Mueller report: Justice Department releases special counsel report, live stream and analysis


CRUMBS IN HIS REPORT, AND DEMOCRATS MAY COME TO A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION. THEY MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR WHAT THEY THINK OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IS AND SO THEY MAY NOT GO AFTER HIM LEGALLY BUT THEY MAY DECIDE THEY WANT TO PURSUE THE PRESIDENT POLITICALLY BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE THAT HE TRIED TO OBSTRUCT THIS INVESTIGATION. AND REPUBLICANS SAY, OF COURSE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE THEY’RE LOOKING FOR ANYTHING TO PIN ON THE PRESIDENT. SO THAT’S SORT OF THE, YOU KNOW, THAT GIVES YOU A SENSE OF THE POLITICAL DRAMA THAT IS TAKING PLACE HERE ON CAPITOL HILL ALONGSIDE THE LEGAL DRAMA. >>YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT’S A GREAT POINT, NANCY, THAT WHILE THIS IS A LEGAL DOCUMENT, IT’S ALSO SORT OF A POLITICAL DOCUMENT AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY SORT OF INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAVE SPUN OUT FROM THIS, THOUGH IT STARTED WITH WHETHER OR NOT AND TO WHAT DEGREE RUSSIA SORT OF — RUSSIA INTERFERED WITH THE 2016 ELECTION BUT CLEARLY THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF OTHER ISSUES AND THERE MAY BE PERTINENT INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT THAT WILL LEAD TO FURTHER QUESTIONING IN CONGRESS FOR A RAINBOW OF INVESTIGATIONS. >>RIGHT. >>Reporter: CAN I MAKE ONE OTHER POINT? >>PLEASE. >>YOU’RE ASKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT ROBERT MUELLER WAS NOT INVOLVED IN CRAFTING THIS FOUR- PAGE SUMMARY. HE WON’T BE WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR TODAY. HE WASN’T NECESSARILY INVITED TO DO THOSE THINGS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MADE IT CLEARLY THAT HE WASN’T GOING TO SEEK ROBERT MUELLER’S INPUT ON THIS SUMMARY. HE SAID HE WOULD — HE OFFERED TO SHOW IT TO MUELLER AND MUELLER DECLINED TO SEE IT. BUT THAT’S DIFFERENT THAN SAYING I WORKED WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO MAKE SURE I GOT IT JUST RIGHT. >>GOOD POINT. >>Reporter: THAT’S PROBABLY THE REASON THAT MUELLER SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF I’M NOT GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN OF THIS DOCUMENT, IF I DON’T HAVE SIGN- OFF ON IT, THERE’S NO POINT IN ME SEEING IT AFTERWARDS JUST SO YOU CAN SHOW ME SOMETHING THAT YOU’RE GOING TO SEND TO CAPITOL HILL. THERE’S NO INDICATION THAT MUELLER WASHED HIS HANDS OF THIS AND WALKED AWAY BUT HE JUST, YOU KNOW, CHOSE NOT TO BE SHOWN THE DOCUMENT THAT HE WAS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ANY INPUT ON. AND WE HAVE EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT IF HE IS ASKED TO COME UP TO CAPITOL HILL TO SORT OF — TO DISCUSS HIS TEAM’S FINDINGS HIMSELF IN PERSON, HE WILL PROBABLY DO IT. >>NANCY, THANK YOU. WEIJIA JIANG, THANK YOU. RICKY IS A CBS NEWS LEGAL ANALYST, REBECCA IS A CBSN LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR AND FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR NEW YORK COUNTY. RICKY, I’D LIKE TO START WITH YOU. YOU WROTE THE BOOK ON GRAND JURY TESTIMONY AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SAID IS I NEED TO REDACT SOME THINGS THAT PROTECT GRAND JURY SYSTEM. WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT? >>GRAND JURY TESTIMONY UNDER RULE 6 E IS WHAT WE CALL SACRED TESTIMONY. IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE DISCLOSED BY THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. AND THERE IS GOOD REASON FOR THAT. PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TESTIFY BEFORE A GRAND JURY AND NOT FEAR REPRIZAL. THAT’S WHY THEIR NAMES ARE KEPT SECRET, THEIR TESTIMONY IS KEPT SECRET AND NO ONE IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE OUT THAT INFORMATION, NOT THE GRAND JURORERS AND NOT THE PROSECUTORS. YOU CAN’T DECIDE WILLY NILLY GO AROUND RULE 6-E AND GIVE GRAND JURY TESTIMONY TO THE PUBLIC. IT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN A BIG MISCONCEPTION IN THE MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE BARR REDACTIONS, BECAUSE HE IS NOT AT LIBERTY TO GO FORWARD WITHOUT GETTING LEAVE OF A COURT IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO GIVE OUT 6-E MATERIAL. NOW, WHILE SAYING THAT, THE WITNESS THEMSELVES, THE WITNESS WHO IS IN THE GRAND JURY, IF THE WITNESS DECIDES THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THEIR TESTIMONY, NO ONE IS STOPPING THEM. SO SOME OF THESE WITNESSES HAVE, IN FACT, TALKED ABOUT úTH SO THEN YOU BECOME INVOLVED IN A QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A WAIVER. >>I WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH MATERIAL WE’RE GOING TO GET TO SEE. CONGRESS IS GOING TO ASK FOR ALL OF IT, A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SHOULD SEE ALL OF IT, BUT IT’S NOT THAT SIMPLE. >>ANOTHER CATEGORY FOR THE REDACTIONS IS ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS. WHEN I FIRST HEARD THAT I THOUGHT THERE’S SO MANY INVESTIGATIONS, THAT’S GOT TO BE QUITE A LARGE CATEGORY. >>IT’S A LARGE CATEGORY AND WE KNOW FROM A MOTION THAT WAS FILED YESTERDAY IN THE ROGER STONE CASE THAT WE ARNOW DEALING WITH THE ISSUE OF OTHER INVESTIGATIONS. BECAUSE THE ROGER STONE CASE WE FIND SUDDENLY IN JUDGE JACKSON’S COURTROOM IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WINDS UP LOOKING AT THE MUELLER REPORT AS WELL AS ROGER STONE’S OWN CASE. SO WE KNOW THAT ROGER STONE HAS ALREADY BEEN INDICTED BUT APPARENTLY THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS COMING FROM THAT. SO YES, ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS ARE TRADITIONALLY NOT GIVEN OUT FOR GOOD REASON. >>REBECCA, LET ME ASK YOU HOW HIGH IS THE BAR WHEN IT COMES TO DETERMINING WHETHER A CRIME IN THIS CASE WAS COMMITTED? >>IT’S HIGH. IT HAS TO DO WITH INTENT AND INTENT IS HARD TO PROVE. PROSECUTORS STRUGGLE ALL THE TIME WITH PROVING INTENT. YOU KNOW, VARIOUS DIFFERENT PROSECUTORS ARE WILLING TO GO INTO THE COURTROOM WITH VARIOUS DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF EVIDENCE IN ORDER TO PROVE INTENT AND ANYTHING LIKE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE OR ANY WHITE COLLAR CRIME INVOLVES SOME DEGREE OF INTENT WHICH IS HARD TO PROVE. IT IS A REALLY HIGH BAR AND THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT IT’S THE SAME BAR THAT THE — THAT CONGRESS HAS TO USE FOR IMPEACHMENT PURPOSES. THEY CAN USE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STANDARD, SO THE QUESTION REMAINS, WHAT ARE THE FACTS IN THIS REPORT. I THINK THAT’S WHAT EVERYBODY IS LOOKING FOR IS FACTS AND NOT NECESSARILY LEGAL CONCLUSION, NOT SPIN, JUST PLAIN FACTS, WHAT DO THEY CONCLUDE WHAT HAPPENED. >>IT’S POSSIBLE PEOPLE COULD WALK AWAY SAYING THIS LOOKS BAD BUT IT DIDN’T RISE TO THE BAR. >>IT DIDN’T RISE TO THAT BAR ACCORDING TO THESE PROSECUTORS, INCLUDING THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WHO DID NOT COME TO A CONCLUSION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. HE’S IN A STATE OF EQUIPOISE. HE PASSES IT OFF TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OR CONGRESS, ONE REALLY DOESN’T KNOW WHAT ROBERT MUELLER’S INTENT WAS BUT WILLIAM BARR AND ROD ROSENSTEIN MADE THE DECISION THAT IT DID NOT REACH THE LEVEL OF CRIMINAL INTENT FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THIS OBSTRUCTION IF THERE IS ANY OR THE EVIDENCE ABOUT THIS OBSTRUCTION, IS THAT A LOT OF THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIVITY WAS DONE IN PLAIN SIGHT. IT WAS DONE BECAUSE HE WENT ON TELEVISION. IT WAS DONE BECAUSE HE TWEETED. THERE’S NOT TOO MUCH THAT WE DON’T KNOW ABOUT, ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S INTENT. WE KNOW WHAT FORMER FBI DIRECTOR COMEY SAID ABOUT THE FIRING OF — EXCUSE ME, ABOUT THE NON-PROSECUTION OF MICHAEL FLYNN. AND COMEY SAYS WHEN HE TESTIFIES IN FRONT OF CONGRESS, WELL, HE TOLD ME TO GO EASY ON THE GUY, HE’S A NICE GUY, WAS IT A DIRECT ORDER? NO. MIGHT I TAKEN IT AS A DIRECT ORDER EVEN THOUGH IT WAS KIND OF A PASSING OF WORDS, IT’S NOT QUITE A SLIP OF THE TONGUE, JUST A PHRASE, YOU KNOW, HE’S A NICE GUY, MAYBE YOU SHOULD GO EASY ON HIM, BUT DOES THE FBI DIRECTOR TAKE THAT AS MICHAEL COHEN SAID, A CODED ORDER. WELL, LOOK, IF YOU’VE GOT TO GO INTO A COURT OF LAW, YOU CAN’T TAKE SOMEONE’S INTERPRETATION OF CODE. YOU HAVE TO TAKE WHAT IS REAL. >>REBECCA, RICKY BROUGHT UP SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN HOTLY DEBATED, THIS IDEA THAT THE A.G. DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE, BASED ON READING MUELLER’S REPORT, THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONCLUDE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BUT THE DEBATE IS, WAS THAT REALLY WHAT MUELLER WAS WANTING HIM TO DO WHEN HE DID NOT MAKE A CALL ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE? OR WAS THE EXPECTATION THAT THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED TO CONGRESS TO DETERMINE? >>IN A WAY, I DON’T THINK MUELLER CARED. HE WANTED TO GET THE FACTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND CONGRESS TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION. HE WAS AWARE OF THE D.O.J. POLICY THAT WE DON’T INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT AND IT WHAT MATTERS IS WHAT CONGRESS THINKS OF THIS MATERIAL AND WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THE MATERIAL AND THE CRIMINAL STANDARD IS ALMOST BESIDE THE POINT. IT’S LIKE, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN OBSESSED WITH THIS QUESTION, LIKE THE LEGAL QUESTION, MYSELF PEOPLE, THAT DOESN’T REALLY MATTER, SO I DON’T THINK MUELLER WAS JUST SAYING, LOOK, WE’RE GOING TO STAY OUT OF THIS, WHICH IS IN FACT A POLITICAL FIGHT. IN MOST CRIMINAL CASES IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS BUT HERE IT IS A POLITICAL FIGHT. WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO, WHICH I THINK IS — I DON’T KNOW, WHAT I SPECULATE THAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO IS JUST TRY TO KEEP HIMSELF AWAY FROM THE POLITICAL FRAY IN ORDER TO SAVE THE REPUTATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE FBI AS AN APOLITICAL BODY AS A BODY THAT CAN BE TRUSTED AND RESPECTED. >>HOPEFULLY WE WILL GET CLARITY ON THAT ONCE WE SEE THE REPORT. >>NO, YOU’RE GOING TO GET SOME CLARITY ON THAT ONCE ROBERT MUELLER TESTIFIES. BECAUSE WE CAN’T READ ROBERT MUELLER $MIND BUT MAYBE IN THE REPORT HE SAID I INTEND THIS TO GO TO CONGRESS, I DON’T KNOW. >>THAT WOULD BE VERY WISHFUL THINKING, ANNE-MARIE. >>WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS IN BROAD DAYLIGHT, WHERE THEY DON’T OHE OHE SAID, QUOTE IN BROAD DAYLIGHT I WILL TELL YOU THIS, RUSSIA, IF YOU’RE LISTENING I HOPE YOU CAN FIND THE 30,000 E-MAILS THAT WERE MISSING, YOU WOULD BE REWARDED BY OUR PRESS. IF HE SAID THAT BEHIND THE SCENES, WE WOULD BE LIKE, WHOA! THAT’S A BIG DEAL. >>THAT’S A GOOD POINT. >> EXACTLY. BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT HE HAS SAID PUBLICLY, ESPECIALLY DURING HIS CAMPAIGN RALLIES AND I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WIKILEAKS, ARE YOU LISTENING, WIKILEAKS, COME AND HELP US OUT, GIVE US THE E- MAILS BUT ALSO WHAT HE HAS SAID ON TWITTER, THAT BECAUSE IT’S THE OLD, WHERE IS THE DEFENDANT HIDING? WHERE IS THE SUSPECT HIDING? AND HE’S HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT. SO THIS IS SOMEONE WHO BY VIRTUE OF HIS BURSTING EVERYTHING OUT IN THE OPEN, INCLUDING HIS INTERVIEW WITH LESTER HOLT ABOUT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, AND ABOUT THE FIRING OF COMEY, WHERE HE SAYS TO LESTER HOLT THAT HE FIRED HIM BECAUSE OF, QUOTE UNQUOTE THAT RUSSIA THING. AND THAT TYPE OF COMMENT EXACTLY CORRECT, DAVID, IF YOU SAID IT IN PRIVATE, WOULD CLEARLY BE A MOUNTAIN OF OBSTRUCTION. BUT BECAUSE YOU SAY IT PUBLICLY, IT TAKES AWAY THE SECRECY. >>IF YOU’RE HIS LEGAL COUNSEL, IS THAT PROBABLY THE MOST BRILLIANT THING YOUR CLIENT IS DOING? BECAUSE IT’S NOT HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENE. HE’S SAYING IT AND SOMETHING ELSE IS SAID TWO HOURS LATER WHICH IS — >>NO LEGAL COUNSEL WOULD HAVE EVER COUNSELED HIM TO DO THAT. >>BUT THE BEST EXCUSE I’VE HEARD SO FAR IS WELL, HE’S JUST BEING INNOCENT AND HIMSELF. >>HE’S BEING TRUMP. >>IT’S AN EXCUSE BUT BACK TO WHAT YOU GUYS WERE SAYING ABOUT OBSTRUCTION, YOU NEED TO PROVE INTENT AND THEY DIDN’T TALK TO THE PRESIDENT. THEY DIDN’T SAY, WELL, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY ALL THESE TWEETS. WERE YOU JUST JOKING? >>IT’S A PROBLEM OF HAVING NOT SPOKEN WITH HIM. THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. I THINK ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT BOTHERS A GREAT MANY CRITICS ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT IS THE QUESTION OF WHAT HAPPENED TO CONVERSATIONS WITH JARROD? WHAT HAPPENED TO CONVERSATIONS WITH DONALD TRUMP, JUNIOR, WHERE IS ALL OF THE EVIDENCE HAVING TO DO WITH OBSTRUCTION, HAVING TO DO WITH DEALING WITH THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING, AND THEN THE ALLEGED DRAFTING OF THE EXCUSE FOR DONALD TRUMP, JUNIOR, ON AIR FORCE 1 AS TO WHY THAT MEETING WAS HELD. THAT SEEMS TO HAVE JUST GONE INTO THE WIND. SO I HOPE WHETHER I LOOK AT THIS, I’M GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR THAT MEETING. WHAT HAPPENED TO IT? >>WITH THAT MEETING, DO YOU SUBSCRIBE TO SORT OF THE THEORY IF YOU’RE NOT ONE OF THE WITNESSES BEING QUESTIONED THEN YOU MAY BE THE SUBJECT? BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT — WE KNOW DON McGHAN WAS QUESTIONED. WE KNOW THAT DONALD TRUMP, JUNIOR, WAS NOT. >>SUBJECTS ARE QUESTIONED. TARGETS MAY NOT BE. >>THEY’RE THE LAST PERSON. >>YOU KNOW, IF ANYTHING THEY WOULD BE THE LAST PERSON. >>JARED KUSHNER WAS QUESTIONED, HE WAS IN THE ROOM FOR THAT MEETING. >>WE’VE BEEN GIVEN A TWO- MINUTE WARNING THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL STEP TO THE PODIUM SHORTLY. REBECCA, AS WE CONTINUE BRIEFLY, WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE OF THE FACT THAT MR. MUELLER DIDN’T COMPEL THE PRESIDENT TO TESTIFY? >>AGAIN, I DON’T THINK THIS IS A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. I DON’T THINK HE EVER INTENDED IT TO BE A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. ANY GOOD PROSECUTOR IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD HAVE DONE THAT IF IT WAS A NORMAL CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. SINCE HE KNEW THIS WAS NEVER GOING TO BE IN A COURT OF OF LAW, HOW IMPORTANT WAS IT? I DON’T THINK IT WAS THAT IMPORTANT FOR CONGRESS. WE KNOW WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD SAY IN A CIRCUMSTANCE LIKE THAT. IT’S NOT CRITICAL. IT’S CRITICAL TO HAVE ALL THIS INFORMATION OUT THERE AND I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY, I’M LOOKING AT THE REPORT TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHY. OKAY, SO IF HE WASN’T OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, WHY. THERE ARE ALL THESE CONTACTS FROM RUSSIA AND THE PRESIDENT IS LYING ABOUT IT. AND MAYBE IT’S JUST FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES AND THEN, WE CAN JUDGE, PEOPLE CAN JUDGE THAT FOR WHAT THEY WANT. IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE STRANGE. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHY. WHY WERE SO MANY PEOPLE LYING ABOUT WHAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING ON. >>RICKY, IF YOU COULD ASK MUELLER ONE QUESTION, WHAT WOULD IT BE? >>WHY HE DIDN’T COME TO A CONCLUSION ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT MUELLER IS A VERY DIFFERENT SPECIAL COUNSEL THAN WHEN WE SAW KEN STARR IN HIS ROLE DURING CLINTON — >>TELL US WHY. >>KEN STARR WAS OUT FRONT WITH EVERYTHING. KEN STARR WAS THE LEADING PROSECUTOR. KEN STARR ASSUMED THE ROLE NOT ONLY OF INVESTIGATOR BUT HE REALLY ASSUMED THE ROLE THAT WILLIAM BARR IS ASSUMING NOW. WE SAW KEN STARR ALL OVER THE PLACE AND KEN STARR’S STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT WHAT WAS INDEED A CRIME. >>CAN YOU IMAGINE IF TRUMP WOULD HAVE HAD KEN STARR AND KEN STARR WOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE PODIUM EVERY WEEK? AT LEAST MUELLER SAID NOTHING. >>MUELLER BELIEVES IN SAYING NOTHING. I’VE KNOWN HIM FOR MANY DECADES PROFESSIONALLY AND HE DOES NOT LIKE TO TALK TO THE PRESS. HE BELIEVES HE SHOULD DO HIS JOB WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE PRESS. >>HOW DO YOU THINK MUELLER IS GOING TO SORT OF GO DOWN IN HISTORY? >>SILENCE ON THE SIDE — >>I THINK HE’S — IN ALL OF THIS, PEOPLE ARE BEING RIPPED APART BY POLITICS AND I THINK AT LEAST FOR NOW, AND AGAIN, WE HAVEN’T SEEN THE REPORT, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT’S IN THERE BUT MOST PEOPLE STILL HAVE FAITH HE DID THIS IN A NOT A POLITICAL WAY, HE WAS DEVOTED IN BEING IMPARTIAL AND THAT GOES DOWN IN HISTORY. >>AS I RECALL — WHO HAD BEEN THE U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AND HAD THE DISTINCTION OF BEING THE ONE THAT WOULD NOT RE SIGN WAND PRESIDENT TRUMP FIRED HIM, AND HE WAS ASKED ON TWITTER IF HE STILL THOUGHT THAT ROBERT MUELLER WAS HIS HERO AFTER WILLIAM BARR CAME OUT WITH HIS FOUR-PAGE SUMMARY, AND THERE WERE NO — THERE WAS NO FINDING OF COLLUSION AND AMBIGUOUS FINDING AT BEST ABOUT OBSTRUCTION AND HE SAID THAT INDEED ROBERT MUELLER REMAINED HIS HERO. >>WHAT ABOUT THE FALLOUT WHEN IT COMES TO THIS REPORT BEYOND, YOU KNOW, THE REPORT, AND YOU KNOW, WHAT NADLER DOES WITH IT, IF HE DECIDES THE IT IMPEACHABLE OR NOT. >>THERE ARE OTHER INVESTIGATIONS GOING ON. IF THIS REPORT COMES OUT AND YOU KNOW, EVERYONE GETS A GOOD LOOK AT IT AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, ABSOLUTELY NO WAY, YOU KNOW, COLLUSION OR COOPERATION, COORDINATION, WHATEVER THE PHRASING IS, NO WAY, DOES THIS TAKE THE STEAM OUT OF ALL THESE OTHER INVESTIGATIONS? HOLD THAT THOUGHT. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE YOU TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. WE’LL HAVE A CBS SPECIAL REPORT START ANY MOMENT. IT LOOKS LIKE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL COME TO THE PODIUM. >>WE GOT A TWO-MINUTE WARNING BUT THEY DELAYED IT. CAPTIONING FUNDED BY CBS >>>THIS IS A CBS NEWS SPECIAL REPORT. AND THIS IS THE DAY FOR NEARLY TWO YEARS THAT MANY AMERICANS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. I’M NORAH O’DONNELL WITH GAYLE KING AND J>>>WE WANT TO TAKE YOU TO WASHINGTON WHERE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR IS ABOUT TO SPEAK TO REPORTERS ABOUT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ON RUSSIAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE. >>LATER THIS MORNING, BARR WILL RELEASE A REDACTED VERSION OF ROBERT MUELLER’S REPORT MEANING THAT SOME OF THE MATERIAL WAS REMOVED AS REFERRED BY LAW. BARR SAID LAST MONTH EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT CHARGES FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BUT DOES NOT EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT. >>PAULA REID JONES US ON THE PHONE. PAULA, WE HEARD THIS MORNING A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MIGHT BE TALKING ABOUT. ONE OF THEM IS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT? >>Reporter: THAT’S RIGHT. THERE HAVE BEEN OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE PRESIDENT HAS TRIED TO ASSERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OVER ANY MATERIALS IN ITS REDACTED REPORT BUT HERE COMES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SO I’M GOING TO HOP OFF. >>NOW WE SEE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WILLIAM BARR. ; JOINED BY THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN AS WELL. >>GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY AND THANKS FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING. AS YOU KNOW ON MARCH 22nd, SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER CONCLUDED HIS INVESTIGATION INTO MATTERS RELATED TO RUSSIAN ATTEMPTS TO INTERFERE IN OUR 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. AND HE SUBMITTED HIS CONFIDENTIAL REPORT TO ME PURSUANT TO DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS. AS I SAID DURING MY SENATE CONFIRMATION HEARING AND SINCE, I’M COMMITTED TO ENSURING THE GREATEST DEGREE POSSIBLE OF TRANSPARENCY CONCERNING THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION, CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW. AT 11 THIS MORNING, I’M GOING TO TRANSMIT COPIES OF THE PUBLIC VERSION OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT TO THE CHAIRMAN AND RANKING MEMBERS OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES. THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WILL ALSO MAKE THE REPORT AVAILABLE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY POSTING IT ON THE DEPARTMENT’S WEBSITE AFTER IT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO CONGRESS. I’D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS TODAY ON THE REPORT. BEFORE I DO THAT, I WANT TO THANK DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN FOR JOINING ME HERE TODAY. AND FOR HIS ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. RODS YOU A KNOW HAS SERVED AT THE DEPARTMENT FOR NEARLY 30 YEARS WITH DEDICATION AND DISTINCTION, AND IT’S BEEN A GREAT PRIVILEGE AND PLEASURE FOR ME TO WORK WITH HIM SINCE MY CONFIRMATION. HE HAD WELL-DESERVED PLANS TO STEP BACK FROM PUBLIC SERVICE THAT WERE INTERRUPTED BY MY ASKING HIM TO HELP IN MY TRANSITION. ROD HAS BEEN AN INVALUABLE PARTNER AND I AM GRATEFUL THAT HE IS WILLING TO HELP ME AND HAS BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION THROUGH TO ITS CONCLUSION. THANKS, ROD. I’D ALSO LIKE TO THANK SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER FOR HIS SERVICE. AND THE THOROUGHNESS OF HIS PARTICULARLY HIS WORK EXPOSING THE NATURE OF RUSSIA’S ATTEMPTS TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTORAL PROCESS. AS YOU KNOW ONE OF THE PRIMARY PURPOSES OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION WAS TO DETERMINE WHETHER PRESIDENT TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN OR ANY INDIVIDUAL ASSOCIATED WITH IT CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE IN THE 2016 ELECTION. VOLUME 1 OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT DESCRIBES THE RESULTS OF THAT INVESTIGATION. AS YOU WILL SEE, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT STATES THAT HIS, QUOTE, INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES. I AM SURE THAT ALL AMERICANS SHARE MY CONCERN ABOUT THE EFFORTS OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT TO INTERFERE IN OUR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT MAKES CLEAR, THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT SOUGHT TO INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION PROCESS, BUT THANKS TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S THOROUGH INVESTIGATION, WE NOW KNOW THAT THE RUSSIAN OPERATIVES WHO PERPETRATED THESE SCHEMES DID NOT HAVE THE COOPERATION OF PRESIDENT TRUMP OR THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. OR THE KNOWING ASSISTANCE OF ANY OTHER AMERICAN FOR THAT MATTER. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT ALL AMERICANS CAN AND SHOULD BE GRATEFUL TO HAVE CONFIRMED. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT OUTLINES TWO MAIN EFFORTS BY THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT TO INFLUENCE THE 2016 ELECTION. FIRST THE REPORT DETAILS — A RUSSIAN COMPANY WITH CLOSE TIES TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT TO SEW SOCIAL DISCORD AMONG AMERICAN VOTERS. FOLLOWING A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION, OF THIS DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL PROPERTY CHARGES IN FEDERAL COURT AGAINST SEVERAL RUSSIAN NATIONALS AND ENTITIES FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE ROLES IN THIS SCHEME. THOSE CHARGES REMAIN PENDING AND THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS REMAIN AT LARGE. BUT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOUND NO EVIDENCE THAT ANY AMERICAN, INCLUDING ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CON FIRED OR COORDINATED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT OR THE IRA IN THIS ILLEGAL SCHEME. INDEED AS THE REPORT STATES, QUOTE, THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT IDENTIFY EVIDENCE THAT ANY U.S. PERSON KNOWINGLY OR INTENTIONALLY COORDINATED WITH THE IRA’S INTERFERENCE OPERATION, UNQUOTE. PUT ANOTHER WAY, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOUND NO COLLUSION BY ANY AMERICANS IN IRA’S ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. SECOND, THE REPORT DETAILS EFFORTS BY THE RUSSIAN MILITARY OFFICIALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GRU, THE RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION, TO HACK INTO COMPUTERS AND STEAL DOCUMENTS AND E-MAILS FROM INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND HILLARY CLINTON’S CAMPAIGN FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVENTUALLY PUBLICLY SIZING THESE DOCUMENTS. OBTAINING SUCH UNAUTHORIZED — FOLLOWING A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THESE HACKING OPERATIONS, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL BROUGHT CHARGES TO SEVERAL RUSSIAN MILITARY OFFICERS FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE ROLES IN THESE ILLEGAL HACKING OPERATIONS. THOSE CHARGES ARE STILL PENDING AND THE DEFENDANT REMAIN AT LARGE. BUT AGAIN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT DID NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE THAT MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE CAMPAIGN CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN THESE HACKING OPERATIONS. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN COLLUSION WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT’S HACKING. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION ALSO EXAMINED RUSSIAN EFFORTS TO PUBLIC PUBLISH STOLEN E-MAILS AND DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOUND THAT AFTER THE GRU DISSEMINATED SOME OF THE STOLEN DOCUMENTS TO ENTITIES THAT IT CONTROLLED, D.C. LEAKS AND GUCIFER 2, THE — TO WIKILEAKS FOR PUBLICATION. WIKILEAKS MADE A SERIES OF DOCUMENT DUMPS. SPECIAL COUNSEL ALSO INVESTIGATED WHETHER ANY MEMBER OR AFFILIATE OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ENCOURAGED OR OTHERWISE PLAYED A ROLE IN THESE DISSEMINATION EFFORTS. UNDER APPLICABLE LAW, PUBLICATION OF THESE TYPES OF MATERIAL WOULD NOT BE CRIMINAL UNLESS THE PUBLISHER ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THE UNDERLYING HACKING CONSPIRACY. HERE TOO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT DID NOT FIND ANY PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ILLEGALLY PARTICIPATED IN THE DISSEMINATION OF THE MATERIALS. FINALLY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATED A NUMBER OF LINKS AND CONTACTS BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN INDIVIDUALS AND INDIVIDUALS CONNECTED TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT DURING THE 2016 CAMPAIGN. AFTER REVIEWING THESE CONTACTS, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID NOT FIND ANY CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE U.S. LAW INVOLVING RUSSIAN LINKED PERSONS AND ANY PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. SO THAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE. AFTER NEARLY TWO YEARS OF INVESTIGATION, THOUSANDS OF SUBPOENAS, HUNDREDS OF WARRANTS AND WITNESS INTERVIEWS, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONFIRMED THAT THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT SPONSORED EFFORTS TO ILLEGALLY INTERFERE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL I’LL ELECTION BUT DID NOT FIND THAT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OR OTHER AMERICANS COLLUDED IN THOSE EFFORTS. AFTER FINDING NO UNDERLYING COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT GOES ON TO CONSIDER WHETHER CERTAIN ACTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT COULD AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. AS I ADDRESSED IN MY MARCH 24th LETTER, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID NOT MAKE A TRADITIONAL PROSECUTIAL JUDGMENT REGARDING THIS ALLEGATION. INSTEAD THE REPORT RECOUNTS 10 EPISODES INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT AND DISCUSSES POTENTIAL LEGAL THEORIES FOR CONNECTING THOSE ACTIVITIES TO OFFENSE. 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 ATTORNEY GENERAL AND I CONCLUDED THAT THE EVIDENCE DEVELOPED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE OFFENSE. ALTHOUGH THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL AND I DISAGREED WITH SOME OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S LEGAL THEORIES, AND FELT THAT SOME OF THE EPISODES EXAMINED DID NOT AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION AS A MATTER OF LAW, WE DID NOT RELY SOLELY ON THAT IN MAKING OUR DECISION. INSTEAD, WE ACCEPTED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR PURPOSES OF OUR ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATED THE EVIDENCE AS PRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IN REACHING OUR CONCLUSIONS. IN ASSESSING THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT, IT IS IMPORTANT TO BEAR IN MIND THE CONTEXT. PRESIDENT TRUMP FACED AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION. AS HE ENTERED INTO OFFICE AND SOUGHT TO PERFORM HIS RESPONSIBILITIES AS PRESIDENT, FEDERAL AGENTS AND PROSECUTORS WERE SCRUTINIZING HIS CONDUCT BEFORE AND AFTER TAKING OFFICE AND THE CONDUCT OF SOME OF HIS ASSOCIATES. AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WAS RELENTLESS SPECULATION IN THE NEWS MEDIA ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL CUP ABILITY. CULPIBILITY. AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY, PROPELLED BY HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND FUELED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. NONETHELESS, THE WHITE HOUSE FULLY COOPERATED WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION, PROVIDING UNFETTERED ACCESS TO CAMPAIGN AND WHITE HOUSE DOCUMENTS, DIRECTING SENIOR AIDES TO TESTIFY FREELY AND ASSERTING NO PRIVILEGE CLAIMS. AT THE SAME TIME, THE PRESIDENT TOOK NO ACT THAT IN FACT DEPRIVED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OF THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES NECESSARY TO COMPLETE HIS INVESTIGATION. APART FROM WHETHER THE ACTS WERE OBSTRUCTIVE, THIS EVIDENCE OF NONCORRUPT MOTIVES WEIGHS HEAVILY AGAINST ANY ALLEGATION THAT THE PRESIDENT HAD A CORRUPT INTENT TO OBSTRUCT THE INVESTIGATION. BEFORE I TAKE QUESTIONS, I WANT TO ADDRESS A FEW ASPECTS OF THE PROCESS FOR PRODUCING THE PUBLIC REPORT THAT I AM RELEASING TODAY. AS I SAID SEVERAL TIMES, THE REPORT CONTAINS LIMITED REDACTIONS RELATED TO FOUR CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION. TO ENSURE AS MUCH TRANSPARENCY AS POSSIBLE, THOSE REDACTIONS HAVE BEEN CLEARLY LABELED SO THAT THE LEADERS CAN TELL — THE READERS CAN TELL WHICH REDACTIONS CORRESPOND TO WHICH CATEGORIES. NOW, AS I — THOSE CATEGORIES ARE GRAND JURY MATERIAL, INFORMATION THAT THE IC BELIEVES WOULD DISCLOSE SOURCES AND METHODS, INFORMATION THAT WOULD IMPAIR THE INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OF OTHER CASES THAT ARE UNDER WAY AND FINALLY INFORMATION THAT IMPLICATES THE PRIVACY AND REPUTATIONAL INTERESTS OF PERIPHERAL THIRD PARTIES. AS YOU WILL SEE, MOST OF THE REDACTIONS WERE COMPELLED BY THE NEED TO PREVENT HARM TO ONGOING MATTERS AND TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS PROHIBITING THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BEARING ON ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS AND CRIMINAL CASES SUCH AS THE IRA CASE AND THE ROGER STONE CASE. THESE REDACTIONS WERE APPLIED BY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ATTORNEYS WORKING CLOSELY WITH ATTORNEYS FROM THE SPECIAL’S OFFICE AS WELL AS THE — PROSECUTORS ARE HANDLING THE ONGOING CASES. THE REDACTIONS ARE THEIR WORK PRODUCT. NO REDACTIONS DONE BY ANYBODY OUTSIDE THIS GROUP. THERE WERE NO REDACTIONS DONE BY ANYBODY OUTSIDE THIS GROUP. NO ONE OUTSIDE THIS GROUP PROPOSED ANY REDACTIONS. AND NO ONE OUTSIDE THE DEPARTMENT HAS SEEN THE UNREDACTED REPORT. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CERTAIN SECTIONS THAT WERE MADE AVAILABLE TO IC, THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY, FOR THEIR ADVICE ON PROTECTING INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS. CONSISTENT WITH LONG-STANDING EXECUTIVE BRANCH PRACTICE, THE DECISION WHETHER TO ASSERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OVER ANY PORTION OF THE REPORT RESTED WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE HAD VOLUNTARILY COOPERATED WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THE REPORT CONTAIN MATERIAL OVER WHICH THE PRESIDENT COULD HAVE ASSERTED PRIVILEGE. AND HE WOULD HAVE BEEN WELL WITHIN HIS RIGHTS TO DO SO. FOLLOWING MY MARCH 29th LETTER, THE OFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL REQUESTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE REDACTED VERSION OF THE REPORT IN ORDER TO ADVISE THE PRESIDENT ON THE POTENTIAL INVOCATION OF PRIVILEGE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH LONG- STANDING PRACTICE. FOLLOWING THAT REVIEW, THE PRESIDENT CONFIRMED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF TRANSPARENCY AND FULL DISCLOSURE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, HE WOULD NOT ASSERT PRIVILEGE OVER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT. ACCORDINGLY, THE PUBLIC REPORT I AM RELEASING TODAY CONTAINS REDACTIONS ONLY FOR THE FOUR CATEGORIES THAT I PREVIOUSLY OUTLINED AND NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN REDACTED BASED ON EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. IN ADDITION, EARLIER THIS WEEK, THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL COUNSEL REQUESTED AND WAS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ A FINAL VERSION OF THE REDACTED REPORT BEFORE IT WAS PUBLICLY RELEASED. THAT REQUEST WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE PRACTICE FOLLOWED BY THE ETHICS AND GOVERNMENT ACT TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS NAMED IN THE REPORT PREPARED BY AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE REPORT BEFORE PUBLICATION. THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYERS WERE NOT PERMITTED TO MAKE AND DID NOT REQUEST ANY REDACTIONS. IN ADDITION TO MAKING THE REDACTED REPORT PUBLIC, WE ARE ALSO WORKING WITH CONGRESS TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR LEGITIMATE OVERSIGHT INTERESTS WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. WE’VE BEEN CONSULTING WITH CHAIRMAN GRAHAM AND CHAIRMAN IN NADLER THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. GIVEN THE LIMITED NATURE OF THE REDACTIONS, I BELIEVE THAT THE PUBLICLY RELEASED REPORT WILL ALLOW EVERY AMERICAN TO UNDERSTAND THE RESULTS OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. NEVERTHELESS, IN AN EFFORT TO ACCOMMODATE CONGRESSIONAL REQUESTS, WE WILL MAKE AVAILABLE SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATE SAFEGUARDS TO AA # BIBIPARTISAN GROUPS A VERSION OF THE REPORT WITH ALL THE REDACTIONS REMOVED EXCEPT THOSE RELATING TO GRAND JURY INFORMATION. THUS, THESE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WILL BE ABLE TO SEE ALL OF THE REDACTED MATERIAL FOR THEMSELVES WITH THE LIMITED EXCEPTION OF THAT WHICH BY LAW CANNOT BE SHARED. I BELIEVE THAT THIS ACCOMMODATION TOGETHER WITH MY UPCOMING TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE AND HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES WILL SATISFY ANY NEED CONGRESS HAS FOR INFORMATION REGARDING THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. ONCE AGAIN, I’D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND I WILL NOW HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. >>MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL, WE DON’T HAVE THE REPORT IN HAND, SO COULD YOU EXPLAIN FOR US THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S ARTICULATED REASON FOR NOT REACHING A DECISION ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND IF IT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DEPARTMENT’S LONG-STANDING GUIDANCE ON NOT INDICTING A SITTING PRESIDENT AND YOU SAY YOU DESCRIBE WITH HIS LEGAL THEORIES. WHAT DID YOU DISAGREE WITH HIM ON? >>I’D LEAVE IT TO HIS DESCRIPTION IN THE REPORT, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OWN ARTICULATION OF WHY HE DID NOT WANT TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS AN OBSTRUCTION OFFENSE. BUT I WILL SAY WHEN WE MET WITH HIM, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROSENSTEIN AND I MET WITH HIM, ALONG WITH ED OCALLAHAN, WHO IS THE PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATE DEPUTY, ON MARCH 5th. WE SPECIFICALLY ASKED HIM ABOUT THE OLC OPINION AND WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS TAKING THE POSITION THAT HE WOULD HAVE FOUND A CRIME BUT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE OLC OPINION AND HE MADE IT VERY CLEAR, SEVERAL TIMES, THAT THAT WAS NOT HIS POSITION. HE WAS NOT SAYING THAT BUT FOR THE OLC OPINION HE WOULD HAVE FOUND A CRIME. HE MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE HAD NOT MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT THERE WAS A CRIME. >>WHAT DID YOU DISAGREE WITH HIM ON? >>GIVEN THAT, WHY DID YOU AND MR. ROSENSTEIN FEEL YOU HAD TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP TO CONCLUDE THERE WAS NO CRIME ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE POLICY? >>THE PROSECUTIAL FUNCTION AND ALL OUR POWERS AS PROSECUTORS, INCLUDING THE POWER TO CONVENE GRAND JURIES AND COMPULSORY PROCESS THAT’S INVOLVED THERE IS FOR ONE PURPOSE AND ONE PURPOSE ONLY, IT’S TO DETERMINE YES OR NO WAS ALLEGED CONDUCT CRIMINAL OR NOT CRIMINAL. THAT IS — THAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT’S WHY WE HAVE THE TOOLS WE HAVE, AND WE DON’T GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS JUST TO COLLECT INFORMATION AND THROW IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC. WE COLLECT THIS INFORMATION, WE USE THAT COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THAT DECISION. BECAUSE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID NOT MAKE THAT DECISION, WE FELT THE DEPARTMENT HAD TO AND THAT WAS A DECISION BY ME AND THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. >>SPECIAL COUNSEL INDICATE THAT HE WANTED YOU TO MAKE THE DECISION OR THAT IT SHOULD BE LEFT FOR CONGRESS? AND ALSO, HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO CRITICISM YOU’RE RECEIVING FROM CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS THAT YOU’RE ACTING MORE AS AN ATTORNEY FOR THE PRESIDENT RATHER THAN AS THE CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER? >>SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER DID NOT INDICATE THAT HIS PURPOSE WAS TO LEAVE THE DECISION TO CONGRESS. I HOPE THAT WAS NOT HIS VIEW, SINCE WE DON’T CONVENE GRAND JURIES AND CONDUCT CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS FOR THAT PURPOSE. I AM TOLD HIS REACTION TO THAT WAS THAT IT WAS MY PREROGATIVE AS ATTORNEY GENERAL TO MAKE THAT DECISION. >>ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN SHARE TODAY ABOUT YOUR REVIEW OF THE GENESIS OF THE RUSSIAN INVESTIGATION AND WHETHER ASSETS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO INVESTIGATE? >>NO, TODAY I’M REALLY FOCUSED JUST ON THE PROCESS OF RELEASING THIS REPORT. >>DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS HAVE ASKED FOR ROBERT MUELLER HIMSELF TO TESTIFY. ROBERT MUELLER REMAINS A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE AS OF THIS MOMENT. WILL YOU PERMIT HIM TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY TO CONGRESS? >>I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO BOB MUELLER PERSONALLY TESTIFYING. >>MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL, IT’S NOT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE QUESTIONED THE PROCESS, A REPUBLICAN — CAUSED A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THESE REDACTIONS. YOU CLEARED THE PRESIDENT ON OBSTRUTION. THE PRESIDENT IS FUNDRAISING AND HERE YOU HAVE REMARKS THAT ARE QUITE GENEROUS TO THE PRESIDENT, INCLUDING ACKNOWLEDGING HIS FEELINGS AND EMOTIONS. WHAT DO YOU SAY TO PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THE PRESIDENT? >>THE STATEMENTS ABOUT SIS SINCERE BELIEFS ARE RECOGNIZED IN THE REPORT SO I’M NOT SURE OF YOUR BASIS IS THAT — >>IT SEEMS LIKE THERE’S A LOT OF EFFORT TO GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO — >>IS THERE ANOTHER PRECEDENT FOR IT? >>NO. >>UNPRECEDENTED IS AN INACCURATE DESCRIPTION. >>YES BUT WHAT ARE YOU SAYING TO PEOPLE WHO SAY YOU ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THE PRESIDENT? >>THERE IS A — WAS HE INVITED TO JOIN YOU UP ON THE PODIUM? WHY IS HE NOT HERE? >>THE REPORT HE DID FOR ME AS THE ATTORNEY, HE IS REQUIRED UNDER THE REGULATION TO PROVIDE ME WITH A CONFIDENTIAL REPORT. I’M HERE TO DISCUSS MY RESPONSE TO THAT REPORT AND MY DECISION ENTIRELY DISCRETIONARY TO MAKE IT PUBLIC. SINCE THESE REPORTS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE MADE PUBLIC. THAT’S WHAT I’M HERE TO DISCUSS. