump have the intent to shut down the probe or not. this is the kind of evidence that cuts against donald trump. the idea that he took overt acts to tell people, quote, according to the mueller report, mueller has to go. >> don't move. i need you to stick around to participate in the questioning of our next guest. we have been joined by jay seculo who is on the president's legal team. counselor, thank you very much for joining us. my first question, i'm afraid will verge on plain english. where did the attorney general get off with that characterization this morning, including four mentions that there was no collusion? what document was he reading compared to the one we're

bob mueller or are you going to believe lindsey graham? bob mueller or donald trump? and that's what it's going to come down to. and the -- let's not forget, every house democrat has said that we are going to continue our investigations. mueller said, you know, basically, i hit a stone wall because people were either lying to me or they destroyed information. we don't know what's going happen with this investigation continuing. we don't know what's going to happen when people are called to testify and once again have to go under oath. so we need to continue going down this road and doing an investigation. let's see what comes of it. it may very well end up with impeachment proceedings, but we don't know yet. >> the risk of investigation fatigue. >> i think right now, i think it's objectively true that republicans are less of a united front than republicans are. >> i know what you mean. >> steny hoyer saying, we're not going to go ahead with impeachment. >> congresswoman dean looked like she was not ready to go to impeachment, but not ready to rule it out. >> and you h

mueller -- that was not mueller's conclusion. >> that's not what i said. >> i would zero in. okay, now you've had your interruption, we're even one each. >> i don't keep score of that on this show, as you know, ken. >> mueller and barr -- is that taking exactly the firing of the special counsel, if the president had done that that would be done on his article 2 authority. that is not a basis for an obstruction claim when he exercises his constitutional authority. that's the legal position of the attorney general. it's the legal position of alan dershowitz. >> i don't agree with alan dershowitz either. >> that's fine, i'm not saying you do. but i would also point out that in 448 pages, robert mueller never mentioned the precedent that is on point and that's the lawrence walsh special counsel precedent with bush pardoning wineberger and others on the doorstep of wineberger's trial. walsh didn't like it and he said he didn't like it. he didn't advance any -- >> that's not controlling precedent. it just happens to be an analog that we can look to. you're right to point at that. b

robert mueller. >> fake news. "new york times" fake stories. >> so he was lying there. right then when he said that. it turns out he was lying as it was reported at the time he wasn't telling the truth. that is just one of many trump claims that the mueller report has proved to be untrue. sarah murray here now with a look at others. sarah, what have you got. >> one of the things we learned in the report is the white house and the president lied to us a whole lot of times. that is not a crime lucky for president trump. when candidate trump said he had nothing to do with moscow over and over again and they were pursuing the trump tower moscow deal into 2016, much longer than we previously thought. we also learned that that infamous trump tower meeting, it wasn't about adoptions. we learned that mueller confirmed this was to get dirt on hillary clinton. that is something that they were not straightforward about. they also weren't straightforward about how this statement was crafted on air force one that said the meet

this is what robert mueller said. at byvestigation found the president capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigation. the president's efforts were mostly unsuccessful. that is because the person surrounding the president declined to carry out orders or a seat to his request. as a prosecutor, does that warned prosecution? jeffrey: you honed in on something different than how the attorney general profited. what did the person intent? even those around him, mcgann, who was his then counsel, and there was an iteration with corey lewandowski, he asked him to interfere. i think lewandowski handed it off to someone else. they saved him from himself but it is certainly one of the building box that could lead to an obstruction. that it didfound not rise to the level of a criminal conviction but perhaps congress can take it from here. david: let's talk about congress. attorney general william barr said robert mueller not asking congress to decide. congress can always decide to impeach. the attorney gene

he refused to speak to mueller. and as you can see in there, take the example of sarah huckabee sanders, she said something publicly, it was based on absolutely nothing. we would never have known that unless she was under oath, unless she was under threat of going to jail. and i think the same would have been true with the president. i think we would have learned a lot if the president had been compelled to speak. and i think it also speaks to why we need mueller and others to go to congress, where they can be asked questions openly, by members on both sides. >> and i think that's going to happen. scott, mueller seemed to leave open the possibility that president trump could be charged after he leaves office. former fbi deputy director andrew mccabe even said, he absolutely interpreted this as a road map to either begin impeachment proceedings or pursue charges against donald trump after he's no longer president. what do you make of that, scott? >> well, first of all, andrew mccabe is not a paragon of credibility in

including mueller. >> and he was saved by don mcgahn from firing -- from firing mueller. but, you know, the idea that there was sort no harm, no foul here, and just to raise -- just to raise another point that the -- why should he -- he should have been so upset because there was no collusion and it was unfair to have an investigation for something there was no underlying crime for. how about bill clinton. you know, bill clinton lied about his affair with lewinsky. his affair with monica lewinsky was not a crime but a lot of people had no problem with the investigation of bill clinton for the very serious matter of lying and obstruction of justice when it wasn't an underlying event that was a crime either. >> john, i want to ask you a question about the fact that obviously attorney general barr as political operatives do put a spin on this that was fwafrable to the president and the truth is if you believe that the mueller report's main goal was to investigate whether anybody on team trump conspired with the russians, it in fact -- it's very clear that they say that there

mueller there. that has been confirmed by mueller's former spokesperson just this hour. and rachel notes, well before anyone will be allowed to access even barr's redacted version of mueller's findings. why? where's mueller? i put her simple questions to you. >> i think bob mueller is biding his time. what i'll say, ari, those of us who work for the department of justice i do not believe it will be in the public's interest to summarize the full report or release it in a piece meal fashion. that will be on defense and people overreacted to the initial letter. if as chairman nadler asserts that they do this press conference before releasing the report and mueller's folks say he's not there tomorrow, is that the right thing or what barr claimed he would not do. >> he is speaking out of both sides of his mouth. he is the consummate institutionalist and we heard so little from bob mueller and his team and his spokesperson and what did we hear tonight in the few words that statement as you put it, we are

mueller. here's what the president said about it at the time. >> did you seek to fire robert mueller? >> fake news, folks. fake news. >> what's your message? >> typical "new york times" fake stories. >> not fake. true. the person dispensing with the person offering fake news, president trump. >> yeah, exactly. i mean, you know, the president threw a lot of these stories, not just this one, started calling them fake news. and here they are detailed, chapter and verse, in the mueller report. and again, i want to emphasis, these are people who were testifying under oath, not talking to journalists. where you don't have to take an oath. but testifying under oath, and even today, in the president's tweet, he's saying the same thing. he's saying it's total bs. these people, don mcgahn in particular, are lying. but when you look at the level of detail in the mueller report, where the president calls in don mcgahn and said i never said that to you, and don mcgahn says, yes, you did. you told me to cal

fire robert mueller. this just kept coming up and aggravating the president more and more. and i think robert mueller included that in his report so we can see the president's frame of mind. that gets me to my third big takeaway and that is how little of the president's frame of mind this white house provided to special counsel, his office because they go through how they waited for over a year, back and forths with the president's lawyer to try to get a sit-down interview. they refused and then the questions that they got back, the written answers to those questions, were so sparse. over 30 times said he did not recall or did not remember, did not have an independent recollection of certain events. that shows, again, that the attorney general is not giving us the substance of this report which he said contradictly that this white house had coordinated and given over everything and they fully cooperated with the investigation. >> all right. julia ainsley, well done from outside the justice department. i w