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>AN EXTRAORDINARY STATEMENT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, DESCRIBING SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER’S REPORT WHICH WILL BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE AFTER A NEARLY TWO-YEAR INVESTIGATION. AS WE HEARD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT STATES THAT THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED WITHHE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS ELECTION INTERFERENCE. SO NO CONSPIRACY, NO COORDINATION, NO COLLUSION, ALSO NO OBSTRUCTION. HE ALSO — >>HE SAID THAT SEVERAL TIMES. IT WASN’T JUST ONE TIME, HE SAID THAT — HE MADE THAT POINT SEVERAL TIMES. >>YES, HE SAID, TOO THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL AND PERSONAL LAWYERS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE REPORT. THEY DECIDED NOT TO REQUEST ANY REDACTIONS NOR DID THE PRESIDENT, THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, SEEK EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO BLOCK ANY OF THAT, THAT THEY WANTED ESSENTIALLY THERE TO BE TRANSPARENT. JONATHAN TURLEY IS WITH US. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THIS FIRST READ? >> THERE WAS SOME INFORMATION THAT WE DID GARNER FROM THIS. WE DIDN’T KNOW BEFORE. FIRST OF ALL, TO START ON A POSITIVE NOTE, THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR WAIVING EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. I DON’T KNOW OF ANY PRECEDENT FOR THIS EXTENT OF A WAIVER AND HE DID SAY THAT SAY ALL THE SENIOR STAFF WERE MADE AVAILABLE. THERE WERE NO DOCUMENTS WITHHELD AND THAT’S ALL IN THE PRESIDENT’S FAVOR. ONE, HE SAID THAT THE INFORMATION FROM THE RUSSIAN OPERATIVES WERE FIRST RELEASED THROUGH THEIR OWN SOURCES AND THEN GIVEN TO WIKILEAKS. JULIAN ASSANGE’S LAWYERS ARE LIKELY TO REALLY LIKE THAT BECAUSE BARR THEN SAID IT’S NOT A CRIME TO PUBLISH THAT INFORMATION WHICH IS OF COURSE WHAT WIKILEAKS DID. HE DIDN’T SAY THAT WIKILEAKS WAS WORKING OR COORDINATING WITH THE RUSSIANS. SO THAT’S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT YOU’RE NOT ONLY GOING TO SEE A LOT OF INTEREST IN CONGRESS BUT IN LONDON WHERE ASSANGE IS FACING EXTRADITION. HE ALSO SAID THAT THE — DECIDING NOT TO SAY THIS WAS OBSTRUCTION. BUT HE ALSO DID INDICATE THAT SOME OF THOSE PROSECUTORS BELIEVED AN OBSTRUCTION CASE COULD BE MADE. >>FIRST OF ALL, THIS STARTED WITH RUSSIA AND IT WAS INTERESTING TO HEAR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAY AT LEAST THREE TIMES IF NOT FOUR ABOUT HOW THOROUGH ENTERING THING IN PRESIDENT IS SOMEWHAT FUZZY ABOUT, IS THE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE CAMPAIGN, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THANKED ENTER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THANKED MUELLER FOR THAT. YOU WITH ON THE QUESTION OF WIKILEAKS, HE SAID IT WAS NOT ILLEGAL TO DISSEMINATE IF YOU DID NOT DO THE HACKING. THAT, IN A POLITICAL CONTEXT MIGHT MEAN SOMETHING QUITE DIFFERENT, WHICH IS TO SAY THEY MIGHT HAVE DESEEM NATEED IT BUT BECAUSE THEY DID NOT DO THE UNDERLYING HACKING, IT’S NOT ILLEGAL. >>THERE IS A DIFFERENT BETWEEN EXONERATED AND VINDICATED. IT DOES NOT MEAN HE IS EXONERATED FROM BLAME. MUCH OF THE DAMAGE WILL BE IN THE SECOND VOLUME UM, DEALING WITH THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THERE WERE 10 EPISODES DESCRIBED BY BILL BARR. AND THE AND HE SAID HE AND ROD ROSENSTEIN ACCEPTED THE DEFINITION. THERE WAS A MEMO THAT WAS DISCUSSED WHERE HE ADOPTED A FAIRLY NARROW VIEW OF OBSTRUCTION. IT’S CLEAR THAT THE PROSECUTORS I THINK DID NOT FOLLOW HIS LOGIC. HE THEN SAID YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DIDN’T REALLY GO THERE. ASSUMING THE OBSTRUCTION THEORY IS VALID, IS THIS A CASE THAT CAN BE PROSECUTED. BOTH OF THEM SAID IT WAS NOT. >>WERE YOU SURPRISED THAT HE SAID HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH ROBERT MUELLER TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS? >>YEAH, THAT WAS VERY UNPRECEDENTED. THEY ARE BEING TRANSPARENT TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY MADE PEOPLE AVAILABLE. HE WILL TESTIFY. YOU CAN ALMOST HEAR THE PHONES PICKED UP IN CONGRESS. >>LET’S GO TO WEIJIA JIANG. AND WEIJIA, WE HEARD PRESIDENT TRUMP HUNDREDS OF TIMES CALL THIS A WITCH HUNT ISSUE AND APPEARS FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THIS HAS LARGELY EXONERATED MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. >>Reporter: HE TWEETED OUT AN EDITED CLIP OF HIMSELF SAYING NO OBSTRUCTION, AND HE SENT OUT AN IMAGE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT’S FROM THE SAME GRAPHICS AS THE TELEVISION SHOW “GAME OF THRONES” AND IN BIG LETTERS, IT SAYS GAME OVER FROM THE PRESIDENT’S TWITTER ACCOUNT. NO COLLUSION OR OBSTRUCTION FROM THE HATERS AND RADICAL LEFT DEMOCRATS. SO WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DID SOUND LIKE A VICTORY FOR THE PRESIDENT IN MANY WAYS. OUR COLLEAGUE, PAULA REID, EVEN ASKED HIM, YOU KNOW, WHY HE WAS BRINGING UP THE PRESIDENT’S EMOTIONS AND WHY HE WAS TALKING ABOUT WHAT HE WAS FEELING AND WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAD TO GO THROUGH PERSONALLY IN TALKING ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT WHICH IS EXTREMELY FACTUAL AND IS SUPPOSED TO JUST RELY ON THAT. HE WAS STOIC FOR THE MOST PART BUT HE DID BECOME DEFENSIVE IN SAYING, YOU KNOW, I AM JUST REPORTING THE FACTS, AND THIS WAS UNPRECEDENTED. THE MINUTE WENT THROUGH A LOT, SO, YOU KNOW, EVEN BEFORE TODAY, WE ANTICIPATED ANOTHER VICTORY LAP. SOURCES WERE SAYING, REGARDLESS WHAT COMES OUT — TO JONATHAN TU ARE, LEY’S POINT, THERE COULD BE UNSAFERY THINGS THAT COME OUT, AND AS YOU POINTED OUT, NORAH, NO CONSPIRACY, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, AND THESE WILL BE THINGS THAT HE PUTS IN THE BANK AS HE HITS THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL. SO IT COULD BE A VERY POWERFUL TOOL FOR THE PRESIDENT, BUT CERTAINLY HE IS CELEBRATING AFTER THAT PRESSER. >>THANK YOU, WEIJIA. AND DEMOCRATS WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT SAY ON THINGS, OF COURSE. THEY SAY THAT BARR’S NEWS CONFERENCE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. NANCY? >>Reporter: NOT ONLY DO THEY SAY IT SHOULDN’T HAVE HAPPENED BUT THERE IS CERTAIN TO BE ANGER HERE ON CAPITOL HILL NOW THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOES SHARE THE FINDINGS WITH LEGAL COUNCIL BEFORE ANYONE HERE ON CAPITOL HILL WAS ABLE TO GET A LOOK AT IT. BARR SAID THAT WAS COMPLETELY ACCORDING TO STATUTE AND PRECEDENCE AND THE OFFICE OF THE LEGAL COUNSEL NEEDED TO LOOK AT THE REPORT TO DETERMINE IF THE PRESIDENT WAS GOING TO EXERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OVER IT. THEY HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR WEEKS NOW THAT HE IS PUTTING HIS THUMB ON THE SCALE FOR THE PRESIDENT ANY WAY HE CAN AND I THINK THAT’S WHY PAULA REID ASKED HIM QUESTIONS IN THE PRESS CONFERENCE SAYING THAT HE SPENT MORE TIME SAYING THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS ANGRY AND FELT HOUNDED UNFAIRLY THAN LAYING OUT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S EXPLANATION FOR WHY THEY FOUND THE PRESIDENT’S BEHAVIOR QUESTIONABLE, AND PAULA ASKED IF HE WAS GOING TO BAT FOR THE PRESIDENT IN THIS SITUATION, AND GOT HEATED. HE CERTAINLY DOESN’T LIKE THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT DEMOCRATS WILL CONTINUE TO BEAT THE DRUMS INTEREST ON CAPITOL HILL ALTHOUGH THERE WILL BE SOME OF THEM THAT ARE VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO VIEW THE UNREDACTED VERSION OF THIS REPORT, NOT ALL OF IT. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS STILL SAYING SOME OF IT WILL BE KEPT UNDER WE’LL PROBABLY SEE A COURT BATTLE ABOUT THAT. BUT THE U WRAPS. WE WILL PROBABLY SEE A COURT BATTLE ABOUT THAT, BUT THE UNREDACTED PORTION WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS IN TWO COMMITTEES ON CAPITOL HILL. BACK TO YOU. >>THANK YOU, NANCY, AND JONATHAN, YOU JUST HEARD NANCY SAY THAT THEY WILL SHARE THE VERSION. DO THEY HAVE A CASE THERE? >>THEY HAVE A DEAL OF THIS KIND NOT JUST AS A COURTESY TO THEM, AND WHAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME IS WHEN HE WENT THROUGH THE 4 CATEGORIES OF REDACTION HE SAID THAT THE GREAT MAJORITY OR CERTAINLY THE LARGEST NUMBERS WERE RELATED TO ONGOING CASES. IT WAS NOT RELATED TO THE FOURTH CATEGORY THAT FRANKLY, CONCERNED A LOT OF US. IT WAS A LITTLE SQUISHY WHEN HE SAID THEY WOULD TRY AND PROTECT THE REPUTATION OF INDIVIDUALS WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DOES DO BUT MOST WAS ON THE INVESTIGATIVE SIDE. >>I WANT TO BRING IN SOMETHING WE HAVE JUST LEARNED. JERRY NADLER HAS FORMALLY REQUESTED THAT ROBERT MUELLER COME AND TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS NO LATER THAN MAY 23, AND HE WAS ASKED IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD OBJECT, AND HE SAID NO. >>JONATHAN SAID I CAN HEAR THE PHONES BEING PICKED UP AS WE SPEAK, AND YOU’RE RIGHT. >>I WANT TO CLARIFY. THERE WAS A MOMENT WHEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKED WHY ISN’T MUELLER HERE? IT’S HIS REPORT, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID, NO, IT’S NOT. IT’S A REPORT THAT HE DID FOR ME. HE IS A SPOKEN. HE IS A SPECIAL COUNSEL. HE IS NOT AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. >>I THINK HE WOULD RATHER DRINK LEAD THAN TESTIFY. HIS VIEW OF CONDUCT WAS TO CREATE A REPORT AND GIVE TO THE MAIN JUSTICE AND THAT WAS THE DISTINCTION WITH THE LOSS OF JAMES COMEY. >>WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT IS INDICTABLE. AND TWO OTHER CATEGORIES YOU USED WERE IMPEACH AND CONTEMPTIBLE. ARE THOSE CATEGORIES STILL OUT THERE? >>THERE IS, BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO IMPEACH A PRESIDENT, YOU REALLY NEED A SUCKING CHEST WOUND. I WAS THE LEAD INVESTIGATOR ON THE LAST IMPEACHMENT TRIAL, AND MY OPPOSING COUNSEL WAS DISTURBINGLY GOOD IN THAT ROLE. BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, THAT CASE WAS CONSIDERED A STRAIGHTFORWARD CASE, AND IT TOOK 17 MONTHS FROM THE TIME WE FINISHES FROM THE HOUSE TO THE SENATE. SO THE DEMOCRATS ARE RUNNING OUT OF RUNWAY IF THEY WANT ANY IMPEACHMENT CASE. THAT WOULD PUT THEM AT THE 2020 ELECTION. >>NANCY PELOSI MADE IT CLEAR SHE DOESN’T WANT TO MAINTAIN A CONVERSATION ABOUT IMPEACHMENT. ONE OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE CONCERNS ABOUT BILL BARR IS HE WOULD LAY FAVORABLE GROUND FOR THE PRESIDENT BEFORE ANYONE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE REPORT. IT’S INTERESTING, IT IS QUESTION FROM PAULA REID, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE UNITED STATES OR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE DONALD TRUMP? HE DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION. >>I KNOW BILL BARR WELL. THAT’S WHEN YOU STARTED TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT OF — >>IRRITATION? >>IRRITATION IN HIS VOICE. THE REASON IS BILL BARR REALLY IS CUT FROM DOJ CLOTH, AND THAT — YOU COULD NOT ASK ANYTHING MORE INSULTING TO BILL BARR THAN THAT QUESTION. NOW, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE TESTY THERE. BUT BILL BARR IS AS YOU SEE HIM, A STRAIGHTFORWARD PERSON. HE DOESN’T SPIN. HE WILL TELL YOU STRAIGHT UP. >>IT’S INTERESTING THAT HE TALKS ABOUT THE LEGITIMATE INTEREST, A PUSH AND PULL WHICH IS AN OLIVE BRANCH IF YOU WILL, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYING YOU HAVE REASONS FOR ASKING THESE THINGS. >>THE ONLY THING REDACTED WILL BE THE GRAND JURY INFORMATION, AND BILL BARR IS CORRECT. HE CAN’T GIVE THE INFORMATION. HE SAID OTHERWISE. WE HAD A RULING A WEEK AGO MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR THE FEDERAL JUDGE TO RELEASE IT. >>ALL RIGHT. ED O’KEEFE IS IN WASHINGTON. HE IS FOLLOWING THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS ON THE MUELLER REPORT. ED, WHAT’S YOUR OBSERVATION TODAY? >>Reporter: GAYLE, GOOD TO SEE YOU GUYS, AND I WANT TO PICK UP ON WHAT JONATHAN WAS SAYING AND HOW IT WILL BE PICKED APART IN A POLITICAL CONTEXT AS OPPOSED TO A LEGAL CONTEXT. REMEMBER. THERE ARE MULTIPLE INVESTIGATIONS UNDER WAY ESPECIALLY THE POTENTIAL FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. SO WHILE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND HIS TEAM MAY HAVE DECIDED THERE WAS NO LEGAL DANGER FOR THE PRESIDENT, POLITICALLY, IT WILL PROBABLY BECOME THE CENTRAL FOCUS, AND HE GAVE US A TEASE. WE DON’T EXPECT TO SEE THE FULL REPORT UNTIL LATER TODAY BUT THERE WAS 10 EPISODES INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT WHERE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE COULD HAVE BEEN A POTENTIAL CONCERN AND PART OF THE REASON WE ARE SO CONCERNED, THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS, DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS WANT TO SEE THE REPORT BUT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ALSO WANT WASHINGTON TO MOVE ON. AND IT LOOKS LIKE TO WON’T HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER MAY 23 WHEN ROBERT MUELLER WILL TESTIFY AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HIMSELF WILL FACE QUESTIONS EVEN STRONGER THAN FROM OUR COLLEAGUES THIS MORNING. IN EARLY MAY, HE WILL TESTIFY IN FRONT OF TWO COMMITTEES ON THE FINDINGS OF THE REPORT. SO A LOT MORE TO COME, BUT THE PUSH TO RELEASE IT FULFILLS THE DESIRE OF AMERICANS TO LOOK AT IT AND FICK APART. >>WHAT WOULD YOUR ADVICE BE TO PEOPLE WHO SAY I CAN’T WAIT TO READ IT? >>I SAY QUITE FRANKLY, MOST PEOPLE WILL SKIP THE COLLUSION PART AND GO TO OBSTRUCTION. THAT WOULD HAVE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF REDACTIONS BECAUSE THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION LARGELY GATHERED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF. THE FOOTPRINT WAS NOT IN THE GRAND JURY. ON COLLUSION, IT WAS A GLOBALLY — IT WAS A GLOBAL REACH IN TERMS OF BANKS AND OTHER SOURCES THEY HAD TO PULL THROUGH THE GRAND JURY. OBSTRUCTION, IT’S 10 EPISODES. WE HAVE TO LOOK FOR THE KEY PLAYERS. I THINK LOOKING AT JON McGANN ANDS HIS STATEMENTS, REMEMBER. HE WAS AT THE EPICENTER OF THESE. THERE WAS A RECOURSE THAT THE PRESIDENT DID WANT TO FIRE PLAYERS IN THE INVESTIGATION, AND McGANN REFUSED. IF THAT’S TRUE, THEN IT MEANS THAT THE PRESIDENT DID HIS LEVEL BEST AND THEY CREATED A HUMAN WALL TO PROTECT HIM. >>AND IT GOES TO WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER, WHAT IS INDICTABLE, AND WHERE THEY MIGHT FIND DISCREPANCY? >>THAT’S RIGHT. WE DON’T DEFINE THE PRESIDENT BY THE CRIMINAL CODE. WE HOPE THAT THE STANDARDS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT. BUT THE INTERESTING THING IS IT’S DIFFICULT TO DEFINE THE CRIME. HE DID HIS LEVEL BEST TO DO THE NEAR IMPOSSIBLE AND ACTUALLY OBSTRUCT A CRIME HE DIDN’T BELIEVE HE COMMITTED. THE THING THAT KEPT HIM FROM CROSSING THE RUBICON ARE THE ORDERS. WHEN WE LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT THE REPORTS ARE TRUE, AND IF SO IT RAISES TROUBLING ISSUES. >>IT’S A COLLUSION QUESTION AND WHETHER THE RUSSIANS HAD DONE ANY INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTION, AND IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO LOOK INTO THAT AND IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR THE COLLUSION QUESTION AND THE OBSTRUCTION QUESTION. >>THE OBSTRUCTION STATUTE TALKS ABOUT OBSTRUCTING AND IMPEDING BUT IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT INFLUENCING. AND THAT INFLUENCING ISSUE CONCERNS US ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. HE DID NOT RECOGNIZE THE TRADITIONAL LINE SEPARATING THE WHITE HOUSE FROM THE F.B.I. AFTER HE FIRED JAMES COMEY — ONCE AGAIN, THIS WILL BE INTERESTING IN THE REPORT BECAUSE THE WORD WAS IN THE PRESS VIRTUALLY EVERYONE IN THE WHITE HOUSE SAID FOR THE LOVE OF MIKE, DO NOT DO THAT. YOU WILL TORCH YOUR OWN ADMINISTRATION. THE ONLY PERSON WHO SAID THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA IS JARED KUSHNER, AND IF THAT’S TRUE, THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT NEEDED. BUT IT DID WHAT HIS ADVISORS TOLD HIM TO DO. IT SET THE ADMINISTRATION ON FIRE, AND WHEN IT CAME TO THE REPORT OF SETTING OTHERS ON FIRE, POLITICAL PLAYERS PUT THEMSELVES BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS. THEY MAY HAVE SAVED THE PRESIDENT FROM A MORE SERIOUS OBSTRUCTION CHARGE. >>I WANT TO RECAP FOR THE CONVERSATION WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THOSE JUST TUNING IN. ACCORDING TO THE REPORT, THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CONSPIRED OR COORDINATORRED. HE ALSO SAID NO COLLUSION BY ANY AMERICAN IN THE IRA, THE RUSSIANS IN THIS CASE, NOT THE IRISH BUT THE RUSSIANS IN THE CASE, AND IT’S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THERE WAS A COORDINATED EFFORT BY THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT TO TRY AND INFLUENCE THE 2016 ELECTION ON NUMEROUS FRONTS. THAT IS STILL AN EFFORT THAT OUR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IS TRYING TO BEAT BACK TO THE DAY. >>I THINK THE TWO INTERESTING REFERENCES IN THE PRESS CONFERENCE IS JULIAN ASSANGE AND STONE. THIS CERTAINLY HELPED STONE’S CASE BUT THE BIG BENEFICIARY IS JULIAN ASSANGE SAY FIGURE YOU JUST PUBLISH THIS INFORMATION, IT’S NOT A CRIME. WE WILL HAVE TO SEE IN THE COMING DAYS IF NEW CHARGES ARE BROUGHT AGAINST ASSANGE SAYING HE IS A VERY ACTIVE PLAYER. >>AND JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY — I’M SORRY. BUT JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY WHY IT’S IMPORTANT, THOSE E- MAILS WERE LEAKED, TOO, ON THE VERY DAY THAT BILLY BUSH CAME OUT, SO THERE WAS A COORDINATING EFFORT. >>YOUR POINT IS IT’S GOOD FOR THEM LEGALLY, AND IT MAY BE UNPROVED BUT WE WILL LOOK AND SEE IF IT’S THERE, IF THE WIKILEAKS E-MAILS WERE PASSED ALONG A CONDUIT, BUT THAT IS JUST BAD POLITICALLY BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE UNDERLYING HACKING, THE LEGAL TRIP WIRE THAT HAS TO BE TRIPPED. >>BARR WAS JUST REACHING SAYING NO AMERICANS WERE ENGAGED IN COORDINATION WITH THE RUSSIANS, AND THAT GIVES A CLEAN SLATE NOT JUST FOR TRUMP BUT MANY OTHER PEOPLE, AND I THINK THE INTEREST WILL SHIFT OVER TO THE OTHER 10 EPISODES AND WHETHER WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID WAS APPROPRIATE. THAT CAN INVOLVE IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT. IT COULD BE A MOSAIC SAYING WE DON’T BELIEVE YOU ACTED APPROPRIATELY OR ABUSIVELY. BUT IT’S A HARD-LINE SAYING WE DON’T BELIEVE THERE IS POLITICAL MISCONDUCT. >>AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SUMMARIZED THE REPORT TWICE. SO IN TERMS OF A POLITICAL FIGHT HE HAS SET THE STANDARD AND SAID THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS A CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH, AND IT’S UP TO THE POLITICAL SIDE TO DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING THINGS ARE BAD. SO THEY HAVE AN UPHILL FIGHT. >>THAT’S RIGHT. THE DEMOCRATS EVEN AFTER THE INITIAL SUMMARY WAS GIVEN TO CONGRESS CAME FORWARD AND SAID, NO. WE CLEARLY HAVE COLLUSION. LOOK. THEY ARE IN OPPOSITION NOT JUST TO BILL BARR AND THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL BUT THEY ARE TAKING OPPOSITION TO MUELLER HIMSELF. THEY SAID THAT IT’S CLEAR THAT THAT PART OF THE REPORT DID NOT FIND COLLUSION, CERTAINLY IN ANY CRIMINAL SENSE, AND IF IT’S NOT COLLUSION IN THE CRIMINAL SENSE, THEN, WELL, WHAT WERE WE TALKING ABOUT IF THEY FOUND NO CONSPIRACY OR COORDINATION? >>ED SAID SOMETHING INTERESTING. THE AMERICANS WANT TO SEE THE REPORT, BUT A BIG MAJORITY IS TRYING TO MOVE ON. JONATHAN, TIME TO MOVE ON? IS IT STILL TO EARLY TO TELL UNTIL WE RECEIVE THE REPORT? IT’S SEEMS TO BE VERY GOOD NEWS FOR THE PRESIDENT. >>FOR GOD SAKE, DON’T SWITCH TO POLITICAL ANALYST. DON’T MOVE ON. [ LAUGHTER ] I KNOW THAT SOUNDS SELF SERVING, BUT THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS TO ANSWER. >>JONATHAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND WE WILL HAVE CONTINUING COVERAGE ON CBSN OR DOWNLOAD THE CBS NEWS APP. >>>THAT WAS A SPECIAL REPORT. WE HEARD FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, HIS OVERRIDING COLLUSION ON THE REPORT, NO COLLUSION AND NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WHICH IS WHAT HE SAID BEFORE IN A 4-PAGE SUMMARY BUT STILL, A WHOLE LOT OF QUESTIONS. >>THE RELEASE OF THE REPORT IS EMINENT. WE ARE TOLD IT WILL BE POSTED ON THE DOJ WEBSITE, AND WE HAVE THE PRINTERS READY AND WE’LL PRINT IT AND GO PAGE BY PAGE EVEN THOUGH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS CONCLUDED, NO CRIME BUT THERE MAY BE VERY EMBARRASSING INFORMATION. AND WE HAVE RICKY AND REBECCA WITH US. LADIES, THANK YOU FOR STAYING WITH US. WHAT IS YOUR TAKE AWAY? >>MY TAKE AWAY IS THE PRESS CONFERENCE AT ALL BEFORE THE RELEASE. WHAT THIS PERMITTED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO DO IS SCHEDULE THE QUESTION ASKED BY PAULA REID, OUR REPORTER, IN WASHINGTON WHICH HAS TO WITH SPIN. WHEN YOU HAVE A REPORT ISSUED IN AN HOUR OR SO AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SPEAKING FIRST AND DEFENDS THE PRESIDENT OF BEING IN A FRUSTRATING SITUATION WHERE HE WAS EMOTIONAL IN TRYING TO TAKE CHARGE OF THE COUNTRY AND YET BEING UNDER THE SUSPICION, THEREFORE HIS EMOTIONAL CONTENT AND CONTEXT CREATED SOME OF HIS COMMENTS AS IF THIS IS AN EXCUSE. WELL, ALL DEFENDANTS AND SUSPECTS IN A CRIME ARE EMOTIONAL AND VERY FRUSTRATED. IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD THEREFORE COMMIT A CRIME. I FOUND THAT THAT WHOLE SECTION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR’S SUMMARY HERE THIS MORNING WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER OFF NOT SAID. >>IN FACT, WHAT HE SAYS IS THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY THIS SINCERE BELIEF THIS THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY. >>I FEEL THAT COMES FROM HIS TWEETS AND PUBLIC TATEMENTS BECAUSE HE WASN’T QUESTIONED. >>EXACTLY. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THIS IS HIM INFERRING THE INTENSE DESIRE. HOW DID HE COME TO THAT CONCLUSION, REBECCA? HOW DID HE COME TO THAT? >>I AGREE. I CAN’T QUITE FIGURE OUT WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE WAS OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT DIDN’T EXERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. THAT IS NEWS I AM HAPPY TO HAVE. I COULD HAVE FOUND THAT OUT WHEN I HAD THE REPORT BUT I AM HAPPY TO HAVE THE NEWS BUT TO TALK ABOUT THE CONVERSATION ABOUT HIS EMOTIONS, AGAIN, HE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY — THE PRESIDENT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY ALL OF THESE THINGS UNDER OATH AND CHOSE NOT TO. I THINK IT’S SORT OF STRANGE THAT THE PUBLIC STATEMENT IS MADE ON HIS BEHALF BY AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH A SWORN OBLIGATION TO THE PRESIDENT BUT NOT A PARTICULAR PRESIDENT. IT’S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY IS THIS IS A LITTLE BIT THE SAME AS A SUMMARY REPORT IN THAT HE IS STATING LEGAL CONCLUSIONS. I DON’T CARE ANYMORE. I JUST WANT TO SEE THE FACTS AS YOU SAID. I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE JUST WANT TO SEE THE FACTS. THEY ARE KIND OF SICK OF HEARING WHAT IS IN THE REPORT OR WHAT THE REPORT MEANS OUT ACTUALLY READING THE REPORT. >>IT WAS INTERESTING TO HEAR HIM SAY IT BECAUSE HEARING HIM SAY IT AT TIMES, HE SEEMED LIKE A WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON USING HIS TONE AND HIS INFLECTION AND THAT KIND OF STUFF. LET’S GO TO ED O’KEEFE, OUR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT. ED, WHAT’S THE REACTION ON CAPITOL HILL? >>Reporter: MUCH OF LIKE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. WHEN DID THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BECOME A SPOKESMAN FOR THE PRESIDENT? IN ABOUT AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF WHEN WE CAN SEE THIS FOR OURSELVES, MOST PEOPLE WANT TO BE PATIENT AND READ THE 400 PAGE REPORT WHEN IT ARRIVED. THEY GAVE US THE TO BE CONTINUED TEASE IN THE IDEA THAT THERE ARE 10 EPISODES RECOUNTED IN THIS REPORT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN GROUNDS FOR POTENTIAL OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE CHARGES. WHAT I WONDER IS DOES THE REPORT DEMONSTRATE HOW EMOTIONALLY WROUGHT THE PRESIDENT WAS AND THAT’S WHY HE THOUGHT HE COULD EXPLAIN HIS BEHAVIOR AND EMOTIONS TAKING OFFICE AND THE CONCERN THAT THIS WAS UPENDING HIS EARLY PRESIDENCY. REMEMBER. THIS IS THE SAME CRITICISM THAT JAMES COMEY GOT AT THE HEIGHT OF THE 2016 CAMPAIGN WHEN HE CAME OUT TO EXPLAIN THINGS. IF YOU DO. IF YOU DON’T. THE DIFFERENCE IS BARR WAS APPOINTED BY THIS SITTING PRESIDENT AND HAS WRITTEN THINGS IN THE PAST THAT SUGGESTED HE WAS CRITICAL OF THIS WHOLE AFFAIR TO BEGIN WITH, AND BY THE QUESTIONS FROM REPORTERS, IT SUGGEST THAT IS THE TESTIMONY WE WILL GET FROM HIM NEXT MONTH, EARLY MAY, WILL BE QUITE EXPLOSIVE. HE DID NOT ENJOY THE SUGGESTION HE IS SPEAKING OUT ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT. WE’LL SEE. THE OTHER THING TO KEEP IN MIND NOW IS HE SAID THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER COULD TEST. THERE WAS A NOTE ALMOST IMMEDIATELY SENT FROM JERRY NADLER TO MR. MUELLER SAYING PLEASE SHOW UP TO TESTIFY ON MAY 23, BEFORE MEMORIAL DAY WHEN THE SUMMER RECESS BEGINS. THAT, TOO, SIGNALS THAT WE’LL PROBABLY SOON HEAR FROM ROBERT MUELLER HIMSELF, ONCE WE GET A LOOK AT THE 4-00 PAGE REPORT LATER TODAY. >>I’M CURIOUS, ED. NO COLLUSION. NO OBSTRUCTION. BUT 10 EPISODES. I WHAT CAPITOL HILL FEELS ABOUT THIS. DO THEY FEEL BOLSTERED OR DEFEATED? >>Reporter: WE HAVE TO REMIND FOLKS WHAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID OR ESTABLISHES OR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS CONCERNING THE LEGAL CONCERNS OVER WHAT THEY HAVE HAPPENED BUT THE POLITICAL, NON-PARTISAN POLITICAL REPORT — WELL, THEY WILL BE PARTISAN BUT POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS FROM CAPITOL HILL WILL BE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT MATTER WITH AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT BURDEN OF PROOF. THESE 10 EPISODES THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ALLUDES TO TODAY ARE LIKELY TO BE THE BASIS OF SOME OF THIS. THERE IS AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE INVESTIGATION LED BY THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. JUST LAST 9, THEY SUBPOENAED 9 BANKS INCLUDING CITIGROUP, BANK OF AMERICA, AND WELLS FARGO. YOU HAVE ONGOING BATTLES OVER WHETHER OR NOT THE PRESIDENT AND HIS FAMILY ARE UNFAIRLY PROFITING FROM THE HOTEL DOWN THE STREET FROM THE WHITE HOUSE IN THE FOREIGN HEADS OF STATE AND CORPORATE LEADERS STAY THERE WHILE HE IS THE SITTING PRESIDENT, AND THEY WILL LIKELY CONTINUE IN ONE WAY OR OTHER, BUT YOU LOOK AT THE POLLING WE HAVE DONE AT CBS AND OTHERS HAVE DONE ELSEWHERE. WHILE THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT TO SEE THE REPORT AND READ IT THEMSELVES, THEY ALSO WANT WASHINGTON TO MOVE ON. WHILE THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS THINK IT’S OKAY TO KEEP THIS UP, THE REST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN’T NECESSARILY THINK SO, SO THERE WILL BE A POLITICAL RIFT ESPECIALLY IF IT LAYS OUT THAT THE PRESIDENT DIDN’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL. >>RICKI AND REBECCA, SOME OF THE EVIDENCE MIGHT BE SQUIRRLY OR SUSPICIOUS. BUT THE DECISION WAS INNOCENT. THAT’S WHAT BILL BARR SAID TODAY, DESPITE WHAT YOU MIGHT READ THAT IS DAMNING, BUT NOT GUILTY. WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS. THE LAWMAKERS SAID NO CRIME. MOVE ON. >>WELL, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON THAT THERE IS NO CRIME BECAUSE THE LAWMAKER HAS SAID THIS IS NO CRIME. SO AT LEAST IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S PURVIEW, THERE IS NO CRIME FOR WHICH THE PRESIDENT OR ANY MEMBER OF HIS CAMPAIGN COULD BE PROSECUTED AS TO THE ISSUE OF CONSPIRACY AS I CALL IT, RATHER THAN COLLUSION, AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. HOWEVER, QUNG IS UNDER A SEPARATE STANDARD. IT HAS TO DO WITH CHARACTER. IT HAS TO DO WITH ISSUES OF WHAT IS APPROPRIATE IN OFFICE. SO THAT’S A SEPARATE STANDARD. IN ADDITION, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT NO CRIME, WE ARE DEALING ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS NOT JUST IN THE CONGRESS BUT WE ARE DEALING WITH CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, PARTICULARLY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE IN MANHATTAN, THE U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AS TO VARIOUS ASPECTS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, HIS FOUNDATION, HIS ORGANIZATION. SO THOSE CASES MAY OR MAY NOT PROVE THAT THERE IS A CRIME. BUT WHEN WE’RE DEALING WITH THE 4 CORNERS OF THE 400-PAGE MUELLER REPORT, CRIME IS OFF THE TABLE. >>THAT’S SIGNIFICANT. >>YES. >>I MANY, WE REALLY SHOULDN’T FORGET THAT CRIMES HAVE BEEN CHARGED. SO IT’S LIKE — I MEAN, MEMORY IS SHORT ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH THAT COMES OUT. BUT THERE HAS BEEN MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE INDICTMENTS. NOW, RICKI IS RIGHT THAT THEY ARE NOT A CONSPIRACY. BUT ALL THE TIME, PROSECUTORS CHARGE OTHER SORTS OF CRIMES WHEN THEY HAVE LOTS OF EVIDENCE THAT CERTAIN CRIMES HAVE HAPPENED BUT NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AND PROVE OTHER CRIMES THAT THEY CAN PROVE. SO I SAY WE HAVE TO WAIT TO READ THIS REPORT. I THINK THERE ARE SO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS. MAYBE THE ANSWERS WILL BE REDACTED BUT I REALLY THINK WE NEED TO READ THE REPORT BEFORE WE MOVE ON OR DON’T MOVE ON OR BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING. WE JUST NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE FACTS ARE. >>I THINK REBECCA MAKES A GREAT POINT HERE BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE PRESIDENT AND PARTICULARLY, THE PEOPLE CLOSE TO HIM, AND PERHAPS IN MY VISION WE FORGET THAT ONE OF THE FIRST STATEMENTS THAT ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR MADE TODAY WAS ABOUT THE INDICTMENT OF THE RUSSIANS FOR DOING THE HACKING. IN ADDITION TO THAT,LEST WE FORGET THAT PAUL MANAFORT WAS THE CAMPAIGN MANAGER, HE IS DOING TIME IN PRISON. AND MIKE FLYNN WAS NOT DISPOSED OF. WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH MIKE FLYNN. AND WE HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED. >>DISPOSED OF? [ LAUGHTER ] >>ISN’T IT TRUE THAT HE APPLAUDED THE INDICTING OF THE RUSSIANS INVOLVED — >>I THINK THAT’S TOTALLY SIGNIFICANT. I WANT TO HAVE FAITH IN HIM BECAUSE HE IS THE PERSON STANDING THERE IN CHARGE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MAKING IMPORTANT DECISIONS FOR THE COUNTRY BUT HE JUST DOES THINGS THAT UNDERMINE MY ABILITY TO TRUST HIM. ONE WAS THE PRESS CONFERENCE TO START WITH. AND ONE WAS THE 4 PAGE SUMMARY. WHY DOES HE DO THAT IF HE WANTS FAITH — >>I WANT TO PLAY A CLIP. YOU KNOW, CONGRESS HAVING A DIFFERENT STANDARD THAN THE LEGAL SYSTEM. AND THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHY ON EARTH MUELLER LEFT OBSTRUCTION OPEN, WHY HE WOULD SAY I CANNOT EXONERATE? I CANNOT MAKE A CALL ON THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. HERE IS THE EVIDENCE. WAS THE OBJECTION THAT CONGRESS WOULD BE THE ONE MAKING THAT CALL? AND — >>I THINK — >>ATTORNEY BARR WAS ASKED THAT. I WANT TO PLAY THAT AND GET YOUR REACTION IF WE HAVE IT. THAT WAS MY LONG LEAD UP TO GET THE SOUND. >>AFTER NEARLY TWO YEARS OF INVESTIGATION, THOUSANDS OF SUBPOENAS, HUNDREDS OF WARRANTS AND WITNESS INTERVIEWS, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONFIRMED THAT THE RUSSIANS INTERFERED WITH THE 2016 ELECTION BUT DID NOT FIND THAT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OR OTHER AMERICANS COLLUDED IN THE EFFORTS. >>MY BAD. THAT’S SORT OF A PORTION OF THE STATEMENT THAT HE WAS ASKED THAT QUESTION DIRECTLY. HE SAID THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT ROBERT MUELLER WANTED THIS TO BE DECIDED BY CONGRESS. >>CORRECT. >>BUT HE DIDN’T INDICATEHE WANTED THAT TO HAPPEN. >>PROSECUTORS HAVE A DIFFICULT ROLE. YOU GO TO THE GRAND JURY AND GET YOUR TRUE BILL OR DON’T GET YOUR TRUE BILL AND BRING CHARGES OR DON’T BRING CHARGES BUT YOUR ULTIMATE OBLIGATION IS TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. HERE, IT’S FAR, FAR BIGGER. PART OF YOUR OBLIGATION AS OSECUTOR WHICH BARR DID NOT EXPLAIN WHY IS TO THE PUBLIC, AND YOU DON’T ONLY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO BRING CHARGES OR NOT, BUT IT’S A SEMBLANCE OF YOUR JOB, AND HERE, SOME DEGREE OF TRANSPARENCY IS ESSENTIAL. HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT BUT HE IS BACKTRACKING AND SAYING LET’S GET THE MATERIAL TO THE CONGRESS TO LOOK AT IT. IT WAS DONE IN WATERGATE, AND THERE IS NO REASON NOT TO DO THAT AND HE IS NOT SAYING WHY. I WANT THE ANSWER ON THE QUESTION. >>IT’S 10:34 IN NEW YORK, AND WE ARE WAITING FOR THE RELEASE OF THE REPORT. AND I AM LOOKING AT A PICTURE OF THE WHITE HOUSE. SO WE MAY TAKE THAT IF THE PRESIDENT DECIDES TO TALK — >>HE IS AT A WOUNDED WARRIOR EVENT, AND THE PRESIDENT IS PRONE TO — >>AD LIB? >>EXACTLY. AND FROM HIS PERSONAL ATTORNEY, RUDY GIULIANI, HE HAS A STATEMENT. WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO SAY, RICKI? >>IT SEEMS TO ME IT’S SO UNNECESSARY TO HAVE THE REBUTTAL. HE CAN TAKE HIS VICTORY LAP NOW. HE COULDN’T HAVE GOTTEN MORE THAN HE GOT THIS MORNING FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, NOT JUST IN THE WAY HE SAID BUT IN THE WAY HE SAID IT. SO WHY NOT LET IT SIT? IN DOING THE REBUTTAL, YOU KNOW WITH RUDY GIULIANI INVOLVED, IT WILL BE PAINSTAKING AND CAUSTIC. SO YOU PROLONG THE CONVERSATION. NOT ONLY ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT BUT NOW ABOUT THE REBUTTAL. WHY SHOULD THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYER PUT THE PRESIDENT, FRANKLY, IN THE POSITION OF HAVING THE MEDIA ABLE TO CRITICIZE THE REBUTTAL IF THEY ARE IN THE CAT BIRD SEAT CRITICIZING THE REPORT? PEOPLE MIGHT SAY IN RETROSPECT, THAT PEOPLE HAVE CRITICIZED THE APPEARANCES ON THE SUNDAY TALK SHOWS THAT PERHAPS RUDY GIULIANI WAS THE WISEST ONE OF CALL BECAUSE OF THE RESULTS HE GOT. >>THERE IS A DEBATE IF THERE WAS A BRILLIANT TACTIC, BECAUSE, YOU ARE RIGHT. WHAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT IS THE 30-PAGE REBUTTAL. >>DID YA’LL FIND IT INTERESTING THAT BARR CONFIRM THAT DOES ROBERT MUELLER DID NOT THINK, ON HIS OWN, NOT JUST LEAVE IT UP TO BARR TO MAKE THE DECISION, BUT MUELLER, ACCORDING TO BARR SAID I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED >>I FOUND THAT ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS HE SAID, AND ANOTHER REASON THAT THE CONGRESS IS CORRECT TO CALLING ROBERT MUELLER TO TESTIFY BECAUSE WE NEED TO HEAR THE WORDS COME OUT OF ROBERT MUELLER’S MOUTH, AND IT CAME OUT THERE WERE MIXED FUELINGS AMONGST PROSECUTORS ABOUT THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS OBSTRUCTION WHICH IS WHY IT BECAME THISIMBIGUOUS COUNT. >>AND TO YOUR POINT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CONFIRMED THERE MAY HAVE BEEN OTHER SPECIAL PROSECUTORS WHO THOUGHT THAT THEY COULD HAVE — >>CORRECT, CORRECT. THEY SHOULD HAVE. >>HERE IS WHAT HE SAID ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATION MR. MULER >>ALTHOUGH THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL DISAGREED WITH SOME OF THE THEORY AND SOME DID NOT OBSTRUCTION TO AS A MATTER OF LAW, WE DID NOT RELY SOLO THAT ON MAKING OUR DECISION. INSTEAD, WE ACCEPTED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATED EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IN REACHING OUR CONCLUSION. >>SO WHAT ARE WE TO MAKE OF THAT? >>I WANT TO SAY I THINK IT’S RELEVANT THAT MUELLER IS NOT THERE. WHY WOULDN’T YOU HAVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL STANDING WITH YOU? PART OF THAT IS THE SPIN THAT BARR IS SAYING THIS WAS MADE FOR ME. I AM THE ULTIMATE DECIDER AND PUTTING MUELLER IN THE BACKGROUND AT THIS POINT. TO ME, I AM NOT SO INTERESTED IN BARR’S SUMMARY. >>LET ME PUSH BACK, COUNSELOR, IF I MAY. YOU DON’T CARE SO MUCH WHAT BARR HAS TO SAY. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS THE ONE AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT COMMISSIONED THIS INVESTIGATION. IT WASN’T AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. IT WAS COMMISSIONED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. >>WELL, SORT OF. SORT OF. BUT THE REASON IT WAS NOT DONE JUST BY — YOU CAN JUST GET ONE OF YOUR PROSECUTORS TO LOOK INTO SOMETHING. YOU DON’T NEED TO CONVENE A SPECIAL COUNSEL. WHY DO YOU CONVENE A SPECIAL COUNSEL? THERE IS A SENSE THAT YOU HAVE TOO MUCH OF A CONNECTION TO THAT POLITICAL ACTOR TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT INVESTIGATION. IT’S LIKE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. WHILE YOU’RE RIGHT THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL IS DIFFERENT IN THAT HE IS NOT AS INDEPENDENT FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE REGULATIONS CREATE QUITE A BIT OF INDEPENDENCE JUST FOR THAT. IF YOU ARE INVESTIGATING TOP EXECUTIVE OFFICIALS, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL HAVE A HARD TIME DOING THAT BECAUSE HE IS SO CONNECTED TO THE PRESIDENT IN OTHER WAY. >>I SEE YOU BOBBING YOUR HEAD. >>AND WE MAY RECALL WHAT HAPPENED IN THE FIRING OF JIM COMEY, THE PERSON THAT USED THE MEMORANDUM AT THE BASIS OF THE FIRING WAS ROD ROSENSTEIN. HE WAS THE ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL — LET ME REPHRASE THAT. HE WAS THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, NOT THE ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL. BUT HE WAS IN CHARGE OF THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION BECAUSE OF JEFF SESSIONS’ RECUSAL. SO HERE IS ROD ROSENSTEIN SMACK IN THE MIDDLE BECAUSE HE WRITES THE MEMORANDUM THAT FIRES JIM COMEY AND IS CONFRONTED WITH THE FACT ABOUT WHAT THE EVIDENCE AT LEAST AT THAT POINT OR AT LEAST THE BEGINNINGS OF WHAT YOU MAY BELIEVE AND YOU KNOW WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU CAN PROVE IS IN THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN AND SO HE IS COMPROMISED HIMSELF. SO HE IS A.ED SPECIAL COUNSEL. BANNON SAID IS THAT THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY IS THE GREATES MISTAKE EVER DONE BECAUSE IT CREATED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. >>ED, I KNOW YOU ARE STANDING BY, AND LISTENING, BUT WE ALSO HAVE THE QUESTION OF IMPEACHMENT. EVERYONE WAS HOLDING BREATH TO FIGURE OUT WHO THE DEMOCRATS WOULD MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE SINCE THE MID- TERM ELECTION, THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LUKEWARM, NOT LUKEWARM BUT ALMOST COLD ON THE IDEA OF PURSUING IMPEACHMENT. I PRESUME WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT WOULD REINFORCE THAT. >>Reporter: RIGHT, AND MOST DEMOCRATS SAY THEY WANT TO SEE THE RESULTS OF THE REPORT BEFORE THEY MADE THE STATE — DECISION FOR THAT. SO WE WILL GET A SENSE IF THERE IS A DEMOCRATIC REPORT TO PROCEED DOWN THAT ROUTE. BUT REMEMBER WHEN NANCY PELOSI SAID. THERE HAS TO BE OVERWHELMING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND EVIDENCE TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION, AND IF YOU BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PREVIEW OF THE FULL REPORT WE ARE NOT THERE YET. SHE HAS WEIGHED IN FROM EUROPE WHERE SHE IS TRAVELING SAYING THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS CONFIRMED THE STAGGERING EFFORT TO SPIN THE VIEW OF THE REPORT COMPLETE WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT THE TRUMP TEAM RECEIVED A SNEAK PREVIEW. LET’S FACT CHECK A PIECE OF THAT. THE TRUMP TEAM IS THE TRUMP LEGAL TEAM, HIS LAWYER PURSUANT TO A FEDERAL LAW THAT ALLOWS HIM TO SEE IF THEY ARE THE SUBJECT OF THIS INVESTIGATION AND WE KNOW THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WILL TESTIFY MAY 23. IN THE PERMISSION GIVEN THIS MORNING BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL LETS HIM DO THAT. BUT RIGHT NOW AT LEAST IN THE MOMENTS BEFORE THE REPORT IS RELEASED TO THE WORLD, THE CERTAIN AMONG DEMOCRATS THAT IS BILL BARR CAME OUT AND DID WHAT HE DID. BUT THERE IS AN OLD ADDAGE IF THIS TOWN. IF YOU’RE FIGHTING OVER THE PROCESS, YOU’RE LOSING, AND THAT’S ALL THE DEMOCRATS HAVE RIGHT NOW. BUT IN TWO HOURS IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE REPORT WILL BE RELEASED BUT THEY HAVE DONE A QUICK JOB OVERNIGHTINTO TODAY TO DISCREDIT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CALLING HIM OUT AS A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE PRESIDENT INSTEAD OF CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICE. >>AS WE MOVE YARD BEYOND THIS REPORT, THE 400-PAGE REPORT, I DON’T KNOW MAYBE AFTER EVERYONE GOES AWAY FOR A LONG WEEKEND, NO ONE WILL BE INTERESTED IN THE REPORT. DO YOU THINK THIS WILL BE A FACTOR IN THE 2020 CAMPAIGN? >>Reporter: THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE DEMOCRATS WILL — >>TRY? >>Reporter: TRY OR AT LEAST DRAW ATTENTION TO THE PRESIDENT, HIS BEHAVIOR, HIS DECISIONS, HIS CONDUCT, HIS CHARACTER. BUT I THINK YOU TALK TO PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT IN THE FIELD AND THE DEMOCRATS WHO SHOW UP TO PRIMARY EVENTS THEY TELL YOU, WE HAVE ISSUES WITH THE PRESIDENT AND WE DON’T LIKE HIM AND WE HAVE TO DEFEAT HIM BUT TO DEFEAT HIM WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT DEMOCRATS WOULD DO IF THEY HAD TOTAL CONTROL OF WASHINGTON. THAT WAS A TRICKY BALANCING ACT EARLY ON. A LOT OF THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY BREAKING THROUGH, BUT IF THE PARTY EXPECTS TO REPEAT WHAT IT WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF IN NOVEMBER THEY HAVE TO DO THAT AND THAT’S WHY YOU SEE A LOT OF NERVENESS AMONG THE MORE MODERATE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE, ABOUT THE TALK OF IMPEACHMENT OR RILING UP SUPPORTERS OF THE PRESIDENT SAYING THINGS THAT ARE EXTRA CRITICAL BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY HAVE TO GO HOME AND ASK WHAT DID YOU DO ABOUT HEALTHCARE? WHAT DID YOU DO ABOUT SALVAGING THE ECONOMY AND PAYING OFF MY STUDENT LOANS AND CONFER TABLE ISSUES FOR WHAT AMERICANS CARE ABOUT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRESIDENT IS GATHERING WITH MEMBERS OF THE WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT AND THE SOLDIER RIDE, A MULTI-DAY BIKE RIDE. THAT IS COUNTER PROGRAMS IF THERE EVER WAS ONE. THAT WAS A LONG-SCHEDULED EVENT THAT HAPPENS TO RUN INTO WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DECIDED TO ANNOUNCE TODAY. IN KENTUCKY, MITCH McCONNELL WILL BE ANNOUNCING THEY WILL PASS A BILL IN THE SENATE TO RAISE THE FEDERAL TOBACCO AGE FROM 18 TO 21. THERE WAS A BIG BIPARTISAN CONCERN IN WASHINGTON THAT THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY HAS TO BE BETTER REGULATED TO GET THE E- CIGARETTES AND JUUL DEVICES OUT OF THE HANDS OF HIGH SCHOOLERS. THAT IS THE KITCHEN TABLE ISSUE IS MORE LIKELY TO BREAKTHROUGH. IT’S GOING TO BE TRICKY FOR DEMOCRATS TO KEEP THE ISSUE GOING IF THE REPORT CONCLUDES THAT THE PRESIDENT DID NOTHING WRONG AND HE AND REPUBLICANS ATTEMPT TO MOVE ON. >>10:45, AND WE STILL DON’T HAVE THE REPORT, AND IT HAS NOT ARRIVED IN THE HANDS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL OFFICIALS. THE PROCESS IS THEY GET IT AND THEN WE GET IT? >>Reporter: EXACTLY. ESSENTIALLY IN THE NEXT HOUR OR SO, I THINK IT’S SAFE TO SAY AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID EARLIER, THE LEADERS OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND OTHER SENIOR LEADERS WILL BE HANDED CD ROMs. WHAT WAS THE LAST TIME SOMEONE WAS HANDED A CD ROM? >>IS THIS THE 1990s. >>Reporter: AND THEY WERE JOKING THAT YOU WILL GET 12 HOURS OF FREE AOL ON LINE. [ LAUGHTER ] [ LAUGHTER ] >>THEY DON’T ALWAYS PURCHASE THE MOST ADVANCE EQUIPMENT. >>TOUCHE. I WANT TO BRING IN THE LEGAL LADIES HEREMENT FOR NANCY PELOSI TO SUGGEST THAT THE PRESIDENT’S TEAM GOT A SNEAK PEEK, THAT IS UNTOWARD. THAT’S NOT THE CASE HERE. >>THAT’S NOT THE CASE. IT IS TRUE, AS ED NOTED THAT THERE IS AN ETHICS LAW TO ALLOW THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL COUNCIL TO DECIDE IF THE MATERIAL IS SUBJECT TO EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO TO ASSERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. IF MEANS IF THE PRESIDENT HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH PEOPLE, HE HAS THE RIGHT TO FIGHT THIS ISSUE IN COURT THAT YOU CANNOT LET THIS OUT. THE SAME REASONING AS BETWEEN ANY PRIVILEGE, ATTORNEY/CLIENTS, PSYCHOTHERAPIST AND PATIENTS, THERE ARE THINGS THAT PEOPLE CAN SAY IN PRIVATE THAT WILL NOT COME FORTH IN THE WORLD. THE PRESIDENT, VERY MUCH APPLAUDED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID WE WILL NOT EXERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OR THE APPROXIMATELY’S COUNSEL SAYING WE WILL NOT EXERT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. IT’S CERTAINLY NOTED TO BE MAGMANIOUS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. >>ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE PRESIDENT OR NOT RUDY GIULIANI? >>NO, NO, NO, NOT RUDY GIULIANI. >>WHAT IS HE RESPONDING TO? >>FIRST OF ALL, THE PRESIDENT HAS WAIVED HIS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE FIRMLY MEANING THAT EVERYTHING IS OUT THERE. SO RUDY GIULIANI IN HIS SEPARATE ROLE AS PERSONAL COUNCIL TO THE PRESIDENT AND WHOEVER ELSE IS WORKING WITH MR. GIULIANI, THEY ARE WRITING A REBUTTAL — AND I ASSUME THEY ARE — HE WILL BE RESPONDING TO THE 10 EPISODES OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. >>SO RUDY JULIANY JEWEL — GUILLANI IS AWARE OF WHAT’S IN THE REPORT? >>I ASSUME HE IS AWARE OF WHAT IS IN THE REPORT OR THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE AWARE OF WHAT IS IN THE REPORT THROUGH THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, OR RUDY GIULIANI HAS TAKEN THE BOLD MOVE WHICH MANY LAWYERS HAVE DONE, TO GUESS WHAT MIGHT BE IN A REPORT AND GO FORTH AND JUST GO A POLITICAL DOCUMENT THAT IS COUCHED AS A LEGAL DOCUMENT. >>I JUST WANT TO ADD, THOUGH, TO WHAT YOU SAID. THIS — THIS ETHICS AND GOVERNMENT ACT REVISION IS PART OF WHAT MAKES THIS DECISION UNIQUE AND UNCHARTED. >>RIGHT. >>THE THING IS IN THE WAYS THAT BARR SEEMS TO WANT TO ACCEPT THE WAY IT’S UNIQUE, HE IS ACCEPTING THE WAY IT’S UNIQUE, AND IN OTHER WAYS, HE IS RETREATING BEHIND THIS IS THE WAY THE NORMAL DOJ POLICY WORKS, CHARGE OR DON’T CHARGE. IN FACT, THIS IS A REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATION AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT A LOT OF MOVING PIECES AND DIFFERENT ROLES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS HERE. WHEN HE ACTS LIKE MY HANDS ARE TIED BECAUSE THIS IS DOJ POLICY, THIS IS REALLY DIFFERENT, AND THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE. >>I WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER AND THE PRESIDENT’S INTENT AND HIS BEHAVIOR AND OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE AND WHAT BILL BARR HAD TO SAY. IT JUMPED OUT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. IT JUMPED OUT TO PAULA REID WHO ASKED HIM DIRECTLY I WANT TO PLAY THAT SOUND. >>MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE DEMOCRATS HAVE SAID THAT, YOU, QUOTE, CREATED AN ENVIRONMENT THAT CAUSED A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE REDACTIONS. YOU CHEERED THE PRESIDENT FROM OBSTRUCTION, AND YOU HAVE REMARKS THAT ARE QUITE GENEROUS TO THE PRESIDENT, INCLUDING ACKNOWLEDGING HIS FEELINGS AND HIS EMOTIONS. SO WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THOSE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE SAYING YOU WERE TRYING TO PROTECT THE PRESIDENT? >>ACTUALLY, THE STATEMENT ABOUT HIS SINCERE BELIEFS ARE RECOGNIZED IN THE REPORT THAT THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR THAT. SO I AM NOT SURE WHAT YOUR BASIS IS FOR SAYING THAT I AM GENEROUS WITH THE PRESIDENT. >>IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS A LOT OF EFFORT TO ACKNOWLEDGE — >>THERE ANOTHER PRECEDENT FOR IT? >>WELL, NO BUT — >>SO UNPRECEDENTED IS NOT ACCURATE, IS IT? >>IT’S INTERESTING THAT HE SAID SUBSTANTIAL EVERYDAY. I KNOW IT MEANS A QUOTE BUT IN CASUAL TALK, IT MEANS SARCASM, YEAH, BUT I WANT TO ASK EACH OF YOU YOUR TAKE ON THIS. ED, YOU ARE OUT IN WASHINGTON D.C. AND YOU HEARD THE STATEMENT TALK ABOUT THE SINCERE FEELINGS OF THE PRESIDENT BUT THE PRESIDENT NEVER SPOKE TO ANY OF THE INVESTIGATORS. >>Reporter: HE PROVIDED WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM MUELLER’S TEAM, AND SOMEWHERE IN THE WRITTEN ANSWERS, IT WOULD SPEAK TO HIS STATE OF MIND. >>WILL WE SEE THE WRITTEN ANSWERS? >>Reporter: I DON’T KNOW, BUT STAY TUNED. UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT APPLIES TO THE REDACTION WE MAY SEE THEM IF WE ARE GETTING ALL THE DATA THAT WAS COMPILED BY THE INVESTIGATORS. WE’LL SEE. IT WILL BE SUMMARIZED OR WE’LL GET THE RAW ANSWERS THEMSELVES. WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW. WE LITERALLY ARE THE PRE-GAME SLOW TO THE BIG REVEAL THAT IS COMING HERE IN THE COMING MINUTES. SO IF YOU’RE AT HOME, GET YOUR LUNCH, POP YOUR POPCORN AND HIT REFRESH ON CBSNEWS.COM/MUELLER, AND YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR DAY LEADING A RALLY 400-PAGE REPORT WHICH WE SHOULD POINT OUT IS QUITE WELL WRITTEN, WRITTEN BY THE GUYS FILING THE COURT CASES OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. THERE ARE VERY GOOD WRITERS THAT WORK FOR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND PROVIDE US WITH CLEAR PROSE. BUT, LOOK. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOESN’T LIKE THE INSINUATIONS HE IS DEFENDING THE PRESIDENT HOW HE RESPONDS TO PAULA. BUT, AGAIN THE PRESS CONFERENCE MAY BE A SUBNOTE AND FORGOTTEN MOMENT DEPENDING ON WHAT IS IN THE REPORT WHEN WE GET A CHANCE TO SEE IT. EVERYONE WANTS TO SEE IT. A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL SPEND SOMETIME DIGESTING IT. HE WAS CLEARLY TRYING TO SET THE TABLE FOR THE QUESTIONS. >>REBECCA? >>IF YOU WANT TO DEFEND BARR, I CAN SEE YOU DOING SAYING HE BELIEVES IN A STRONG PRESIDENCY AND THAT THE INVESTIGATION WEAKENS THE PRESIDENCY, NOT TRUMP BUT THE PRESIDENCY, AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT HE IS SITTING AND THAT’S WHY HE IS SO FRUSTRATED. HE IS DOING THIS TYPICAL CONSERVATIVE THING, SAYING, LOOK YOU ARE WEAKENING THE PRESIDENT AND THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO HAVE THE POWER TO KEEP THE COUNTRY SAFE. TO ME, IT SEEMS STUBBORN NOT TO ENGAGE IN WHAT SHE WAS ASKING. THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT OR MEANT IT OR NOT ARE INTERCEPTING YOUR CONDUCT IN A CERTAIN WAY. YOU DIDN’T HAVE TO SAY SPYING. YOU COULD HAVE SAID SURVEILLANCE. AND USING THE PRESIDENT’S TALKING POINT IS WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO END THE INVESTIGATION. PEOPLE SEE WHAT THEY SEE OR DON’T SEE WHAT THEY DON’T SEE. BUT YOU HAVE YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS AND NOT SEEING HIM ADDRESS THAT, THAT IS FRUSTRATING >>HERE IS THE THING. THE GOOD FOLKS WHO ARE IN LOUISIANA WHERE I GREW UP SAY I DON’T CARE WHAT IS IN THE 400 PAGES. THE MAN GAVE HIS CONCLUSION. I HAVE KNOWN IT ALL LONG. MOVE ON. >>AND I’M TURNING OFF THE TV RIGHT NOW AND I’M NOT LOOKING AT MY PHONE. >>RIGHT, RIGHT. >>AND I’M NOT ON TWITTER >>AND I’M CERTAIN NOT LOOKING AT THE 400 PAGES BECAUSE I AM MORE CONCERNED ABOUT MY JOB AND CONCERNED ABOUT MY HEALTH CARE AND THE FACT THAT I GOT A SMALLER TAX REFUND OR NO REFUND AT ALL. GOING BACK TO THE SOLE ISSUE OF THE PRESSURE BEING FRUSTRATED, AS A CRIMINAL LAWYER, THAT CONCEPT JUST ABSOLUTELY FLOORS ME. >>WHY? >>BECAUSE THE WHOLE IDEA THAT I’M FRUSTRATED AND SO I CAN THEREFORE SAY CERTAIN THINGS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WIND UP BEING — AMOUNTING TO A CRIME BUT AT LEAST SOME PROSECUTORS THINK IT IS, AND SOME PROSECUTORS THINK IT ISN’T, BUT THAT I CAN SAY THESE THINGS AND I’M EXCUSED BECAUSE I’M FRUSTRATED? I MEAN, I JUST FIND THAT COMING FROM A LEGAL SPOKESPERSON TO — TO BE OVER THE TOP. >>I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD TO THAT I THINK THE IDEA THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND SAY YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING CRIPPLE — CRIMINAL BUT I HAVE SEEN WITH MY EYES THINGS SITUATION IN WHICH WE FIND OURSELVES IN IN WHICH PEOPLE DON’T BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS HIS WORK. BECAUSE IF WE DIDN’T HAVE A PRESIDENT OUT THERE SAYING THIS IS A WITCH HUNT, STORM TROOPER, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN SCARE CLOTHES, WE WOULD NOT HAVE ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR. THIS IS HATE DAMAGE. >>SO SOMEONE INVESTIGATING MICHAEL COHEN’S FATHER — >>I AM JUST SAYING — I AM JUST SAYING FOR CONGRESS TO LOOK INTO THIS OR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW THIS, WHATEVER THE FACTS ARE, I ALREADY KNOW. I ALREADY SAW IT. THERE IS A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CRIME AND WHAT IS WRONG. AND THIS DEMOCRACY IS NOT JUST KEPT UP BY PREVENTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. IT’S ALSO KEPT UP BY RESPECTING THE INSTITUTIONS AND NORMS THAT WE HAVE THAT HE HASN’T DONE. >>THAT’S THERE BUT RESPECTING THE NORM DOESN’T FALL YOU WERE THE LEGAL PURVIEW. RIGHT? RESPECTING THE NORMS IS — >>SURE BUT IT’S NOT NOTHING. >>OH, NO. I HEAR YOU, BUT I’M JUST SORT OF PUSHING BACK ON THIS. THERE WAS TWO YEARS OF AD NAUSEA UM I HAD STEERIA, AND THAT IS JUST THE SIGNIFICANT OF THE RIGHT. AM I WRONG? >>NO. THAT’S A DINNER PARTY CONVERSATION IN PLACES ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY FOR 2 YEARS. I AM SURE THERE IS OBSTRUCTION. THIS IS THE ONE THAT DOES IT. OF COURSE, THERE IS OBSTRUCTION, AND THEN IT IS OTHER SIDE IS SAYING YOU HAVE TO WAIT. >>BUT IT WAS THE BRILLIANCE OF THE TRUMP TEAM TO LINK THE GOAL TO THAT. OH, MY GOSH, WHY IS THAT WHAT WAS TOMORROWED, WHETHER THE PRESIDENT HAS DONE SOMETHING WRONG? YOU WANT A PRESIDENT THAT HAS NOT COMMITTED A CRIME BUT YOU WANT MORE FROM A PRESIDENT. THOSE WHO SAY HE HAS NOT COMMITTED A CRIME, THAT’S GENIUS. >>AND THE METHODOLOGY IS DEBATABLE. THE THING ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IT’S DEBATABLE WHETHER OR NOT THERE NEEDS TO BE AN UNDERLYING CRIME. >>HIGHLY DEBATABLE. >>WILLIAM BARR HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO COORDINATION OR COLLUSION THERE CANNOT BE OBSTRUCTION. BUT NOT EVERYONE THINKS THAT WAY. >>NOT EVERY CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR THINKS THAT WAY. >>AND THERE ARE PEOPLE SITTING IN JAIL ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, LOTS OF THEM. AGAIN, I DON’T THINK IT’S NECESSARY TO HAVE THE DEBATE WHETHER OR NOT IT’S A CRIME. AGAIN, THE ACADEMIC DEBATE IS HE IS NOT GETTING CHARGED. WHAT MATTERS IS THE FACTUAL SUPPORT WHICH IS WHY, LIKE, THIS WHOLE THING — I AM SO HAPPY TO BE HERE TALKING TO YOU BUT LIKE WHY — WHY ARE WE TALKING FOR TWO HOURS ABOUT HIS SECOND SUMMARY OF THE THING WE HAD? >>BECAUSE WE STILL HAVEN’T SEEN IT. >>WE ACTUALLY NEED THE FACTS. NO MORE TALK ABOUT WHAT IS A CRIME OR NOT A CRIME OR LEGAL CONCLUSIONS, AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, AND WHETHER IT’S SO BAD HAVING THIS PERSON AS PRESIDENT IS DANGEROUS. >>WHAT WE WANT TO KNOW, FIRST AND FOREMOST, THIS MEDDLING, RUSSIAN MEDDLING, HAD STARTED THIS WHOLE THING, AND ALSO, WE WANT TO KNOW, CAN WE STILL HAVE FAITH IN THE SYSTEM? RIGHT? WHEN IT COMES TO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT IMPEACHMENT, IT DOESN’T NEED TO BE A CRIME — A CRIME DOESN’T NEED TO OCCUR FOR THERE TO BE AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE TO OCCUR. BECAUSE THE IDEA OF IMPEACHING A PRESIDENT IS SAYING WE AS A COUNTRY DO NOT HAVE FAITH IN THIS PERSON AND WE NEED TO REVERSE OUR DECISION. SO YOU TOTALLY MAKE A LOT ONLY SEVEN PEOPLE AROUND THE PRESIDENT ARE CRIMINALS AND NOT THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. >>THERE IS A WHOLE LOT MORE TO DISCUSS. >>WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH THE ISSUES THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR IMPEACHMENT — BUT THEY ARE SIMPLY THERE FOR THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. FOR THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. IT IS AN INTERESTING FACTOR WHEN YOU CONSIDER THIS IS 2019. WE ARE A YEAR AWAY AND SOME MONTHS FROM A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. WHICH IS WHY SOME OF THE CANDIDATES ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE SIMPLY SAID — INCLUDING, BY THE WAY, NOT A CANDIDATE, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NANCY PELOSI SAID WE HAVE THINGS TO DO IN CONGRESS. WE NEED TO SHOW THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THAT WE ARE HERE FOR THEIR NEEDS AND THE REAL REFERENDUM ON WHAT DONALD TRUMP HAS DONE IS STILL TEN EPISODES OF POSSIBLE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WHICH TELLS US SOMETHING ABOUT HIS CHARACTER AND SOMETHING ABOUT HOW HE VIEWS HIS OWN ROLE IN OFFICE, THE BALLOT BOX IS THE REMEDY. >>THE VIOLATIONS ARE SOMETHING TRUMP SUPPORTERS KNOW ABOUT AND ACCEPT. ■ THE REPORT IS OUT. CONTROL ROOM, CAN YOU TELL ME IS THE REPORT OUT ON THE DOJ WEBSITE? WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS — AS WE ARE SPEAKING LIVE — OUR NEWS TEAM IN THE HUB IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THE DIGITAL VERSION OF THE REPORT SO WE CAN PRINT IT OUT. CBSNEWS.COM/MUELLER. WE CAN GO THROUGH THE REPORT AND READ SECTIONS. WE HAVE THESE WONDERFUL ANALYSTS WHO ARE ALL HEAR. RICKY KLEEMAN AND MOLLY HOOPER. I ALWAYS SAY PEOPLE DESERVE TO HAVE THEIR NAME PRONOUNCED PROPERLY. THE REPORT IS OUT IN YOU WANT TO READ IT. WE ARE WAITING FOR THE PRESIDENT TO TAKE THE PODIUM AT THE WHITE HOUSE. THERE IS A WOUNDED WARRIORS EVENT. HE HAS NOT GOTTEN THERE YET. HE TWEETED GAME OVER. WE HAVE A NETWORK SPECIAL REPORT. WE’LL SEND YOU OVER TO THAT. STAND BY. HERE WE GO. ♪>>>THIS IS A THIS IS A CBS NEWS SPECIAL REPORT. I’M JOHN DICKERSON WITH NORAH O’DONNELL AND GAYLE KING IN NEW YORK. SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER’S REPORT HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RELEASED A REDACTED VERSION OF THE MATERIAL. >>THE CONGRESS RECEIVED THE REDACTED REPORT A SHORT TIME AGO. THEY GOT IT ON A CD ROM AFTER ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR SUMMARIZED IT. IT IS COLOR-CODED. BARR, IN HIS PRESS CONFERENCE SAYS THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT ACCUSATIONS THAT THE PRESIDENT OBSTRUCTED THE MUELLER PROBE AND FOUND NO COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA. JUST AS THE REPORT IS BEING RELEASED WE SEE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ENTER INTO THE EAST ROOM OF THE WHITE HOUSE. >>IT WAS UNCLEAR IF THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO SPEAK TODAY. MY GUESS IS COME UP WITH SOMETHING TO RESPOND TO MR. BARR’S PRESS CONFERENCE THIS MORNING. >>IT IS SOMETHING VERY, VERY SPECIAL. FEW PEOPLE COULD DO IT. INCLUDING ME. I HATE TO ADMIT IT. I HATE TO ADMIT THAT GENERAL, BUT INCLUDING ME. WE ARE DEEPLY HONORED TO BE IN THE PRESENCE OF TRUE AMERICAN HEROES. I WANT TO THANK OUR GREAT VICE PRESIDENT, MIKE PENCE AND KAREN PENCE FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. THANK YOU, MIKE AND KAREN. STAND UP. MIKE, STAND UP. [ APPLAUSE ] THEIR’S IS A FIERCE DEVOTION. >>CBS NEWS LEGAL ANALYST IS JOINING US AGAIN AT THE TABLE. LET’S DISCUSS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN SO FAR THIS MORNING WITH MR. BARR’S PRESS CONFERENCE. >>THUS FAR WE HAVE SOME NEW INFORMATION. AN INTERESTING ISSUE IS THERE WAS A DISAGREEMENT AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BETWEEN THE PROSECUTORS AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. TO ATTORNEY GENERAL MADE A REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT HE ACCEPTED THEIR DEFINITION OF OBSTRUCTION IN DECIDING IT WOULD NOT MAKE A PLAUSIBLE CRIMINAL CASE. THAT INDICATES THEY DID NOT ACCEPT BARR’S MORE NARROW DEFINITION OF THAT CRIME. WE HAVE THE DESCRIPTION OF THESE TEN EPISODES. >>LET ME PAUSE YOU FOR A MOMENT. WE ARE JUST GETTING THIS REPORT THAT HAS BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. PAULA REED COVERS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND THE WHITE HOUSE FOR US. SHE HAS READ THROUGH LARGE SECTIONS OF THIS REPORT. PAULA, YOUR HEADLINES? >>Reporter: ONE OF THE MOST REMARKABLE THINGS I SAW IS WE ARE GETTING, FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO BEING INFORMED BY HIS FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER HAD BEEN APPOINTED. HE SAID THIS IS TERRIBLE. I’M F’D. HE SAID QUOTE, EVERYONE TELLS ME IF YOU GET AN INDEPENDENT COUNCIL IT RUINS YOUR PRESIDENCY. IT TAKES YEARS AND YEARS AND I WON’T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING. T EVER HAPPENED TO ME. IN THIS REPORT WE ARE LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE PRESSURE THE PRESIDENT APPLIED ON HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL WHEN HE GOT WIND OF THE FACT THAT HE MAY RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. THIS REPORT CONFIRMS THAT THE PRESIDENT TRIED TO CONVINCE HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL TO UNRECUSE HIMSELF. SO FAR, IN GOING THROUGH THIS, THAT WAS THE MOST REMARKABLE PASSAGE. SEEING HOW RATTLED THE PRESIDENT WAS WHEN HE LEARNED SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WAS GOING TO LOOK INTO TIES WITH RUSSIA AND HIS CAMPAIGN. SESSIG SESSION’S RECOLLECTION THAT THE PRESIDENT SAID, QUOTE, YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT ME, WHICH SUGGESTS AGAIN GETS TO THIS IDEA, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE EVENTS UNDOUBTEDLY AND WHAT’S INTERESTING ABOUT WHAT PAULA READ IS THE PRESIDENT SAID HE’S IN TROUBLE HEARING THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WAS NAMED. IT IS UNCLEAR IF HE SAID I’M IN TROUBLE BECAUSE SOMETHING WAS DONE WRONG OR I’M IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO PIN DOWN MY ADMINISTRATION FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND I’M NOT GOING TO GET ANYTHING DONE. >>THAT GOES TO THE QUESTION OF INTENT. IT WAS CLEAR THE PROSECUTORS FELT THEY COULD NOT MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. THE PROSECUTORS WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. THE PRESIDENT DECLINED TO BE INTERVIEWED. THE PROSECUTORS, AT THE END OF THE DAY SAID LOOK, WE CAN NOT RESOLVE WHAT YOUR INTENT IS. YOU DIDN’T SPEAK TO US. ALL WE HAVE ARE THESE DISTURBING QUESTIONS. THAT STILL GETS TO THIS ISSUE OF SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS. THE PRESIDENT LEFT EVERY IMPRESSION OF SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO SCUTTLE THE INVESTIGATION. HE IS THE GUY THAT RUNS EVERY TIME A CAR ALARM GOES OFF. >>THERE ARE SO MANY DISCLOSURES IN THE 400 PAGE REPORT. LET’S GO BACK TO PAULA REED, WHO HAS BEEN READING THROUGH THE REPORT. >>Reporter: ONE THING IS HOW LIGHTLY THIS REPORT HAS BEEN REDACTED. THERE IS LITTLE THAT WE CAN NOT ACTUALLY READ. ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS IS IN THE END THAT TALKS ABOUT OTHER INVESTIGATIONS THIS INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED. THAT’S THE ONLY PLACE WE SAW ANY REDACTIONS. YOU SEE ALMOST THREE PAGES OF TOTAL REDACTIONS. THEY COULD NOT SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH US BECAUSE THESE ARE ON-GOING CASES. IF ANYONE THINKS THIS IS THE END OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATIONS, THE REDACTIONS SUGGEST OTHERWISE. THERE WAS A WHOLE SECTION ABOUT WHY THEY DECIDED NOT TO SUBPOENA PRESIDENT TRUMP. CITY COUNCILSPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER SAID HE KNEW HE COULD DO THIS. HE DID NOT WANT TO DELAY THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION. A LOT OF PEOPLE WONDERED WHY THEY DIDN’T SUBPOENA THE PRESIDENT AND FORCE HIM TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEYOND THE WRITTEN ANSWERS. HE DIDN’T ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. >>DID MUELLER SAY IN THE REPORT THAT CONGRESS HAS THE ABILITY TO FIND THE PRESIDENT OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE. >>Reporter: I DIDN’T SEE THAT SPECIFICALLY. I WAS SKIMMING AND LOOKING FOR SPECIFICATION THINGS. IT IS TRUE. CONGRESS CAN TECHNICALLY HOLD A TRIAL AND IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT. ONE OF THOSE CRIMES HE COULD POTENTIALLY BE IMPEACHED FOR WOULD — IF THERE WAS EVIDENCE, BE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS ASKED EARLIER WHY DIDN’T YOU PASS THIS QUESTION OFF TO CONGRESS. IF SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER COULD NOT COME TO A CONCLUSION, WHY COULD YOU? ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR SAID HE BELIEVED IT WAS HIS MISSION. HE DIDN’T SEE IT AS AN OPTION TO HAND IT OFF TO CONGRESS. >>THANK YOU. ONE PIECE FROM THE MUELLER REPORT HERE THAT CONCERNS AN IMPORTANT DRAMA WAS THE QUESTION OF THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY. JAMES COMEY FELT THE PRESIDENT FIRED HIM BECAUSE COMEY WAS FINDING SOMETHING OUT IN THE INVESTIGATION. ROBERT MUELLER SAYS EVIDENCE INDICATES THE PRESIDENT WANTED TO PROTECT HIMSELF FROM AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS CAMPAIGN. IN ADDITION, THE PRESIDENT HAD A MOTIVE TO PUT THE FBI’S INVESTIGATION BEHIND HIM. THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE TERMINATION OF COMEY WAS DESIGNED TO COVER UP A CONSPIRACY BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND RUSSIA. ON THE COLLUSION QUESTION, THAT CLEARS THE PRESIDENT. EVIDENCE INDICATES THE PRESIDENT WANTED TO PROTECT HIMSELF FROM AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS CAMPAIGN. IT GETS INTO A MURKY QUESTION AGAIN. HE WANTED TO PROTECT HIMSELF BUT WHY? BECAUSE IT WAS GOING TO CLOT UP HIS ADMINISTRATION FOR YEARS OR BECAUSE HE THOUGHT THEY MIGHT FIND SOMETHING. MUELLER CONCLUDED THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT WORRIED ABOUT FINDING OUT ABOUT A CONSPIRACY BETWEEN TRUMP AND THE RUSSIANS. >>THAT’S WHAT MAKES TRUMP HISTORICALLY, MUCH OF THIS WAS BY HIS OWN HAND. HAD HE NOT FIRED JAMES COMEY, THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION LOOKED LIKE IT WAS WINDING DOWN. IT TIED UP HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION. THAT’S PRECISELY WHAT HE WAS TOLD WOULD HAPPEN. AS THE BAFFLING ASPECT THAT HIS INCLINATION TO COUNTER PUNCHED ALMOST SUCCEEDED INTO COUNTER PUNCHING INTO AN OBSTRUCTION CASE. >>YOU ALWAYS HEAR PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE HIDE NOTHING. IT SEEMED LIKE THEY WERE TRYING TO HIDE A LOT. >>AT THE END OF THE DAY WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? >>TRUMP IS TRUMP. HE IS A VERY DIFFICULT STUDY OF WHAT MOTIVATES HIM. HE HAS THESE INSTINCTS THAT ARE OFTEN WRONG. IF THE REPORT IS TRUE AND WE ARE STILL GOING THROUGH THE REPORT THAT HE WANTED TO FIRE CRITICAL PLAYERS, HE WAS ONLY PROTECTED FROM A CRIMINAL CASE BY HIS STAFF KEEPING HIM FROM FIRING SOMEONE AND MAKING THE COMEY THING LOOK LIKE A WALK IN THE PARK. HE MADE A PLAUSIBLE CASE OF OBSTRUCTION. WE’LL HAVE TO SEE MORE ABOUT THE DETAILS. OF THESE TEN EPISODES, THE PROSECUTORS WERE CLEARLY LOOKING FOR LINKAGES. IS THERE A PATTERN HERE? THEY DO INDICATE THEY THINK THE CONSISTENT MOTIVATION HERE SEEMS TO BE TRUMP TRYING TO AVOID THE COSTS OF AN INVESTIGATION. HE WANTED SOMEONE TO RID HIM OF THIS MEDDLESOME PROSECUTOR. HIS STATEMENT ABOUT SESSIONS IS SO MADDENING IN THIS SENSE. HE SEEMED TO BELIEVE HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS THERE TO QUOTE, PROTECT HIM. >>PAULA REED, WE’LL GO BACK TO YOU. I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE MORE ON WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAD TO SAY. >>Reporter: THEY INCLUDED THE PRESIDENT’S FULL WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IN THIS REPORT. WHEN I WOKE UP THIS MORNING THIS WAS THE NUMBER ONE THING I WAS LOOKING FOR. THIS GIVES US THE SENSE OF A PRESIDENT WHEN FACING THE POSSIBILITY OF CRIMINAL CHARGES, WHAT WOULD BE HIS VERSION OF EVENTS IN TERMS OF COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN RUSSIA AND HIS CAMPAIGN? HE SAID HE DENIES HAVING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING. WHERE HIS SON, HIS SON-IN-LAW, HIS CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN MET WITH A RUSSIA ATTORNEY PROMISING DIRT ON HIS OPPONENT. THERE HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT COULD HAPPEN WITHOUT CANDIDATE TRUMP KNOWING. HE DENIES KNOWING ABOUT THE MEETING. HE SAYS HE HAD NO RECOLLECTION THAT WIKILEAKS WOULD RELEASE E- MAILS THAT WOULD BE DAMAGING TO THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN IN OCTOBER 2016. HE DENIES HAVING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. HE SAYS HE NEVER DISCUSSED RUSSIA OR THE UKRAINE WITH HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT WHO IS IN PRISON FOR NOT DISCLOSING THE WORK HE WAS DOING ON BEHALF OF RUSSIA POLITICIANS. IT HELPS EXPLAIN WHY THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL ATTORNEYS WERE COMFORTABLE HAVING THEIR CLIENT ANSWER WRITTEN QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RUSSIA COLLUSION ASPECT BUT NO COMFORTABLE ANSWERING QUESTIONS OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. >>SO MUCH HAS BEEN MADE ABOUT THE MEETING WITH THE RUSSIANS AT TRUMP TOWN WITH DONALD TRUMP JR. AND JARED KUSHNER WAS THERE. >>THE PROBLEM WITH THE TRUMP TOWER WAS IT WAS IMPLAUSIBLE THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE COLLUDING WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND MET IN THE TRUMP TOWER WITH HALF THE WORLD’S MEDIA DOWNSTAIRS WITH PEOPLE WHO DIDN’T KNOW WOULD BE IN THE MEETING AND DIDN’T PRODUCE ANYTHING. THERE WAS ALWAYS A DISCONNECT IN TERMS OF LOGIC. >>THE NEXT QUESTION IS WELL, DID HE WANT TO OBSTRUCT EFFORTS TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE MEETING? THE MUELLER REPORT SAYS THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUGGEST THAT THE PRESIDENT INTENDED TO PREVENT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OFFICE OR CONGRESS OF OBTAINING E-MAILS FROM THE JUNE 9TH MEETING. THAT’S WHAT THE REPORT SAYS ABOUT THE OBSTRUCTION PIECE OF THAT. >>AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID, MUELLER FOUND NO COLLUSION BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OR MEMBERS OF HIS CAMPAIGN WITH THE RUSSIANS. WE SAW THE PRESIDENT A SHORT TIME AGO IN THE EAST END OF THE WHITE HOUSE SPEAKING WITH WOUNDED WARRIORS. HE DID ADDRESS THE CONTENTS OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. LET’S LISTEN. >>THEY ARE HAVING A GOOD DAY. I’M HAVING A GOOD DAY, TOO. IT WAS CALLED NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. [ APPLAUSE ]>>THERE NEVER WAS, BY THE WAY AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. WE HAVE TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THESE THINGS, I WILL SAY. THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN. I SAY THIS IN FRONT OF MY FRIENDS, WOUNDED WARRIORS AND I JUST CALL THEM WARRIORS. WE JUST SHOOK HANDS AND THEY LOOK GREAT. THEY LOOK SO GOOD AND SO BEAUTIFUL. I SAID IN FRONT OF MY FRIENDS THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO ANOTHER RESIDENT AGAIN. THIS HOAX. IT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO ANOTHER PRESIDENT AGAIN. THANK YOU. >>WEIJIA JIANG IS AT THE WHITE HOUSE. IT WAS REPORTED YESTERDAY BY SOME OUTLETS THAT WHITE HOUSE STAFFERS WERE NERVOUS AND IN A PANIC. ARE THEY NERVOUS AND IN A PANIC TODAY? >>I THINK AFTER THAT PRESS CONFERENCE FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THEY HAD A SHORT TIME TO AT LEAST CALM DOWN AND REALIZE IT WAS A GOOD DAY FOR THE PRESIDENT. HOWEVER, THERE ARE READING TEAMS IN PLACE HERE, JUST LIKE WE HAVE. PAPERS ARE FLYING OFF OF PRINTERS. WE’LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH WORD FOR WORD TO SEE HOW MUCH INFORMATION — HOW MANY OF THE DETAILS AND NUGGETS ABOUT THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ACTIONS COULD BE ULTIMATELY NEGATIVE FOR HIM. DURING EVENTS LIKE THIS, WHERE THE PRESIDENT IS IN RIGHT NOW IN THE EAST ROOM, TYPICALLY HE STICKS TO THE SCRIPT. HE DOES NOT BREAK. ESPECIALLY WHEN HE IS SURROUNDED BY VETERANS. HE DOES NOT ADDRESS THE NEWS OF THE DAY. IT IS SIGNIFICANT THAT HE MADE AN EXCEPTION BECAUSE HE’S NOT JUST SPEAKING TO THIS ROOM. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE HE USED, HE USED THE WORD HOAX. HE USED CATCHPHRASES NO COLLUSION AND NO OBSTRUCTION. HE IS TALKING TO HIS SUPPORTERS. HE SAID YOU ARE RIGHT. TODAY IS MY DAY OF VINDICATION. NOW YOU HAVE THIS 400 PAGE REPORT. EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE DETAILS IN THERE ABOUT ME THAT ARE NOT POSITIVE, I DECIDED TO WITHHOLD EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND ALLOW YOU TO SEE ALL OF IT. NOT ONLY IS HE ABLE TO SAY THESE ARE THE CONCLUSIONS. HE IS ABLE TO SAY I WANT YOU TO SEE ALL OF IT. I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHY MUELLER CAME TO THIS REPORT. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRUMP SUPPORTER AND THIS INFORMATION IS TRICKY. PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO DIGEST THIS ON THEIR OWN AND SEE IF IT INFLUENCES THEM GOING FORWARD. I DID SPEAK TO SOURCES WHO SAID THIS IS NOT GOING TO COST A SINGLE VOTE. THEY BELIEVE IT WILL HELP THE PRESIDENT. IT HAS EMBOLDENED HIM AND GIVEN HIM ALL OF THE VINDICATIONS HE’S BEEN LOOKING FOR FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS. >>WEIJIA JIANG AT THE WHITE HOUSE. PAULA REED HAS A STATEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYERS. >>Reporter: THIS IS A LENGTHY STATEMENT I JUST RECEIVED FROM THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LEGAL TEAM. HEAD LINE IS THEY BELIEVE THIS IS INDICATION OF THE PRESIDENT. AN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD FOR THE COUNTRY. A STRONG REMINDER THAT THIS KIND OF ACCUSE NEVER BEEN PERMITTED TO OCCUR AGAIN. IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT EARLIER TODAY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAD A PRESS CONFERENCE BEFORE ANY OF US HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THE DOCUMENT. HIS REMARKS WERE COMPLIMENTARY AND EMPATHIC TO THE PRESIDENT. I ASKED HIM ABOUT THAT. I SAID I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT YOU WENT OUT OF YOUR WAY TO SAY THIS WAS AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION FOR ANY PRESIDENT. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID THAT IN NO WAY DID THE PRESIDENT TRY TO INTERFERE WITH THIS INVESTIGATION. WHICH I BELIEVE IS THAT HE HAS DANGLED PARDONS IN FRONT OF SEVERAL WITNESSES IN THIS CASE. I THOUGHT TODAY ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR’S REMARKS FOR GENEROUS TO THE PRESIDENT. I ASKED WHAT HE WOULD SAY TO AMERICANS WHO BELIEVE HE IS TRYING TO HELP OR PROTECT THE PRESIDENT WITH A SPEECH LIKE THIS. HE DID NOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >>THANK YOU, PAULA. WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION FROM THE REPORT ON PAGE 79 REFERRING TO JEFF SESSION. THE PRESIDENT THEN TOLD SESSIONS HE SHOULD RESIGN HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL. SESSIONS AGREED TO SUBMIT HIS RESIGNATION. HE LEFT THE OVAL OFFICE. THE NEXT DAY, FBI AGENTS DELIVERED A PRESERVATION NOTICE THAT DISCUSSED AN INVESTIGATION RELATED TO JAMES COMEY’S TERMINATION. HE LEFT ME ON AN ISLAND. TWO DAYS LATER THE PRESIDENT TOLD ADVISORS HE DECIDED TO FIRE JAMES COMEY. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO YOU? >>THE PRESIDENT’S INCLINATION AT EVERY STAGE SO FAR IN THE REPORT IS TO, FRANKLY FLAIL ABOUT. HIS RESPONSE TO SESSIONS RECUSING HIMSELF, WHICH WAS THE CORRECT THING TO DO WAS I’LL FIRE SESSIONS. WHAT IS TROUBLING IS THIS IDEA HE HAS THAT HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL IS HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL REPRESENTING HIM. EVEN THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DOESN’T REPRESENT HIM. IT REPRESENTS THE WHITE HOUSE HIMSELF. THIS INCLINATION WE SEE THROUGH THIS REPORT IS SO DAMAGING, NOT JUST TO HIMSELF, BUT TO HIS OFFICE. YOU CAN SEE IN THE REPORT, STAFFERS TRYING TO HOLD HIM BACK. >>DOES HE SOMETIMES PUNCH WHEN HE DOESN’T NEED TO? >>ABSOLUTELY. MOST OF THE DAMAGE HERE IS SELF- INFLICTED. >>IT COMES FROM — ISN’T THIS THE CRUCIAL QUESTION — WHETHER HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS? HE LOOKS AT BOBBY KENNEDY THINKING BOBBY KENNEDY WAS IN THERE WORKING FOR JACK KENNEDY WHEN HE WAS ATTORNEY GENERAL. WHY ISN’T SESSIONS DOING THAT FOR ME? >>THE PRESIDENT HAD A CRITICAL PART OF HIS LIFE IN THE REAL ESTATE MARKET IN NEW YORK. HE HAD ROY CHON WHO TAUGHT HIM TO COUNTER PUNCH. YOU SHOULD NEVER APOLOGIZE. YOU SHOULD ALWAYS ATTACK. THAT LEFT HIM DYING BANKRUPT AND DISBARRED. THE PRESIDENT HAS ALWAYS HAD THIS IDEA THAT YOU HAVE TO ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK. THAT MAY BE GOOD FOR NEW YORK REAL ESTATE. IT IS A SIGNATURE OF THAT MARKET. IT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THE QUESTION WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS REPORT, WHEN WE LOOK FOR IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT IS WHETHER THE PRESIDENT WAS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT WAS A CRIME BUT NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO? THAT RAISES A TOUGH QUESTION. IF THE PRESIDENT WANTED TO TAKE A CRIMINAL ACT BUT STAFFERS PREVENTED HIM FROM DOING SO, IS THAT SOMETHING CONGRESS NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT? >>COULD IT BE THAT HIS BEHAVIOR IS DISTASTEFUL BUT NOT ILLEGAL? >>THAT’S RIGHT. HE STAYED SHORT OF THE CRIMINAL CODE. CLEARLY THE PROSECUTORS DID NOT BELIEVE THERE WAS A CASE TO BE MADE. IT IS NOTABLE THAT MUCH OF WHAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL LOOKED AT WERE HIS PUBLIC TWEETS. THEY WERE THE PUBLIC STATEMENTS HE MADE. HE WAS DOING THIS IN OPEN. HE WAS NOT SOMEONE WHO WAS CONCEALING MUCH. WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS REPORT IS THAT THIS IS A GUY THAT PLAYS POKER WITH THE CARDS FACING OUTWARD. HE ATTACKS. >>ONE OTHER THING THE INVESTIGATION FOUND IS THAT ON THIS QUESTION OF MICHAEL FLYNN, THE PRESIDENT’S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR AND WHETHER FLYNN WAS HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH RUSSIA ABOUT SANCTIONS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAD PUT ON RUSSIA, THE MUELLER REPORT SAYS OUR INVESTIGATION DID NOT PRODUCE EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT KNEW ABOUT FLYNN’S DISCUSSIONS OF SANCTIONS BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE NOTIFIED THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2017. THE POINT BEING, IF THE PRESIDENT DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT FLYNN’S DISCUSSIONS WITH THE RUSSIANS HOW COULD HE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO BLOCK THE EFFORTS? >>IF YOU ARE NOT COLLUDING WITH THE RUSSIANS, HOW COME THERE ARE SO MANY RUSSIANS AROUND? YOU ARE MEETING THEM IN HOTELS. STAFFERS ARE MEETING THEM. THE FACT IS THIS IS WASHINGTON, D.C. ZIP MATSDIPLOMATS REACH OUT TO OTHERS. WHAT COMES OUT OF THE REPORT IS THIS WAS BACK CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS. THE RUSSIANS WERE VERY INCENSED BY THE SANCTIONS IMPOSED AGAINST THEM ON ADOPTION. THEY KEPT RAISING THAT WITH CRITICAL FIGURES. >>WE ARE ALL GOING THROUGH THIS REPORT NOW. IT IS EXTENSIVE. IT IS ONLINE. WE ARE READING THROUGH MUCH OF IT AND DISTILLING IT. PAULA REED, AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, HAS BEEN COVERING THE PROBE FROM THE BEGINNING. WHAT ELSE HAVE WE LEARNED? >>Reporter: WHAT I’M SEEING EMERGE IS A TALE OF TWO PRESIDENTS. THE PRESIDENT’S FORWARD FACING APPROACH TO THE PRESS DISMISSING IT AS A WITCH HUNT TRYING TO UNDERMIND IT IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION. BEHIND THE SCENES ENCOURAGING COOPERATION AND TRANSPARENCY WITH INVESTIGATORS. WHEN THE STORY ABOUT THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING STARTED TO BECOME PUBLIC, APPARENTLY THE PRESIDENT ENCOURAGED HIS SON-IN- LAW AND HOPE HICKS NOT TO TALK ABOUT IT. JUST TO LEAVE IT ALONE. NOT TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES. HICKS TOLD INVESTIGATORS SHE THOUGHT THIS WAS UNUSUAL. THE PRESIDENT USUALLY CONSIDERED, NOT RESPONDING TO THE PRESS TO BE THE ULTIMATE SIN. SHE FOUND IT NOTEWORTHY THE PRESIDENT DID NOT WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT. LATER ON IN THE INVESTIGATION HE ENCOURAGED HICKS AND OTHERS TO BE FORTHCOMING WITH INVESTIGATORS. IT IS AN INTERESTING TALE OF BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN. BEHIND THE SCENES HE FOLLOWED GOOD LEGAL ADVICE, WHICH IS FULL DISCLOSURE. >>THE REPORT IS OUT. WE HAVE JUST GOTTEN OUR FIRST COPY. >>WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS REPORT TOGETHER. THIS IS OUR FIRST COPY. THIS IS VOLUME ONE. IT IS 196 PAGES. WHAT WERE Y’ALL LOOKING AT? >>WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S INTENT. THERE IS A PART ON PAGE 60. >>THIS IS THE FIRST PART OF THIS ON COLLUSION. IT SAYS, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED OR DIRECTED INTELLIGENCE AGENCY LEADERS TO STOP OR INTERFERE WITH THE FBI’S RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. THE PRESIDENT TOLD COMEY THAT IF SOME SAD LIGHT WAS INVOLVED IN RUSSIA ELECTION INTERFERENCE IT WOULD BE GOOD TO FIND THAT OUT. THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ACCOUNTS WE READ EARLIER WHERE HE APPROACHED CABINET MEMBERS TO GET THEM TO INTERVENE. MUELLER SAID WHATEVER ACTIONS HE TOOK WAS NOT TO STOP THE INVESTIGATION. >>THE PRESIDENT HAVING CALLED THE INVESTIGATION A WITCH HUNT IS SAYING TO COMEY, IF YOU FIND PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THE CAMPAIGN, THAT HE SHOULD GO AFTER THEM. HE WAS TELLING COMEY HUNT FOR THE WITCHES. >>THAT’S CONSISTENT IN ONE OTHER RESPECT. IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT COMEY TESTIFIED AND WHAT OTHER CRITICAL PLAYERS SAID, THE PRESIDENT WAS UPSET, NOT NECESSARILY WITH THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION AS A WHOLE. BUT COMEY’S REFUSAL TO SAY PUBLICLY WHAT HE HAD TOLD CONGRESS. THAT TRUMP WAS NOT A TARGET OF THE INVESTIGATION. >>HERE’S AN INTERESTING PART OF THIS. SHOULD WE GO TO NANCY CORDIS FIRST? >>WHAT ARE YOU HEARING ON CAPITOL HILL? THE INITIAL REACTION? >>Reporter: INITIAL REACTION IS COMING DOWN ALONG PARTY LINES. THAT’S THE REACTION BEFORE MOST LAWMAKERS HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH THIS REPORT WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB. DEMOCRATS NOT LIKING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PRESS CONFERENCE THIS MORNING. IT IS A SAD DAY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BECAUSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOUBLED DOWN ON PROTECTING HIS BOSS RATHER THAN SERVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THEN YOU HAVE THE REPUBLICAN LEADER OF THE SENATE, MITCH McCONNELL OF KENTUCKY SAYING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS COMMITTED TO TRANSPARENCY. THE NATION IS LUCKY TO HAVE HIM. LEADER McCONNELL IS LOOKING FORWARD TO READING THE REPORT. ACROSS THE HILL, RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE STAFFERS WITH READING GLASSES ON AND A BIG POT OF COFFEE. THEY ARE GOING THROUGH THE REPORT, WHICH WAS DELIVERED BY MANILA ENVELOPE. A WOMAN IN A BLACK SUIT DROPPED IT OFF AT THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ROOM. LAWMAKERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE GETTING INTO THE REPORT. WE ARE IN A TWO WEEK CONGRESSIONAL RECESS RIGHT NOW. IT IS NO ACCIDENT THAT THIS REPORT IS BEING RELEASED DURING THAT RECESS AND RIGHT BEFORE EASTER AND PASSOVER WEEKEND. WHEN IT WILL BE MORE DIFFICULT FOR DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS TO COORDINATE ON A MESSAGE IN RESPONSE TO WHAT YOU ARE HEARING FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE PRESIDENT. THE CHAIR OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ANNOUNCED A PRESS CONFERENCE FOR THIS AFTERNOON. NOT HERE AT THE CAPITOL BUT IN NEW YORK CITY. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SEE WHAT YOU WOULD ORDINARILY SEE IF CONGRESS WAS IN SESSION WHICH IS LAWMAKERRING RUINING TO THE MICROPHONES ON CAPITOL HILL OR IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT. THAT WAS PROBABLY A TACTICAL DECISION MADE BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. HE IS SLATED TO TESTIFY ABOUT THE REPORT AFTER CONGRESS COMES BACK INTO SESSION IN MAY. >>ONE THING WE ARE LOOKING FOR IS WHETHER THERE IS DAYLIGHT BETWEEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR AND WHAT IS IN THE REPORT. THAT’S ONE THING WE ARE LOOKING CLOSELY AT. ONE SIGNIFICANT FACTOR, THE WAY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CHARACTERISED THAT THE WHITE HOUSE WAS COOPERATIVE. PROSECUTORS CALLED TRUMP’S ANSWERS INADEQUATE. THEY DID CONSIDER SUBPOENAING TRUMP FOR THIS. WHICH HAD BEEN REPORTED AT THE TIME. BUT DECIDED AGAINST IT WEIGHTING A LONG LEGAL BATTLE. THEY CONCLUDED THEY HAD OTHER INFORMATION. A SECOND THING WE LEARNED. IF YOU ARE READING THROUGH THIS. VOLUME ONE IS ON COLLUSION. WHICH WE KNOW THE RUSSIANS WERE INVOLVED TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION. THE SECOND IS ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. IF YOU WANT TO GET THERE QUICKLY, USE CONTROL F. LET ME START HERE. LET ME READ FROM VOLUME ONE. THE INTRODUCTION THAT SAYS THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT INTERFERED IN THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN SWEEPING AND SYSTEMATIC FASHION. WE KNEW THAT. THE INVESTIGATION QUOTE, IDENTIFIED NUMEROUS LINKS BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. WE KNEW THAT. THESE TRUMP TOWER MEETINGS. LATER WHEN HE BECAME PRESIDENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE. IT SAYS ALTHOUGH THE INVESTIGATION ESTABLISHED THAT THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT PERCEIVED IT WOULD BENEFIT FROM A TRUMP PRESIDENCY AND WORKED TO SECURE THAT OUTCOME, AND THAT THE CAMPAIGN EXPECTED IT WOULD BENEFIT FROM INFORMATION STOLEN AND RELEASED THROUGH RUSSIAN EFFORTS, THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OF CONSPIRED OR COORDINATED IN THAT. EVERYONE IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. HOW DID ALL THESE FRIENDSHIPS, CONNECTIONS ALL HAPPEN? >>WE TALKED ABOUT THE THREE STANDARDS. LEGAL. POLITICAL AND CONGRESSIONAL. NUMEROUS LINKS. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS NO CONNECTION. THERE WERE NUMEROUS LINKS. THEY JUST DIDN’T BREAK THE LAW. HE FOUND THERE IS NO EXCISE BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN. EXPLICITLY THAT THEY EXPECTED BENEFIT FROM IT FROM THIS CONNECTION BETWEEN RUSSIAN-OBTAINED INVESTIGATION AND THE CAMPAIGN AND THAT’S IN THE POLITICAL CONTEXT AND THE CONGRESSIONAL CONTEXT WHERE THE CONVERSATION WILL NOW GO IS THAT WHERE THE CONVERSATION WILL GO IS THESE CONNECTIONS TOOK PLACE. THEY WERE NOT CRIMINAL BUT THEY EXISTED. WHAT DO WE FEEL ABOUT THAT AS A COUNTRY? >>EVEN IF THE OPTICS DON’T LOOK GOOD. >>THIS IS A FASCINATING RAID. THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE DETAILS OF THESE MEETINGS ARE BEING REVEALED. THE REPORT SAYS ROD ROSENSTEIN DID NOT OBJECT TO THE FIRING OF COMEY. THERE WAS ALWAYS A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT ROLE HIS MEMO PLAYED? IT WAS REPORTED THAT HE WAS UPSET THAT THE WHITE HOUSE SUGGESTED IT WAS HIS MEMO THAT CAUSED THE FIRING OF THE PRESIDENT. WHAT IS FASCINATING HERE IS THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS SAYING THIS WAS RAISED WITH BOTH SESSIONS AND ROSENSTEIN. THEY DID NOT OBJECT TO FIRING COMEY. IT ALSO SAYS THIS. IT SAYS THE ACT OF FIRING COMEY, REMOVED AN INDIVIDUAL OVERSEEING THE FBI INVESTIGATION. IT GOES ON TO SAY, FIRING COMEY WOULD QUALIFY AS AN OBSTRUCTIVE ACT IF IT HAD THE PROBABLE EFFECT OF IMPEDING THE INVESTIGATION. THEY DID FIND THAT THE FIRING COULD BE AN ACT OF OBSTRUCTION. THEN THEY WENT ON TO SAY THAT IT DIDN’T HAVE THAT IMPACT. NOTHING WAS DONE TO STOP THE INVESTIGATION. MEANING IT WOULD HAVE HAD THAT IMPACT REGARDLESS OF THE PRESIDENT’S INTENT. >>IT STILL WILL CHARGE HIM. YOU HAVE TO SHOW CORRUPT INTENT. THE ACT ITSELF COULD BE AN ACT OF OBSTRUCTION. IT IS A VERY FAIR REPORT. MUELLER DOES SAY, ON THE OTHER HAND HE APPOINTED MCCABE THAT HE KNEW WAS CLOSE TO COMEY. IT DIDN’T INTERFERE WITH THE INVESTIGATION. THIS IS A MUCH BETTER REPORT THAN I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT TRUMP COULD HOPE FOR. IT HAS MANY EMBARRASSING FACTORS HERE. >>ARE YOU SURPRISED TO HEAR THAT ROD ROSENSTEIN WASN’T UPSET ABOUT THE FIRING OF COMEY? IT WAS WIDELY REPORTED HE FELT HE WAS BEING MADE THE FALL GUY FOR THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY. >>THE WHITE HOUSE HAD TO MAKE THE CAT WALK BACKWARDS. THEY RELEASED THAT. TRUMP SAID IT WASN’T ROD ROSENSTEIN THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THIS. >>LET’S GO TO ONE OF THE KEY DETAILS. THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING THAT HAS BEEN THE FOCUS OF REPORTING. PAULA REED HAS BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS REPORT. WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? >>Reporter: I’M WORKING OFF OF TWO PHONES TRYING TO GET THROUGH ALL THE DETAILS. IT IS INCREDIBLE. WE ARE LEARNING THE MORNING OF THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING, RICK GATES, FORMER DEPUTY TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN RECALLED TO INVESTIGATORS THAT THAT MORNING DONALD TRUMP, JR. ANNOUNCED TO A SENIOR STAFF MEETING THAT THEY HAD A GOOD LEAD ON SOME DAMAGING INFORMATION ABOUT THE CLINTON FOUNDATION. THERE HAVE LONG BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW MUCH THEY KNEW ABOUT THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING AND HOW WILLING THEY WERE OF TAKING DAMAGING INFORMATION OF THEIR OPPONENT FROM SOMEONE LINKED TO A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT. NOT ONLY WAS THIS ANNOUNCED AT A MEETING WHERE THREE OF THE PRESIDENT’S FIVE CHILDREN WERE. THEY, ACCORDING TO THIS NARRATIVE, WOULD HAVE HAD SOME INDICATION THIS MEETING WAS HAPPENING. IN HIS WRITTEN ANSWERS TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, THE PRESIDENT SAYS HE HAS QUOTE, NO RECOLLECTION OF ANY EVENTS OR KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS MEETING WAS HAPPENING. THIS IS REALLY HELPING TO FLUSH OUT ONE OF THE KEY MOMENTS IN THIS INVESTIGATION. >>WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT? >>Reporter: FOR SOME PEOPLE IT WILL RAISE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO WRAP THIS IN. TO OTHER PEOPLE IT WILL LOOK LIKE AN EXONERATION OF THE PRESIDENT. PERHAPS THERE WERE THINGS THAT HAPPENED ON THE CAMPAIGN HE DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT. HIS FORMER PERSONAL ATTORNEY GENERAL, MICHAEL COHEN TESTIFIED ABOUT A TIME HE WAS IN THE OFFICE. HE BELIEVED DONALD TRUMP, JR. CAME IN AND WHISPERED TO HIS FATHER. MICHAEL COHEN BELIEVED IT WAS ABOUT THE MEETING. MICHAEL COHEN IS NOW HEADED TO PRISON. HE SAID HE HAD NO RECOLLECTION. THERE IS NO CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT HAD ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING. >>ONE MAJOR PIECE OF NEWS FROM THE MUELLER REPORT. JONATHAN CURLY IS NODDING HIS HEAD. WE ARE LEARNING WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON McGAHN REFUSED TO CARRY OUT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S ORDER FOR FIRING MUELLER FOR FEAR AS BEING SEEN AS TRIGGERING ANOTHER SATURDAY NIGHT MASSACRE. WE KNEW THE PRESIDENT WAS ANGRY WITH MUELLER. HIS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL SAID YOU CANNOT DO THIS. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE? >>THIS IS AN EXTRAORDINARY PART OF THIS REPORT. YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES GIVING A DIRECT ORDER THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL. THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL SAYING NO. I DON’T KNOW HOW MANY OCCASIONS THAT HAS HAPPENED. I EXPECT VERY FEW. YOU SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT. HERE, McGAHN GETS THIS ORDER THAT MUELLER SHOULD BE FIRED FOR A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, ACCORDING TO THIS REPORT, SAT DOWN WITH THE PRESIDENT AND SAID WE DETERMINED HIS PRIOR WORK IN THE LAW FIRM IS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THERE IS NO BARRIER TO HIS CONTINUING. TRUMP STILL WANTED HIM FIRED. THAT GETS US BACK TO THIS QUESTION. IF FIRING MUELLER WOULD HAVE BEEN AN OBSTRUCTIVE ACT, IS BEING PREVENTED FROM COMMITTING THAT CRIME SOMETHING CONGRESS HAS TO LOOK AT? >>CONSIDERED A BIG PART WAS PREVENTING THE PRESIDENT FROM DOING THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN DISASTEROUS. THIS SEEMS TO FALL IN THE SAME CATEGORY. >>IN FAIRNESS TO THE PRESIDENT. MUELLER REPEATEDLY COMES BACK TO THE POINT THAT TRUMP’S PRIMARY POINT OF ANGER WITH COMEY WAS HIS REFUSAL TO SAY WHAT HE WAS TELLING EVERYBODY. THAT TRUMP WAS NOT A TARGET OF THE INVESTIGATION. MUELLER COMES BACK TO THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN. AND SAYS THAT APPEARS TO BE THE REASON FOR HIS ANGER. ON THE FIRING OF MUELLER, HE SAID THE PRESIDENT BELIEVED MUELLER WAS AN IMPROPER CHOICE BY ROSENSTEIN FOR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. IT IS NOT SAYING HE WANTED TO KILL THE INVESTIGATION. >>IT GOES TO THE POINT OF INTENT. NOW WEIJIA JIANG HAS SOME MORE REPORTING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. >>Reporter: AS SOON AS WE HEARD FROM ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR HE FRAMED WHAT THIS REPORT WAS ALL ABOUT AND REMINDED AMERICANS THAT LOOK, THE BAD GUY HERE IS RUSSIA. HE ALIGNED THE ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE PRESIDENT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL ON ONE SIDE AND SAID WE ARE ALL STANDING UP TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT HERE, WHICH IS AT FAULT. THIS IS ABOUT THEM TRYING TO MEDDLE IN OUR ELECTION. I WANT TO READ FROM YOU A FINDING FROM THIS REPORT THAT THE INVESTIGATION ESTABLISHED MULTIPLE LINKS BETWEEN TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS AND INDIVIDUALS TIED TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. THOSE LINKS INCLUDED RUSSIAN AUTHORS IN THE CAMPAIGN. IN SOME INSTANCES, THE CAMPAIGN WAS RECEPTIVE TO THE OFFER. IN OTHER INSTANCES THE CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS SHIELD AWAY. ULTIMATELY THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE CAMPAIGN COORDINATED OR CONSPIRED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN THE ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES. WE ARE GETTING A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE PRESIDENT’S MINDSET. WHEN HE WAS BEING BRIEFED ABOUT THIS — WHERE HE WAS. JUST BEFORE THAT, WHAT I READ FROM YOU, THERE ARE PAGES THAT DESCRIBE HIS FORMER DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR TELLING HIM THAT THEY BELIEVED THAT THE RUSSIANS INTERFERED. TRUMP ASKED McFARLAND IN A BRIEFING MEANING DIDTHE RUSSIANS INTERFERE? HE SAID YES. TRUMP EXPRESSED DOUBT IT HAD BEEN THE RUSSIAN. HE SAID SANCTIONS WOULD GIVE HIM LEVERAGE WITH THE RUSSIANS. THIS BRINGS US BACK TO THE EXTRAORDINARY MOMENT WHEN PRESIDENT WAS STANDING NEXT TO PRESIDENT VLADIMI PUTIN IN HELSINKI AND HE BOLDLY SEEMED TO TAKE THE SIDE OF PUTIN RATHER THAN HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY THAT ALREADY MADE THIS CONCLUSION AN EVEN THOUGH HE TRIED TO STEP BACK A FEW DAYS LATER WHEN HE WAS BACK IN WASHINGTON, THAT CHAPTER IS STILL A DARK CLOUD OVER HIS PRESIDENCY BECAUSE IT SENT SO MANY PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR HIM — WHO ARE IN HIS ADMINISTRATION — ADVISING HIM ON SECURITY MATTERS INTO A TIZZY. THEY COULD NOT BELIEVE HE WOULD NOT STAND UP TO PUTIN WHEN GIVEN THE CHANCE ON SUCH A WORLD STAGE. I DO THINK THESE ARE IMPORTANT CONCLUSIONS. THEY GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHERE THE PRESIDENT WAS THROUGHOUT THE INVESTIGATION. >>WEIJIA JIANG AT THE WHITE HOUSE. THANK YOU. JONATHAN HAS MORE ON THE REPORT. >>IT IS AN AMAZING INSIGHT. DURING THIS WHOLE PROCESS, WE ARE ALL LOOKING AT THE MOMENT WHEN McGAHN WAS TOLD REPEATEDLY TO FIRE MUELLER. WHAT IS AMAZING IS AROUND PAGE 86, IT DESCRIBES THE PRESIDENT REPEATEDLY TELLING McGAHN TO PUNCH THIS GUY’S TICKET AND GET HIM OUT. McGAHN CALLS ONE OF HIS AIDS AND SAYS HE IS COMING INTO THE OFFICE TO PACK HIS THINGS. HE TELLS HIS AID HE WANTS ME TO FIRE THIS GUY. I’M GOING TO COME INTO THE OFFICE AND PACK UP. YOU CAN SEE THE TENSION HERE WHERE McGAHN UNDERSTOOD HE JUST SAID NO. NOT TO ONE, BUT REPEATED ORDERS OF A SITTING PRESIDENT. >>EXPLAIN WHY THIS MATTERS. AT THE END OF THE DAY IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. DON McGAHN BARRED THE DOOR AND SAID YOU CANNOT DO THAT. IF YOU ARE A SUPPORTER OF PRESIDENT TRUMP OR A CRITIC OF PRESIDENT TRUMP IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. >>EXACTLY. THIS IS THE BOMB THAT DIDN’T GO OFF. >>IT WAS NOT THE SATURDAY NIGHT MASSACRE. >>WHICH MOVES IT INTO THE THIRD CATEGORY. WHICH IS WHAT WILL VOTERS MAKE OF THIS? IS THIS THE PRESIDENCY AS IT SHOULD EXIST? LET’S HAVE FOUR MORE YEARS? IS IT NOT THE PRESIDENCY AS IT SHOULD EXIST? WHICH IS TO SAY A PRESIDENT PUSHING FOR SOMETHING AND BEING RESTRAINED BY ADVISORS. >>WHAT IT SHOWS IS A PRESIDENT ENGAGING IN BAD JUDGMENT. AND JUDGMENT THAT COULD HAVE INFLUENCED THE INVESTIGATION — COULD HAVE EVEN STOPPED THE INVESTIGATION — BUT DID NOT. FOR PEOPLE THAT FELT THERE WAS A CONCERN. KENNETH STARR SAID HE FELT THIS REPORT WOULD BE A POLITICAL HIT JOB. IT IS NOT. IT IS A VERY BALANCED REPORT. IT GIVES GREAT CREDENCE TO THE PRESIDENT’S MOTIVATIONS. WHAT IS INTERESTING TO ME IS EVEN THOUGH THEY SAY WE CAN NOT SAY THAT THERE WAS A CORRUPT INTENT HERE THEY GO FAR IN SAYING THAT THE PRESIDENT DID SEEM TO BE MOTIVATED BY HOW ALL OF THIS LOOKED. HE DIDN’T WANT HIS ADMINISTRATION TIED UP IN A LONG INVESTIGATION. THAT WORKS TO THE PRESIDENT’S FAVOR. >>I THOUGHT JOHN RAISED AN INTERESTING POINT JUST THEN. WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT DO THE VOTERS WANT? A PRESIDENT WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE PEOPLE AROUND HIM TO BLOCK THE DOORS AND SAY LISTEN, YOU CANNOT DO THAT? WHAT DO YOU WANT? >>IT GOES BACK TO JONATHAN’S POINT, PEOPLE WILL SAY SURE, BUT THE PRESIDENT WAS BEING INUNDATED WITH FALSE REPORTS AND BEING ATTACKED FROM EVERY CORNER. THESE WERE THE LEGITIMATE ACTS OF A PRESIDENT THAT FELT BESIEGED. >>THAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH THE PRESIDENT’S “GAME OF THRONES” TWEET. THIS IS WHAT GOT HIM IN TROUBLE. IT DOESN’T HELP IF YOU WANTED TO BURN THEM OFF AND A STAFFER STOPPED YOU FROM DOING THAT. IT IS NOT A GOOD ANALOGY. IT SHOWS THE PRESIDENT, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, TRIED TO MANAGE THE CONTROVERSY AND GOT HIMSELF DEEPER AND DEEPER INTO OBSTRUCTION. MANY PEOPLE SAID WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT IF YOU DIDN’T HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE? >>KIM WHALEY IS A FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY AND A PROFESSOR AT BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW. SHE WORKED WITH KENNETH STARR DURING THE INVESTIGATION OF PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON. GOOD MORNING. WHAT DOES THIS REPORT TELL YOU ABOUT THE QUESTION OF OBSTRUCTION? >>WELL, I THINK THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN MR. MUELLER’S VIEW OF OBSTRUCTION AND MR. BARR’S VIEW OF OBSTRUCTION. WHICH CAN BE CLARIFIED IF YOU READ MR. BARR’S LETTER FROM % JUNE 2018 TO THE WHITE HOUSE. ONE VIEW OF OBSTRUCTION IS LISTEN, I THINK THE PROSECUTOR IS A MEANY AND I’M GOING TO DO WHAT I CAN TO STOP THAT INVESTIGATION. THAT WOULD BE A MUELLER-TYPE VIEW THAT MR. BARR CRITICIZED PRIOR TO BEING APPOINTED. THE OTHER VIEW THAT SEEMS TO BE MR. BARR’S VIEW IS THAT I THINK THE PROSECUTOR IS A MEANY. IF HE CONTINUES TO DO WHAT HE IS DOING, SOMETHING WILL BE UNCOVERED THAT HURTS ME. MY READING OF THIS LANGUAGE IS THAT MR. MUELLER’S VIEW IS LEGAL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF WHAT CONGRESS SET FORTH. THERE ARE PARAGRAPHS OUTLINING THE ATTEMPTS MR. TRUMP MADE TO AFFECT THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION. YOU HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT SOME OF THEM. HE WANTED TO FIRE MUELLER. MR. McGAHN STOPPED HIM. HE WANTED COREY TO TELL JEFF SESSIONS IT WAS A FAIR INVESTIGATION. HE UNCOURAGED PEOPLE IN THE WHITE HOUSE NOT TO DISCLOSE E MAILS OF THE INFAMOUS TRUMP TOWER MEETING IN NEW YORK. THESE ARE EFFORTS TO SAY I DON’T LIKE THIS. I WANT TO SLOW IT DOWN. I THINK THERE IS A HUGE LEGAL QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE FACT THAT IT WASN’T COMPLETED SOMEHOW EXONERATES HIM FROM A CRIME. THE OTHER POINT — AND I THINK THIS HAS COME UP — WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THINKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT AS A BLACK AND WHITE THING. EITHER EXONERATED OR GUILTY OF A CRIME. THERE IS A HUGE GRAY AREA. THE GRAY AREA IS THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM. MR. BARR DID APPLY THAT DEFINITION THIS MORNING. WHICH I THINK, IS CONFUSING FOR PEOPLE. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL SAYS THE RUSSIANS WORKED TO SECURE THE OUTCOME OF A TRUMP PRESIDENCY AND THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN EXPECTED THAT HELP. ON A LOOSE DEFINITION OF WINK AND NOD COLLUSION, ARGUEABLY THAT COLLUSION IS SOMETHING THE VOTERS WILL HAVE A PROBLEM WITH. I COMMEND MR. BARR FOR THE TRANSPARENCY FOR MAKING IT ALL PUBLIC. HE DID NOT HAVE TO DO THAT UNDER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REGULATIONS. TRANSPARENCY IS HOW THE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY WORKS. PEOPLE SHOULD READ THIS THEMSELVES AND MAKE A DETERMINATION. THE PROCESS WORKED. I TAKE ISSUE WITH PEOPLE CALLING THIS A HOAX OR ABUSE. GUESS WHAT? ONE THING IS CLEAR, THE RUSSIANS ATTACKED OUR ELECTORAL PROCESS. THAT’S THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY. >>THE PRESIDENT SAID HE IS HAVING A GOOD DAY. NO COLLUSION. THIS WAS A WITCH HUNT. DOES HE HAVE REASON TO FEEL GOOD TODAY? >>YEAH. SURE. THAT’S A POLITICAL QUESTION. HE DID CHOSE — HAND PICK AN ATTORNEY GENERAL, MR. BARR, WHO IS WELL REGARDED AND RESPECTED AS AN ATTORNEY. MR. BARR HAS AN EXTREMELY BROAD VIEW OF EXECUTIVE POWER. HIS PRESS CONFERENCE THIS MORNING — HOW HE IS HANDLING THIS SHORES UP AN VIEW OF THE PRESIDENCY, IF WE SHORE UP THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENT THAT AMOUNT OF POWER GOES TO THE NEXT PRESIDENT, GOES TO THE NEXT PRESIDENT, GOES TO THE NEXT PRESIDENT. THE NOTION THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE ULTIMATE POWER OVER PROSECUTORS INFORMED MR. BARR’S VIEW OF THIS. WHICH IS INFORMING HOW THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WOULD SEE THIS NARRATIVE. A DIFFERENT ATTORNEY GENERAL — MAYBE IF DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN HAD BEEN APPOINTED AND CONFIRMED FOR THE POSITION, A DIFFERENT ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY HAVE TAKEN A MORE NEUTRAL STANCE SAYING LET THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. I’M GOING TO LET THIS PLAY OUT IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS OF THE AMERICAN CONSCIOUSNESS AND THROUGH CONGRESS. MR. BARR DECIDED TO HAVE MR. TRUMP’S BACK ON IT AND FRAME IT IN A WAY THAT WAS ADVANTAGEOUS TO HIM. WE CAN NOT SEE IT IN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WAY. >>STAND BY FOR A MOMENT. I WANT TO GO BACK TO PAULA REED WHO HAS BEEN AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS. ONE SECTION DEALS WITH WIKILEAKS. WHICH WAS DAMAGING INFORMATION RELEASED DURING THE CAMPAIGN THAT SIGNIFICANTLY HURT THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN. >>Reporter: THAT’S RIGHT. THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE JUICY ASPECTS OF THIS REPORT I HAVE COME ACROSS IS A FAR. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONFIRMS DONALD TRUMP, JR HAD DIRECT ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS WITH WIKILEAKS. THIS IS SOMETHING WE’LL REVISIT. THE CONVERSATION CONTINUES WITH TRUMP ASKING WHAT IS THIS WEDNESDAY ANNOUNCEMENT I HEAR ABOUT? WIKILEAKS COMING BACK AT HIM, ENCOURAGING HIM AND HIS FATHER TO TWEET OUT THEIR WORKS, SPECIFICALLY AGAINST HIS RIVAL. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN KNEW ABOUT WIKILEAKS’ PLANS TO OBTAIN THESE E-MAILS IN AN EFFORT TO DAMAGE CANDIDATE CLINTON OR WHETHER OR NOT THEY DIRECTLY WORKED TOGETHER. MANY OF THE E-MAILS WIKILEAKS RELEASED ARE BELIEVED BY U.S. INTELLIGENCE TO HAVE BEEN HACKED. THIS IS INTERESTING THAT THERE IS A DIRECT LINE OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT’S SON AND WIKILEAKS. AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT ENOUGH FOR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO ESTABLISH MY CONSPIRACY OR COLLUSION BETWEEN THE CAMPAIGN AND ANY FOREIGN ENTITY. >>THANK YOU. THAT’S BECAUSE AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID FOR IT TO BE ILLEGAL THE CAMPAIGN NEEDED TO HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THE ACTUAL HACK ITSELF. WIKILEAKS DIDN’T EVEN DO THE HACK. IT WAS HACKED BY THE RUSSIANS. >>LET’S GO BACK UP HERE. WHY DID THIS START? WE HAVE A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TRYING TO CRUSH OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. PAGE 97 HAS A RATHER DAMAGING SECTION ON IT LIMITS THE INVESTIGATION. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS TELLING THE PRESIDENT DID NOT GO THROUGH OFFICIAL CHANNELS BUT USED PEOPLE TO CONVEY THIS INFORMATION. IT HAS THIS LINE. IT IS SAYS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO HAVE PRESIDENT LIMIT THE SCOPE TO FUTURE ELECTION INTERFERENCE WAS INTENDED TO PREVENT INVESTIGATIVE SCRUTINY OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS CAMPAIGN CONDUCT. THERE WAS A FINDING OF SUBSTANCE, EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT DID TAKE ACTIONS WHICH WERE MEANT TO LIMIT THE INVESTIGATION. THAT EXPLAINS WHY THIS WAS SUCH A CLOSED QUESTION BETWEEN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND MAIN JUSTICE AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. >>ABOUT OBSTRUCTION? >>THAT’S RIGHT. >>ABOUT OBSTRUCTION ON THAT PARTICULAR MATTER, MOVING FORWARD. >>WE ARE LIKELY TO HEAR THAT PASSAGE READ REPEATEDLY FROM NOW ON AS WE MOVE INTO THE OTHER VENUES, WHICH ARE MORE POLITICAL AND NOT BY THE STRICT DEFINITION OF LAWS. >>IT RAISES EYEBROWS AND SEEMS DAMAGING. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM LINE OF THE REPORT, AS WILLIAM BARR SAID REPEATEDLY NO COLLUSION, NO COLLUSION, NO COLLUSION. HE WAS CLEARED. >>SOME OF THE DETAILS HERE — KEEP IN MIND HALF THE WORLD’S MEDIA WAS CONTACTING WIKILEAKS TO GET THAT INFORMATION. >>MUCH MORE TO COME ON THIS. COVERAGE WILL CONTINUE ON OUR 24-HOUR STREAMING SERVICE CBSN. YOU CAN WATCH IT AT CBSNEWS.COM AND DOWNLOAD THE CBS NEWS APP. I THINK THIS IS NOT THE ENTIRE THING, ACTUALLY. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GO THROUGH IT AS THE SPECIAL REPORT WAS ON THE AIR AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN SUM IT UP, WHICH IT IS DIFFICULT, BUT WHAT YOU SEE OVER AND OVER AGAIN IN THIS DOCUMENT IS THE IDEA THAT CERTAINLY THERE WERE ESTABLISHED LINKS BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND RUSSIA, BUT NO COLLUSION. I WANT TO READ ONE PORTION OF IT. IT BEGINS IN SOME, THE INVESTIGATION ESTABLISHED MULTIPLE LINKS BETWEEN TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS AND INDIVIDUALS TIED TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. THOSE LINKS INCLUDED RUSSIAN OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE TO THE CAMPAIGN AND SOME INSTANCES, THE CAMPAIGN WAS RECEPTIVE TO THE OFFER WHILE IN OTHER INSTANCES THE CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS SHIED AWAY. ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE CAMPAIGN COORDINATED OR CONSPIRED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES. SO THAT IS THE UMBRELLA. THERE ARE A LOT OF INTERESTING DETAILS INSIDE THIS DOCUMENT.>>THERE IS SO MUCH THERE. THERE IS SO MUCH FIRE, BUT IT NEVER REALLY IGNITED INTO THE BLAZE OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT. AM I WRONG, RIKKI?>>YOU’RE RIGHT, ACCORDING TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND THEN ACCORDING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THROUGH WILLIAM BARR AND ROD ROSENSTEIN.>>WHAT TOUCHES YOU ABOUT WHAT YOU READ?>>WHAT YOU HAVE IS YOU HAVE TWO SIDES COMING TOWARD EACH OTHER ON A FAIRLY OFTEN BASIS WHETHER IT IS SOMETHING WE KNOW IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN AS MUCH AS WIKILEAKS OR THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING OR WHETHER YOU SIMPLY HAVE THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY, THE INVESTIGATION, AS IT IS GOING ON, SO THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING, COMING, COMING, WANTING TO GET TRUMP ELECTED, INTERFERING, AND WE KNOW THAT MANY OF THEM HAVE BEEN INDICTED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, AND YOU HAVE THE TRUMP PEOPLE, PERHAPS THROUGH IGNORANCE, I SAY IGNORANCE OF THE FACT THAT IF YOU’RE CONTACTED BY SOMEONE THAT IS FROM A FOREIGN NATIONAL OR SOMEONE WHO HAS INFORMATION DERIVED FROM A FOREIGN NATIONAL THAT THE FIRST CALL YOU MAKE IS TO THE FBI, NOT TO OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR CAMPAIGN STAFF AND GLEEFULLY SAY LET’S GET THE INFORMATION. THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP, BUT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, AS YOU START TO READ THROUGH THE 400 PAGES, WHAT YOU GET IS THAT THEY WERE LUCKY. THEY WERE LUCKY THAT NOTHING FOLLOWED THROUGH BECAUSE THERE WERE ATTEMPTS FROM BOTH SIDES THAT DIDN’T SEEM TO COALESCE.>>I WANT TO NOTE ONE THING. THEY DID TALK ABOUT LIMITATIONS ON THEIR INVESTIGATIONS, SO ONE THING IS THAT PEOPLE WERE LYING TO THEM. A LOT OF THE EVIDENCE WAS HELD IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND THERE WAS SOME OTHER, I DON’T KNOW WHAT THIS IS, BUT SOME REASON SOME DOJ POLICIES THAT MADE IT HARD TO GET INFORMATION, MAYBE FROM THE PRESIDENT. PROSECUTORS, A LOT OF TIMES, CAN’T BUILD A CASE EVEN WHEN THEY REALLY KNOW THERE IS A CASE SOMEWHERE. I JUST THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE THINK IN A BINARY WAY, PEOPLE COMMITTED A CRIME OR THEY DIDN’T. THAT IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE. THERE IS A LOT THAT I WOULD CALL EVIDENCE EVEN IF IT DOESN’T AMOUNT TO OR EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, EVEN IF IT DOESN’T AMOUNT TO BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT OF CONSPIRACY.>>WHAT STANDS OUT TO YOU THEN?>>THE PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT WAS ACCIDENTALLY DROPPED BY MANAFORT’S LAWYERS, THAT MANAFORT HAD HAD A MEETING WITH CONSTANTINE KILIMNIK. AT THE MEETING, SECRET POLLING DATA FROM THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WAS EXCHANGED AND WE DIDN’T REALLY KNOW THE DETAILS BUT NOW IT SAYS SPECIFICALLY FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE UKRAINE PEACE PLAN AND SO THAT LOOKS A LOT LIKE CONSPIRACY TO ME. IT CERTAINLY IS COLLUSION.>>IT IS A QUID PRO QUO, A COMING TOGETHER. JUST LIKE YOU WERE SAYING THE TWO SIDES DIDN’T COME TOGETHER, THEY KIND OF CAME TOGETHER AT LEAST IN THE ONE MOMENT. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT –>>WOULD YOU PROSECUTE, BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW, WOULD YOU PROSECUTE?>>IF HE WEREN’T THE PRESIDENT?>>YEAH.>>YOU KNOW, WE, NEW YORK PROSECUTORS, ARE KIND OF SCRAPPY SO I FEEL LIKE WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE. I MEAN, AGAIN, IT IS SO HARD TO TAKE IT OU OF CONTEXT. THE IMPLICATIONS ARE SO BIG WHEN IT IS THE PRESIDENT OR SOMEONE ELSE DOING THAT.>>EXPLAIN BY WHAT YOU MEAN IF HE WASN’T THE PRESIDENT. BECAUSE HE WAS THE PRESIDENT, WHAT IS THE ONE RULE THAT APPEARS THAT MUELLER AND HIS TEAM SAID BECAUSE OF THAT.>>THIS IS THE ELECTED REPRESENT OF THE UNITED STATES. IT IS SO DISRUPTIVE. IT IS REALLY UNDERMINING OF THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. THIS IS A DEMOCRACY. YOU REALLY WOULD WANT AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU SAID THIS PERSON SHOULD BE PROSECUTED. INSTEAD THERE IS A PROCESS.>>BEYOND THAT, THERE IS A DOJ RULE, RIGHT?>>THE DOJ RULE BUT THE DOJ RULE IS BUILT AROUND THE PROPER PROCESS FOR HOLDING PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. IT IS NOT THERE BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ABOVE THE LAW. IT IS THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE A DIFFERENT PROCESS. THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT PROCESSES. ONE IS THE POLITICAL PROCESS WHERE PEOPLE CAN VOTE AND THE OTHER IS CONGRESS AND IMPEACHING. THAT IS WHY I WOULDN’T.>>AND TO PICK UP ON THAT POINT, I REMEMBER A FEW MONTHS AGO, I WAS TALKING TO REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS, A FORMER PROSECUTOR WHO WORKED WITH MUELLER BACK IN THE DAY, BACK IN THE DAY, WHO SAID, WHO BASICALLY PREDICTED THAT MUELLER WOULD DO THIS. HE WOULD FIND ALL OF THE FACTS AND WHAT NOT AND LEAVE IT UP TO CONGRESS TO BASICALLY DECIDE WHETHER TO MOVING FORWARD WITH IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS OR TO TAKE THE INFORMATION, THE FINDING. THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, YOU KNOW, PRESENTS TO THEM AND GO THE IMPEACHMENT ROUTE OR OTHER INVESTIGATION. WHAT WAS HIGHLIGHTED BY JERRY NADLER, ONE OF THE DEMOCRAT JUDICIARY CHAIR MEN, HE HIGHLIGHTED THE POINT OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. AND THIS IS FROM THE REPORT, FROM THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE AFTER A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WE WOULD SO STATE. BUT WE CANNOT SO STATE.>>HE DIDN’T.>>THAT LOOKS LIKE IT IS SOMETHING, A THREAD THAT THEY WILL PICK UP ON.>>YOU BROUGHT UP SOMETHING THAT WAS SORT OF UNCOVERED. WE WERE ALL QUESTIONING, WHAT WERE SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THAT CAME BEFORE AND AFTER THE WORDS THAT BARR USED IN HIS FOUR PAGE SUMMARY. IT SORT OF LACKED CONTEXT. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT INDICATES, THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, YOU KNOW, HAD DEFINITELY A FIRM FEELING OR THE LANGUAGE WAS A LITTLE MORE FIRM ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE PRESIDENT AND THE CAMPAIGN VIOLATED THE LAW.>>WELL, THIS IS ANOTHER THING.. YOU POINTED THIS OUT EARLIER, ANNE-MARIE. ONE IS THAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANTS TO KNOW WHAT THE PRESIDENT DID. THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. THEY WANT THE FACTS AND THEY WANT TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THAT WAS APPROPRIATE OR INAPPROPRIATE IT WAS. THE SECOND THING IS THE LEGITIMACY OF THE INSTITUTIONS HAVE BEEN IN DOUBT AND PEOPLE NEED TO BE REASSURED. THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS CONCERNING ABOUT THAT. BILL BARR WENT OUT INTO A PRESS CONFERENCE AND SAID ONE THING AND THE MUELLER REPORT REALLY DOES SAY SOMETHING ELSE. THE MUELLER REPORT REALLY CONCLUDES THE REASON WE AREN’T REACHING THIS LEGAL CONCLUSION IS THAT WE THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE DECISION FOR CONGRESS TO MAKE. BILL BARR REALLY DID MISREPRESENT THAT.>>HE DID.>>QUITE STARKLY.>>I FEEL LIKE THAT IS SO CONCERNING. TO ME IT IS ONE OF THE WORST THINGS ABOUT THIS DAY. YOU KNOW, SO THE PRESIDENT DID VARIOUS THINGS, THANK GOD IT DIDN’T AMOUNT TO ACTUALLY GETTING OUT THERE AND CONSPIREING. THAT SHOULD BE REASSURING TO EVERYBODY AND I’M REASSURED BUT WHAT IS REALLY NOT MAKING ME HAPPY RIGHT NOW IS THE FUNCTIONING OF THE INSTITUTIONS AND HOW MUCH THEY HAVE BEEN DAMAGED IN THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS.>>LET’S GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT PAULA REID AT THE DOJ. WHAT IS THE LATEST THING YOU READ THAT STANDS OUT.>>WHAT STANDS OUT TO MOST TO ME IS THE INSIGHT WE’RE GETTING INTO THE PRESIDENT’S FRAME OF MIND THE MOMENT HE HEARD THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER HAD BEEN APPOINTED. PUBLIC FACING PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS TRIED TO DISMISS THIS AS A WITCH HUNT AND UNDERMINE THIS, WHAT WE SEE HERE IN THIS REPORT FROM A FIRST HAND ACCOUNT OF SOMEONE IN THE ROOM IS THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS SCARED. A DIRECT QUOTE FROM FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF DESCRIBED THE PRESIDENT AS SLUMPING BACK IN A CHAIR AND SAYING, QUOTE, OH, MY GOD, THIS IS TERRIBLE. THIS IS THE END OF MY PRESIDENCY. I’M F ‘ED. HE SAYS IT TAKES YEARS AND YEARS AND I WON’T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING. THIS IS THE WORST THING THAT EVER HAPPEN TO ME. THIS IS AN EXCHANGE THAT OCCURRED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER HIS FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS INFORMED THE PRESIDENT THAT DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN APPOINTED THE FORMER FBI DIRECTOR TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO TAKE OVER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. OF ALL OF THE THINGS, IT STRUCK ME, EARLIER TODAY, ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW HARD THIS HAS BEEN ON THE PRESIDENT, TALKED A LOT ABOUT HIS EMOTIONS AND HIS FEELINGS AND HOW THIS WAS UNPRECEDENTED BUT WE’RE GETTING MORE OF THAT IN THIS REPORT AND LEARNING HOW THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT ONLY UPSET ABOUT THIS, HE WAS FRIGHTENED.>>WHAT ABOUT THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU SORT OF CAME ACROSS THAT SECTION OR NOT AND WHETHER OR NOT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL BELIEVED JAMES COMEY’S VERSION OF EVENTS OR THE PRESIDENT’S.>>AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY FOUND THAT THE FIRING OF JAMES COMEY DID NOT CONSTITUTE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE FOR SEVERAL DIFFERENT REASONS. I’LL BE HONEST, I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO READ THAT PROVISION. A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT DID STICK OUT TO ME IN TERMS OF HOW HE TREATED HIS TOP JUSTICE OFFICIALS. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN HE GOT WIND THAT ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS COULD POSSIBLY RECUSE HIMSELF, HE PUT PRESSURE ON HIM NOT TO DO SO. EVEN WHEN HE STEPPED ASIDE, HE PUT PRESSURE ON HIM TO UNRECUSE HIMSELF. I THOUGHT THAT WAS INCREDIBLY SIGNIFICANT. ANOTHER ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING ASPECTS OF THIS RELEASE WHICH IS LIGHTLY REDACTED ARE THE PRESIDENT’S WRITTEN ANSWERS TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. WHEN I WOKE UP THIS MORNING, THIS WAS THE NUMBER ONE THING I WAS HOPING WOULD BE IN THE REPORT. I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE PRESIDENT WOULD SAY. WHAT WOULD BE HIS VERSION OF EVENTS IF HE WAS UNDER THE THREAT OF POSSIBLE PERJURY CHARGES. WHAT IS SO INTERESTING IS HE DENIES ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING AHEAD OF TIME. HE SAID HE NEVER DISCUSSED RUSSIA OR THE UKRAINE WITH PAUL MANAFORT. IT IS INTERESTING TO GO THROUGH HIS WRITTEN ANSWERS. IT IS CLEAR HIS ATTORNEYS FELT HE DIDN’T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE ON THE QUESTION OF COLLUSION BUT CLEARLY SINCE THE OBSTRUCTION ISSUE IS STILL OPEN ENDED, THEY DID NOT THINK IT WAS GOOD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THE TOPIC.>>I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING, EVERY QUESTION BEGINS TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, AS FAR AS I CAN REMEMBER.>>THAT IS GOOD LAWYERING, ANNE-MARIE. WHATEVER HE IS PAYING THEM, HE IS GETTING HIS MONEY WORTH. THAT IS GOOD SENSE. ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU’RE DEALING WITH THIS KIND OF CLIENT.>>LET’S GO TO ED O’KEEFE AT THE D.C. BUREAU. WHAT IS THE LATEST ON CAPITOL HILL. I KNOW LAWMAKERS HAVE BEEN TWEETING. THE SPEAKER HAS TWEETED. WHAT ARE YOU HEARING?>>ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN HEARING ALL ALONG, DAVID. DEMOCRATS WANT TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER. THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO READ THROUGH THE REPORT AND WE EXPECT THEY ARE DOING THAT RIGHT NOW, NOT ONLY HERE IN. WITH APRIL BUT MOSTLY AROUND THE COUNTRY AND AROUND THE WORLD. CONGRESS IS ON RECESS. THEY WILL BE BACK AFTER THE EASTER HOLIDAY. REPUBLICANS ALSO SAYING THEY’RE PLEASED TO SEE THIS AND LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER TESTIFY IN THE COMING WEEKS AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THAT MATTER. REMEMBER, HE IS SCHEDULED TO MAKE TWO APPEARANCES ON THE HILL DURING THE FIRST WEEK OF MAY. LOTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS STAND OUT. YOU GUYS HAVE TOUCHED ON THE HIGHLIGHTS. WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE, WHAT PEOPLE WILL APPRECIATE IS TWO GUYED DON AND ANOTHER NAMED DAN. THE PRESIDENT’S SON APPARENTLY DECLINED TO BE VOLUNTARY INTERVIEWED ABOUT THE TRUMP TOWER MEETINGS IN QUESTION. THAT IS ONE HIGHLIGHT THAT STANDS OUT HERE. ANOTHER DON, DON McGAHN WHO SERVED AS THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, THE TOP LAWYER FOR THE WHITE HOUSE. HE IS GOING TO BE BEST REMEMBERED IN HISTORY AND CERTAINLY RECENT HISTORY AS THE MAN WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SHEPHERDING THE NOMINATIONS OF NEIL GORSUCH AND BRETT KAVANAUGH ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT BECAUSE AS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, YOU’RE RESPONSIBLE IN PART FOR OVERSEEING JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS AND WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR PUTTING THE TWO MEN ON THE SUPREME COURT. ACCORDING TO THIS REPORT, HE MAY BE REMEMBERED FOR STOPPING THE PRESIDENT FROM ESSENTIALLY STARTING A SECOND SATURDAY NIGHT MASSACRE. OF IT WAS McGAHN WHO WAS ASKED TO PRESSURE JEFF SESSIONS, TO PRESSURE JAMES COMEY IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND REBUFFED THOSE REQUESTS AND SLOWED DOWN THE PRESIDENT’S INSTINCTS TO ESSENTIALLY CLEAN OUT HOUSE IN A PANIC. AND THEN THERE IS DAN. DAN COATS, THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, WHO IS STILL ON THE JOB. THE REPORT RECOUNTS A JANUARY 27TH, 2017, MEETING, WHERE THE PRESIDENT MET WITH SENIOR ADVISORS, THE NIGHT THAT THEN ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL SALLY YATES TOLD DON McGAHN THAT THEY NEEDED TO TALK ABOUT MICHAEL FLYNN, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR. IN THAT DINNER, THE PRESIDENT ASKED THE SENIOR ADVISORS, INCLUDING DAN COATS, WHAT DO YOU THINK OF JAMES COMEY. NOBODY IN THE ROOM, ACCORDING TO THE REPORT, THOUGHT COMEY SHOULD GO AND COATS SAID HE THINKS HE IS A GOOD DIRECTOR. HE SUGGESTED THAT THE PRESIDENT AND COMEY SHOULD MEET FACE TO FACE BEFORE THE PRESIDENT MADE ANY DECISION ABOUT COMEY’S FATE, SO IT LOOKS AS IF WE CAN ESSENTIALLY CITE DAN COATS NOW AS THE REASON THAT THE PRESIDENT ULTIMATELY DECIDED TO HAVE THAT INTIMATE ONE-ON-ONE DINNER WITH THE FBI DIRECTOR. YOU’LL REMEMBER THAT JAMES COMEY DETAILED THAT MEETING IN A MEMO AND LATER IN HIS CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY AND APPARENTLY HE DID IT TO INVESTIGATORS AS WELL. SO IF YOU’RE LOOKING FOR CHARACTERERS AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE BY PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS, LOOK AT DON JUNIOR, DON McGAHN, AND DAN COATS. THOSE ARE THREE NAMES THAT LEAST SO FAR STAND OUT TO PLAY CRITICAL ROLES OR DON JUNIOR, PERHAPS NOT AS WILLING TO BE FORTH COMING AS OTHERS INVOLVED IN THE INVESTIGATION.>>AS YOU’RE TALKING, RIKKI KLIEMAN IS JUMPING TO GET IN.>>IT IS NOT EVEN THAT I’M JUMPING TO GET IN. HE ALMOST KNOCKED ME OVER WITH A FEATHER. WHOLE IDEA OF DAN COATS SUGGESTING THAT JAMES COMEY SHOULD HAVE A PRIVATE MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT OR THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE A PRIVATE MEETING WITH JIM COMEY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BOTHERED JAMES COMEY SO MUCH, WHICH HE STATED DURING HIS CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY WAS THAT HE REALLY KNEW IT WAS TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR HIM TO EVER HAVE A PRIVATE MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT. IT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REFUSED TO TAKE PHONE CALLS FROM THE PRESIDENT, BECAUSE IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE PRESIDENT TO BE DIRECTLY SPEAKING WITH THE U.S. ATTORNEY AND CERTAINLY IN PUTTING COMEY IN A TERRIBLY DIFFICULT POSITION BY HAVING ANY KIND OF PRIVATE ENCOUNTER. THAT IS WHAT ALMOST KNOCKED ME OUT. THE OTHER THING THAT, AND I LIKE DAN COATS A GREAT DEAL. I DON’T KNOW HIM, I’M JUST SAYING THAT MY IMPRESSION IS HE IS A TRULY HONORABLE MAN AND BELIEVES IN GOD AND COUNTRY. THE OTHER THING THAT ED SAID THAT I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK, I DON’T KNOW IF YOU CAN GET BACK TO ED IS –>>I’M HERE, RIKKI.>>OKAY. GOOD. I’M GOING TO LOOK TO YOU. WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT DON JUNIOR, WHAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND, FRANKLY, IS YOU’RE SAYING THAT HE DECLINED TO SPEAK TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. WHAT I DON’T UNDERSTAND IS WHY THEY DIDN’T THEN SUBPOENA HIM AND GET HIM IN THERE. DON JUNIOR AND THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING IS REALLY BITING AT ME. I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY IT HAS NOT BECOME THE FOCUS, PARTICULARLY THE PRESIDENT ALLEGEDLY WRITING THE EXCUSE FOR DON JUNIOR OR DICTATING IT ON-AIR FORCE ONE THAT UNLESS I HAVEN’T GOTTEN TO IT IN THE 400 PAGES, I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY DON JUNIOR WAS NOT REALLY, IF NOT A SUBJECT, CERTAINLY A TARGET OF THIS INVESTIGATION.>>AND RIKKI, ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS ON PAGE 117 –>>THANK YOU.>>– OF THIS REPORT, AND THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE INCREDIBLE READING TEAM THAT IS READING THIS BEHIND ME AND UP IN NEW YORK, IT SAYS DONALD TRUMP JR., PAUL MANAFORT, JARED KUSHNER PARTICIPATED ON THE TRUMP SIDE WITH A HANDFUL OF THE RUSSIAN OFFICIALS. ULTIMATELY, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE, A GUY INCLUDING, WELL, ULTIMATELY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE SPOKE TO EVERY PARTICIPANT. THE LATTER OF WHOM DECLINED TO BE VOLUNTARY INTERVIEWED BY THE OFFICE. WE CONTINUE TO READ THROUGH THIS TO SEE IF THERE IS MORE REASON AS TO WHY THAT IS, BUT –>>WELL –>>THE SIGNAL IS THAT HE WAS — MAYBE HE UNDERSTOOD THAT HE WAS IN GREATER PERIL –>>I UNDERSTAND WHY HE DIDN’T TALK TO THEM. MY QUESTION IS WHY DIDN’T THEY GO FORWARD AND REALLY SUBPOENA HIM AND GET HIM IN FRONT OF A GRAND JURY.>>CAN I FLAG ONE OTHER THING THAT HAS BEEN FOUND. THIS IS ON PAGE 185 OF VOLUME ONE. THIS STANDS OUT — SPEAKS A LITTLE BIT TO WHERE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE WAS GOING BUT ULTIMATELY DID NOT GO. IT SAYS HERE THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID CONSIDER, CONSIDER CHARGING JARED KUSHNER, THE PRESIDENT’S SON-IN-LAW AND PAUL MANAFORT, THE FORMER CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN WITH CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW VIOLATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE JUNE 9TH, 2016, MEETING. IT SAYS THE OFFICE CONSIDERED WHETHER TO CHARGE CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS WITH CRIMES IN CONNECTION TO THE MEETING BUT CONCLUDED IT COULDN’T MEET THE BURDEN OF PROOF. E MAIN CHAINS SHOWED THEY WERE AWARE OF THE JUNE 9TH MEETING, TO GET HELPFUL INFORMATION TO THE CAMPAIGN FROM RUSSIAN SOURCES. SPECIAL COUNSEL COULD MAKE REASONABLE ARGUMENTS THAT THE INFORMATION, QUOTE, WOULD CONSTITUTE A THING OF VALUE, END QUOTE BUT DECIDED NOT TO CHARGE KUSHNER OR MANAFORT. THERE LIKELY WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO MEET THE BURDEN OF PROOF. HE QUESTIONED WHETHER THE CAMPAIGN DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION CONSTITUTE A THING OF VALUE THAT CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW BANS FOREIGN SOURCES FROM CONTRIBUTING. SPECIAL COUNSEL COULD NOT FIND LEGAL PRECEDENT AND WORRIED ABOUT FIRST AMENDMENT QUESTIONS OF CHARGING FOR THE OFFICER OF THE INFORMATION. THAT SPEAK TO THE THINKING OF THE MEETINGS AND HOW FAR TO GO, ULTIMATELY DECIDING THAT THE BURDEN OF PROOF, PERHAPS HAD BEEN TOO HIGH. WHETHER THEY WOULD HAVE LEARNED MORE FROM DON JUNIOR IF HE VOLUNTARY AGREED TO MEET WITH THEM, THOUGH, IS UNCLEAR. AND YET, LOOK, IN REPORTING, OUR GOAL IS TO SPEAK WITH AS MANY PEOPLE IN THE ROOM AS POSSIBLE. IT LOOKS AS IF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL GOT TO ALL BUT TWO PEOPLE. THAT IS PRETTY GOOD. MAYBE THEY DECIDED THEY JUST DIDN’T NEED TO GO ANY FURTHER. AND WE’LL KEEP READING TO FIND OUT.>>I AGREE THAT THEY DID A VERY, VERY THOROUGH JOB AND I HAVE ENORMOUS RESPECT FOR ROBERT MUELLER BUT I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DIDN’T SPEAK WITH DON JUNIOR, UNLESS THEY DID AND WE HAVEN’T FOUND IT YET.>>AS YOU GUYS ARE READING THE HIGHLIGHTS HERE AND I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF INDICTMENTS THAT HAVE SPUN OUT FROM THIS INVESTIGATION, BUT ALSO CONNECTED TO THE INVESTIGATION, BUT IS THERE A CHANCE THAT MUELLER SORT OF WAS PICKING AND CHOOSING, THAT HE SAID, YOU KNOW, THE REASON THAT I’M DOING THIS IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT — IS TO DETERMINE THE TYPE OF INFLUENCE THAT RUSSIA HAD ON THE 2016 CAMPAIGN AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS COLLUSION. THERE MAY BE EVIDENCE OF A NUMBER OF OTHER CRIMES, BUT I CAN’T GO DOWN EVERY SINGLE ROAD SO I’M JUST GOING TO FOCUS ON THIS.>>RIGHT, BUT MY ROAD I’M TRYING TO GO DOWN OR THAT I WONDER WHY THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR DID NOT GO DOWN, WOULD HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE OF POSSIBLE COLLUSION OR CONSPIRACY OR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PROVEN NOT TO HAVE BEEN. I DON’T UNDERSTAND IT, I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND IT UNLESS IT IS FINALLY EXPLAINED TO ME.>>IN LOOKING AT THE SMALL SECTION HERE THAT WE HAD SEEN THE HIGHLIGHTS OF ABOUT JAMES COMEY BEING FIRED AND HOW IT SORT OF SAID TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME THAT IT SORT OF INDICATED THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS CERTAINLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON HIS PRESIDENCY AND HIS CAMPAIGN AND HAD REASON TO WANT TO INHIBIT AN INVESTIGATION, BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WAS NO PROOF THAT HE FIRED JAMES COMEY BECAUSE HE WANTED TO STOP THE INVESTIGATION. THERE WERE WITH TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.>>AND RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER.>>I THINK THERE IS ALSO, VERY CLEAR IN THE REPORT THAT THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS COMEY’S ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED AND NOT THE PRESIDENT’S ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED. IN A DIFFERENT PART OF THE REPORT, THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE WHITE HOUSE TRIED TO SUGGEST — TRIED TO MAKE IT SO THAT ROD ROSENSTEIN HAD THE LAST WORD ON COMEY’S FIRING WHICH SEEMS STRANGE SINCE THAT IS NOT TRUE. SO THAT IS NOT GREAT. I WANT TO TAKE A BIRD’S EYE VIEW ON THAT ISSUE FOR A SECOND TO SAY THAT THE WHITE HOUSE OR THE PRESIDENT, PARTICULARLY, HAS BEEN TRYING TO CAST THE INVESTIGATOR. THE FBI, COMEY, MUELLER, ALL IS CORRUPT. HERE WE ARE, YOU KNOW, NOW WITH THE CONCLUSIONS, AND IT CERTAINLY LOOKS TO ME, FROM THAT STORY, IF ANYONE IS BEHAVING IN A WAY IN WHICH THEY SHOULD NOT BE BEHAVING, NOT NECESSARILY CRIMINALLY, BUT INAPPROPRIATELY, IT IS THE WHITE HOUSE BEHAVING INAPPROPRIATELY. NOT THE INVESTIGATORS. MUELLER THERE, IS NOTHING IN THERE SUGGESTING — AGAIN, I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER INVESTIGATIONS INTO MUELLER BUT THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS THAT SEEMS LIKE THE INVESTIGATORS DID ANYTHING WRONG. WHAT LOOKS WRONG IS HOW THE WHITE HOUSE WAS REACTING TO THEM, SO IF WE TAKE A STEP BACK FROM THE CRIMINAL AND LOOK AT INAPPROPRIATE, IT REALLY LOOKS INAPPROPRIATE.>>I WAS GOING TO SAY PICKING UP ON THAT POINT, THIS IS WHERE YOU’LL SEE REPUBLICANS LIKE LINDSEY GRAHAM THAT EVEN THOUGH I THINK PART OF HIM WANTS TO DO THIS PUSH FOR IT, BUT LOOKING AT THE ORIGINS OF THE INVESTIGATION, HOW THIS CAME ABOUT AND WAS THIS WHOLE INVESTIGATION BASED ON A FAULTY FISA WARRANT. THEY WILL TRY TO PUSH THE NARRATIVE AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WHILE DEMOCRATS PICK UP ON THESE OTHER POINTS WE’RE TALKING BYTE KEEP IN MIND, JERRY NADLER STILL CAN, YOU KNOW, SUBPOENA THE FULL, UNREDACTED VERSION OF THE MUELLER REPORT AND THE COMMITTEE AUTHORIZED THEM TO ISSUE THE SUBPOENAS, ADDED A FEW OTHER PEOPLE HE CAN SUBPOENA. DON McGAHN, STEVE BANNON, REINCE PRIEBUS, HOPE HICKS AND DONALDSON. DON JUNIOR WASN’T ON THE LIST. WHO KNOWS, WE COULD SEE DON McGAHN IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE SOON.>>AND WITHOUT SUBPOENA, MUELLER SAID HE WILL SEND KEY CONGRESSIONAL OFFICIALS THE UNREDACTED REPORT. IF YOU WANT TO READ THE REPORT, YOU HAVE TIME, 400 PAGES IT IS ON OUR WEBSITE, CBSNEWS.COM. YOU MENTIONED McGAHN. I WOULD LIKE TO READ, SINCE WE HAVE TIME FROM A PORTION THAT REALLY JUMPED OUT AT ME. PHONE RECORDS SHOW THE PRESIDENT CALLED McGAHN IN THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 17TH, 2017, AND THEY SPOKE FOR 23 MINUTES. PHONE RECORDS DO NOT SHOW ANOTHER CALL BETWEEN McGAHN AND THE PRESIDENT THAT DAY, ALTHOUGH McGAHN RECALLED RECEIVING MULTIPLE CALLS FROM THE PRESIDENT ON THE SAME DAY IN LIGHT OF THE PHONE RECORDS. THE FIRST PHONE CALL CAME ON JUNE 14TH, 2017, WHILE McGAHN WAS NOT CERTAIN OF THE SPECIFIC DATES OF THE CALLS, HE WAS CONFIDENT HE HAD AT LEAST TWO PHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PRESIDENT WHERE THE PRESIDENT DIRECTED HIM TO CALL THE ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL, TO HAVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REMOVED. AND THEN IT GETS JUICY. WHEN THE PRESIDENT CALLED McGAHN A SECOND TIME TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ORDER TO CALL, HE SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF CALL ROD, TELL ROD THAT MUELLER HAS CONFLICTS AND HE CANNOT BE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. McGAHN RECALLED TELLING THE PRESIDENT OR THE PRESIDENT TELLING McGAHN MUELLER HAS TO GO, CALL ME BACK WHEN YOU CAN DO IT AND McGAHN DESCRIBES FEELING TRAPPED. HE SAID HE DID NOT PLAN — HE RECALLED FEELING TRAPPED BECAUSE HE DID NOT PLAN TO FOLLOW THE PRESIDENT’S DIRECTIVE. HE DECIDED HE HAD TO RESIGN. HE CALLED HIS PERSONAL LAWYER AND CALLED THE CHIEF OF STAFF TO INFORM HER OF HIS DECISION. THEN HE DROVE TO THE OFFICE, PACKED HIS BELONGINGS AND SUBMITTED HIS RESIGNATION LETTER. HE WAS READY TO GO.>>SO LET’S LOOK AT THIS, THAT TERE IS NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE COUNT FOR THE IDEA OF TRUMP ORDERING HIS OWN COUNSEL TO FIRE ROBERT MUELLER BECAUSE HIS OWN COUNSEL DID NOT DO IT. SO IT SEEMS IN MUCH OF THE OBSTRUCTION FACTUAL BASIS IN THIS REPORT THAT THE PRESIDENT IS SAVED –>>BY HIS OWN PEOPLE.>>WOW.>>BECAUSE THEY REFUSED.>>WOW. THAT IS A HEADLINE FOR YOU.>>AND DAVE, WELL, AGAIN, THAT JUST REITERATES WHAT I WAS SAYING EARLIER THAT DON McGAHN, THE FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL, IS GOING TO GO DOWN AS SOMEBODY WHO PLAYED AN INCREDIBLY INFLUENTIAL ROLE IN CEMENTING THE LEGACY OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. TWO SUPREME COURT JUSTICES PUT ON WITH HIS ASSISTANCE AND STOPPED THE PRESIDENT FROM STARTING WHAT COULD BE A LARGER CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS BY STARTING A FIRE. IF YOU’RE A REPUBLICAN OFFICE HOLDER, YOU’RE SENDING FLOWERS TO DON McGAHN TODAY. IT IS INCREDIBLE.>>PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE DON McGAHN IS SO TAPPED INTO CAPITOL HILL. HE HAS WORKED WITH ALL OF THE OFFICIALS. HE IS FRIENDS WITH PAUL RYAN. HE KNOWS THE PLAYERS ON CAPITOL HILL AND HE KNOWS IF THIS HAPPENS, ALL HECK IS GOING TO BREAK LOOSE FOR THE PARTY AND SO BY HIM REFUSING TO DO THAT, I HAVE A FEELING IT MAY HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY INDIVIDUALS HE TALKED TO, NAMELY GOP LAWMAKERS, WHO ARE SAYING THE PRESIDENT CAN’T DO THIS. HE CANNOT DO THIS.>>IT IS LIKE THIS STORY GOES RIGHT TO GOING BACK TO BILL BARR’S STATEMENT. IT GOES TO HIS THOUGHT ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WHICH IS HE TRIED TO SPIN THIS NARRATIVE BEFORE WE GOT THIS REPORT THAT SAYS THE PRESIDENT WAS ONLY DOING THESE SORTS OF THINGS, YES, HE WAS, BUT HE WAS ONLY DOING IT BECAUSE HE WAS INNOCENT, HE SINCERELY BELIEVED THIS WAS A PLIGHT, LIKE IT WAS THIS BLIGHT ON HIS PRESIDENCY. HE COULDN’T FUNCTION AS PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF THIS. NOW, I THINK, AGAIN, WHAT MUELLER WAS DOING AND HOW WE SHOULD REACT IS, WELL, OKAY, WHAT DO YOU THINK? BECAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU THAT I DON’T THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THINK THAT IS KOSHER. YOU CAN’T DO THAT EVEN IF YOU’RE INNOCENT. OKAY, JUST WAIT UNTIL HE SHOWS YOU’RE INNOCENT. LEAVE HIM ALONE. YOU CAN’T DO THAT. SO BARR CAN SAY ALL HE WANTS, THIS OBSTRUCTION THEORY, THAT IS HOW HE GOT THE JOB, BUT IT DOESN’T MATTER AND THAT IS WHY I STICK BY MUELLER IS A GENIUS. YOU CAN TAKE HIS VIEW. WHAT MATTERS IS WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT IT? I DON’T THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THINK THAT IS A GREAT THING TO DO.>>AND IT REALLY SHOWS THE COMPLETE REASONING, IF PEOPLE SAY ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE THAT THE REASON THAT WILLIAM BARR WENT FORWARD WITH THE PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY AND THE SAME REASON THAT HE GAVE THE ORIGINAL FOUR PAGE SUMMARY WAS TO BE THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYER, BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THIS 400 PAGE DOCUMENT, PAGE BY PAGE, WE ARE FINDING THINGS THAT MAKE US GASP. THE FACT THAT THEY DON’T ULTIMATELY RESOLVE IN A CRIMINAL CHARGE, NONETHELESS, GIVES US REASON TO PAUSE.>>ULTIMATELY, WILL IT ALL MATTER AS WE MOVE TOWARD THE 2020 ELECTION?>>I’M NOT A POLITICAL ANALYST, BUT I’M GOING TO ASK YOU THIS QUESTION. IT SEEMS LIKE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SICK OF ALL OF THE SCANDAL. ONE SCANDAL AFTER THE NEXT AND SO I THINK THEY WANT TO MOVE ON. BUT DON’T THEY WANT TO MOVE ON WITH A SCANDAL FREE PRESIDENCY AND DO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE FAITH THAT IF WE PUT THE MUELLER STUFF BEHIND US THAT IT WILL BE A SCANDAL FREE PRESIDENCY AFTER SEEING ALL OF THIS.>>I DON’T THINK IT MATTERS WHO THE PRESIDENT. THEY’RE ALL GOING TO BE GOING FOR BROKE. I MEAN, THAT IS KIND OF WHERE CONGRESS IS RIGHT NOW. EVERYTHING IS SO DIVIDED. YOU LOOK AT TWITTER. PEOPLE SAY THE NASTIEST THINGS ABOUT EACH OTHER AND IT CREATES MORE DISUNITY AND DISFUNCTION AS OPPOSED TO UNITY AND BIPARTISAN SHIP. THAT IS WHY I BELIEVE ED WAS ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT IT YESTERDAY OR EARLIER TODAY HOW MITCH McCONNELL. YOU LOOK AT LAWMAKERS AND WHAT THEY’RE DOING OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AS THEY’RE OUT ON THE SPRING BREAK FOR CONGRESS. THEY’RE BACK HOME IN THEIR DISTRICTS AND THEY’RE WORKING THE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE REALLY CARE ABOUT. PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES, THAT ACTUALLY MAY COME THROUGH. IT MAY COME TOGETHER. THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN AND IT IS FOLKS LIKE THE CAPITOL HILL OR THE INCREASE CORRIDOR. ISN’T THAT WHAT THEY’RE SAYING?>>THE BUBBLE.>>THAT’S RIGHT. IT IS REALLY INTERESTING. WE’LL SEE. WHEN I TALK TO LAWMAKERS, THE COMMON REFRAIN IS MY VOTERS AREN’T TALKING ABOUT THIS VERY MUCH. THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE IS MY NEXT PAYCHECK.>>THEY MAY BE TALKING ABOUT IT LESS BECAUSE WE CAN DIG THROUGH THE 400 PAGES AND GIVE YOU, YOU KNOW, ONE SORT OF DETAIL AFTER ANOTHER ABOUT OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR. BUT IF ULTIMATELY MUELLER’S INVESTIGATORS DETERMINE THERE IS NO CRIME HERE, THEN WHAT DO ALL OF THESE DETAILS MEAN? YOU KNOW, THEY MEAN NOTHING.>>AND THEY MAY MEAN NOTHING BECAUSE MANY OF THEM WE KNEW ALREADY IN ONE FORM. WE MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN THE ENTIRE CONVERSATION THAT DONALD TRUMP HAD WITH JAMES COMEY OR THAT DONALD TRUMP HAD WITH JEFF SESSIONS, BUT WE KNEW THERE WERE CONVERSATIONS AND WE KNEW FROM TRUMP’S TWEETS AND WE KNEW FROM TRUMP’S OUT BURSTS THAT THE CONVERSATIONS WERE HAPPENING.>>AND THE LEAKS IN THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES.>>IT IS HOW THE NARRATIVE GETS FRAMED. THE PRESIDENT HAS HAD A MONOPOLY AND HAS BEEN WINNING AT FRAMING THE NARRATIVE. I THINK THERE ARE POWERFUL PEOPLE IN CONGRESS THAT ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THIS AND I MEAN, I CAN DEVELOP A NARRATIVE THAT CAN TRY TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT THIS SHOULD MATTER. THIS IS A PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE THAT IS BEHAVING INCREDIBLY INAPPROPRIATELY IN A WAY THAT HAS LASTING AND PERMANENT EFFECTS ON DEMOCRACY AS A WHOLE. IF SOMEONE GETS UP THERE AND SAYS THAT, I MEAN –>>LET ME CHALLENGE YOU ON THAT. NANCY PELOSI WOULD AGREE WITH YOU BUT ALSO TELL YOU SHE DOESN’T HAVE THE VOTES TO IMPEACH HIM OR REMOVE HIM. SHE WANTS TO WORK WITH HIM AND KIND OF, WHERE DOES THIS GO? LISTEN, WE HAVE 400 PAGES. TRUMPERS ARE CONVINCED AT WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND ANTI-TRUMPERS ARE AS WELL. THE PRESIDENT HAS TWO WORDS FOR US. GAME OVER. THAT WAS HIS TWEET.>>HERE IS THE THING. NADLER STILL HAS THOSE SUBPOENAS AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT WE’LL SEE DONNIE M. COMING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER AND HE WILL BE PRESSED ON ALL OF THESE.>>IT IS AN AMAZING STORY.>>IT REALLY IS. IT SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR THE PRESIDENT AND YOU KNOW, STARTING OUT THIS ADMINISTRATION, ANOTHER COMMON REFRAIN I HEARD FROM REPUBLICANS IS THAT THE PRESIDENT REALLY PICKED GOOD PEOPLE. A LOT OF SENATORS LIKED JEFF SESSIONS. LOOK WHAT JEFF SESSIONS DID. HE IS THE ONE WHO SAID I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF AND YES, LET’S GO FORWARD WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, WHICH OF COURSE, ON PAGE, WHAT PAGE, I’M SO F’ ED. THAT IS WHAT DONALD TRUMP SAID TO JEFF SESSIONS SAYING YOU BASICALLY SCREWED ME OVER BY DOING THIS.>>THIS IS A LOT ABOUT HOW ANGRY HE IS AND WANTED JEFF SESSIONS TO KNOW HE WAS FURIOUS WITH HIM. THAT IS NOT EXACTLY OBSTRUCTION BUT WHEN YOUR BOSS IS THAT MAD AT YOU, IT WON’T END UP GOOD.>>WE END UP WHERE WE STARTED RG THE FRUSTRATION AND UPSET IS NOT AN EXCUSE IF YOU’RE GOING TO COMMIT ACTS OF OBSTRUCTION, EVEN IF THEY DON’T AMOUNT TO A CRIME, BUT DO AMOUNT TO YOUR TERM OF BEING AGAINST THE NORMS AND CERTAINLY THAT SOME OF THE PROSECUTORS IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE BELIEVED THERE WERE ACTS OF OBSTRUCTION, EVEN IF ULTIMATELY THE DECISION IS THAT THEY WERE NOT.>>NOT CRIMINAL, ANYWAYS.>>JUST RANDOM, I’LL PUT YOU ON THE STOP. YES OR NO, DO YOU THINK PRESIDENT TRUMP GETS REELECTED? DO YOU THINK THIS HURTS HIS REELECTION CHANCES?>>I CAN’T GIVE YOU A YES OR NO. I CAN GIVE YOU A YES OR NO ON THE DOES IT HURT HIS CHANCES FOR REELECTION? THIS DOES NOT HURT HIS CHANCES FOR REELECTION. I MAKE ABSOLUTELY NO PREDICTION AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME AS TO WHETHER OR NOT HE GETS REELECTED. SINCE WE DON’T EVEN KNOW –>>DOES IT HURT HIS CHANCES?>>.>>I THINK IF SOMEONE CAN CONTROL HIS NARRATIVE AND NOT JUST SPEAK IN THEIR OWN BUBBLE BUT SPEAK TO EVERYBODY AND I THINK THERE ARE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES OUT THERE THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO IT AND I KNOW THEY NEED TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUES MORE IMPORTANTLY BUT THE ISSUES ARE BOUND UP WITH THE MORALS OF THE PERSON WHO IS CHARGED WITH, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPING AND ENFORCING THOSE THINGS. I THINK IT AFFECTS IT.>>THAT IS A YES.>>I THINK IT DOES HURT HIS CHANCES IF HOUSE DEMOCRATS HANDLE THEIR INVESTIGATIONS WELL AND THEY ENERGIZE DEMOCRATS TO GET OUT AND VOTE AGAINST THE PRESIDENT. I DON’T THINK THAT IT HURTS THE PRESIDENT WITH HIS BASE AT ALL.>>RIGHT.>>IT IS SORT OF THE QUESTION OF WHO DOES THIS ENERGIZE MORE? TRUMP VOTERS OR ANTI-TRUMP VOTERS.>>MAYBE BOTH.>>MAYBE BOTH.>>WHO IS THE DEMOCRATIC –>>WHO IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION.>>IT IS SO EARLY.>>ED O’KEEFE IS OUT THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE’LL TAKE A QUICK BREAK. YOU’RE STREAMING CBSN, CBS NEWS, ALWAYS ON. WE HAVE A LOT MORE COMING UP. OUR COLLEAGUE TANYA RIVERO WILL JOIN US. .>>>OF ALL OF THE COUNTRIES THAT ACCEPTED REFUGEES, SWEDEN TOOK IN THE MOST.>>WE DON’T KNOW HOW MANY WE’RE TAKING IN.>>WE HAVE PROBLEMS IN OUR CITY.>>THE ISSUE OF MIGRATION AND THE RISE OF THE RIGHT IS MIRRORED IN THE U.S..>>WE NEED A STRONG WELFARE STATE SO THEY CAN FEEL INCLUDED.>>THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT RIGHT CONTINUES TO RISE.>>ALL CULTURES ARE NOT EQUAL.>>I FEEL AN INCREDIBLE RESPONSIBILITY TO BE IN THE MODERATOR POSITION BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE OVERWHELMED BY OPINION RIGHT NOW. THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS GETTING THE KIND OF TRUSTED, CALM, ANALYSIS THAT WE TRY TO PUT ON THIS PROBLEM. THIS IS MODERATING WHAT A DIFFICULT PLACE WE ARE IN IN OUR COUNTRY, WHERE OFTEN WE CAN’T HAVE CONVERSATIONS. WE HAVE ONE ON THIS SHOW THIS WEEK. WE’LL SHOW YOU WHAT IS IMPORTANT. WE’LL TELL YOU WHY AND WE’LL HAVE THE DECISION MAKERS THAT ARE CHANGING THE COUNTRY YOU’RE LIVING IN CHLT.>>>HELLO, EVERYONE, I’M TANYA RIVERO.>>I’M DAVID BEGNAUD. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. THE MUELLER REPORT WAS RELEASED ABOUT AN HOUR AGO. AN HOUR 15.>>VOLUME ONE.>>THIS IS ONLY A QUARTER OF IT AND BY THE WAY, IF YOU WANT TO READ IT, WE HAVE IT ON THE WEBSITE. WHAT WE ALSO HAVE IS SOME WONDERFUL WRITERS BREAKING DOWN KEY CHUNKS. YOU CAN LOOK AT SOME OF THE LIVE UPDATES ONLINE IF YOU DON’T WANT TO DELVE THROUGH THE 400 PAGES, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND.>>WE’LL BREAK IT DOWN FOR YOU.>>BOB LITT JOINS US. HE IS A FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY DISTRICT ATTORNEY. HI, BOB, THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US. HAVE YOU HAD THE CHANCE OF GOING THROUGH MOST OF THIS, AT LEAST ONE OF THE VOLUMES?>>I WOULDN’T SAY MOST OF IT. I HAVE SKIMMED PORTIONS OF. IT I HAVE READ MOST OF THE PART ABOUT RUSSIA AND JUST STARTED ON THE OBSTRUCTION POINT.>>SO WHAT IS STANDING OUT TO YOU MOST AT THIS POINT?>>I HAVE TO SAY WHAT IS STANDING OUT TO ME MOST IS MY SURPRISE AND DISAPPOINTMENT AT BARR’S NEWS CONFERENCE EARLIER. ONE WORD OF THOUGHT THAT IF THE REPORT WAS COMING OUT IN AN HOUR, RATHER THAN SUMMARIZING AND SPINNING THE REPORT, HE WOULD HAVE JUST LET IT UNDERSTAND FOR ITSELF. HE SAID A SELECTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REPORT. FOR EXAMPLE, BASED ON WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN THE REPORT, BARR COULD HAVE SAID THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE OF SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND RUSSIA IN THE CONTEXT OF A CLEAR RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION ON TRUMP’S BEHALF. THIS WARRANTED A FULL INVESTIGATION FROM THE FBI, WHICH WAS NOT A WITCH HUNT. HE DIDN’T SAY ANYTHING LIKE THAT. INSTEAD HE MIMICKED THE LANGUAGE OF THE PRESIDENT IN A WAY THAT I THINK IS FUNDAMENTALLY INCONSISTENT WITH HIS ROLE AS LEADER OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.>>ABSOLUTELY. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT WAS CHARACTERIZED AS SPYING AT ONE POINT.>>EXACTLY.>>TO CONGRESS THERE. I WAS STRUCK BY THAT AS WELL. THERE WAS SORT OF A CLEAR REASONING AS TO WHY THIS INVESTIGATION BEGAN AND IT SEEMED TO MAKE PERFECT SENSE.>>A COUPLE OF OTHER POINTS I WOULD MAKE ABOUT THE REPORT ITSELF, THE FIRST IS HAVING READ THE SECTION ON THE RUSSIA ACTIVITIES AND CONNECTION TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, IT IS CLEAR THAT WHAT MUELLER FOUND WAS THAT THERE WAS EXTENSIVE CONTACT BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, BUT THAT HE COULDN’T FIND THAT THEY ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT. IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT THEY WERE APPROPRIATE OR THEY WERE RIGHT. FOR EXAMPLE, HE TALKS ABOUT THE FAMOUS JUNE 9TH MEETING IN THE TRUMP TOWER AND HE SAYS THAT THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES THAT JARED KUSHNER AND I THINK MANAFORT WENT TO THE MEETING KNOWING THAT THE PURPOSE WAS TO GET INFORMATION FROM THE RUSSIANS TO INFLUENCE THE CAMPAIGN BUT HE COULDN’T BRING CHARGES BECAUSE, A, HE COULDN’T SHOW THAT THEY KNEW IT WAS AGAINST THE LAW AND B, HE COULDN’T SHOW THAT THE INFORMATION THEY GOT WAS WORTH $2,000 OR MORE. THAT IS HARDLY AN EXONERATION OF THE CONDUCT.>>CAN WE PUT UP THE PAGE THAT WE JUST HAD ON THE SCREEN FOR FOLKS WHO MAY NOT BE WATCHING BUT MAY BE LISTENING TO THIS. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE GRAPHIC RIGHT THERE? I WANT TO READ IT AS PART OF THE REPORT. CONTROL ROOM, CAN WE DO THAT? HERE IT IS. ALL RIGHT, QUOTE, IN SUM, THE INVESTIGATION ESTABLISHED MULTIPLE LINKS BETWEEN TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS AND INDIVIDUALS TIED TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. THOSE LINKS INCLUDED RUSSIAN OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE TO THE CAMPAIGN. IN SOME INSTANCES, THE CAMPAIGN WAS RECEPTIVE TO THE OFFER, WHILE IN OTHER INSTANCES, THE CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS SHIED AWAY. ULTIMATELY, THE INVESTIGATION DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE CAMPAIGN COORDINATED OR CONSPIRED WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT IN ITS ELECTION INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES. BOB, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?>>I THINK THE KEY PART OF THAT IS THE WORDS COORDINATED AND CONSPIRED, THOSE ARE LEGAL TERMS. THOSE ESTABLISH CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND MUELLER FOUND THAT, FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, HE COULDN’T MEET THE NECESSARY EVIDENTIARY THRESHOLD OF PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT TO ESTABLISH CRIMES WERE COMMITTED. BUT IN A CONTEXT WHERE THE RUSSIANS WERE TRYING TO HELP TRUMP AND THE TRUMP PEOPLE KNEW THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE TRYING TO HELP THEM, THEY COULDN’T ESTABLISH AN AGREEMENT TO VIOLATE THE LAW.>>I WANT TO BRING IN THE LADIES WITH US HERE AT THE TABLE. RICKIE, REBECCA AND MOLLY. WHEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS SPEAKING, HE SAID NO ONE HAD KNOWING ASSISTANCE. THERE WASN’T KNOWING ASSISTANCE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON, RIGHT? SO COULD HAVE BEEN BAD, MAYBE IT WAS BAD WHAT THEY WERE GIVEN BUT THEY DIDN’T KNOW.>>RIGHT. BUT WE DO HAVE A BASIC, IT IS NO EXCUSE.>>WHY DIDN’T THEY FOLLOW THAT.>>ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BECOMES DIFFICULT IS BECAUSE THEY WERE SO, NO PUN INTENDED, THEY WERE SO INTENT ON FINDING INTENT. THEY REALLY WANTED — THEY BEING THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, WAS REALLY LOOKING TO SEE, ARE WE GOING TO BLAME PEOPLE WHO WERE DOING THINGS JUST BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA? AND NOT BECAUSE THEY HAD AN INTENT, NOT BECAUSE THEY HAD AN INTENT TO BREAK THE LAW. I HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THAT AND I’M SURE THAT THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF OTHER LEGAL COMMENTATORS AND POLITICAL COMMENTATORS THAT WILL HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THAT. GETTING INTO A PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN SHOULD NOT BE A FROLIC. GETTING INTO A PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN MEANS YOU’RE LOOKING TO EVENTUALLY HAVE SOMEONE OCCUPY THE EXALTED OFFICE AND POWERFUL OFFICE OF THE MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD SO YOU SHOULD DO IT BY THE NUMBERS. YOU SHOULD NOT BE DOING IT WITH A GLEEFUL, OH, LET’S GET THOSE WIKILEAKS E-MAILS AND, OH, COME ON, GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, I KNOW SOMEONE WHO KNOWS SOMEONE THAT CAN GIVE YOU DIRT ON HILLARY CLINTON. CAMPAIGN OPERATIVES, I’M SURE MOLLY CAN CORROBORATE THIS, CAMPAIGN OPERATIVES WHO ARE SEASONED KNOW THAT THERE ARE RULES AND YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES.>>BUT HE WAS A RULE BREAKER AND THAT IS THE THING HE RAN ON, HE BRAGGED ABOUT IT.>>BUT YOU DON’T BREAK LEGAL RULES.>>FAIR COUNSELOR, FAIR.>>THE QUESTION IS WAS THAT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. THE ANSWER SEEMS TO BE NO. IT DIDN’T REACH THAT THRESHOLD.>>BECAUSE IT APPEARS THEY ALL KEPT MISSING EACH OTHER. RUSSIANS AND PEOPLE ATTACHED TO THE RUSSIANS WANTED TO GIVE THEM INFORMATION. THEY WANTED DONALD TRUMP TO BECOME THE PRESIDENT. THE PEOPLE IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, I’M NOT SAYING THE PRESIDENT, BUT THE PEOPLE IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN CERTAINLY MANY OF THEM WHO HAVE BEEN NAMED, WANTED TO GET INFORMATION FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE RUSSIAN OR WHO KNEW THE RUSSIANS OR WHO WERE ATTACHED TO THE RUSSIANS AND THAT THAT WOULD HELP THEM AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON.>>WHEN IT COMES TO CONSPIRACY, HOW IMPORTANT AGREEMENT?>>AGREEMENT IS CONSPIRACY. IT IS THE ESSENCE. YOU CANNOT HAVE A CONSPIRACY WITHOUT AGREEMENT. WHILE I SAY THAT, YOU DON’T HAVE NECESSARILY TWO PEOPLE IN A ROOM WITH A WITNESS WHO SHOWS THAT THEY AGREED. SO YOU PUT TOGETHER CASES BY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. IT IS ALMOST LIKE THE GAME THAT COULDN’T SHOOT STRAIGHT. THEY KEPT TRYING TO SHOOT AND MATERIAL KEPT COMING AT THEM BUT SOMEHOW IT DIDN’T HIT THE MATERIAL.>>IF YOU GO BACK AND THINK ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON’S E-MAIL SERVER, IT IS LIKE, THAT JUST PALES. I FEEL LIKE IT PUT THE CRIMINAL CONDUCT, WHETHER IT AMOUNTS TO A CRIME OR DOESN’T AMOUNT TO A CRIME, IT IS LIKE, I MEAN, NATIONAL SECURITY PEOPLE WERE SO UPSET ABOUT THAT. IT IS REALLY BAD, BUT IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO WELCOMING A FOREIGN, HOSTILE FOREIGN POWERS ASSISTANCE IN A CAMPAIGN OR NOT REBUFFING IT. THAT, TO ME, IT IS, LIKE, I FEEL LIKE THIS WHOLE THING HAS GOTTEN — IT IS LIKE IT GOT PUT IN A CRAZY PLACE BECAUSE IT DOESN’T EVEN MATTER. THEY WERE CHANTING LOCK HER UP BECAUSE SHE HAD AN E-MAIL SERVER THAT WAS NOT SAFE AND COMPARED TO WHAT THEY WERE DOING, HOW MANY PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMPROMISED BY THE FACT THAT THEY WERE DOING THIS AND HOW MUCH POWER WAS HANDED TO THE HOSTILE — I MEAN IT IS LIKE NIGHT AND DAY. SO TO ME IT IS, LIKE, WHO MANAGED TO WIN. SO I TURN THIS OVER TO MOLLY. I THINK IT IS A MATTER OF WHO MANAGED THE RHETORIC WHO IS WINNING IN THE POLITICAL SPHERE? IN REALITY, PEOPLE WHO CARE ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND KNOW HOW GOVERNMENT WORKS WOULD SAY TO YOU, OKAY, THIS WHOLE ADMINISTRATION HAS REALLY CROSSED OVER THESE LINES SO MUCH THAT THEY’RE INCOMPETENT.>>REBECCA MAKES A GOOD POINT. WHAT WILL THE POLITICAL FALL OUT FROM THIS REPORT BE NOW THAT WE KNOW ALL OF THE CLOSE MISSES AS RIKKI DESCRIBED THEM, THERE MUST BE SOME POLITICAL FALL OUT, NO?>>THAT IS THE MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION. YOU KNOW, THE TIMING HERE IS REALLY INTERESTING BECAUSE THIS REPORT IS DROPPED ON — IN THE MIDDLE OF RECESS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, SO YOU DON’T HAVE DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, PEOPLE ARE NOT ON CAPITOL HILL AND THEY’RE NOT REALLY ABLE TO EASILY COME TOGETHER TO HASH THESE THINGS OUT.>>AND THE FRIDAY BEFORE PASSOVER.>>THE FRIDAY BEFORE PASSOVER AND ADDED TO THAT, HALF OF THE MEMBERS ARE OVER SEAS CATCHING UP BECAUSE REMEMBER WITH THE GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN, THEY COULDN’T REALLY MAKE THEIR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION VISITS AND CATCHING UP WITH THEIR CONSTITUENTS AT HOME. IT MAKES IT REALLY DIFFICULT FOR DEMOCRATS TO COME TOGETHER ON THE SAME PAGE. YOU WILL SEE SOMEBODY, YOU’LL SEE JERRY NADLER, HE IS HAVING A PRESS CONFERENCE LATER TODAY, I UNDERSTAND, TO REACT TO WHAT WE HAVE SEEN.>>YOU BRING UP A REALLY GOOD POINT. I WAS WONDERING WHY WE HAVEN’T GONE TO A LIVE PICTURE ON CAPITOL HILL. IT WOULD BE A FREE FOR ALL RIGHT NOW.>>I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN RELEASED A STATEMENT ON THE RELEASE OF THE FULL MUELLER REPORT AND I QUOTE, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS BEEN FULLY AND COMPLETELY EXONERATED YET AGAIN. NOW THE TABLES HAVE TURNED AND IT IS TIME TO INVESTIGATE THE LIARS WHO INSTIGATED THIS SHAM INVESTIGATION INTO PRESIDENT TRUMP MOTIVATED BY POLITICAL RETRIBUTION AND BASED ON NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. WILL THERE IS NO DENYING THAT SPYING DID OCCUR ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ON THE 2016 ELECTION AS ATTORNEY BARR SAID. HE WENT ON TO TESTIFY THAT THERE WAS A, QUOTE, FAILURE AMONG A GROUP OF LEADERS THERE AT THE UPPER ECHELON IN BRACKETS OF THE FBI AND I FEEL I HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT GOVERNMENT POWER IS NOT ABUSED, END QUOTE. NOW THAT THE COLLUSION AND OBSTRUCTION CONSPIRACY THEORYS HAVE BEEN EXPOSED FOR THE PATHETIC HOAXES THEY ALWAYS WERE, THE OBAMA ERA DOJ AND FBI MUST ANSWER FOR THEIR MISDEEDS AND THE SCAM THAT THEY PERPETUATED AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED.>>ALL RIGHT, SO THAT IS FROM THE CAMPAIGN SIDE OF THE TRUMP –>>THAT IS WHY THEY’RE SO GOOD. IT GOES BACK TO REBECCA’S POINT. THEY KNOW HOW TO SPIN. THE IDEA THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS HERE, CONCERNING OBSTRUCTION, WHEN WE’RE WADING THROUGH 400 PAGES THAT HAVE INCIDENT AFTER INCIDENT, THAT SOME PROSECUTORS FIRMLY BELIEVED WITHIN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE WAS OBSTRUCTION AND WHEN YOU LOOK EVEN AT THE ISSUE OF RUSSIA COLLUSION, THAT THE CONDUCT, ALTHOUGH HE WAS CLEARLY EXONERATED OF RUSSIAN COLLUSION, I DO NOT THINK THAT THEY CAN SAY, WELL, THEY CAN SAY WITH A STRAIGHT FACE BECAUSE THEY HAVE MASTERED THAT, BUT WITH THE SPIN, THAT HE IS TOTALLY EXONERATED, NOW WE’LL GO INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS, THE 400 PAGES CERTAINLY SHOW THAT THE INVESTIGATORS, WITHIN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE, WERE NOT CORRUPT.>>NO AND THERE WAS LOTS OF EVIDENCE HERE AS TO WHY THE INVESTIGATION BEGAN. IT SORT OF CLEARLY DETAILED THE REASONS AND THE GENESIS OF THE INVESTIGATION.>>I ALSO WANT TO — THIS MAKES ME SO UPSET. OBAMA ERA DOJ AND FBI. FIRST OF ALL, THAT IS INACCURATE AND SECOND OF ALL, WE DON’T HAVE OBAMA DOJ. WE DON’T HAVE TRUMP DOJ. WE HAVE JUST DOJ. HE SAID THIS ABOUT JUDGES, TOO. HE SAID OBAMA JUDGES AND TRUMP JUDGES. WHAT IS BEING DESTROYED IS THE RULE OF LAW. THE RULE OF LAW IS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. IT IS THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THAT IS NOT POLITICAL AND I MEAN IT IS JUST, LIKE –>>THE PUSH BACK ON THIS IS THAT IT IS NOT BEING DESTROYED BECAUSE THE MAN WHO RUNS THE DEPARTMENT SAID TODAY THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, SO HE IS UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW.>>AND I’M NOT SAYING THAT IT HAS BEEN DESTROYED. I THINK IT IS DOING OKAY, ALTHOUGH I ACTUALLY FEEL LIKE I DO FEEL LIKE BARR DID SOME DAMAGE. HE DID SOME DAMAGE –>>HOW SO?>>BY MISCHARACTERIZING MUELLER’S REPORT.>>EXPLAIN WHAT YOU MEAN. HE CAME OUT AND WAS SO DEFINITIVE AND SO CLEAR CUT AND NOW AS WE READ, IT IS LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE, THIS IS NOT CLEAR CUT.>>THAT IS ONE THING. IT IS THE SENSE THAT IT WAS CLEAR CUT THAT WE GOT, BUT I MEAN, SECONDLY, HE SAID THAT MUELLER, THAT MUELLER DECIDED INDIVIDUALLY, MUELLER, BOB MUELLER DECIDED THAT THESE FACTS DID NOT CONSTITUTE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ON ANY THEORY. THE REPORT ITSELF SAYS MUELLER DECIDED THAT THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE DECISION FOR CONGRESS TO MAKE.>>YES.>>SO THAT IS A DIRECT CONTRADICTION AND I FEEL LIKE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD HAVE — THIS IS THE WHOLE THING ABOUT LAWYERS IS THAT WE’RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE, LIKE, A REAL ADHERENCE TO FACT AND OF COURSE I KNOW, LAWYERS SPIN THINGS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE WHEN THEY’RE LITIGATING BUT AN ATTORNEY LIKE AN ATTORNEY GENERAL IS SUPPOSED TO CARE ABOUT TRUTH AND FACT AND I REALLY FIND IT UPSETTING THAT HE HAD THE PRESS CONFERENCE TO START WITH AS BOB LITT SAID, AND ALSO THAT HE USED IT TO ACTUALLY SAY THINGS THAT WERE JUST NOT ACCURATE.>>BOB LITT, DO YOU THINK THERE IS ENOUGH THERE TO HAVE PROSECUTED?>>ON WHICH? ON THE OBSTRUCTION OR ON THE RUSSIA COORDINATION?>>EITHER.>>I CLEARLY THINK THERE IS ENOUGH THERE TO HAVE PROSECUTED ON THE OBSTRUCTION AND I DON’T THINK — I THINK THAT IF YOU READ THE REPORT, WHAT MUELLER SAYS IS THE REASON HE DIDN’T REACH A CONCLUSION WAS BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, HE WAS BOUND BY JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY THAT SAYS HE CAN’T INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT, NUMBER TWO, IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO MAKE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST SOMEONE IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY CAN’T DEFEND THEMSELVES BECAUSE THERE IS NO INDICTMENT.>>DO YOU AGREE WITH THE REASONING OR DO YOU THINK BOB MUELLER FAILED IN THAT MISSION?>>THAT IS HARD TO TELL. I’M ALWAYS INCLINED TO GIVE BOB MUELLER THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. I HAVE IMMENSE RESPECT FOR HIM. HE IS ONE OF MY HEROS. HE HAS DONE AN EXEMPLARY JOB HERE. HE MADE A POINT OF SAYING THAT IF WE HAD FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO OBSTRUCTION, WE WOULD HAVE SAID SO. IF YOU READ THE FACTS AND IN PARTICULAR, THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER ABOUT HIS INTERACTIONS WITH WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL McGAHN, IT IS SOMETHING THAT CLEARLY I THINK COULD HAVE WARRANTED A PROSECUTION FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.>>DO YOU THINK DON McGAHN REALLY THE ONE PERSON THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP NEEDS TO THANK?>>THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE, IF YOU READ THE REPORT, OTHER PEOPLE WHO ALSO DECLINED TO CARRY OUT ORDERS FROM THE PRESIDENT. THERE WAS — HE WANTED COREY LEWANDOWSKI TO CONVEY A MESSAGE TO JEFF SESSIONS AND HE DIDN’T DO IT. I THINK HE WAS WELL SERVED IN MANY RESPECTS BY THE PEOPLE AROUND HIM.>>TOTALLY. THAT WAS A BOMB. A BOMB THAT IF IT EXPLODED, COULD HAVE BROUGHT DOWN HIS PRESIDENCY. AS HE SAID HIMSELF, HE WAS SO WORRIED ABOUT. HOW ABOUT THE FIRST ONE WHEN 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 F’ED.>>WELL, IT CERTAINLY SHOWS HIS REACTION. IF THAT REACTION, IN AND OF ITSELF WAS ENOUGH FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR THIS MORNING TO DESCRIBE IN HIS REMARKS AND PRESS CONFERENCE THAT HE WAS FRUSTRATED THAT THIS WAS UNPRECEDENTED, AND TO REALLY GIVE THE PRESIDENT COVER, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WENT TOO FAR. THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO SIMPLY LOOK AT CONVERSATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE WE CAN READ WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAID, ACCORDING TO JEFF SESSIONS. BY THE WAY, WE CAN GIVE YOU ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THAT WHICH IS THAT ANY PRESIDENT, WHO HAD PLANS, WHO HAD POLICIES, WHO HAD ACTS THAT HE WANTED CONGRESS TO DO, THAT HAD AN AGENDA FOR THIS COUNTRY, THAT HIS OR HER PRESIDENCY WOULD BE STALLED BY VIRTUE OF THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL COUNSEL.>>ALL RIGHT. WELL, BOB, RIKKI, REBECCA AND MOLLY, WE’LL CONTINUE OUR SPECIAL COVERAGE OF THE MUELLER REPORT AFTER A SHORT BREAK. STAY WITH US.>>>WHAT’S NEW UNDER THE SUN? >>GOOD MORNING, I’M JANE PAULEY AND THIS IS “SUNDAY MORNING.” >>EXPERIENCE THOUGHT- PROVOKING, INNOVATIVE AND TRULY ORIGINAL REPORTING. >>HEY, JANE. >>BECAUSE THERE’S ALWAYS SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. >>PLEASE JOIN US WHEN OUR TRUMPET SOUNDS AGAIN. >>ON “CBS SUNDAY MORNING.” >>>WE’RE IN THE MIDST OF A SERIOUS FINANCIAL CRISIS. >>HOUSING SHORTAGES NOW AFFLICT CITIES ACROSS THE NATION AS CORPORATE DEVELOPERS EVICT TENANTS AND DRIVE UP RENTS. >>WE’RE IN NEED OF 550,000 UNITS OF HOUSING, BUT INSTEAD WE’RE BUILDING LUXURY HOUSING. >>I THINK I’M SHOWING YOU MY BEDROOM AND IT SUCKS. >>DID YOU EVER THINK THAT YOU COULD BE LIVING OUT OF YOUR VEHICLE? >>NO. SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE I FAILED AS A MOTHER. >>> I FEEL AN INCREDIBLE RESPONSIBILITY TO BE IN THE MODERATOR POSITION BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE OVERWHELMED BY OPINION RIGHT NOW. THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS GETTING THE KIND OF TRUSTED, CALM, CONTEXTUALIZED ANALYSIS THAT WE TRY TO PUT ON THIS PROGRAM. THIS IS MODERATING WHAT A DIFFICULT PLACE WE ARE IN IN OUR COUNTRY. WHERE OFTEN WE CAN’T HAVE CONVERSATIONS, WE HAVE ONE ON THIS SHOW EACH WEEK. WE WILL TELL YOU ON “FACE THE NATION” WHAT’S IMPORTANT, WE’LL TELL YOU WHY, AND WE WILL HAVE THE DECISION MAKERS WHO ARE CHANGING THE COUNTRY YOU’RE LIVING IN. >>> HELLO, EVERYONE. I’M TANYA RIVERO. >>I’M DAVID BEGNAUD WITH THE MUELLER REPORT IN MY HAND. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 400 PAGES. >>THE FULL THING, THE FULL MONTY. >>NEARLY AFTER A MONTH OF SEEING ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR’S 40-PAGE SUMMARY OF THE MUELLER REPORT, WE HAVE A REDACTED VERSION OF IT. THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DELIVERED IT TO THE CONGRESS IN CD FORM IN THE 11:00 HOUR AND THEN THEY POSTED IT ONLINE SO WE COULD READ IT. >>THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PREVIEWED THE REPORT FOR A SECOND TIME EARLIER TODAY. HE SAID TRUMP HAD FACED A, QUOTE, UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION WHEN COMING INTO OFFICE AND HIS FRUSTRATION ABOUT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION WAS NORMAL. >>AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES, THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY, PROPELLED BY HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND FUELED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. >>THE PRESIDENT WAS STILL CALLING THE PROBE A HOAX ON TWITTER THIS MORNING. BUT AFTER THE REPORT’S RELEASE, PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID HE WAS HAVING A GOOD DAY. >>AND THEY’RE HAVING A GOOD DAY, I’M HAVING A GOOD DAY TOO. IT WAS CALLED NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. [ APPLAUSE ] >>THERE NEVER WAS, BY THE WAY, AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. >>ON THE FINAL PAGE OF THE REPORT, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WRITES, QUOTE, IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE AFTER A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WE WOULD SO STATE. >>HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN JERRY NADLER HAS WRITTEN A LETTER TO ROBERT MUELLER REQUESTING THAT HE TESTIFY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON MAY 23rd. CONGRESSMAN NADLER IS EXPECTED TO HOLD A NEWS CONFERENCE AT 2:00 P.M. TODAY. WHEN THAT HAPPENS, YOU CAN BE SURE WE’LL TAKE IT LIVE. CBS NEWS CORRESPONDENT PAULA REID HAS BEEN AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT THIS MORNING. WE ALSO — IS SHE READY TO GO? NO. WEIJIA JIANG IS ACTUALLY AT THE WHITE HOUSE, AND WE ALSO HAVE NANCY CORDES. THERE EVERYBODY IS. >>VERY EXCITING. SO LET’S START WITH NANCY CORDES ON CAPITOL HILL. NANCY, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT IS THE REACTION YOU’VE BEEN HEARING FROM LAWMAKERS THERE ON CAPITOL HILL AS THEY GO THROUGH THIS 400-PAGE REPORT AS WE DO IN REAL TIME? >>REPORTER: WELL, FIRST IT’S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT, TANYA, THAT THERE AREN’T THAT MANY LAWMAKERS ON CAPITOL HILL TO GET REACTION FROM. NORMALLY IN A CASE LIKE THIS WE’D BE RUNNING ALL OVER THE HILL, STOPPING PEOPLE, TRYING TO INTERVIEW THEM. BUT WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF A TWO-WEEK CONGRESSIONAL RECESS. AND IT IS PROBABLY NO ACCIDENT THAT THIS REPORT WAS RELEASED SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT RECESS RIGHT BEFORE THE EASTER AND PASSOVER WEEKEND. AND THAT’S BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE REALLY SCATTERED TO THE WINDS. AND SO REACTION IS COMING IN, BUT IT’S COMING IN FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE LAWMAKERS ARE FOR THE MOST PART RIGHT NOW AS THEY GO THROUGH THIS REPORT. NOT TOO MUCH REACTION FROM LAWMAKERS YET ABOUT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE REPORT AS THEY READ THROUGH IT. PLENTY OF REACTION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR’S PRESS CONFERENCE EARLIER TODAY. DEMOCRATS OF COURSE SAYING THAT THEY FELT HE PUT HIS THUMB ON THE SCALE FOR THE PRESIDENT, REPUBLICANS APPLAUDING HIS TRANSPARENCY AND SAYING THAT THE NATION IS LUCKY TO HAVE HIM. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? WELL, CONGRESS IS GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH THIS REPORT, AND THEN INTERESTINGLY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID THAT EVEN THOUGH LARGE PORTIONS OF THIS REPORT ARE REDACTED, CERTAIN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ON KEY COMMITTEES FROM BOTH SIDES ARE GOING TO GET A CHANCE TO VIEW MOST OF THAT REDACTED MATERIAL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN AGITATING FOR, THEY SAY THEY NEED TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION. LOOKS LIKE THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW MOST OF IT. THERE WILL STILL BE MOST LIKELY A LEGAL FIGHT OVER WHAT THEY’RE NOT BEING ALLOWED TO SEE, GRAND JURY EVIDENCE. DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO ARGUE THAT IT’S VERY DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHAT TO MAKE OF THE MUELLER REPORT RIGHT UP IF THEY CAN’T SEE THAT GRAND JURY EVIDENCE. THEY HAVE SAID IN THE PAST THAT THEY’RE GOING TO GO TO COURT, ISSUE A SUBPOENA TO TRY TO GET AT IT. SO THAT IS A FIGHT THAT WILL CONTINUE. AND FINALLY, NOW THAT THIS REPORT IS OUT, THE REQUEST FOR ROBERT MUELLER TO COME AND TESTIFY ARE FLYING. WE’VE ALREADY HEARD FROM THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE WHICH WANTS HIM TO COME UP HERE AND TESTIFY, EITHER IN AN OPEN SESSION OR BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. AND THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HAS ASKED HIM TO COME AND TESTIFY NO LATER THAN MAY 23rd. SO WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO. >>PAULA REID IS AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. PAULA, WHAT ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS? >>REPORTER: WELL, I JUST WANT TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING NANCY JUST SAID. I’VE SPOKEN WITH SOURCES CLOSE TO SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER WHO HAVE CONFIRMED THAT HE WOULD CERTAINLY COMPLY WITH ANY REQUEST FOR SUBPOENA FOR HIM TO TESTIFY, THOUGH THEY HAVE NOT COMMITTED TO THESE SPECIFIC DATES BEFORE MAY 23rd. IF THERE IS A REQUEST OUT THERE FOR HIM, WE EXPECT HE WOULD HONOR IT AND THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE A BLOCKBUSTER DAY UP ON THE HILL. BUT TODAY, DAVID, IN THIS REPORT, TWO THINGS THAT STRUCK OUT TO ME, ONE, WHAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL SAID ABOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THEY SAID ARGUABLY ONE OF THE REASONS THEY COULD NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE IS BECAUSE MANY OF THE PEOPLE AROUND HIM DIDN’T FOLLOW THE ORDERS THAT HE GAVE THEM. SO IN SOME WAYS HE WAS ACTUALLY SPARED BECAUSE PEOPLE AROUND HIM FAILED TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE THINGS HE TOLD THEM TO DO. THE OTHER MOST INTERESTING NUGGET I FOUND IN THIS REPORT IS THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME WE GOT THIS INSIGHT INTO HOW SCARED THE PRESIDENT WAS ABOUT THIS INVESTIGATION. WE GET THIS REALLY INTERESTING EXCHANGE RIGHT AFTER SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER IS APPOINTED. HIS FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS TELLS THE PRESIDENT WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND THE PRESIDENT SAYS, QUOTE, OH, MY GOD, THIS IS TERRIBLE. THIS IS THE END OF MY PRESIDENCY. I’M F-ED. EVERYONE TELLS YOU YOU GET ONE OF THESE INDEPENDENT COUNSELS AND IT RUINS YOUR PRESIDENCY. THIS IS THE WORST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO ME. I THINK THIS IS SO SIGNIFICANTLY BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE PRESIDENT WAS GENUINELY SCARED OF THIS INVESTIGATION AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR HIS PRESIDENCY. >>PAULA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. WE TURN NOW TO WEIJIA JIANG, SHE IS CBS NEWS CORRESPONDENT AT THE WHITE HOUSE. WEIJA WHAT MORE CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT HOW THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN RESPONDING TO THIS RELEASED REPORT? >>REPORTER: YOU KNOW, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE HAD ANTICIPATED IN SOME WAYS BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW THERE WERE GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY SOME DAMMING DETAILS TO COME OUT FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP, FOR EXAMPLE, SOME LANGUAGE THAT HE USES AS PAULA JUST POINTED OUT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY SAID WE ALREADY KNOW HOW THIS BOOK ENDS, AND THAT’S BECAUSE BARR HAD ALREADY RELEASED THE CONCLUSIONS THAT HE DREW WEEKS AGO, AND SO REGARDLESS OF WHAT WAS GOING TO COME OUT TODAY, THEY WERE ABLE TO FEEL CNFIDENT THAT THEY COULD RETURN OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO COLLUSION AND THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CLAIM THERE WAS OBSTRUCTION. AND SO IN SOME WAYS THIS IS JUST ANOTHER VICTORY LAP FOR THE WHITE HOUSE. BUT I DO THINK THAT IT IS TBD STILL BECAUSE AS YOU MENTIONED PEOPLE ARE STILL SIFTING THROUGH ALL OF THIS, AND IT’S GOING TO TAKE TIME FOR THAT TO REALLY SETTLE IN AND SEE HOW POTENTIALLY HARMFUL THIS COULD BE FOR THE PRESIDENT. BUT HERE’S THE THING. YOU KNOW, ONE SOURCE TOLD ME THEY DON’T BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO LOSE A SINGLE VOTE AS A RESULT OF THIS AND COULD ACTUALLY GAIN EVEN MORE SUPPORT BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG IN SOME WAYS WHEN HE SAID NO COLLUSION AND PROMISED HIS SUPPORTERS THAT THERE WAS NONE. AND SO THIS IS A DAY OF VINDICATION FOR THE PRESIDENT. WE HEARD A LITTLE BIT OF HIM SPEAKING IN THE EAST ROOM TODAY AT A TOTALLY SEPARATE EVENT, BUT HE COULDN’T HELP HIMSELF BUT SAY THIS IS A GREAT DAY AND THIS IS A HOAX, ONE OF HIS FAVORITE WORDS TO DESCRIBE THIS INVESTIGATION THAT NO OTHER PRESIDENT SHOULD GO THROUGH. AND SO WE ALSO KNOW ACCORDING TO BARR THAT THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL AND THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYERS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THIS REDACTED REPORT BEFORE TODAY. SO THEY WERE PREPARED, THEY KNEW IT WAS COMING AND PERHAPS THAT IS WHY THERE WAS THIS SENSE OF COOL THROUGHOUT THE WEST WING, EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE OTHER REPORTS THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE ON PINS AND NEEDLES AND PEOPLE WERE NERVOUS. I DIDN’T EXACTLY FEEL THAT. I THINK THERE WAS MORE OF AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THIS WASN’T GOING TO BE ALL SHINY FOR THE PRESIDENT, THAT THERE WERE GOING TO BE SOME DARK SPOTS, AS WE ARE SEEING, THAT HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO ANSWER TO AS WE CONTINUE. AND, BY THE WAY, HE KIND OF HINTED THAT THERE MIGHT BE A PRESS CONFERENCE. THERE’S A LOT OF RUMORS SWIRLING AROUND, BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO OFFICIAL PRESS CONFERENCE ON THE SCHEDULE, BUT WE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS ANYWAY IN JUST A COUPLE HOURS WHEN HE LEAVES FOR HIS EASTER VACATION. >>GOOD TO KNOW. KEIR DOUGALL IS A LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR TO CBSN, FORMER PROSECUTOR IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. I SEE YOUR NOTES THERE. WHAT’S YOU CHOMPING TO SAY? >>SO THERE ARE A LOT OF TAKEAWAYS HERE. >>YEAH. >>SEVERAL OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE — WE’D HEARD ABOUT HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED IN THIS REPORT, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO THE OBSTRUCTION PART THAT ALTHOUGH HAVE BEEN CONCLUDED NOT TO RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CRIME BY MR. BARR AND MR. ROSENSTEIN ARE PERHAPS NONETHELESS CONCERNING, THE EFFORT AS PAULA JUST MENTIONED TO HAVE MR. McGAHN TRY TO DIRECT THE FIRING OF HIS SPECIAL COUNSEL, THAT WOULD BE EXTRAORDINARILY CONCERNING. MR. TRUMP TRIED TO DO THAT AND MR. McGAHN REFUSED, AND I THINK PAULA IS CORRECT, LIKELY SPARED HIM FURTHER AND DEEPER CONCERNS ABOUT AN OBSTRUCTIVE ACT. THERE WERE OTHER EFFORTS THAT ARE REPORTED IN THE PARTS THAT I’VE DIGESTED BECAUSE IT IS, IT’S THIS GIANT THREE-INCH STACK OF MATERIAL, BUT THE EFFORT TO HAVE MR. SESSIONS UNRECUSE HIMSELF WHICH HE WAS OBLIGATED TO DO SO THAT HE COULD GET BACK IN AND PUT HIS FINGER OR STEER POTENTIALLY THE INVESTIGATION THE WAY MR. TRUMP WANTED IT TO, WANTED HIM TO. THAT’S ANOTHER AREA WHERE I THINK MR. SESSIONS PREVENTED MR. TRUMP FROM GETTING INTO FURTHER DETAIL. >>THERE WAS ALSO A SECTION WHERE HE WAS DIRECTING INFORMATION ABOUT MICHAEL FLYNN, CORRECT, THAT DID NOT GET FOLLOWED THROUGH WHICH IS ANOTHER PLACE WHERE HIS AIDE MAY HAVE SAVED HIM? >>CORRECT. SO — YOU KNOW, SO THAT’S SORT OF THE BIG TAKEAWAY. I THINK THE MUDDIER ISSUES IN THE REPORT, AS I’M SURE YOU’VE ALREADY NOTED, ARE THE OBSTRUCTION ISSUES, THE ISSUES WHERE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DECLINED TO REACH A PROSECUTIVE DECISION. YOU KNOW, THE OTHER HALF OF THE VOLUME ONE, THE FIRST INCH AND A HALF OF THE REPORT RELATING TO RUSSIAN INFERENCE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE CLEARER ANSWER WHICH I THINK THEORETICALLY AS AMERICANS WE CAN ALL BE PLEASED THAT THERE WASN’T ACTIVE, AT LEAST FOUND BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, THAT THERE WASN’T ACTIVE KOORPGZ AND COORDINATION AND A CONSPIRACY WITH THIS NOW- CONFIRMED EFFORT BY THE RUSSIANS TO INTERFERE WITH THE ELECTION. >>GETTING BACK TO THE OBSTRUCTION QUESTION, IS IT CLEAR TO YOU — IT SORT OF SEEMS TO ME THAT MUELLER’S TEAM STRUGGLED WITH THE QUESTION OF OBSTRUCTION AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS WHERE IT APPLIES TO A PRESIDENT. I MEAN, THEY DID WRITE THAT THE CONCLUSION THAT CONGRESS MAY APPLY THE OBSTRUCTION LAWS TO THE PRESIDENT’S CORRUPT EXERCISE OF THE POWERS OF OFFICE ACCORDS WITH OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES AND THE PRINCIPLE THAT NO PERSON IS ABOVE THE LAW. SO IT SEEMS AS IF THEY JUST COULDN’T DECIDE WHICH WAY TO FALL ON THIS ONE, AND THEY WERE SORT OF LEAVING IT TO CONGRESS. >>YEAH. SO AND YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, TANYA, TO FOCUS ON THAT AREA. WHAT I THINK MUELLER IS SAYING IN THAT PART OF THE REPORT IS THAT HE’S NOT ACCEPTING THIS BROAD UNITARY EXECUTIVE THEORY THAT SOME OF THE MORE RIGHT- WING LEGAL COMMENTATORS ADHERE TO. AND SO THE IDEA THAT EVEN THOUGH A PRESIDENT IS EXERCISING CONSTITUTIONAL POWER LIKE A PARDON OR EXERCISING HIS SUPERVISORY POWER OVER THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH BY FIRING SOMEBODY LIKE JAMES COMEY AND, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS THE MOTIVATION IS APPROPRIATE IS ACTING WITHIN THOSE POWERS. WHAT MUELLER IS SAYING, YES, BUT IF THE PRESIDENT DOES THAT FOR A CORRUPT PURPOSE, CONGRESS CAN STILL PRECLUDE IT, CONGRESS CAN STILL PREVENT IT PAST MAKING THAT A CRIME. THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT’S IN DISPUTE. BUT MUELLER’S REPORT DOESN’T ADOPT THAT THEORY. >>KEIR, STAND BY JUST ONE SECOND. PAULA REID, WEIJIA JIANG AND NANCY CORDES, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR GREAT REPORTING TODAY. THEY’RE GOING TO STEP AWAY AND CONTINUE THEIR REPORTING FOR TONIGHT’S EVENING NEWS. ZEKE MILLER IS GOING TO JOIN OUR DISCUSSION. IT’S A CBSN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR AND WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PRESS. WHAT ARE THE HEADLINES FOR YOU, ZEKE? >>WELL, THE BIGGEST HEADLINE AS YOU WERE JUST DISCUSSING IS IN A WAY HOW THE PRESIDENT’S AIDES SAVED HIM FROM HIMSELF, THE PRESIDENT’S INSTINCTS AT PRETTY MUCH EVERY WHICH WAY THROUGHOUT THIS PROBE HAVE ONLY DEEPENED HIS EXPOSURE, YOU KNOW, THIS REPORT WAS DIVIDED UP INTO TWO VOLUMES. VOLUME TWO DIDN’T NEED TO HAPPEN, THAT HAPPENED — YOU KNOW, THAT WHOLE INCH AND A HALF OF THAT THREE-INCH STACK HAPPENED BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT TOOK ALL OF THOSE ACTIONS THAT WERE TRYING TO OBSTRUCT, COULD BE VIEWED AS OBSTRUCTION. >>THAT’S A VERY GOOD POINT. YOU KNOW, VOLUME TWO OF THE ENTIRE MUELLER REPORT IS A RESULT OF THE PRESIDENT’S ACTION TO VOLUME ONE AS IT WERE. >>YEAH, EXACTLY. AND, YOU KNOW, WE’VE LEARNED, YOU KNOW, OVER — FROM REPORTING BUT ALSO FROM SOME OF THE INCIDENTS THAT ARE DOCUMENTED IN THE REPORT THAT WE HADN’T HEARD BEFORE ABOUT HOW THE PRESIDENT’S AIDES FROM COREY LEWANDOWSKI TO McGAHN AND McFARLAND AND OTHERS JUMPED ON THE GRENADES THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF WAS PULLING THE PIN ON. HE WAS, YOU KNOW, TAKING ACTIONS, YOU KNOW, DAY BY DAY THAT WERE THREATENING HIS VERY PRESIDENCY, OUR SYSTEM OF DEMOCRACY AND PEOPLE AROUND HIM WERE SAVING HIM, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF TALK OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS ABOUT COMMITTEES TO SAVE AMERICA AND ALL THE PRESIDENT’S AIDES DOING THAT. BUT THE THING THAT SAVED THE PRESIDENT AT THE END OF THE DAY HERE WAS PEOPLE NOT OBEYING HIS DIRECTIVES, AND THAT’S REALLY STRIKING. >>IT’S INTERESTING GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT FIRED SO MANY PEOPLE HE DIDN’T LIKE WHO WEREN’T DOING WHAT HE WANTED, RIGHT? >>EXACTLY. >>AND SO, KEIR, I WANT TO ASK YOU THIS, I JUST AM THINKING OF THE GOOD FOLKS IN LOUISIANA WHERE I’M FROM WHO — MANY OF WHOM ARE BIG SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, WHO ARE WATCHING THIS AND HAVE EITHER TURNED OFF THE TELEVISION, ARE TIRED OF US GOING ON AD NAUSEAM AND THINK IT’S VERY SIMPLE, THEY FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, SO MOVE ON. WHAT’S YOUR LEGAL TAKE ON THAT OPINION? >>YEAH. IT’S MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. AND I UNDERSTAND THE INSTINCT TO WANT TO TUNE OUT HERE BASED ON CERTAINLY THE PREREPORT PRESS RELEASE AND THE OTHER STATEMENTS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT HAVE BEEN DECLARING LOUDLY FOLLOWED UP BY MR. TRUMP, YOU KNOW, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO EXONERATION EVEN. BUT THE PROBLEM, AND, TANYA, YOU WERE — I THINK YOU WERE LEADING US INTO THIS QUESTION ABOUT HOW MUELLER WAS LOOKING AT THE OBSTRUCTION CASE IN PARTICULAR, AND SO HE SAYS THAT HE’S BOUND BY THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OPINION THAT HE CAN’T INDICT A PRESIDENT. HE TAKES IT THAT HE’S BOUND BECAUSE HE’S A COMPONENT OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. HE THEN — THE NEXT PART OF THAT IS, WELL, IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO EITHER CHARGE THE PRESIDENT WITH A CRIME UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THE WAY PROSECUTORS VIEW A CRIMINAL TRIAL IS THAT’S A CHANCE FOR YOU TO CLEAR YOUR NAME. AND THAT’S WHAT MUELLER WAS SAYING THAT BECAUSE HE COULDN’T INDICT MR. TRUMP, MR. TRUMP WOULDN’T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAR HIS NAME. SO HE SAYS I’M NOT GOING TO STATE IN MY REPORT THAT MR. TRUMP COMMITTED A CRIME, I’M BOUND NOT TO SAY THAT IN MY REPORT BECAUSE HE’S NOT GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAR HIMSELF. I CAN STATE IF I REACH THAT CONCLUSION, I COULD SAY THERE WAS NO OBSTRUCTION BECAUSE THAT WOULD CLEAR HIM. BUT HE’S GOT — HE’S TIED — THE POLICY TIES HIS ABILITY TO AFFIRMITIVELY REACH THE CONCLUSION ABOUT A CRIME, THEREFORE ALL HE DOES IS LAY OUT THE EVIDENCE. AND SO I THINK ALL OF US ARE LEFT WITH DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT MR. BARR AND MR. ROSENSTEIN WHEN THEY WROTE THEIR INITIAL LETTER SAYING, WELL, MUELLER DIDN’T CONCLUDE BUT WE’RE GOING TO AND THERE’S NO OBSTRUCTION, OKAY, THEY MADE THEIR OPINION. >>SHOULD CONGRESS HAVE MADE THAT DETERMINATION? THAT’S THE QUESTION. >>I THINK WE ALL HAVE — I THINK WE’RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS CONDUCT, NOT ALL OF US ARE LAWYERS, AND CONGRESS ISN’T GOING TO BE CONDUCTING — WOULDN’T CONDUCT A PROSECUTION, THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY BE LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE IMPEACHMENT LENS WHICH ISN’T A STRICTLY LEGAL PROCEEDING, BUT ALL OF US ALSO I THINK NEED TO LOOK AT THIS CONDUCT AND SAY SHOULD THE PRESIDENT HAVE — HAD TO HAVE AIDES SAVE HIM FROM HIMSELF. >>ZEKE, TO THAT POINT, YOU AND I ARE BOTH JOURNALISTS, WE’RE NOT ATTORNEYS. BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS, NANCY PELOSI AND THE OTHERS DON’T HAVE THE VOTES ON CAPITOL HILL IF THEY WANTED TO IMPEACH HIM, CORRECT? >>NO, THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. AND EVEN IF THE HOUSE WERE TO BRING UP ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT, IT’S A REPUBLICAN- CONTROLLED SENATE, THE PRESIDENT ISN’T GOING TO BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE BASED UPON THIS — YOU KNOW, THE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, HOWEVER DAMNING THEY MAY APPEAR TO SOME OF THE PRESIDENT’S POLITICAL OPPONENTS. THE CHALLENGE FOR DEMOCRATS NOW GOING FORWARD IS HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO — ON ONE HAND THE BASIS, THE DESIRE TO CONTINUE PROSECUTORRING THE PRESIDENT, WHETHER IT BE IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION OR ACTUALLY BE THROUGH SOME IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING OR SOME INVESTIGATIONS GOING FORWARD AND THE REST OF AMERICA THAT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ON AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A RECENT POLL OUT AT LEAST THIS WEEK RIGHT BEFORE THE RELEASE OF THE MUELLER REPORT THAT DOES SHOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PLURALITY OF AMERICANS WOULD LIKE INVESTIGATIONS TO CONTINUE, A LOT OF AMERICANS WANT TO TUNE THIS OUT, WANT TO PUT THIS TO BED, YOU KNOW, NOW THAT WE HAVE THE DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE AND HACKING IN THE 2016 ELECTION. THAT IS WHAT STARTED ALL OF THIS FOR A LOT OF AMERICANS AS WE’RE APPROACHING — YOU KNOW, 2019, APPROACHING THE 2020 ELECTION. THEY WANT TO PUT THE LAST ELECTION BEHIND THEM. SO THAT’S THE DELICATE BALANCE THAT DEMOCRATIC LEADERS ARE HAVING TO STRIKE. >>WELL, YOU KNOW, I’D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT AS A RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION THERE WERE NUMEROUS CHARGES, NUMEROUS INDICTMENTS, NUMEROUS GUILTY PLEAS. SO DOES THIS AT LEAST PUT TO BED THE CHARACTERIZATION OF ROBERT MUELLER’S PROBE AS A WITCH HUNT, ZEKE? >>IT CERTAINLY DOES. THIS IS NOT A WITCH HUNT AND NOW WE’RE SEEING THE PRESIDENT SORT OF TRYING TO HOLD UP WHAT HAD BEEN — YOU KNOW, HE’D BEEN CALLING WITCH HUNT AND UNDERMINING THE CREDIBILITY AND SAYING IT’S EXONERATION OR VINDICATION FOR HIM. THE PRESIDENT HAS TRIED TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS AND HE REALLY HAS BEEN FOR QUITE SOME TIME, IN PART BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE, THE PRESIDENT’S ATTORNEYS KNEW FROM THE BEGINNING THIS IS NOT AT THE END OF THE DAY GOING TO BE ABOUT CRIMINAL LIABILITY, MOST LIKELY FOR THE REASONS THAT YOU JUST DISCUSSED, THAT MUELLER WAS GOING TO HAVE DIFFICULTY WRECKING ANY CHARGES AGAINST THE PRESIDENT, WAS UNABLE TO BRING THOSE CHARGES. IT WAS AT WORST GOING TO RESULT IN IMPEACHMENT WHICH IS A POLITICAL PROCESS. SO SOME OF THE PRESIDENT’S PUBLIC PRONOUNCEMENTS AND PRIVATE ACTIONS HAVE BEEN ABOUT SHAPING THAT POLITICAL PROCESS. WHAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, WHAT LAWMAKERS SAY AND DO AND KNOW ABOUT ALL OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, IN SOME CASES THAT GOT HIM INTO TROUBLE. BUT BY AND LARGE THE PRESIDENT’S RHETORIC HAS SHAPED A LOT OF THE WAY AMERICANS DO VIEW THIS PROBE. >>ABSOLUTELY. >>ZEKE MILLER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE IT. BEFORE WE LET YOU GO, KEIR, I WANT TO ASK YOU, AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW, AND I REALIZE YOU HAVEN’T READ ALL 400 PAGE, BUT WOULD YOU PROSECUTE? >>I’D NEED TO READ MORE. BUT THERE CERTAINLY ARE VERY CONCERNING, VERY CONCERNING ISSUES I THINK ABOUT OBSTRUCTION THAT BECAUSE MR. MUELLER WAS SORT OF HIGH BOUND AND PRECLUDED FROM CONSIDERING, BUT THEY’RE DIFFICULT ISSUES AND WHEN YOU WOULD OBVIOUSLY SEEK TO PROSECUTE AN INDIVIDUAL OF THIS STATURE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE THE MOST CONVINCING AND BEST EVIDENCE AVAILABLE. I THINK IT IS A VERY CLOSE CALL. >>A CLOSE CALL. KEIR DOUGALL, THANKS VERY MUCH. >>> WE’RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK NOW, BUT WE’LL HAVE A LOT MORE ANALYSIS AHEAD. YOU’RE STREAMING CBSN. KEER KEER >>> THE MUELLER REPORT WHICH WE HAVE RIGHT HERE, ALL 400 PAGES IN TWO DIFFERENT STACKS IN FRONT OF DAVID AND MYSELF, SHOWS 10 POTENTIAL AREAS, EPISODES OF POTENTIAL OBSTRUCTION BY PRESIDENT TRUMP. AND HERE IS WHAT ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR HAD TO SAY ABOUT THAT. >>AFTER FINDING NO UNDERLYING COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT GOES ON TO CONSIDER WHETHER CERTAIN ACTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT COULD AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. AS I ADDRESSED IN MY MARCH 24th LETTER, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID NOT MAKE A TRADITIONAL PROSECUTORIAL JUDGMENT REGARDING THIS ALLEGATION. INSTEAD THE REPORT RECOUNTS 10 EPISODES INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT AND DISCUSSES POTENTIAL LEGAL THEORIES FOR CONNECTING THOSE ACTIVITIES TO THE ELEMENTS OF AN OBSTRUCTION OFFENSE. 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 ATTORNEY GENERAL AND I CONCLUDED THAT THE EVIDENCE DEVELOPED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE OFFENSE. ALTHOUGH THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL AND I DISAGREED WITH SOME OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S LEGAL THEORIES AND FELT THAT SOME OF THE EPISODES EXAMINED DID NOT AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION AS A MATTER OF LAW, WE DID NOT RELY SOLELY ON THAT IN MAKING OUR DECISION. INSTEAD WE ACCEPTED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR PURPOSES OF OUR ANALYSIS AND EVALUATED THE EVIDENCE AS PRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IN REACHING OUR CONCLUSIONS. >FOR MORE ON THIS WE BRING IN CBSN CONTRIBUTOR KEIR DOUGALL. HE’S STILL AT THE TABLE WITH US IN NEW YORK. HE’S A FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY FOR NEW YORK’S EASTERN DISTRICT AND CBSN KIM WHALEY. >>WHALEY. >>THANK YOU. >>A THIRD TIME IS A CHARM. KIM WHALEY WHO JOINS US NOW FROM OUR WASHINGTON BUREAU. AFTER THAT, KIM, YOU GET THE FIRST WORD. WHAT ARE YOUR HIGHLIGHT? >>WELL, THE HIGHLIGHTS HERE I THINK IS THAT THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THEORIES OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND MR. BARR LAID OUT ONE. AND I WANT TO JUST QUOTE FROM THE ACTUAL SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ON THE OTHER THEORY OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THIS IS ON PAGE EIGHT EIGHT. IT’S IN THE INTRODUCTION AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE READERS IF THEY CAN’T READ THE WHOLE 400 TO READ THE INTRO, AND THAT IS THAT THE TRUMP TEAM ENGAGED IN EFFORTS TO CURTAIL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION AND PREVENT THE DISCLOSURE OF EVIDENCE TO IT, INCLUDING THROUGH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CONTACTS WITH POTENTIAL WITNESSES. SO ONE THEORY OF THAT IS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE IS TAKING STEPS TO CURTAIL AN INVESTIGATION ON PURPOSE. SO THAT I THINK GETS TO THE AMBIGUITY HERE. THERE IS EVIDENCE AND THEY OUTLINED, AS YOU MENTIONED, 10 DIFFERENT EPISODES THAT BEAR ON THAT, INCLUDING, FOR EXAMPLE, TELLING HIS COUNSEL, MR. McGAHN THAT HE WANTED TO FIRE ROBERT MUELLER, THAT WAS CALLED OFF, TELLING COREY LEWANDOWSKI THAT HE WANTED SESSIONS, JEFF SESSIONS, HIS FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PUBLICLY SAY THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS VERY UNFAIR. IT DOESN’T TAKE A STRAINED LOGICAL MIND TO PUT THOSE PIECES TOGETHER AND SAY, LISTEN, MR. TRUMP DID NOT WANT THIS INVESTIGATION OF HIM TO GO FORWARD. THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT IS, AND THIS PARTICULAR ATTORNEY GENERAL, MR. BARR HAS A VERY BROAD VIEW OF EXECUTIVE POWER, THIS NOTION THE PRESIDENT IS IN CHARGE OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, EXTRA HIGH BAR SO TO SPEAK TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER HE ACTUALLY VIOLATED THE OBSTRUCTION STATUTE, AND THERE ARE TWO PIECES HERE THAT I THINK IS LEGALLY A LITTLE BIT SHAKY THAT MR. BARR RELIED ON. I HAVEN’T READ ALL THE DETAILS YET. IT’S 400 PAGES. ONE IS THE IDEA THAT IN ORDER TO OBSTRUCT YOU HAVE TO HAVE TRIED TO ACTUALLY COVER UP A CRIME. SO THE FACT THAT HE DIDN’T ACTUALLY COMMIT COLLUSION, HE DIDN’T TRY TO COVER UP COLLUSION, YOU CAN’T OBSTRUCT. THAT IS NOT EXACTLY THE STANDARD. THAT’S NOT THE STANDARD, ACTUALLY. ANY KIND OF MUCKING AROUND IN AN INVESTIGATION OR TRYING TO STOP THE GEARS OF IT ARGUABLY IS OBSTRUCTION. THE OTHER PIECE IS THIS QUESTION OF WHETHER — AND I THINK THERE WAS A DISTINCTION MR. BARR MADE IN A LETTER TO THE WHITE HOUSE LAST SUMMER BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT WHETHER THERE WAS ACTUAL MESSING WITH FACTS, SORT OF STOPPING THE — OR DISTORTING ACTUAL EVIDENCE. AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT PIECE ACTUALLY ISN’T THERE EITHER. BUT THESE ARE REALLY MINOR LEGAL NUANCES WITH OBSTRUCTION. AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE LEGITIMATE FOR THE CONGRESS TO TAKE THESE THINGS SERIOUSLY. AS WE KNOW, FOR BOTH PRESIDENTS CLINTON AS WELL AS PRESIDENT NIXON, THEIR ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT INCLUDED OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WHICH DOESN’T HAVE TO BE PROVEN AT THE SAME LEVEL FOR PURPOSES OF IMPEACHMENT OR AT LEAST A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION AS IT DOES IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. >>KEIR, DO YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THAT, ON THOSE 10 POINTS THAT WILLIAM BARR TALKED ABOUT AND THAT ARE IN THE REPORT, THE 10 POINTS THAT THEY LOOKED INTO WHETHER OR NOT THE PRESIDENT WAS OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE? >>RIGHT. SO, I MEAN, I WOULD SORT OF FOLLOW UP ON WHAT KIM SAID, THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SORT OF ONE SET OF QUESTIONS WHICH ARE DIFFICULT, IS THE PRESIDENT EXERCISING HIS PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY THROUGH PARDONS OR EXECUTIVE ACTION LIKE FIRING SOMEBODY. BUT THE OTHER HARDER QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT CORRUPT INTENT WHICH IS GENERALLY REQUIRED IN AN OBSTRUCTION CASE. AND SO MR. BARR MADE A POINT IN HIS PRESS CONFERENCE EARLIER TODAY TO MENTION — >>CAN I JUST INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND? >>YEAH. >>SO MUCKING AROUND IN THE FACTS ISN’T ENOUGH? I THOUGHT KIM WAS JUST SAYING THAT SOMETIMES THAT CAN BE THE THRESHOLD FOR OBSTRUCTION. >>IT ABSOLUTELY CAN BE. BUT IN ORDER TO MUCK AROUND AND FOR IT TO BE A CRIME, THERE GENERALLY HAS TO BE CORRUPT INTENT. SO YOU CAN DO ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT ARE LEGAL IF YOU HAVE ONE STATE OF MIND, AND THEN IF YOU DO THEM WITH A BAD INTENT, THEN YOU’RE COMMITTING A CRIME. AND SO ONE OF THE HARD QUESTIONS IN AN OBSTRUCTION CASE LIKE THIS, PARTICULARLY WHERE THE UNDER — THE OFFENSE THAT YOU WOULD THINK WOULD BE COVERED UP, THE RUSSIAN CONSPIRACY CAN’T BE CHARGED, RIGHT? SO THEN YOU’D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CORRUPT INTENT TO PROVE OBSTRUCTION, AND ABSENT THAT UNDERLYING CRIME, IT MAKES PROOF OF INTENT MORE DIFFICULT, AND SO I THOUGHT IT WAS NOTEWORTHY THAT MR. BARR FOCUSED ON THAT IN HIS PRESS CONFERENCE THIS MORNING. THAT’S SORT OF APPROPRIATE. BUT THE THINGS THAT HE POINTED TO RAISED SOME QUESTIONS IN MY MIND. >>SUCH AS THE PRESIDENT’S RIGHTEOUS ANGER AND FRUSTRATION OF BEING INVESTIGATED? >>CORRECT. WHICH IS WHAT EVERY DEFENDANT HAS TO DEAL WITH. SO ONE OF OF THE THINGS THAT RAISED MY EYEBROWS DURING MR. BARR’S PRESS CONFERENCE WAS POINTING TO MR. BARR’S — EXCUSE ME, MR. TRUMP’S BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS IN THE WRONG DIRECTION, WAS A WITCH HUNT, WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AS SOME WAY TO LEGITIMATIZE HIS — >>ATTEMPTS AT OBSTRUCTING IT. >>EXACTLY. IT SEEMED LIKE A DIFFICULT NEEDLE TO THREAD TO ME. >>SO LET’S BRING IN NOW BOB LIT. HE’S A FORMER U.S. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL. BOB, HAVE YOU BEEN LISTENING TO THIS CONVERSATION? WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON IT? >>I HAVE AND I WOULD. AND IF YOU’LL FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I’VE GOT THE REPORT SITTING ON MY LAP HERE AND I MADE A COUPLE OF NOTES THAT I WANTED TO SAY. >>ALL FORGIVEN. >>ONE IS ON THIS ISSUE THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MADE A BIG DEAL OF THIS MORNING ABOUT HOW THE PRESIDENT WAS RIGHTEOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT INTERFERENCE WITH HIS ABILITY TO GOVERN, IF YOU ACTUALLY READ WHAT MUELLER SAYS IN HIS REPORT, AND I’M FOCUSING HERE ON THIS SECTION ABOUT HIS FIRING OF DIRECTOR COMEY, HE SAYS SOME EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT THE PRESIDENT BELIEVED THAT THE ERRONEOUS PERCEPTION THAT HE WAS UNDER INVESTIGATION HARMED HIS ABILITY TO MANAGE DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS. BUT MUELLER THEN GOES ON TO SAY OTHER EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, INDICATES THAT THE PRESIDENT WANTED TO PROTECT HIMSELF FROM AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS CAMPAIGN. THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT ESTABLISH A DETERMINATION COMEY WAS DESIGNED TO COVER UP A CONSPIRACY BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND RUSSIA. BUT THE EVIDENCE DOES INDICATE THAT A THOROUGH F.B.I. INVESTIGATION WOULD UNCOVER FACTS ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN AND THE PRESIDENT PERSONALLY THAT THE PRESIDEN COULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD TO BE CRIMES OR THAT WOULD GIVE RISE TO PERSONAL AND POLITICAL CONCERNS. SO IT’S CLEAR THAT MUELLER FOUND A LOT MORE EVIDENCE ON THE INTENT POINT THAN BARR LED US TO BELIEVE. SECOND POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS FOCUSING ON THE ALLEGATIONS WITH RESPECT TO PAUL MANAFORT AND THE PRESIDENT’S STATEMENTS ABOUT MANAFORT BEING A GOOD GUY AND A PARDON IS A POSSIBILITY. MUELLER ANALYZES THOSE AS TO WHETHER THEY CONSTITUTE AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. AND HE SAYS THE EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT THE PRESIDENT INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE MANAFORT NOT TO COOPERATE WITH THE GOVERNMENT. NOW, THAT’S THE CORRUPT INTENT THAT KEIR WAS TALKING ABOUT BEFORE. AND IF YOU READ THIS SECTION ON MANAFORT, IT’S CLEAR TO ME AT LEAST THAT MUELLER DID EVERYTHING EXCEPT WRITE THE SENTENCE, THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES THAT THE PRESIDENT INTENDED TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE BECAUSE HE ESSENTIALLY FINDS THAT THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES ALL OF THE ELEMENTS OF AN OBSTRUCTION OFFENSE. >>BUT, KEIR, NO OBSTRUCTION. SO YOU HAVE EVERYTHING THERE, BUT IT JUST DIDN’T EXPLODE. >>RIGHT. AND SO THERE’S OBVIOUSLY JUDGMENT THAT’S BEING APPLIED HERE, AND, YOU KNOW, SO YOU STEP BACK, AND YOU SAY, AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, GIVEN THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESIDENT THAT HE CAN’T BE INDICTED, THAT THE TRIAL WOULD POTENTIALLY GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAR HIMSELF WHICH HE WOULDN’T HAVE AND THEREFORE MUELLER CONCLUDED THAT HE COULD CLEAR THE PRESIDENT IF THE RECORD SET THAT UP, BUT HE COULDN’T CONDEMN THE PRESIDENT IN THIS REPORT BECAUSE HE WOULDN’T HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY THAT ALL OF US, LUCKY US WHO CAN BE INDICTED WOULD HAVE AT A TRIAL. SO WE’RE LEFT WITH THESE THORNY QUESTIONS THAT BOB JUST MENTIONED THAT I THINK WE ALL AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE TO THINK ABOUT. >>SO, BOB, I WANT TO GET BACK TO YOU FOR A SECOND BECAUSE SOME OF THE INSTANCES YOU JUST OUTLINED DO SEEM TO DISPLAY INTENT. SO IF YOU PUT YOURSELF IN THE MIND OF ROBERT MUELLER, DO YOU THINK THAT HE’S THINKING TO HIMSELF ABOUT HIS POSITION ON THE WORLD STAGE, ABOUT HIS POSITION IN THIS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL PANTHEON AND HE’S MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON THAT AND NOT JUST CLEARLY ON INTENT? >>WELL, I WILL TELL YOU, AS I SAID TO YOU EARLIER, I THINK ROBERT MUELLER IS ONE OF MY EROS, AND ONE OF THE GOOD THINGS ABOUT ROBERT MUELLER IS THAT HE’S NEVER BEEN WORRIED ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES FOR HIM. HE’S ALWAYS BEEN FOCUSED ON DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND I THINK THAT HE GENUINELY FELT THE POINTS THAT KEIR WAS JUST MAKING IS THAT IT’S UNFAIR TO ACCUSE SOMEBODY OF A CRIME IN A CONTEXT WHERE THEY CAN’T DEFEND THEMSELVES. SO HE LIMITED HIMSELF TO SAYING HERE’S WHAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS. I DON’T THINK THAT MUELLER ANTICIPATED THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD THEN GO ON TO DRAW THE CONCLUSIONS WHICH MUELLER HIMSELF MIGHT WELL NOT HAVE DRAWN IF HE’D BEEN ASKED TO DRAW THE CONCLUSIONS. >>KEIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THAT? >>YEAH. IT’S — YOU KNOW, IT’S GOING TO BE LEFT TO US. >>RIGHT. >>I MEAN, IT’S GOING TO BE LEFT TO US TO DECIDE, EVEN IF THE CONDUCT HAVING BEEN DECLARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND BY ROD ROSENSTEIN AS NOT TO RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CRIME, THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES UNDERNEATH THAT. IS THE CONDUCT SORT OF DOES IT SHOCK OUR CONSCIENCES. DOES IT REFLECT ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE PRESIDENT? YOU KNOW, THESE ARE ISSUES THAT VOTERS ARE OBVIOUSLY GOING TO CONSIDER NEXT YEAR. >>RIGHT. >>AND THAT POTENTIALLY ALTHOUGH — OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT I THINK POLITICALLY FOR CONGRESS TO CONSIDER AN IMPEACHMENT RIGHT NOW, THE — YOU KNOW, THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT ALSO BECAUSE OBSTRUCTION WERE ISSUES IN BOTH CLINTON’S AND NIXON’S IMPEACHMENTS. >>RIGHT. YOU KNOW, I WANT — GO AHEAD. >>NO. >>I JUST WANTED TO ASK YOU, BOTH OF YOU, ACTUALLY, BOB AND KEIR, ABOUT THAT TRUMP TOWER MEETING. I DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THAT YOU READ, BUT APPARENTLY MUELLER DID CONSIDER CHARGING JARED KUSHNER AND PAUL MANAFORT WITH CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW VIOLATIONS IN CONNECTION TO THAT MEETING. >>CAN I READ YOU SOMETHING FROM THAT? >>YES. >>SO I JUST GOT TO PAGE 106, RIGHT? AND THIS IS — YOU HAVE TO BEAR WITH US, WE HAVEN’T HAD TIME TO SORT OF GO STUDY AND COME WITH CHUNK, SO WE’RE LITERALLY READING ON THE FLY. BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PARAGRAPH THAT ACTUALLY FITS IN WITH WHAT YOU JUST INTRODUCED. ON JUNE 29th, HOPE HICKS WARNED THE PRESIDENT THAT THE E-MAILS SETTING UP THE JUNE 9th MEETING WERE REALLY BAD AND THAT THIS STORY WOULD BE MASSIVE WHEN IT BROKE. BUT THE PRESIDENT TOLD HER AND KUSHNER TO, QUOTE, LEAVE IT ALONE. EARLY ON JULY 8th AFTER HICKS TOLD THE PRESIDENT THAT THE “NEW YORK TIMES” WAS WORKING ON A STORY ABOUT THE JUNE 9th MEETING, THE PRESIDENT DIRECTED HER NOT TO COMMENT, EVEN THOUGH HICKS SAID THAT THE PRESIDENT USUALLY CONSIDERED NOT RESPONDING TO THE PRESS TO BE THE ULTIMATE SIN. LATER THAT DAY, THE PRESIDENT REJECTED DONALD TRUMP, JR.’S DRAFT STATEMENT THAT WOULD HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE CAMPAIGN — THAT THE MEETING WAS WITH, QUOTE, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO I WAS TOLD MIGHT HAVE INFORMATION HELPFUL TO THE CAMPAIGN, CLOSED QUOTE. THE PRESIDENT THEN DIRECTED A STATEMENT TO HICKS THAT SAID THE MEETING WAS ABOUT RUSSIAN ADOPTION WHICH THE PRESIDENT HAD TWICE BEEN TOLD WAS DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING. THE STATEMENT DICTATED BY THE PRESIDENT DID NOT MENTION THE OFFER OF DEROGATORY INFORMATION ABOUT CLINTON. THEN MR. MUELLER GOES ON TO WRITE, EACH OF THESE EFFORTS BY THE PRESIDENT INVOLVED HIS COMMUNICATIONS TEAM AND WAS DIRECTED AT THE PRESS. THEY WOULD AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION ACTS ONLY IF THE PRESIDENT BY TAKING THESE ACTIONS SOUGHT TO WITHHOLD INFORMATION FROM OR MISLEAD CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATORS OR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. >>WELL, THAT GOES TO — >>IN OTHER WORDS, YOU’RE COOL TO LIE TO THE PRESS. >>EXACTLY. YOU CAN LIE TO THE PUBLIC, YOU CAN LIE TO THE PRESS ALL YOU WANT, THERE’S NO CRIME IN THAT, BUT YOU BETTER NOT LIE TO INVESTIGATORS. >>ISN’T THAT INTERESTING? SO HE KNEW, DECIDED WE GONNA LIE ANYWAY, AND MUELLER DETERMINED, WELL, YA’LL GOT LIED TO, BUT HE DIDN’T SAY THAT TO US. >>WELL, BOTH BOB AND KIM KNOW THAT’S CORRECT, AS LONG AS THERE ISN’T SOME OTHER THING GOING ON. YOU CAN LIE ALL YOU WANT TO THE PRESS AND IN PUBLIC. >>RIGHT. >>AND WHAT COMES BACK IS, YOU KNOW, YOUR REPUTATION AND YOUR CHARACTER. >>RIGHT. >>BUT WHAT’S DESCRIBED HERE, AND IT’S BEEN CONCERNING TO SEVERAL PEOPLE, IT’S AN OFFER OF SOMETHING OF VALUE, INFORMATION THAT’S DETRIMENTAL TO THE HILLARY CAMPAIGN BY AN IDENTIFIED FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, AND THAT SETS UP THE POSSIBILITY OF A CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, EITHER ONE — IF IT’S COMPLETED THE SUBSTANTIVE CRIME OR AN AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT IT WHICH WOULD POTENTIALLY BE A CONSPIRACY. >>I WANT TO READ YOU SOMETHING WE WERE JUST HANDED. THIS IS A JOINT STATEMENT FROM LEADER SCHUMER AND SPEAKER PELOSI ON THE SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER’S REPORT. QUOTE, THE DIFFERENCES ARE STARK BETWEEN WHAT ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR SAID ON OBSTRUCTION AND WHAT SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER SAID ON OBSTRUCTION. AS WE CONTINUE TO REVIEW THE REPORT, THE ONE THING IS CLEAR, ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR PRESENTED A CONCLUSION THAT THE PRESIDENT DID NOT OBSTRUCT JUSTICE WHILE MUELLER’S REPORT APPEARS TO UNDERCUT THAT FINDING. >>SO, BOB, ARE YOU STILL WITH US? WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THAT? DO YOU THINK THAT THAT IS ACCURATE? DO YOU THINK THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S SUMMARY WAS AN ACCURATE SUMMARY OF WHAT WE’VE BEEN READING TODAY? >>I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT IT. IT DOES APPEAR TO ME THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PICKED OUT PORTIONS THAT WERE FAVORABLE TO THE PRESIDENT AND EMPHASIZED THOSE WHILE IGNORING THE PORTIONS THAT ARE NOT FAVORABLE TO THE PRESIDENT AND EVEN IN SOME RESPECTS DISTORTING THE FINDINGS AS WITH THE PASSAGE I READ EARLIER ABOUT WHAT THE PRESIDENT’S CONCERN WAS. I THINK THAT — AS I SAID EARLIER, MAYBE AN HOUR OR SO AGO, BARR COULD HAVE USED THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THERE WAS CLEARLY A RUSSIAN EXTENSIVE EFFORT TO INTERFERE WITH THE ELECTION, TO FAVOR DONALD TRUMP, AND THERE WERE CLEARLY EXTENSIVE CONTACTS BETWEEN RUSSIA AND INDIVIDUALS IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN THAT WARRANTED AN INVESTIGATION BY THE F.B.I. AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. THIS WAS NOT A WITCH HUNT. THIS WAS A LEGITIMATE INVESTIGATION AS WE’VE SEEN. HE DIDN’T DO THAT. AND THAT I THINK IS WRONG FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL NOT TO STAND UP FOR HIS PEOPLE IN THAT REGARD. >>SO, BOB, YOU WOULD HAVE WRITTEN A DIFFERENT SUMMARY. >>KEIR, WHAT ABOUT YOU? WHAT KIND OF SUMMARY WOULD YOU HAVE WRITTEN? >>YEAH, YOU KNOW, IT IS CONCERNING. AND I GUESS THE LARGER QUESTION IS WHY WRITE IT AT ALL? WHY NOT LET IT — >>SPEAK FOR ITSELF. >>WHY NOT LET THE REPORT SPEAK FOR ITSELF? IF YOU’RE COMMITTED TO TRANSPARENCY, WHY GET IN BETWEEN? WHY — YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS, BUT IF YOU TESTIFY AT YOUR CONFIRMATION HEARING THAT YOUR PRIMARY OBJECTIVE IS TRANSPARENCY, WHY GET IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS AT ALL? >>KIM, DOES THIS FUEL THE THOUGHT THAT, SOME HAVE, THAT BARR IS JUST A PUPPET FOR THE PRESIDENT? >>I THINK IT WILL FUEL THAT THOUGHT. I THINK THAT’S PROBABLY AN UNFAIR CHARACTERIZATION, BUT AS BOB INDICATED, THERE ARE OTHER WAYS OF APPROACHING THIS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPTIMALLY IS VIEW AS SOMEWHAT — SORT OF THE NEUTRAL ON THESE ISSUES AND INDEPENDENT. AND I THINK — OF COURSE HE’S CHOSEN BY THE PRESIDENT. THERE’S NO REQUIREMENT THAT HE ANSWER TO THE PRESIDENT OR BE SORT OF HAVE THE PRESIDENT’S BACK, BUT THAT’S PRECISELY WHY THE PRESIDENT ASSAILED JEFF SESSIONS AND CALLED HIM, WHAT, MR. McGOO AND MR. ROSENSTEIN WAS MR. PEEPERS. THESE ARE NOT POSITIVE REVIEWS OF PEOPLE WITHIN HIS CHAIN OF COMMAND WHOM HE BELIEVED REALLY SHOULD BE HIS OWN PERSONAL LAWYER, AND I THINK MR. BARR HAS WALKED IN AND IS SERVING THAT GOAL. I AGREE IT’S A ONE-SIDED SUMMARY OF IT AND ARGUABLY THAT’S PERFECTLY WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HIS POSITION. BUT I THINK IT DELEGITIMATIZES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S POSITION OVERALL, BUT I ALSO BELIEVE HAVING LOOKED AT HIS WRITINGS PRIOR TO BECOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT IT’S CONSISTENT WITH A REALLY BIG BROAD BELIEF IN THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY, SORT OF AN ALMOST IMPEERISTIC PRESIDENCY. SO AS MUCH AS THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE CHEERING ON TRUMP WHICH MAKES SENSE, I MEAN, WE HAVE OUR POLITICAL POINTS OF VIEW, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE ENLARGE OR AGGRANDIZE THE SCOPE OF THE PRESIDENCY, THAT SCOPE OF POWER STAYS IN THAT OFFICE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTY. I’VE ALSO — I’M A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR, I HAVE A BOOK COMING OUT ON THE CONSTITUTION FOR REGULAR PEOPLE IN JUNE, AND I THINK THIS BROADER PICTURE IS OFTEN LOST IN THIS PARTICULAR DISCUSSION. BARR SHOULD NOT BE FOR OUR PRESIDENT DID HE COMMIT CRIMES THAT COULD PUT HIM IN JAIL. THE BAR SHOULD BE SOMETHING LOWER THAN THAT. >>SO, KIM, DO YOU THINK THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION IS BEING UNDULY STRENGTHENED? >>ABSOLUTELY. I THINK IT’S NOT JUST UNDER THIS ADMINISTRATION, IT’S A STEADY ACCUMULATION OF POWER FOR A LONG TIME. I MEAN, OUR OWN PAULA REID ASKED A QUESTION RELATING TO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THIS WOULD BE PERCEIVED IN SOME WAY THAT WAS SOMEHOW POLITICAL AND MR. BARR ALMOST WAS TAKEN ABACK IN THAT REGARD. AND I THINK THAT’S — IT’S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL NEED TO BUY INTO THE LEGITIMACY OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, AND FOR HIM TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ON ONE HAND, LISTEN, IT’S MY CALL ON OBSTRUCTION BECAUSE I’M THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND ON THE OTHER HAND SAY BUT WE’VE GOT A POLICY THAT YOU CANNOT INDICT THE PRESIDENT IS KIND OF MEANS THE PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW, AT LEAST WHEN IT COMES TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. THAT’S WHY THE POLITICAL PROCESS HAS TO KICK INTO GEAR. AND I MUST SAY, I GIVE BARR A LOT OF POINTS IN THAT REGARD FOR MAKING MOST OF THIS REPORT PUBLIC. H DIDN’T HAVE TO DO THAT. AND I THINK THAT THAT IS A GOOD THING FOR DEMOCRACY AND A GOOD THING FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. >>BUT WHEN CAN A PRESIDENT AND APPOINT AND FIRE AN ATTORNEY GENERAL, ISN’T THERE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THERE? >>WELL, IT’S CLEAR UNDER THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO APPOINT WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE SENATE. NOW, THIS HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN A PROBLEM. IT’S ARGUABLY A BLIND SPOT IN THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE WE’VE SEEN NOW MULTIPLE TIMES, STARTING WITH PRESIDENT NIXON, THEN AGAIN WITH PRESIDENT CLINTON AND NOW WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, WE’VE SEEN VARIOUS MECHANISMS DECIDE, LISTEN, WE CANNOT HAVE THE PRESIDENT’S OWN PEOPLE BE INVESTIGATING HIM. THAT’S WHY CONGRESS CREATED AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL BY STATUTE. I WORKED FOR KEN STARR. THAT STATUTE EXPIRED. SO NOW WE DO HAVE MR. BARR WITHIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. AND I THINK WHAT — EXCUSE ME, MR. BARR WITHIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND AND MR. MUELLER IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. AND BY WHAT BARR DID BY STEPPING INTO THE SHOES AND MAKING THAT CALL ON OBSTRUCTION WAS BASICALLY GUT THE WHOLE POINT OF HAVING THE MUELLER PROBE TO BEGIN WITH. MR. ROSENSTEIN APPOINTED MUELLER SPECIFICALLY TO TAKE HIM OUT OF THE PRESIDENT’S DIRECT CHAIN OF COMMAND, SO WHATEVER OUTCOME HAPPENED WE ALL HAVE SOME SENSE OF BUY-IN. LIKE WE’VE ALL BEEN TO A KID’S BASEBALL GAME. IF WE THINK THAT THE UMPIRE IS BEING PAID OFF BY ONE TEAM, WE GET REALLY ANGRY THAT THE PROCESS IS UNFAIR. AND I THINK IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT WITH THE STAKES AT HAND THAT THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, BELIEVE IN THE PROCESS. I THINK THAT WAS IN PLACE WITH MR. MUELLER >>>I DO THINK NOW WE’RE SHIFTING IT, MAKING IT A LITTLE MORE POLITICIZED BY THE WAY MR. BARR HAS DECIDED TO HANDLE IT ONCE HE HAD THE HANDOFF OF THE REPORT. >>YOU’RE ON A ROLL. YOU GET THE LAST QUESTION. YOU WERE INVOLVED WITH KEN STARR. THAT WAS AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. MR. MUELLER WAS A SPECIAL COUNSEL. TELL OUR FRIENDS WHO ARE WATCHING THE DIFFERENCE. >>GREAT QUESTION. SO THE REASON THAT WE HAD AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL WHICH IS A STATUTE CREATED BY CONGRESS THAT CREATED A SEPARATE OFFICE WAS BECAUSE OF THE SATURDAY NIGHT MASSACRE, BECAUSE NIXON BASICALLY TRIED TO CALL OFF THE DOGS ON HIMSELF WITHIN HIS OWN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. CONGRESS SAID, LISTEN, THIS DOBTS WORK. WE CAN’T HAVE A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATING THEIR BOSS. WE’RE GOING TO CREATE AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. KEN STARR WAS APPOINTED BY JUDGES, AND HE COULDN’T BE REMOVED BY LAW BY THE PRESIDENT AT WILL. THAT EXPIRED. CONGRESS DECIDED, LISTEN, THE WHITEWATER INVESTIGATION GOT úW GOING TO RENEW THAT. WE’RE GOING TO KEEP THIS WITHIN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND HERE WE ARE AGAIN. ROD ROSENSTEIN PICKED I THINK BY ALL ACCOUNTS THE RIGHT PERSON FOR THE JOB, SOMEONE WHO IS A RULE-OF-LAW GUY. AND THEN IT GOT HANDED OFF TO SOMEONE WHO WORKS FOR THE PRESIDENT WITHIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND, AND WE’RE KIND OF BACK IN A WATERGATE CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROBLEM. ARGUABLY THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH THE STRUCTURE OF THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF. I DON’T THINK THIS IS THE LAST TIME WE’RE GOING TO SEE A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, WE MIGHT IN THE FUTURE, EVEN SEE LEGISLATION AGAIN UNDER A DIFFERENT CONGRESS THAT CREATES AN INDEPENDENT ENTITY TO INVESTIGATE THE PRESIDENT. >>CLEARLY THAT’S SOMETHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN, CORRECT? >>I JUST THINK WE HAVEN’T RESOLVED IT. I THINK THE PROCESS SHOULD SAY — I THINK THE PROCESS HAS WORKED, THE PROCESS HAS WORKED IN THAT WE’VE HAD MULTIPLE INDICTMENTS FROM MR. MUELLER AND THAT WE’VE GOT A 400-PAGE REPORT THAT I THINK IS EXHAUSTIVE AND EVENHANDED. I THINK GOING FORWARD, I REALLY ENCOURAGE EVERYONE, EVERY AMERICAN TO READ THIS INFORMATION ON THEIR OWN BECAUSE THE WAY IT GETS IN OUR 24/7 SORT OF INFORMATION CULTURE, IT’S EITHER BLACK OR WHITE. THIS IS NOT BLACK AND WHITE. IT’S GRAY. AND THE GRAYNESS HAS EXTRAORDINARY IMPLICATIONS FOR THIS SORT OF DEMOCRATIC PROCESS AND INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES FOR OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE REGARDLESS OF DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN, OUR FRAMERS DID NOT WANT A KING. THEY DID NOT WANT AN IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY. WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT INCREASING CREEPING ACCUMULATION OF EXECUTIVE POWER. WE SAW IT WITH THE DECLARATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY. IT’S THE SAME ARGUMENT. WE NEED TO HAVE CHECKS ON EVERY BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, OTHERWISE WE HAVE BULLIES THAT ARE GOING TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON ARBITRARY CRITERIA LIKE WHAT YOUR POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS ARE, THEN WE DON’T HAVE A úDEMO WE HAVE SOMETHIG ELSE. AND I DON’T THINK IT’S SOMETHING THAT WILL BE BETTER THAN WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. >>KIM WEHLE, YOU ARE MAKING EXCELLENT POINTS. BOB, WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN? ARE WE SEEING AN EROSION OF A PROPER BALANCE OF POWERS IN THIS COUNTRY? >>WELL, I DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE BROADER POLITICAL THING. I WOULD SAY TO SOMEONE WHO IS IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WHEN WE HAD KEN STARR AND A NUMBER OF OTHER INDEPENDENT COUNSELS OPERATING. I DO THINK FROM THE OVERALL FUNCTIONING OF OUR OVERALL POLITICAL SYSTEM, I THINK IT’S PROBABLY BETTER TO HAVE EVERYTHING WITHIN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND HAVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONSIVE TO THE PRESIDENT AND HAVE THE KINDS OF CONFLICTS THAT KIM IS TALKING ABOUT WHICH ARE VERY REAL WORKED OUT THROUGH THE POLITICAL SYSTEM, AS, IN FACT, IS HAPPENING IN THIS CASE. WE DO — MUELLER HAS ISSUED A REPORT. THIS IS GOING TO GO — THIS IS GOING TO CONGRESS, THEY ARE GOING TO BE INVESTIGATING, AND I THINK WE HAVE TO RELY ON THE POLITICAL SYSTEM TO DEAL WITH THESE CONFLICTS RATHER THAN CREATE INDEPENDENT POWER STRUCTURES THAT WILL THEMSELVES NOT BE CHECKED. >>SO LEAVE IT TO THE VOTERS, THE VOTERS HAVE TO READ THE REPORT, AS KIM POINTED OUT. EVERY AMERICAN NEEDS TO READ THE REPORT FOR THEMSELVES. >>AND IT’S ON OUR WEBSITE. >>BOB, KIM, KEIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>THANK YOU. >>WE APPRECIATE IT. >>>LET’S GO NOW TO THE WHITE HOUSE. KELLYANNE CONWAY IS SPEAKING. >>LET’S MOVE ON, LET’S TALK ABOUT WHAT WAS HER WORD YESTERDAY? KITCHEN TABLE ISSUES. LET’S HAVE AT IT. I PRESENT TO YOU THE DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS THE DEMOCRATS’ SUCCESSES — HI. THIS IS THE SUCCESS OF THE DEMOCRATS IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS IN CONGRESS. HERE IT IS. THERE’S NOTHING. >>REPORTER: THERE WERE IN A MOMENTS MENTIONED IN THE MUELLER REPORT WHERE THERE WERE CONTACTS BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, TRUMP ASSOCIATES AND RUSSIANS, RUSSIAN OPERATIVES AND SO ON, AND WHAT HAPPENED FOLLOWING THAT IS WE GOT SOME FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE CONTACTS FROM THE CAMPAIGN, FROM PEOPLE AT THE WHITE HOUSE, FROM PRESS SECRETARY AND SO ON. >>IS THERE A QUESTION IN THERE? >>REPORTER: WELL, THE QUESTION IS IS THERE ANY REGRET FOR PASSING ON FALSE INFORMATION TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THESE CONTACTS AND SOME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS THAT WENT ON ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON DURING THE CAMPAIGN? >>ABOUT WHOM ARE YOU SPEAKING IN THE CAMPAIGN? THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I’M YET TO MEET SOME OF THESE PEOPLE AND I WAS A CAMPAIGN MANAGER. I’VE NEVER MET CARTER PAGE. I DON’T THINK I’VE MET GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS. MAYBE I HAVE. >>REPORTER: THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT’S SON AND SON-IN-LAW — >>TOTAL EXONERATION FROM THAT, JIM, WHAT’S BEEN REURPED BECAUSE THE MEDIA IS NEVER UNDER OATH. ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO SIT ON TV ALL DAY. >>REPORTER: RIGHT. >>YOU’RE HERE WORKING HARD. YOU HAVE PEOPLE ON YOUR NETWORK SITTING ON TV ALL DAY JUST SAYING THINGS BECAUSE THEY’RE NOT UNDER OATH. THEY CAN SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT. ADAM SCHIFF — WHERE IS THE QUOTE AMPLE INVESTIGATION? EXCUSE ME, AMPLE EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, WHERE IS IT? TELL THEM TO BRING IT RIGHT NOW, I WANT TO SEE IT. >>REPORTER: CAN YOU TELL US WHY, KELLYANNE, WHY WERE WE ORIGINALLY TOLD A BOGUS STORY ABOUT THAT? >>BY WHOM? NO. I READ THE QUOTE IN THE “NEW YORK TIMES” ARTICLE THAT IT’S PRIMARILY. IT IS IN THE MUELLER REPORT. I JUST READ ON THAT. I’M USING MY VERY EXPENSIVE LAW DEGREE TODAY. I READ THAT IN THE ENTIRE SECTION WHERE THERE’S AN EXCHANGE BETWEEN DON, J R AND HOPE HICKS AND HE SAYS THERE’S SOME B.S. STUFF AT THE BEGINNING ABOUT HILLARY, BUT IT’S IMPORTANT AND YOU WENT RIGHT BY IT. YOU’RE MAKING CONJECTURE ABOUT IT FOR TWO YEARS AND IT’S NOT TRUE. SO THE TRUTH IS WHAT’S IN THE REPORT AND DON, JR. IS EXONERATED, HOPE HICKS, DON, SR IS EXONERATED. YOU’LL HAVE TO MOVE ON AND START COVERING ISSUES THAT AMERICANS TELL YOU IN YOUR OWN POLLS THAT ARE IMPORTANT HERE, EDUCATION, ECONOMY, FOREIGN POLICY, DENUCLEARIZED NORTH KOREA, LIKE WE HAVE A LOT TO SOLVE IN THIS COUNTRY. I SAID TO YOU 2 1/2 YEARS AGO WHEN THE PRESIDENT WAS ELECTED, I SAID WE ARE GOING TO HAVE JOINT CUSTODY OF THIS COUNTRY FOR THE NEXT FOUR TO EIGHT YEARS. WE GOT SIX TO GO, 5 1/2 TO GO. WE GOTTA FIND A WAY TO MANAGE THAT JOINT CUSTODY OF THIS COUNTRY. YOU GOTTA BE HONEST WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, JIM, THAT THERE’S NO COLLUSION. >>REPORTER: OKAY. GETTING BACK TO BEING HONEST, KELLYANNE — >>REPORTER: HAS PRESIDENT TRUMP EVER EXPRESSED CONCERN TO YOU THAT HE THOUGHT HIS PRESIDENCY WAS GOING TO COME TO AN END? >>NEVER ONCE. I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO SEE THAT BY SOMEBODY WHO’S BEEN HERE SPARINGLY OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO SEE THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT THE REACTION OF THE PRESIDENT THAT DAY WHEN I WAS THERE, AND HE HAS NEVER — THERE WORDS WERE THE PRESIDENT IS QUOTED THROUGHOUT THE REPORT WHERE HE DOESN’T USE THOSE WORDS. SO I’M NOT SURE. YOU CAN ASK THE PEOPLE ABOUT THAT. BUT I WILL TELL YOU HE HAS NEVER ONCE ON THE CAMPAIGN SAID I THINK WE SHOULD RESIGN, I’M NOT GOING TO RUN ANYMORE, LET’S JUST — WE’RE DONE HERE, I CAN GO BACK TO MY HAPPY LIFE, MAKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, HE NEVER SAID THAT DURING THE CAMPAIGN. HE CERTAINLY HAS NEVER SAID THAT SINCE WE’VE BEEN HERE AND I’VE BEEN HERE BY HIS SIDE ON THE CAMPAIGN AND HERE. HE’S NEVER EXPRESSED THAT, LIKE MY PRESIDENCY IS OVER. AND I KNOW THAT WAS THE PROMISE AND THE WISH OF MANY PEOPLE, MANY PEOPLE WHO FOR SOME REASON YOU GIVE A LOT OF AIR TIME AND INK TO WHO HAVE ZERO CREDIBILITY NOW WHO PROMISED COLLUSION, WHO SWORE THERE’D BE CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, WHO WOULD WHISPER IN THE EARS OF PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP FAMILY OR BOTH, WHO WOULD BE HEADED TO JAIL, WOULD BE INDICTED BY THE GRAND JURY, WOULD BE TAKEN TO PRISON, I MEAN, THAT’S REALLY A DISGRACE, PEOPLE WHISPERING IN OUR EARS ABOUT THAT. NONE OF THAT HAPPENED. I THINK HONESTLY IT’S TIME TO MOVE ON, TOTAL EXONERATION, THE PRESIDENT IS IN A GREAT MOOD, AND I THINK WHAT’S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT HERE IS THAT DEMOCRACY AND IN THE WORLD’S GREATEST DEMOCRACY, COUNTRY FLOURISHES. YOU DON’T NEED TO GET INFORMATION FROM WIKILEAKS, YOU CAN WIN ELECTIONS FAIRLY AND SQUARELY. >>REPORTER: WAS THE E-MAIL HACKED BY RUSSIA? >>REPORTER: DOES THIS VINDICATE — >>REPORTER: WOULD THE PRESIDENT LIKE TO SEE MUELLER TESTIFY, THE DEMOCRATS ARE CALLING FOR IT, WOULD THAT BE — >>WHY ARE THEY ASKING FOR MR. MUELLER TO TESTIFY? THIS IS THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION, THIS IS THE MUELLER REPORT. THESE WERE THE MUELLER REDACTIONS IN CONCERT WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL. SO WHY WOULD — >>REPORTER: CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT. >>FINE. IF THEY THINK IT IS AND THEY CAN CALL HIM TO TESTIFY, BUT THE COUNTRY ALSO HAS A RIGHT TO ASK WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO LEGISLATE AND NOT INVESTIGATE. IS THIS OVERSIGHT OR OVERREACH? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID TODAY, SURE, YOU WANT TO CALL MR. MUELLER TO TESTIFY, CALL HIM TO TESTIFY. BUT I THINK THE BURDEN IS INCREASINGLY GOING TO BE ON THOSE WHO WON’T LET GO OF THIS BIG LIE TO PROVE WHY THEY ARE CONTINUING JUST IN A DIFFERENT FORM. I MEAN, WE HAD THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION. THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE GOLD STANDARD. YOU KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I WAS ASKED SIX WAYS TO SUNDAY WOULD HE FIRE ROSENSTEIN, WILL HE FIRE MUELLER, WILL HE FIRE — WILL HE SHUT DOWN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. NONE OF THAT HAPPENED. IF ANYTHING, IF YOU READ THE REPORT, TOTAL COMPLIANCE, TOTAL COMPLIANCE AND TOTAL EXONERATION. >>REPORTER: WHERE’S THE PRESIDENT’S POINT-BY-POINT REBUTTAL THAT RUDY GIULIANI SAID WAS COMING OUT >>HE DOESN’T NEED A POINT-BY- POINT REBUTTAL. HIS GREATEST REBUTTAL WILL BE HE’S IN OFFICE, REMAIN IN OFFICE AND GET RE-ELECTED. THE DEMOCRATS BANKED EVERYTHING ON THIS. YOU HAVE 15, 18 PEOPLE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AND NOT A SINGLE MESSAGE THAT DOESN’T INVOLVE, TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP. AND SOME OF THEM HAVE PROMISED COLLUSION, SOME OF THEM RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, SOME WHO SHARE RANKING MEMBERS ON CAPITOL HILL, THEY SAY THEY’VE GOT PROOF OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. JUST BECAUSE THEY’RE ON TV SHOWS VOMITING THEIR OWN NONSENSE AND TALKING POINTS EVERY NIGHT AND NOT UNDER OATH DOESN’T MEAN THEY SHOULD FACE FULL EXONER’. THEY SHOULD PRODUCE — EXONERATION. THEY SHOULD PRODUCE THAT. >>REPORTER: DOES THE PRESIDENT THINK THIS IS A CRIMINAL MATTER? >>EL WITH, THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID ALL — WELL, THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID ALL ALONG IT’S A WITCH HUNT, IT’S A HOAX. I CALL IT A PROCTOLOGY EXAM AND WE EMERGED WITH A CLEAN BILL OF HELP. THIS IS SOMETHING THE INVESTIGATORS THINK WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. THIS COUNTRY — LOOK, IF YOU’RE GOING TO SCREAM ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND YOU NEED INVESTIGATIONS FOR TWO YEARS, I GOT 22 MORE MONTHS TO SEE HOW WE GOT HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE, THOSE FISA APPLICATIONS, WHY THE F.B.I. WAS MAKING PAYMENTS TO CHRISTOPHER STEELE AND HIS DIRTY DOSSIER, ALSO PAID BY HILLARY CLINTON AND THE D.N.C. WHAT’S HIS NAME? GLENN SIMPSON HAS TAKEN THE FIFTH, FUSION GPS, I’D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT. YOU’VE SEEN ALL THE TEXT MESSAGES, SEXING, TEXTS BETWEEN STRZOK AND PAGE AND YOU KNOW WHAT THE OHRS WERE DOING, HIM AT FUSION GPS, HIM AT THE F.B.I. AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. I THINK AMERICA HAS BEEN TOLD BY ALL OF YOU, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, THAT WE HAVE A RIGHT TO ú WE WANT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE DEMOCRACY IS HONEST. LET’S INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS. HOW DID WE GET HERE? BECAUSE WHEN THE PRESIDENT SAYS THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO ANOTHER PRESIDENT EVER AGAIN, LET’S SEE HOW WE GOT HERE. HOW DID IT START? >>REPORTER: KELLYANNE DID IT START WHEN YOU WENT ON STAGE AND ENCOURAGED RUSSIA TO HACK THE ELECTION? >>REPORTER: THE REPORT SUGGESTS THAT DONALD TRUMP DID TRY TO GET RID OF ROBERT MUELLER, THAT THAT WAS AN ATTEMPT AT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BUT THAT HIS TEAM WOULDN’T ALLOW THAT. HOW DOES THAT AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTION? >>REPORTER: THEY FOUND NO OBSTRUCTION. YOU HAVE TO READ THE REPORT COMPLETELY AND NOT JUST — I SURE HAVE. I’VE READ THE WHOLE REPORT AND I GOT IT VERY RECENTLY. NO. LET ME JUST MAKE THE POINT THAT — LET ME JUST MAKE THE POINT TO YOU THAT THE PRESIDENT — IF YOU LOOK AT THE ENTIRE REPORT, THE PRESDENT HAD THE COMPLETE RIGHT TO FIRE MUELLER. IF HE WANTED TO GET RID OF MUELLER, HE COULD HAVE JUST FIRED HIM. HE DOESN’T NEED TO DO ANYTHING ELSE. HE CAN FIRE HIM LIKE HE FIRED COMEY. HE HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DO THIS. THIS REPORT MAKES CLEAR THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT HE FIRED JAMES COMEY TO TRY TO IMPEDE THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE RUSSIANS AND THE CAMPAIGN, DID NOT DO THAT WHATSOEVER. HE FIRED COMEY BECAUSE HE COULD. HE COULD HAVE FIRED MUELLER, HE COULD HAVE FIRED ROSENSTEIN. HE’S FIRED A LOT OF PEOPLE, INCLUDING THROUGH THE REPORT POLISHING APPLES IF YOU ASK ME. HE HAS A RIGHT TO DO ALL OF THAT. IF HE WANTED TO GET RID OF MUELLER, HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN RID OF MUELLER. >>REPORTER: DOES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR LAN TO GO AFTER THE ILLEGAL LEAKERS IN THE D.O.J. AND THE F.B.I.? >>YOU’D HAVE TO ASK THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THAT. >>REPORTER: DO YOU FAVOR IT? >>BUT WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS AND TRANSPARENCY BUILT ON VERY LITTLE IF ANYTHING. SO I’D SAY THERE IS AMPLE EVIDENCE — I MEAN, LOOK, PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY WERE LEAKING INFORMATION, COMEY SAID THAT HE PUT THINGS OUT THERE HOPING THAT THE — YOU KNOW, LEAKED THE INFORMATION HOPING IT WOULD TRIGGER AN INVESTIGATION, TRIGGER A SPECIAL COUNSEL. CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. ANDREW MCCABE IS A CONFIRMED LEAKER AND LIAR. SO WE KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN LEAKS. AND, AGAIN, IN THE INTEREST OF OUR THRIVING DEMOCRACY BEFORE THE PRESIDENT GETS REELECTED WHICH IS A SURE THING AT LET’S SEE WHO WAS LEAKING. LET’S PUT THEM UNDER OATH. LET’S INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS. WHY NOT. ANYBODY WHO OBJECTS TO THAT IS JUST BEING PARTSON AND HAVING AMNESIA ABOUT HOW MUCH WE ALL LOVE TRANSPARENCY. >>YOU SAID THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS IN A GOOD MOOD. >>HE’S IN A GREAT MOOD. >>WHEN DID HE GET THE NEWS AND WATCH IT ON TV, WHAT HAS HE SAID? >>WELL, I WON’T GO THROUGH ANY DETAILS. HE’S TALKING TO HIS LAWYERS, WATCHING THE PRESS CONFERENCE OBVIOUSLY, AND THEN A NUMBER OF US WERE GOING THROUGH THE REPORT BIT BY BIT. HE’S IN THERE RIGHT NOW, ASKED ME TO COME OUTSIDE, HAVE A LITTLE TALK WITH YOU. BUT HE OF COURSE HAS THE LAST WORD ON ALE OF THIS. HE’S THE ONE WHO WAS DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED FAIRLY AND SQUARELY. THAT WAS KELLEYANNE CONWAY SPEAKING AT THE WHITE HOUSE. AS SHE SAID WE WILL HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT IN ABOUT TWO HOURS AS HE HEADS OUT FOR THE EASTER BREAK. >>WHAT DID SHE SAY CITIZEN BEEN A POLITICAL PROCTOLOGY EXAM. AND WE WILL LEAVE IT THERE. GOING TO TAKE A BREAK, PAY SOME BILL COMES COME BACK. WE’VE GOT THIS COUPLE OF GUESTS. LISTEN. IF YOU WANT TO READ THE ENTIRE REPORT, CBS NEWS.COM. WE ALSO HAVE AN ARTICLE WITH KIND OF A RUNNING LIST OF UPDATES. STICK AROUND. BE BACK IN A MOMENT. >>>HELLO, EVERYONE. I’M TANYA RIVERO. AND I’M DVNLT THANK YOU FOR JOINING US OR STAYING WITH US. WHAT A MORNING IT HAS BEEN. NEARLY A MONTH AFTER BEING ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR’S 4-PAGE SUMMARY OF THE MUELLER REPORT, WE HAVE THE MORE THAN 400-PAGE REDACTED VERSION OF IT RIGHT HERE ON THE DESK. WE’VE GOT IT ONLINE IF YOU WANT TO READ IT YOURSELF. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DELIVERED IT TO THE CONGRESS IN CD FORM. THEY DID THAT AT ABOUT 11:00 A.M. THIS MORNING AND THEN THEY POSTED IT ONLINE. >>THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PREVIEWED THE REPORT FOR A SECOND TIME EARLIER TODAY. HE SAID MR. TRUMP HAD FACED AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION WHEN COMING INTO OFFICE. AND HIS FRUSTRATION ABOUT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION WAS NORMAL. >>AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY, PROPELLED BY HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS, AND FUELLED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. >>THE PRESIDENT WAS STILL CALLING THE PROBE A HOAX ON TWITTER THIS MORNING. BUT AFTER THE REPORTS RELEASED, PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID HE WAS HAVING A GOOD DAY. >>AND THEY’RE HAVING A GOOD DAY. I’M HAVING A GOOD DAY TOO. [ LAUGHTER ] IT WAS CALLED NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ] THERE NEVER WAS, BY THE WAY, AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. >>AND ON THE FINAL PAGE OF THE REPORT, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WRITES, QUOTE, “IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE AFTER A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WE WOULD SO STATE.” HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN JERRY NADLER HAS WRITTEN A LETTER TO MR. MUELLER REQUESTING HE TESTIFY BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON MAY 23rd. CONGRESSMAN NADLER IS EXPECTED TO HOLD A NEWS CONFERENCE AT 2:00 P.M. THE PRESIDENT IS EXPECTED TO HOLD ONE AT 4:00 P.M. >>SIR MIKOL SINGLE TON IS A POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT. DO YOU WANT A FOURTH TITLE? [ LAUGHTER ] SO I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS ARE HEARING FROM YOUR COUNTERPARTS. LET’S START WITH YOU. WHAT ARE YOUR FELLOW REPUBLICANS SAYING? >>I HAVE BEEN TEXTING SOME FRIENDS WHO ACTUALLY WORK IN THE WHITE HOUSE. TEXTING SOME FOLKS WHO WERE CLOSE TO A COUPLE REPUBLICAN SENATORS AND THEY ALL SEE THIS AS A GOOD DAY FOR THE PRESIDENT. THE PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN HAS ALREADY SENT OUT AN EMAIL SAYING EXONERATED AGAIN. SO I THINK FOR REPUBLICANS, THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON THE ECONOMY. THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THINGS LIKE DEREGULATION. THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON JUDGES AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT ANOTHER JUDGE. RUTH BADER GINSBURG WHO MAY RETIRE AT SOME POINT. SO I THINK REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO SPIN THIS IN A WAY TO SAY, SEE, THIS IS DEMOCRATS CONTINUING TO TRY TO ENCROACH ON THE PRESIDENT’S ABILITY TO DO HIS JOB. >>SO REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY SEE THIS AS A COMPLETE EXONERATION? >>FROM TEXTING A LOT OF MY FRIENDS, THEY DON’T THINK THAT THIS WILL HAVE STAYING POWER POLITLY. THEY THINK FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS HERE AND THERE THIS MAY BE AN ISSUE, BUT THEY JUST DON’T SEE RESONANCE WITH THE AVERAGE VOTER AIT’S PERTAINS TO THIS REPORT. >>SO, TODAY, SIR, AS A WEAPON OF MASS CONFUSION IN AMERICAN POLITICS, NUMBER ONE, WHAT WE SEEN THIS MORNING FROM THE PRESS CONFERENCE WAS SIMPLY A POST-GAME PUBLIC RELATIONS SHOW BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS MOST OF THE SUBSTANTIVE THINGS IN THE REPORT I THINK WE COULD NOT SEE THEM, THEY WERE REDACTED. THERE WERE SOME KEY ELEMENTS OF THE REPORT THAT WILL AGAIN PUSH DEMOCRATS TO DIG DEEPER AND CHOMP DOWN EVEN MORE ON DOING THEIR JOB AS THE OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIVE BRANCH. WHAT I CONCLUDE FROM THIS WAS DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR WAS TOO DUMB TO EVEN KNOW THAT HE WAS BREAKING THE LAW THROUGH ALL OF THIS. AND SO WHAT WE KNOW NOW FROM ALL OF THIS AND WHAT WE CAN CONFIRM EVEN THOUGH THE REPUBLICANS WANTED TO DENY THIS FROM THE BEGINNING IS THAT RUSSIA DID HACK INTO OUR ELECTIONS, THEY DID DO IT IN THE NAME OF HELPING DONALD TRUMP BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. I THINK THAT IS NOT DEBATABLE. WHAT WE KNOW GOING FORWARD IS THAT THIS WAS NOT THE END. IN FACT, THIS WAS PROBABLY JUST THE BEGINNING BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO SPEND THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, MAYBE EVEN YEARS TRYING TO CONTINUE TO FLUSH OUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AND WHO HAD INVOLVEMENT BECAUSE THE KEYWORD IN THIS IS THIS DOES NOT FULLY EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT. SO THEY CAN DO VICTORY LAPS AND TOE-TOUCHES AND PULL OUT THEIR MEDALS. BUT THANKFULLY ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES AND DEMOCRATS HAVE THE INVESTIGATIVE LATITUDE TO INVESTIGATE FARTHER. >>BUT WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT DEMOCRATS DO HAVE TO BE A LITTLE CAREFUL WITH HOW FAR THEY GO WITH THIS INVESTIGATION? >>I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT. BUT WHAT I’M ALSO SAYING TO YOU IS THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY OF THEIR JOB TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT. BUT WHAT I WILL AGREE IS THAT THIS WILL NOT MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR EITHER PARTY IN TERMS OF TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO BRING THEM FURTHER UNDER THE TENT. REPUBLICANS CAN GO DEEPER IN THEIR CORNER. DEMOCRATS ARE GOING DEEPER IN THEIR CORNER. INDEPENDENTS ARE GOING TO SAY WE ARE GOING TO FIND SOMETHING TO COME OUT TO THE POLLS BUT THIS WILL NOT BE IT. >>WHAT DOES A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION MEAN OTHER THAN THE OBVIOUS? HERE’S WHY. IF THEY HAD THE VOTES IN THE HOUSE TO IMPEACH HIM, THEY DON’T HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REMOVE HIM. >>THEY DON’T. >>SO WHERE DOES THIS GO? >>THE INVESTIGATION SIMPLY GIVES CONFIRMATION AND COMFORT TO SOME OF THE AMERICAN VOTERS WHO ARE STILL CONFUSED BY ALL THIS AND SAY. >>THOSE WHO ALREADY DON’T TRUST THE PRESIDENT. >>ABSOLUTELY. BUT THOSE WHO ARE ON THE FENCE AND DON’T KNOW WHAT ALL THIS MEANS, LET’S BRING IN THE SPECIAL PROSECUTORS. LET’S LET HIM TESTIFY UNDER OATH AND LET’S TRY TO FLESH OUT FURTHER WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW FROM THIS REPORT. AND THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IN THE REPORT WERE REDACTED. >>WELL, RIGHT. DO YOU THINK SO? >>OH, ABSOLUTELY. >>THERE WERE SOME KEY THINGS. >>SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS. KEY AND IMPORTANT ARE THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IN MY MIND. >>IT DID SHOW THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS ONGOING ESPECIALLY WITH RUSSIA. >>POLITICALLY WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF 2020. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT KEY ELECTORAL STATES, IOWA, OHIO, NEW HAMPSHIRE, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING FOR THREE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES. I AM JUST NOT CERTAIN, AND I AM GOING TO BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT FOCUS STUDY GROUPS INDICATE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS. I AM NOT CERTAIN THAT WITH CONTINUED ETION WE WILL GET NEW INFORMATION THAT COULD POLITICALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE ENOUGH THAT WOULD ALLOW DEMOCRATS TO TARGET THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND MOBILIZE THOSE INDEPENDENT VOTERS, PARTICULARLY INDEPENDENT GOP LEADING VOTERS AND SOME MODERATE REPUBLICAN VOTERS IN A WAY THAT WOULD PULL THEM AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENT AND INTO THE DEMOCRATS’ CAMP THAT COULD BENEFIT 2020. >>THE DISHONESTY, THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND THE FACT THAT YOU CANNOT TRUST THIS ADMINISTRATION AND THIS PRESIDENT. AND EVEN THIS REPUBLICAN CONGRESS TO THE BUSINESS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. >>I WOULD PREFACE THAT BY SAYING WE ALREADY KNOW THAT. >>BUT PEOPLE HAVE GONE NUMB TO THAT. SO SOMETIMES A GOOD POP ON THE ARM IS A REMINDER SERVING IT’S A SAFE SPACE. >>THERE ARE GENUINE CONCERNS AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME WE WERE HEARING EARLIER ABOUT THE BAFFLE POWERS IN THIS COUNTRY. SO WHATEVER YOU [email protected] FROM THIS REPORT AS A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT, I THINK EVERYONE WOULD FREE WE WANT OUR GOVERNMENT TO BE HEALTHY. WE WANT THE BALANCE OF POWER TO REMAIN. >>LET ME BE DEVIL’S ADVOCATE HERE. DEMOCRATS FOR SO LONG SAID JUST GIVE US MUELLER, GIVE US MUELLER. AND AS LONG AS HE DOES WHAT HE CAN DO, WE WILL ACCEPT IS AS IS. >>LET’S BE CLEAR WITH DEMOCRATS, AT LEAST THE ONES I WORK WITH AND I SPEAK TO. GIVE IT TO US IN DOSES AND LET’S DRAW CONCLUSIONS IN DOSES. LET’S LET THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR DO HIS WORK. LET’S LET THE REPORT COME OUT BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT NOW. LET’S FIND THE CONCLUSION. WE HAVE THAT NOW. LET’S BRING HIM IN. SO WE HAVE TO DO THIS THING IN DOSES STEP-BY-STEP, BIT BY BIT. SO NOW WE ARE BRINGING THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN. SO UNDER OATH HE CAN TELL US THINGS THAT PERHAPS WERE NOT IN THE REPORT, TELL US WHERE HE COULD HAVE SPENT OFF AND WENT OFF IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS THAT WOULD HAVE NOT DRAWN THIS OUT BECAUSE THIS WAS, HONESTLY, TAXING ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. LET’S GET BACK TO THE BASICS. LET’S FOCUS ON THE THING THAT’S GOT US TO WHERE WE ARE IN THE MAJORITY. LET’S FOCUS ON QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES. LET’S DO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IN THE CONGRESS IN SPITE OF WHAT THE PRESIDENT JUST SAID. KELLEYANNE THAT DEMOCRATS ARE NOT DOING CERTAIN THINGS. >>BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT OVERREACH. AND THAT’S WHY YOU SAW SPEAKER PELOSI TALK WITH NADLER, TALK WITH SCHIFF AND SAY STOP THE COMMENTS ABOUT IMPEACHMENT. WE DON’T KNOW. LET’S PLAY THIS PROCESS OUT BECAUSE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS ARE TOO GREAT HERE. DONALD TRUMP WOULD PROBABLY EASILY BE RE-ELECTED IF ELECTIONS WERE HELD TODAY. LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS WHO ARE CURRENTLY RUNNING, I AM NOT SURE THEY WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO COALESCE AN EXTREMELY FRACTURED AND DIVIDED PARTY TO BEAT THE PRESIDENT. >>THE GOOD NEWS, MY DEAR FRIEND, MY BROTHER FROM ANOTHER MOTHER, IS THAT YOU DON’T HEAR MANY 2020 DEMOCRATS FOCUS ON THIS. INSTEAD THEY FOCUS ON, AGAIN, EXECUTING AND FURTHER FLESHING OUT THE PLAYS THAT GOT US TO THIS POINT. >>WELL, IT’S NEVER A GOOD POLITICAL PLAY TO LOOK BACKWARD. >>BECAUSE, TRUTHFULLY, REPUBLICANS IN PARTICULAR, THIS PRESIDENT WANTED TO HAVE A PERSONALITY BATTLE AND WE AS DEMOCRATS HAVE TO GET IN T THE HABIT OF HAVING A POLICY BATTLE. YOU KNOW WHY IT DID NOT MATTER BECAUSE SHE AND OTHERS THEN GOT CAUGHT UP IN THE PERSONALITY BATTLE. SO INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT POLICY AND STICKING TO THAT, WE FELL INTO SOME OF US FELL INTO THE WHAT DONALD TRUMP WANTED. >>NO, I AGREE WITH THAT 100%. BUT I DO THINK IT’S GOING TO BE VERY, VERY TELLING TO SEE HOW YOU DEBATE AGAINST SOMEONE LIKE TRUMP. HE DEFIES ALL ODDS. HE IS THE DEFINITION OF A POLITICAL PHENOMENON. WHILE I THINK THE NORM HAS BEEN TO DISCUSS POLICY ISSUES AND DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES YOU CAN’T DO THAT WITH SOMEONE WHO GOES BEYOND THOSE. >>THIS TIME HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO DEFEND HIS RECORD. HE DID NOT HAVE A — BUT YOU ASSUME THAT THAT’S GOING TO BE THE NUMBER ONE ISSUES. >>IT IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE, ECONOMY AND HEALTHCARE. >>HEALTHCARE IS NUMBER ONE, IMMIGRATION NUMBER 2, THEN THE ECONOMY. AT THE END OF THE DAY AND WHILE THE ECONOMY IS DO WELL FOR SOME, IT’S NOT DOING WELL FOR OTHERS. PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET, THEY ARE PUTTING TWO ENDS TOGETHER AND HOPING IT’LL MEET. >>THAT’S NOT A NEW PHENOMENON. >>IT’S NOT. BUT YOU CAN’T ALL GO ON THIS NOTION THAT BECAUSE THE ECONOMY’S DOING WELL FOR THE TOP THAT PEOPLE AT THE BOTTOM ARE JUST SITTING AROUND DOING TOE-TOUCHES AS WELL. >>I DISAGREE WITH THAT. >>I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU REALLY QUICKLY, OBVIOUSLY THE PORTRAYAL IS SOMEONE WHO PLAYS A LITTLE FAST AND LOOSE WITH THE RULES. >>HE PLAYS LIKE THERE ARE NO RULES. >>HOW DOES IT PLAY WITH THE RULE OF LAW REPUBLICANS? >>WELL, LOOK. I MEAN, THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION. I WOULD PREFACE THIS BY SAYING IF THIS WAS DURING OBAMA’S TEN- YEAR REPUBLICANS WOULD NOT STAND FOR THIS. I THINK DURING THE BUSH YEARS YOU SAW A DIFFERENT TYPE OF REPUBLICAN PARTY. I THINK AT THIS POINT IN TIME IT’S OBVIOUSLY CLEAR THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TODAY IS THE PARTY OF DONALD TRUMP. THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THERE. AND I DO THINK THAT IF THE PRESIDENT WINS RE-ELECTION, THEN THAT WILL BE SOLIDIFIED. NOW THAT CONCERNS ME FOR A WHOLE HOST OF REASONS. BUT I SAY THAT TO SAY THAT EVEN THE FEW REPUBLICANS AND I HAVE TALKED TO A LOT OF FRIENDS ON THE RIL, WHO DON’T LIKE THE PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF HIS MORALS OR ETHICS OR BECAUSE HE DOES NOT WALK IN SYNC TO THE BECAUSOMS. THAT WE HAVEN’T SEEN IN 60 YEARS. I MEAN, HIS APPROVAL RATING IS SOMETHING THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED FROM ALL SIDES. >>REPUBLICAN FALL IN LINE, DEMOCRATS FALL IN LOVE. AND THAT’S THE FAILURE OF OUR OWN PARTY. AND THIS TODAY, THIS CIRCUS, THIS PR STUNT TODAY WILL CONSOLIDATE HIS BASE. IT’S GOOD AFTERNOON CONSAL DATE OUR BASE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, AND FONZA MAKE THE SQUIRMY FIGHT EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. THAT’S WHY DEMOCRATS HAVE TO BE LASER-FOCUSED ON FOCUSING ON THE ISSUES THAT MATTER TO EVERYDAY VOTERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO TRADITIONALLY DOESN’T HAVE NECESSARILY A COMMUNITY TO CALL HOME . >>BUT YOU SAID WHY THIS SHOULD MATTER, RIGHT? I AGREE. IT SHOULD MATTER. BUT AGAIN I THINK FOR POLITICIANS AND, ANTJUAN, YOU KNOW THIS, THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE IS SELF-PRESERVATION. CAN I WIN RE-ELECTION. >>STAY ALIVE, STAY ALIVE. >>RIGHT. AND IF I’M ADVISING THE REPUBLICAN OR THE SENATE IN THE HOUSE WHILE I THINK MORALLY AND ETHICALLY THIS IS ALL WRONG, YOU GOT TO GET RE-ELECTED, CANNOT STAND AGAINST A PRESIDENT IF YOU WANT THIS JOB, AND THAT’S WHAT POLITICS ULTIMATELY COMES DOWN TO. AND I AM NOT SAYING THAT THAT’S A JUSTIFIABLE POSITION AT ALL. BUT THAT’S THE REALITY. >>BUT HERE’S THE DIFFERENCE. DEMOCRATS WON IN 2018 IN PLACES WHERE TRUMP WAS SUCCESSFUL. GERRYMANDERING DISTRICTS WHERE SOMETIMES HE WON BY DOUBLE DIGITS. NUMBER TWOSHG S THE SENATE MAP IS A LOT SEXIER FOR DEMOCRATS THIS TIME AROUND THAN IT WAS IN 2018. SO REPUBLICANS HAVE SOME DECISION, ARE THEY GOING TO PLAY ALLEGIANCE TO DOING THE RIGHT THING OR WITH THEY GOING TO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THIS NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY CALLED TRUMP’S PARTY. >>ANTJUAN IS RIGHT. 7 I BELIEVE ABOUT 18 REPUBLICAN SEATS ARE UP FOR RE-ELECTION IN 2020. >>NOT TO MENTION THE GOVERNOR’S RACE. >>HE IS ALSO CORRECT BY HOW WELL DEMOCRATS DID IN 2018. BUT I WOULD SAY THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. TO YOUR POINT THOUGH, I DO THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT LEADERS LIKE MITCH McCONNELL, THEY ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS MAP AND THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE THEM COMFORT IN SAYING THERE ARE SOME SENATE REPUBLICANS WHO MAY HAVE TO COME OUT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT ON CERTAIN ISSUES IN ORDER TO WIN RE-ELECTION BECAUSE HIS MAIN CONCERN IS HOW IDEA I MAINTAIN POWER IN THE SENATE. AND YOU DO OR CAN POTENTIALLY LOSE THAT IN 2020 IF YOU’RE NOT CAREFUL. >>WE CAN BECOME SOCIAL MEDIA STARS AND GET LIKES AND RETWEETS AND ALL THE THINGS, BUT AS QUICK AS WE MAINTAIN THE MAJORITY, WE CAN GO DEEPER IN THE RED OR IN TROUBLE IN THE SENATE AND ALSO LOSE RACES. BECAUSE WHAT MATTERS TO ME THE MOST, STATE LEGISLATIVE SEATS AND GOVERNOR’S RACES FOR THAT ONE IMPORTANT TOPIC, REDISTRICTING. >>ALL RIGHT, GENTLEMAN, WE’VE GOT TO LEAVE IT THERE. >>THANK YOU SO MUCH. COME BACK THOUGH. OUR COLLEAGUE ARROW BARNET IS IN D.C.. >>Reporter: ONE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE NOT YET DISCUSSED FULLY THAT HAS COME OUT OF THIS 40- PAGE MUELLER REPORT IS THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT HAS IN THE PAST LIED TO THE PRESS. I WANT TO SHOW YOU THIS EXCHANGE FROM THE DAY AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP FIRED JAMES COMEY IF YOU REMEMBER IT WAS A DRAMATIC EVENT WHEN JAMES COMEY FOUND OUT WHILE HE WAS AT THE ACADEMY OVER ON THE WEST COAST AND THERE WERE SO MANY QUESTIONS AS TO WHY THIS TOOK PLACE. TAKE A LOOK FIRST AT THIS EXCHANGE BY OUR CBS RADIO’S STEVE WITH THE PRESS SECRETARY. LISTEN TO THE EXCHANGE. >>SUCH CONFIDENCE THAT LOST FAITH IN THE FBI — HE WAS A SPECIAL AGENT WHO WAS INSIDE WHO WROTE US WHO SAID “THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE BURER IS IN FAVOR OF DIRECTOR COMEY. THIS IS A TOTAL SHOCK, THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. THE REAL LOSERS HERE ARE 20,000 FRONTLINE PEOPLE IN THE ORGANIZAION BECAUSE THEY LOST THE ONLY GUY WORKING HERE IN THE PAST 15 YEARS WHO ACTUALLY CARED ABOUT THEM.” SO WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE TO THESE RANKIN FILE FBI AGENT WHO’S DISAGREE WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT THEY LOST FAITH IN DIRECTLY COMEY? >>WE HAVE HEARD FROM COUNTLESS MEMBERS OF THE NGI THAT SAY VERY DIFFERENT THINGS — FBI. THE PRESIDENT WILL BE MEETING WITH ACTING DIRECTOR MCCABE LATER TODAY TO DISCUSS THAT VERY THING, THE MORALE AT THE FBI AS WELL AS MAKE AN OFFER TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE FBI IF HE FEELS THAT THAT’S NECESSARY. >>SO, RIGHT THERE, GUYS, YOU KNOW, THAT EXCHANGE IS DISCUSSED ON — THAT EXCHANGE IS DISCUSSED IN THIS REPORT. AND I WANT TO READ TO YOU WHAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL SAYS ABOUT IT. >>THEY SAID “SANDERS TOLD THIS OFFICE THAT HER. SHE ALSO RECALLED THAT HER STATEMENT IN A SEPARATE PRESS INTERVIEW THAT RANKIN FILE FBI AGENTS HAD LOST CONFIDENCE IN COMEY WAS A COMMENT SHE MADE IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT AND WAS NOT FOUNDED ON ANYTHING.” SO IF THAT WASN’T BAD ENOUGH, ANY ASSERTION FROM THE PRESIDENT’S PRESS SECRETARY, THE WHITE HOUSE’S FACE TO THE WORLD SAYING THAT SHE SAID SOMETHING THAT WASN’T TRUE IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT. OUR OWN STEVE NOTES THAT ON MARCH MAY 11th SHE WAS ASKED THE SAME THING ABOUT SUPPORT FOR COMEY AT THE FBI. THE FOLLOWING DAY SHE SAID I’VE HEARD FROM COUNTLESS MEMBERS AT THE FBI. THEY ARE GRATEFUL AND THANKFUL FOR THE PRESIDENT’S DECISION. SO WHILE WE TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT’S IN THIS REPORT AND WHAT’S TRUE AND WHAT’S NOT TRUE, ONE OF THE CASUALTIES COMING OUT OF THIS IS THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE INSTANCES WHERE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN ASKED QUESTIONS BY THE PRESS. WE ARE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE MISLEAD US IN THEIR ANSWERS. THERE IS ANOTHER PART OF THE REPORT WHICH DISCUSSES HOPE HICKS SPEAKING ABOUT THE PRESIDENT ABOUT THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING. HOPE HICKS SAYING THAT SHE THOUGHT THE EMAILS DISCUSSING THIS MEETING FROM DON JUNIOR WERE DAMAGING. SHE DIDN’T WANT THAT RELEASED TO THE PRESS. THE PRESIDENT SAID HE WANTED TO ISSUE A STATEMENT THAT WAS CLOSER TO ADOPTIONS. REMEMBER THAT WAS THE FIRST STATEMENT TO THE PRESS THAT THE WHITE HOUSE SENT OUT. BUT EACH OF THESE EFFORTS, THE DOCUMENT NOTES EACH OF THESE EFFORTS WERE DIRECTED AT THE PRESS. SO WHEN WE GO DOWN TO WHY THEY WEREN’T ABLE TO CROSS THE THRESHOLD OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, THEY SAY HERE CLEARLY THEY WOULD AMOUNT TO OBSTRUCTIVE ACTS ONLY IF THE PRESIDENT BY TAKING THESE ACTIONS SOUGHT TO WITHHOLD INFORMATION FROM OR MISLEAD CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATORS OR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. BUT THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE PRESIDENT TOOK THOSE STEPS. SO WHILE WE LOOK THROUGH ALL OF THIS, ONE OF THE KIND OF THE CASUALTIES OF KNOWING WHAT’S HAPPENED THESE PAST TWO YEARS IS THAT ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, THE WHITE HOUSE HAS MISLEAD THE PRESS, NOT INVESTIGATORS, NOT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, BUT I THINK THAT WILL DETERIORATE THE LEVEL OF TRUST PEOPLE HAVE IN WHAT THIS WHITE HOUSE SAYS OR SPECIFICALLY WHAT THE CURRENT PRESS SECRETARY SAYS. >>THAT GETS BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER IS THAT IT IS NOT A CRIME TO LIE TO THE PRESS OR THE PUBLIC BUT IT IS A CRIME TO LIE TO INVESTIGATORS. >>AND IT’S AMAZING HOW MANY TIMES THEY MENTION IN THIS REPORT PRESS REPORTS AS REALLY DRIVING THINGS AND CONSTANTLY THROUGH THE READING I AM DOING THEY ARE QUOTING ALL THESE PRESS ARTICLES THAT ARE COMING OUT. YOU HIGHLIGHTED SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT FOR THAT. THANK YOU. >>THERE IS ONE OTHER NOTE I WANT TO MAKE. WELL, WHAT’S THE POINT OF THIS, RIGHT? YOU’VE GOT PEOPLE ALL OVER THE COUNTRY WHO ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH THEIR OWN BREAD AND BUTTER ISSUES. RIGHT NOW THERE IS THIS MASSIVE DEBATE ABOUT HOW TO DEAL WITH IMMIGRATION AND WHAT TYPE OF POLICIES THERE SHOULD BE AT THE BORDER. ONE OF THE MAJOR DETAILS OUT OF THIS REPORT IS THAT THE PRESIDENT’S OWN STAFF HAVE BEEN HIS SAFEGUARD IN NOT CARRYING OUT ACTS THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL. JUST THIS PAST WEEK WHAT DID WE SEE? THE PRESIDENT DISMISSING HIS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BECAUSE OF REPORTS THAT SHE WOULD NOT END THE ASYLUM PROGRAM, REFUSE TO TAKE MIGRANTS WHO WERE COMING TO THE BORDER. THERE IS THIS IDEA NOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WOULD DETAIN MIGRANTS TO SANCTUARY CITIES, ALL OF WHICH PEOPLE QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY AND HE DISMISSED HIS DHS SECRETARY FOR SOME REASON. AND I AM SAYING THERE ARE REPORTS THAT IT WAS BECAUSE SHE DIDN’T WANT TO BREAK THE LAW. YOU ALSO HAD REPORTS LAST WEEK THE WHITE HOUSE DENIES THESE REPORTS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP OFFERED A PARDON TO HIS NOW ACTING DHS SECRETARY KEVIN MAC LEANAN IF HE BROKE THE LAW IN ENDING ALL ASYLUMS. AS WE SEE, WOW, SO MANY CLOSE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP HAVE PROTECTED HIM FROM DAMAGING HIMSELF, IT CONTINUES TO BE OR AT LEAST IT SEEMS TO BE A CONTINUAL CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS ADMINISTRATION WHICH HAS AN IMPACT ON POLICE SKY, PEOPLE’S DAILY LIVES. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IN TALKING ABOUT ALL THE HURDLES THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SORT OF HAD AND BY HURDLES I MEAN HIS OWN STAFF WHO WERE SAYING, NOPE, CAN’T DO THAT, NOPE, WON’T TOO THAT. I WANT TO READ — WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO ON THIS PROGRAM IS NOT JUST GIVE YOU SNIPPETS. WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE YOU CHUNKS OF SUBSTANTIVE INFORMATION. THERE IS A PART DEEP INTO THE REPORT THAT IS HEADLINED “EFFORTS TO CURTAIL THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION.” TWO DAYS AFTER DIRECTING DON McTO HAVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REMOVED, THE PRESIDENT MADE ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO EFFECT THE COURSE OF THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION. THE PRESIDENT MET ONE-ON-ONE IN THE OVAL OFFICE WITH HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER, A TRUSTED ADVISOR OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT AND HE DICTATED A MESSAGE FOR HIM TO DELIVER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SEGS. THE MESSAGE THAT SESSIONS SHOULD PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE THAT NOTWITHSTANDING HIS RECUSE WRAL FROM THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION, THE INVESTIGATION WAS VERY UNFAIR TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE PRESIDENT HAD DEAN NOTHING WRONG. SESSIONS PLANNED TO MEET WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND, QUOTE, LET HIM MOVE FORWARD WITH INVESTIGATING ELECTION MEDDLING AND FOREIGN ELECTIONS, CLOSED QUOTE. HE SAID HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE PRESIDENT WANTED HIM TO DO IN. A PRIVATE MEETING A MONTH LATER, THE PRESIDENT ASKED TO LIMIT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION TO FURTHER ELECTION INTERFERENCE. TOLD THE PRESIDENT THE MESSAGE WOULD BE DELIVERED SOON. HOURS AFTER THAT MEETING THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY CRITICIZED SESSIONS AND THEN ISSUED A SERIES OF TWEETS MAKING IT CLEAR THAT SESSIONS ‘JOB WAS IN JEOPARDY. LEWINDOWSKI DID NOT WANT TO DELIVER THE PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE PERSONALLY SO HE ASKED THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL DEERBORN. DEERBORN WAS NOT COMFORTA BILLION AND DID NOT FOLLOW THROUGH. ALL OF THESE PIECES WHERE THE BUCK KEPT GETTING PASSED. >>RIGHT. LIKE YOU DO IT. OH, OKAY, MR. PRESIDENT. IT WAS LIKE A RELAY RACE. >>BUT AGAIN TO ARREL’S POINT, THE PRESIDENT HAS GOTTEN RID OF A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAID NO TO HIM. SO IT’S INTERESTING TO SEE AS A RESULT OF THIS MUELLER INVESTIGATION THAT HAS RESULTED IN NO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE PRESIDENT, HE MAY BE EMBOLDENED IN SOME OF THESE ACTIONS. >>WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WATCH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S PRESS CONFERENCE THIS MORNING, IT WAS SO DEFINITIVE AND PUNCTUATED WITH JUST ABSOLUTES. AND HE ALMOST SOUNDED SO IMPASSIONED THAT HE WAS LIKE A WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON. THEN AS YOU START TO DELVE INTO THE REPORT, IT’S LIKE WAIT A MINUTE, HE ASKED TO DO WHAT? HE TOLD THEM TO SAY WHAT? AND I THINK ANY NORMAL PERSON REGARDLESS OF WHAT SIDE YOU’RE ON, YOU KNOW, I KEEP BRINGING UP MY FOLKS IN LOUISIANA. >>THAT’S GOOD THAT YOU DO. >>WHO ARE STAUNCHLY CONSERVATIVE AND MANY OF THEM ARE SUPPORTERS OF THE PRESIDENT. I THINK EVEN IF THEY WERE TO READ THIS, THEY PROBABLY WOULD’VE SAID HE PROBABLY SHOULDN’T HAVE DONE THIS. BUT IT’S NOT GOING TO AMOUNT TO ANY CHARGES. >>BUT IT DOES GO BACK TO KIM WHALY’S POINT THAT EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD READ THROUGH THIS REPORT AND MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATIONS FOR THIS BEHAVIOR BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF GRAY AS SHE POINTED OUT. IT’S NOT BLACK AND WHITE. >>CBSNEWS.COM, WE HAVE THE ENTIRE REPORT IF YOU HAVE THE TIME. >>>S THE BOTTOM OF THE HOUR HERE IN NEW YORK. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK AND PAY SOME BILLS. THIS ISN’T EVEN ALL OF IT. >>COME ON BACK. >>>THERE IS A UNIQUE POWER AND TRUTH, AND WHETHER THE STORY IS AROUND THE GLOBE OR DOWN THE STREET, WE WANT TO PUT THE POWER OF TRUTH IN YOUR HANDS. >>I’M JEFF. >>I’M JEFF GLOR. THE CBS EVENING NEWS WITH JEFF GLOR, ORIGINAL REPORTING. >>>THE BIGGEST NAMES IN POLITICS. >>WHAT SURPRISED YOU ABOUT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ROBERT MUELLER ASKED YOU? DO YOU THINK THAT THE INTEGRITIY OF THIS INVESTIGATION IS IN PERIL? FACE THE QUESTIONS YOU WANT ANSWERED. >>THERE’S A GREAT QUESTION. YOU’VE ASKED THE MAGIC QUESTION. >>THE PRESIDENT THIS MORNING TWEETED SOMETHING THAT I’D LIKE YOU TO CLARIFY. >>”FACE THE NATION,” SUNDAYS. >>>GO TO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH. THIS IS EXCITING. YOU’VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND REACH FOR THE STARS. >>[ LAUGHTER ] >>HEY, THIS IS PRETTY FUN. LOOK THROUGH A TELESCOPE OF GOLD. WOW. >>EXPERIENCE THOUGHT-PROVOKING INNOVATIVE AND TRULY ORIGINAL REPORTING. BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN ON “CBS SUNDAY MORNING.” >>>THERE IS A UNIQUE POWER IN TRUTH. WHAT’S YOUR MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE WHO COULD DO SOMETHING? AND WHETHER THE STORIES AROUND THE GLOBE, ACROSS THE NATION OR DOWN THE STREET, WE’LL FIND IT. IT AMAZES ME THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE YOUR HOUSE DESTROYED AND YOU WENT BACK TO WORK. >>I WOULD MUCH RATHER BE OUT THERE HELPING. >>BECAUSE EVERY EVENING WE WANT TO PUT THE POWER OF TRUTH IN YOUR HANDS. >>GOOD EVENING, I’M JEFF GLOR. AND WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN THE BROADCAST. >>CBS EVENING NEWS WITH JEFF GLOR REPORTING. >>>I FEEL AN INCREDIBLE POSITION TO BE IN THE MODERATOR POSITION BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ALWAYS GETTING THE KIND OF TRUSTED, CALM, CONTEXTUALIZED. WHERE OFTEN WE CAN’T HAVE CONVERSATIONS. WE HAVE ONE ON THIS SHOW EACH WEEK. WE WILL TELL YOU ON “FACE THE NATION” WHAT’S IMPORTANT. WE WILL TELL YOU WHY. AND WE WILL HAVE THE DECISION MAKERS WHO ARE CHANGING THE COUNTRY YOU ARE LIVING IN. >>>THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE HOMES OVERTAKEN BY MUD. >>GET OUT OF HERE, GO! >>THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT FIRE CREWS WERE AFRAID OF. >>THIS IS WHAT MANY PEOPLE ARE COMING BACK TO. >>THIS, THIS, THIS IS WHERE WE WILL RIDE OUT THE STORM. >>THIS IS ONE OF THE FLASH POINTS RIGHT NOW. >>THIS IS A DANGEROUS AREA. >>THIS IS WHAT FIRST RESPONDERS ARE HAVING TO GET AROUND. >>THIS IS THE MOST ACTIVE ERUPTION. >>THIS, THIS, THIS IS THE CBS EVENING NEWS. . >>>WHAT’S NEW UNDER THE SUN? >>GOOD MORNING, I’M JANE PAULEY AND THIS IS SUNDAY MORNING. WHAT DOES IT SAY ON THAT GRAVESTONE? >>HERE LIES THE OLDEST MAN THAT EVER LIVED. >>APPARENTLY WOMEN JUST DON’T LIKE ME VERY MUCH. [ LAUGHTER ] EXPERIENCE THOUGHT-PROVOKING, INNOVATIVE AND TRULY ORIGINAL REPORTING. BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. >>PLEASE JOIN US WHEN OUR TRUMPET SOUNDS AGAIN. >>ON “CBS SUNDAY MORNING”. >>>THERE IS A UNIQUE POWER IN TRUTH, AND WHETHER THE STORY IS AROUND THE GLOBE OR DOWN THE STREET, WE WILL FIND IT. IT AMAZES ME THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE YOUR HOUSE DESTROYED AND YOU WENT RIGHT BACK TO WORK. >>BECAUSE EVERY EVENING WE WANT TO PUT THE POWER OF TRUTH IN YOUR HANDS. THE CBS EVEN NEWS WITH JEFF GLOR. >>THIS IS A SENSELESS MURDER. THIS IS NOT A MINOR POINT. THIS IS ALL THE VICTIM’S BLOOD. >>THIS IS REALLY A WHO DUN IT. >>THIS IS HATE. THIS IS REAL. THIS IS CRAZY. THIS IS $800,000. THIS IS THE MOMENT OF TRUTH. THIS IS. >>THIS IS. >>THIS IS THE DARK WEB. THIS IS TERRIFYING. AND YOU COULD HIRE A HIT MAN. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I TRIED TO STOP. . >>>WE MET WITH HIM DEPUTY TOMORROW MORNING ATTORNEY GENERAL ROSENSTEIN AND I MET WITH HIM ALONG WITH ED O’CALLAHAN WHO IS THE PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATE DEPUTY ON MARCH 15th WE SPECIFICALLY ASKED HIM ABOUT THE OLC OPINION AND WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS TAKING THE POSITION THAT HE WOULD HAVE FOUND A CRIME BUT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE OLC OPINION. AND HE MADE IT VERY CLEAR SEVERAL TIMES THAT THAT WAS NOT HIS POSITION. HE WAS NOT SAYING THAT BUT FOR THE OLC OPINION HE WOULD HAVE FOUND A CRIME. HE MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE HAD NOT MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT THERE WAS A CRIME. >>THAT WAS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR SPEAKING EARLIER TODAY. JOINING US NOW IS CBSN LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR KEI DUGGAL. AND MOLLY HOOPER IS CBSN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR. MOLLY, WE ARE WAITING ON JERRY NADLER TO SPEAK AT ANY MOMENT NOW. YOU WERE SAYING EARLIER TODAY HE WAS HOPING TO INVITE MR. MUELLER TO TESTIFY. NOW HE’S ALONG TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA. >>WELL, HE IS GOING TO INVITE MUELLER TO TESTIFY. BUT NADLER ALSO SAID I AM GOING TO SUBPOENA, SUBPOENA A FULL UN- REDACTED COPY OF THE MUELLER REPORT. REMEMBER SHORTLY BEFORE CONGRESS LEFT FOR RECESS FOR THEIR TWO-WEEK BREAK, THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AUTHORIZED NADLER TO GO AHEAD AND ISSUE A SUBPOENA OF THE FULL UN- REDACTED VERSION OF THE MUELLER REPORT. NADLER WAS SITUATING UNTIL WE SAW THE REDACTED VERSION AND YOU SAID, OKAY, I WILL WAIT. BUT AFTER SEEING THE 400 PAGES RELEASED TODAY, NADLER SAID I’M ISSUING THIS SUBPOENA. >>WELL, AND REMEMBER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID HE ALREADY PLANS TO SUSPENDED UN- REDACTED REPORT TO CERTAIN KEY CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY CAN’T SHARE IT. >>ONE THING HE DID NOTE WAS HE PREFACED IT WITH THERE ARE REPORTS THAT ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR IS GOING TO BRIEF A FEW OF US, BUT HE HASN’T TOLD ME THAT. SO I PLAN ON ISSUING THIS SUBPOENA SOON, LIKE, I WILL DO THAT. >>AND EVEN THAT PERSON WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE GRAND JURY INFORMATION REDACTED. >>WELL, IT’S UNCLEAR BECAUSE YOU CAN SORT OF PICK AND CHOOSE BY THE COLORS. >>INTERESTING. SO LET’S GET INTO THE QUESTION OF WE DO KNOW THAT MUELLER’S TEAM SAYS THEY WERE DISSATISFIED WITH THEIR INABILITY TO INTERVIEW THE PRESIDENT IN PERSON. THEY DID GET WRITTEN ANSWERS FROM MR. TRUMP. CAN WE TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THOSE ANSWERS HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH AND READ THEM? >>IF YOU HAVE THE REPORT AT HOME C-SECTION. >>AND I RARELY PUT ON MY GLASS, BUT THIS WAS SOMETHING I JUST COULDN’T RESIST. WHAT YOU HAVE IS OVER. I DO NOT IS AN ANSWER TO 30 OF MUELLER’S WRITTEN QUESTIONS ANSWERED UNDER OATH. THEN HE REFUSES TO SIT FOR AN INTERVIEW. AND EVEN WHEN YOU READ THE SUBSTANTIVE ANSWERS THEY REALLY DON’T TELL US VERY MUCH. SO THE CONCLUSION OF THAT IN THE REPORT IS THAT ROBERT MUELLER SAYS THAT AT THIS POINT OUR INVESTIGATION HAD MADE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS, HAD PRODUCED SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR OUR REPORT. WE THUS WEIGHED THE COSTS OF POTENTIALLY LENGTHY LITIGATION AGAINST THE ANTICIPATED BENEFITS FROM OUR INVESTIGATION AND REPORT. WELL, THAT’S A CHOICE. THAT CERTAINLY WAS IN THE HANDS OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. IT’S A CHOICE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY A PROSECUTOR. BUT NEVERTHELESS, IT MAY NOT BE A PARTICULARLY SATISFACTORY CHOICE FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. IT MAY CERTAINL BE A SATISFACTORY CHOICE FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, FOR THE REPUBLICANS. BUT YOU CAN BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO ZERO IN ON BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HOPED, I THINK EVERY AMERICAN HOPED IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING DEFINITIVE AT THE END OF THE MUELLER REPORT. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE MUELLER REPORT CONCLUES THERE WAS NO COLLUSION. THAT IS: NO CONSPIRACY, NO AGREEMENT WITH THE 2016 LEKS AND I THINK THAT’S SATISFYING TO AMERICANS BECAUSE YOU’D LIKE TO THINK THAT YOUR PRESIDENT AND WHEN HE WAS A CANDIDATE AND HIS CAMPAIGN WERE NEVER DOING SUCH A THING. YOU WOULD REALLY LIKE TO THINK THAT YOUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT CORRUPT. BUT WE CAN’T SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT THAT CORRUPTION AND HE DIDN’T ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT CORRUPTIONS. >>BUT HERE’S THE QUESTION FOR YOU. LEGALLY WHEN BEING INTERVIEWED BY PROSECUTORS, IS AN ANSWER THAT BEINGS WITH “AT THIS POINT IN TIME I DO NOT REMEMBER” OR “I HAVE NO INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION,” OR “I DO NOT RECALL BEING AWARE.” IS THAT THE SAME AS, NO, I DID NOT OR, NO, I DID NOT. >>I LOOKED FOR A NO AND I CAN’T FIND IT. >>>>AND THE REASON IS NOT THE SAME BAY THE WAY. I SAID CORRUPTION WHEN I MEANT OBSTRUCTION. THAT WE DON’T HAVE DEFINITIVE ANSWERS ON OBSTRUCTION. ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE TELL WITNESSES AND IT’S QUITE ETHICAL AND QUITE PROPER TO TELL A WITNESS THAT UNLESS YOU ARE REALLY SURE, IT IS BEST TO SAY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION I DON’T RECALL TO THE BEST OF MY MEMORY I DON’T RECALL BECAUSE IF IT’S SOME OTHER POINT IN TIME, SOMETHING JOGS YOUR MEMORY. ANYTHING COULD JOG YOUR MEMORY. A PIECE OF PAPER, A DOCUMENT, A TELEPHONE, A CUP OF COFFEE. IT DOESN’T REALLY MATTER WHAT JOGS YOUR MEMORY. BUT IF IN ANOTHER POINT IN YOU WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THAT ANSWER THEN YOU ARE NOT STUCK WITH PERJURY. YOU ARE STUCK WITH THE FACT OF NOTHING. YOU’VE SAID THIS WAS THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION ON APRIL 17, 2019. BUT ON APRIL 21st, I CAME TO SUNDAY AND I SAID, OH, I REALLY DO REMEMBER SOMETHING ELSE. SO THAT’S REALLY WHY PEOPLE DO THAT. >>KEIR, WHILE YOU WERE UP IN THE GREEN ROOM, I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT SOME THINGS INVOLVING OBSTRUCTION AND SOME THINGS HAVE JUMPED OUT TO YOU. >>AND THEY PLAY DIRECTLY INTO WHAT NIKKI AND MOLLY JUST SAID, WHICH IS THE SORT OF UNSATISFYING FEELING THAT WE HAVE AND THE EFFORT NOW THAT MAY LEAD TO A SUBPOENA BY THE HOUSE. SO THE REPORT DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN SORT OF TWO PHASES OF THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION. THE FIRST BEFORE MR. COMEY IS FIRED WHEN ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT PERSONALLY UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR OBSTRUCTION. AFTER COMEY IS FIRED, THE PRESIDENT WARNS THAT HE IS UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR OBSTRUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION SHOULD BE I THINK CHILLING FOR AMERICANS AS TO WHAT IS DESCRIBED. THE PRESIDENT LAUNCHED PUBLIC ATTACKS ON THE INVESTIGATION. I AM READING NOW FROM PAGE 158. “LAUNCHED PUBLIC ATTACKS ON THE INVESTIGATION AND INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN IT WHO COULD POSSESS EVIDENCE ADVERSE TO THE PRESIDENT. WHILE IN PRIVATE THE PRESIDENT ENGAGED IN A SERIES OF TARGETED EFFORTS TO CONTROL THE INVESTIGATION. FOR INSTANCE, THE PRESIDENT ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, HE SOUGHT TO HAVE MR. SESSIONS UNRECUSE HIMSELF AND LIMIT THE INVESTIGATION, SOUGHT TO PREVENT PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ABOUT INFORMATION RELATING TO THE TRUMP TOWER JUNE 9TH MEETING.” AND ON AND ON. NOW FLIP THE SCRIPT NOW. AND IMAGINE THAT A FUTURE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT OR PRESIDENT OBAMA OR PRESIDENT CLINTON HAD ENGAGED IN THAT CONDUCT. IF YOU WOULD BE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT, THEN AS AMERICANS I THINK WE NEED TO FOLLOW UP AND SO I WOULD UNDERSTAND WHY MR. NADLER WOULD BE INTERESTED IN ISSUING A SUBPOENA FOR THE FULL REPORT AND SPEAKING TO MR. MUELLER. THESE ARE JUST VERY DIFFICULT QUESTIONS. A FUTURE PRESIDENT MIGHT READ THIS AS A ROAD MAP OF, OH, I CAN DO THIS, PRESIDENT TRUMP DID THIS, AND I CAN DO THIS TOO. SO IT’S VERY CONCERNING FOR THE RULE OF LAW THAT WE CONTINUE TO FOLLOW UP ON THESE QUESTIONS. >>IT JUST REMINDED ME THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE CAUSES FOR THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS ON PRESIDENT CLINTON AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY. PRESIDENT CLINTON HAD SAID, AND IT BECAME A RUNNING JOKE FOR YEARS TO COME. THE QUESTION OF THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT IS “IS.” AND THAT REALLY BECAME THE ESSENCE OF THE COMPLAINT THAT WENT TO THE HOUSE THAT BECAME THE IMPEACHMENT BASIS WITH OTHER CHARGES OF COURSE THAT THEN WENT ON TO THE SENATE WHERE HE WAS NOT TRIED AND CONVICTED. SO HE REMAINED AS PRESIDENT. BUT THAT, I MEAN, IT’S KIND OF A JOKE, BUT THE REALITY IS IF YOU LOOK AT THE TRUMP RESPONSES AND YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED DURING THESE TWO YEARS, BOTH, I GUESS THREE YEARS IF YOU LOOK AT THE CAMPAIGN COMMENTS ON THE ROAD AND YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED ONCE THE PRESIDENT WAS IN OFFICE FROM HIS OWN MOUTH. THAT THEN WE HAVE TO SAY, WELL, WHY WASN’T IT OKAY IF PRESIDENT CLINTON SAYS IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IS “IS” AND WHY IS THIS OKAY. I SAY THAT NEITHER ARE OKAY. >>THIS IS IMPORTANT. SO THIS IS IN THE APPENDIX C. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL SAYS THAT IT RECOGNIZED THE PRESIDENT WOULD NOT BE INTERVIEWED VOLUNTARILY AND CONSIDERED ISSUING A SUBPOENA FOR HIS TESTIMONY BECAUSE IT VIEWED WRITTEN RESPONSES AS INADEQUATE. BUT IT CONSIDERED THE LENGTHY LITIGATION THAT WOULD ENSUE AND FURTHER DELAY THE REPORT. AND THE OFFICE FELT THAT IT COULD DRAW RELEVANT CONCLUSIONS ON THE PRESIDENT’S INTENT AND CREDIBILITY FROM OTHER SOURCES WITHOUT INTERVIEWING TRUMP. THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS LARGELY AMOUNT TO NO COLLECTION. >>CORRECT. >>NO RECOLLECTION. >>I’M SORRY. >>BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED WAS JUST AS ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR SAID THIS MORNING TO WHICH MANY OF US FOUND OBJECTIONABLE ABOUT THE FRUSTRATION THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS UNDER AS A RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION. WELL, HOW DOES ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR OR ROBERT MUELLER KNOW WHAT IS IN PRESIDENT TRUMP’S MIND? WELL, OBVIOUSLY AS WE LOOK AT THE REPORT, ROBERT MUELLER AND THEREFORE WILLIAM BARR DECIDED WHAT WAS IN PRESIDENT TRUMP’S MIND WAS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE SAID WAS IN PRESIDENT TRUMP’S MIND. >>LET’S LISTEN. >>IN ASSESSING THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT, IT IS IMPORTANT TO BEAR IN MIND THE CONTEXT. PRESIDENT TRUMP FACED AN UNPRESS TENTED SITUATION. AS HE ENTERED INTO OFFICE AND SOUGHT TO PERFORM HIS RESPONSIBILITIES AS PRESIDENT, FEDERAL AGENTS AND PROSECUTORS WERE SCRUTINIZING HIS CONDUCT BEFORE AND AFTER TAKING OFFICE AND THE CONDUCT OF SOME OF HIS ASSOCIATES. AT THE SAME TIME THERE WAS RELENTLESS SPECULATION IN THE NEWS MEDIA ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL CULPABILITY. YET AS HE SAID FROM THE BEGINNING THERE WAS IN FACT NO COLLUSION. THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY, PROPELLED BY HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND FUELLED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. NONETHELESS, THE WHITE HOUSE FULLY COOPERATED WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION PROVIDING UNFETTERED ACCESS TO CAMPAIGN AND WHITE HOUSE DOCUMENTS, DIRECTING SENIOR AIDES TO TESTIFY FREELY, AND ASSERTING NO PRIVILEGE CLAIMS. AND AT THE SAME TIME THE PRESIDENT TOOK NO ACT THAT IN FACT DEPRIVED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OF THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES NECESSARY TO COMPLETE HIS INVESTIGATION. APART FROM WHETHER THE ACTS WERE OBSTRUCTIVE, THIS EVIDENCE OF NON-CORRUPT MOTIVES WEIGHS HEAVILY AGAINST ANY ALLEGATION THAT THE PRESIDENT HAD A CORRUPT INTENT TO OBSTRUCT THE INVESTIGATION. >>SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF A PREFACE LIKE THAT BEFORE RELEASING THE ENTIRE REPORT? IT MAKES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SOUND A LITTLE BIT LIKE A CHEER LEADER FOR THE PRESIDENT. >>HE CERTAINLY SOUNDS PARTISAN. I WILL SAY THIS. AS TO THE LAST TWO THOUGHTS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHEN HE’S TALKING ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S LEVEL OF COOPERATION, I TOO APPLAUD THE PRESIDENT FOR HIS LEVEL OF COOPERATION AND OFFERING THE COOPERATION OF HIS PEOPLE AND NOT CLAIMING EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE ON ANYTHING IN THE MUELLER REPORT SO THAT THOSE THINGS WOULD HAVE TO BE LITIGATED AND PERHAPS TAKEN OUT OF THE MUELLER REPORT. I THINK THAT’S ALL VERY GOOD. AND ONE MAY SAY, WELL, BECAUSE OF THAT AMOUNT OF COOPERATION THAT HE HAD NO CORRUPT INTENT ON DEALING WITH THE INVESTIGATION. WHEN YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND WE HEAR THINGS LIKE THE ORDERS THAT HE GAVE TO SOMEONE LIKE DON McGAHN WHO HAD TO PACK UP HIS BAGS RATHER THAN CARRY THEM OUT, THEN WE HAVE A SECOND THOUGHT BECAUSE THAT IS A CORRUPT INTENT. HE WAS LUCKY HE WAS THWARTED BY MR. McGAHN. >>LET’S PAUSE JUST FOR A MOMENT. JERRY NADLER IS NOW AT THE PODIUM. WE WILL LISTEN IN. >>GOOD AFTERNOON. FIRST TO OBSERVE, ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR APPEARS TO HAVE SHOWN AN UNSETTLING WILLINGNESS TO UNDERMINE HIS OWN DEPARTMENT IN ORDER TO PROTECT PRESIDENT TRUMP. BARR’S WORDS AND ACTIONS SUGGEST HE HAS BEEN DISINJENNUOUS AND MISLEADING IN SAYING THE PRESIDENT IS CLEAR OF WRONGDOING. ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR’S LETTER SUMMARIZING THE REPORT FROM MARCH 24th QUOTED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT, QUOTE “WHILE THIS REPORT DOES NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME, IT ALSO DOES NOT EXONERATE HIM. HE IGNORED WHAT IS IN THE MUELLER REPORT JUST TWO SENTENCES BEFORE WHERE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONCLUDED THAT, QUOTE, “IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE AFTER A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WE WOULD STATE SO BASED ON THE FACTS AND THE APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS, HOWEVER, WE ARE UNABLE TO REACH THAT JUDGMENT.” OBVIOUSLY, THIS CHANGES THE EMPHASIS AND MEANING OF THE PARAGRAPH, AND OBVIOUSLY HE DIDN’T INCLUDE THE KEY SENTENCES. SECOND SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WENT ON TO SAY THAT, QUOTE, A THOROUGH FBI INVESTIGATION WOULD UNCOVER FACTS ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN AND THE PRESIDENT PERSONALLY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD TO BE CRIMES OR THAT WOULD HAVE RISEN TO PERSONAL AND POLITICAL CONCERNS, CLOSED QUOTE. FOR SOME REASON ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR EXCLUDED THIS CRITICAL FINDING AS WELL FROM HIS VERSION OF EVENTS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S DECISION TO WITHHOLD THE FULL REPORT FROM CONGRESS IS REGRETTABLE BUT NO LONGER SURPRISING. BARR HAS SO FAR REFUSED TO WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE TO PROVIDE US WITH INFORMATION, THE KIND OF INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN CUSTOMARILY PROVIDED IN THE PAST AND TO WHICH THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS ENTITLED. THESE CONCERNS AND MANY OTHERS WILL BE ADDRESSED WHEN BARR TESTIFIES BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON MAY 2nd. EVEN IN ITS INCOMPLETE FORM, HOWEVER, THE MUELLER REPORT INCOMPLETE BECAUSE PART OF IT IS REDACTED. EVEN IN ITS INCOMPLETE FORM, HOWEVER, THE MUELLER REPORT OUTLINES DISTURBING EVIDENCE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP ENGAGED IN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND OTHER MISCONDUCT. CONTRARY TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S STATEMENT THIS MORNING THAT THE WHITE HOUSE, QUOTE, FULLY COOPERATED, END QUOTE, WITH THE INVESTIGATION, THE REPORT MAKES CLEAR THAT THE PRESIDENT REFUSED TO BE INTERVIEWED BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND REFUSED TO PROVIDE WRITTEN ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS. PAGE 13 OF VOLUME II MAKES CLEAR THAT HIS ASSOCIATES DESTROYED EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO THE RUSSIAN INVESTIGATION. PAGE 10, VOLUME I. THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP ATTEMPTED TO PREVENT AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS INVESTIGATION AND HIS OWN CONDUCT. PAGE 157 VOLUME II. THAT IS WHY 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. FINALLY, IT IS CLEAR THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE CONDUCTED AN INCREDIBLY THOROUGH INVESTIGATION IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE FOR FUTURE INVESTIGATORS. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL MADE CLEAR THAT HE DID NOT EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT AND THE RESPONSIBILITY NOW FALLS TO CONGRESS TO HOLD THE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS ACTIONS. CONGRESS MUST GET THE FULL, UNDERACKETED REPORT ALONG WITH THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE UNCOVERED BY SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER. CONGRESS REQUIRES THIS MATERIAL IN ORDER TO PERFORM OUR CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED RESPONSIBILITIES. THANK YOU. THAT IS A STATEMENT. I WILL ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS. YES. >>WHEN YOU SAY THAT IT’S — [ INAUDIBLE ] TO HOLD THE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTABLE, DOES THAT MEAN IMPEACHMENT? >>THAT IS ONE POSSIBILITY. THERE ARE OTHERS. WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO GET TO THE BOTTOM. IT’S TOO EARLY TO REACH THOSE CONCLUSIONS. IT’S ONE REASON WE WANTED THE MUELLER REPORT. WE STILL WANT THE MUELLER REPORT IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WE WANT OTHER EVIDENCE TOO. >>CONGRESSMAN, WILL CONGRESS PROCEED WITH THEIR OWN OBSTRUCTION INQUIRIES? >>WE WILL PROCEED WITH OUR INQUIRIES. I MEAN, THE FIRST THING WE WILL DO IS MAKE SURE WE GET THE REST OF THE REPORT AND THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE. WE WILL HAVE ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR TESTIFY IN FRONT OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MAY 2nd. I ANTICIPATE THAT MR. MUELLER WILL TESTIFY SOMETIME IN THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS AFTER THAT. AND WE WILL PROBABLY HOLD A SERIES OF HEARINGS ON OTHER ASPECTS AND WE WILL SEE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE. >>IF YOU CHOOSE TO GO TOWARD IMPEACHMENT, HOW IMPORTANT WOULD THIS REPORT BE? DOES IT PROVIDE A ROAD MAP? >>WELL, IT’S TOO EARLY TO TALK ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW, 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 THIS INFORMATION. BUT CERTAINLY I THINK FROM THE STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT, ALTHOUGH I AM A LITTLE TENTATIVE BECAUSE I AM ONLY SKIMMED IT. WE HAVEN’T HAD IT VERY LONG. I THINK IT WAS PROBABLY WRITTEN WITH THE INTENT OF PROVIDING CONGRESS A ROAD MAP AS OTHER REPORTS HAVE IN THE PAST AND, BUT WITH A LOT OF THE REDACTIONS AND OTHERS, ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR SEEMS TO BE TRYING TO FRUSTRATE THAT INTENT. >>WE’LL TAKE ONE MORE QUESTION. >>YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO HEAR MUELLER TO BETTER UNDERSTAND HIS FINDINGS. BASED ON WHAT YOU’VE SEEN FROM THE REPORT, WHAT SPECIFICALLY DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM MUELLER ABOUT THAT YOU ALREADY DON’T HAVE — >>OH, THERE ARE DOZENS OF THINGS WE WANT TO HEAR. >>JUST GIVE ME A FEW. >>WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, BARR SAYS — I DON’T REMEMBER WHERE HE SAID IT, HE TOLD US THAT THE SPECIAL PROSECUTORS’ DETERMINATION THAT THE PRESIDENT, THAT HE WASN’T GOING TO INDICT THE PRESIDENT ON OBSTRUCTION CHARGES, HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DOCTRINE OR OPINION THAT A SITTING PRESIDENT IS UNINDICTABLE AS A MATTER OF LAW. THERE IS A LOT OF MATERIAL IN THE REPORT THAT SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT THAT DOCTRINE WAS CONSIDERABLY IMPORTANT. WE’D WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. >>NANCY? YOU HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO JERRY NADLER I BELIEVE OUR CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL RESPONDENT. NANCY CORD YES IS ON THE HILL. WHAT’S YOUR REACTION? >>Reporter: REACTION IS THAT DEMOCRATS, AND THIS ONE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT DEMOCRAT HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF THE MUELLER REPORT’S FINDINGS THAN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DID THIS MORNING. CHAIRMAN NADLER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAYS THAT WHEN HE GOES THROUGH THIS REPORT PERHAPS NOT SPRIEGZLY HE FINDS LOTS OF EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT TRIED TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE. HE SAYS THAT THIS IS ALL THE MORE REASON WHY CONGRESS NEEDS ACCESS TO THE FULL MUELLER REPORT AND UNDERLYING EVIDENCE. YOU HEARD HIM USE THAT PHRASE A COUPLE TIMES. HE NEEDS THE FULL MUELLER REPORT AND THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE. HERE IS WHY THAT PHRASE IS SO KEY. ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID THIS MORNING THAT CERTAIN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND NADLER WILL CERTAINLY BE ONE OF THEM, WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THE FULL UN- REDACTED MUELLER REPORT. SO YOU WON’T SEE ALL THOSE BLACKED OUT PAGES IF YOU’RE A LAWMAKER WHO FALLS INTO THAT CATEGORY. HOWEVER, HE ONE PIECE OF INFORMATION THEY WON’T GET IS GRAND JURY EVIDENCE. GRAND JURY EVIDENCE WAS USED TO HELP THE MUELLER TEAM COME UP WITH A LOT OF ITS FINDINGS. BUT UNDER THE LAW THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS HE DOESN’T NEED TO HAND THAT OVER TO CONGRESS. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CHAIRMAN NADLER IS VERY EAGER TO GET HIS HANDS ON BECAUSE HIS COMMITTEE AND FIVE OTHER HOUSE COMMITTEES, KEEP IN MIND THE HOUSE CHANGED HANDS BACK IN JANUARY. SO ALL THOSE DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED COMMITTEE ARE DOING THEIR OWN INVESTIGATIONS INTO ABUSE OF POWER SO THEY WOULD REALLY LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT GRAND JURY EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT MIGHT HELP THEM IN THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT THEY ARE CONDUCTING. >>RICKI, WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO KEEP SECRET THAT GRAND JURY TESTIMONY? >>GRAND JURY TESTIMONY IS SECRET UNDER RULE 60 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. AND IT IS BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT WE LIKE TO PROTECT WITNESS WHO’S TESTIFY BEFORE THE GRAND JURY, THAT THEY SHOULD BE FREE TO TELL THE TRUTH, THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE HELD UP TO SCORN OR RIDICULE OR PRESSURE OR INTIMIDATION AS LONG AS THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE HAVE BEEN ENACTED, THIS HAS BEEN A SACROSANCTPRINCIPLE. NOW, YOU CAN GO TO COURT TO GET 6E. THAT’S WHAT WE CALL IT, GRAND JURY MATERIAL, WHICH IS, BY ITS NATURE, SECRET. BUT YOU HAVE TO SHOW A PARTICULARIZED NEED IN ORDER FOR THAT SOMEONE WHO HAD STANDING, I’M NOT SURE IF THE CONGRESS DOES HAVE STANDING TO GO FORWARD TO GET THIS GRAND JURY MATERIAL. BUT THEY COULD TRY. SO THEY GO TO THE FEDERAL COURT AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. THEY ASK FOR IT. THEY HAVE TO SHOW MARYLANDED NEED. NOT A FISHING EXPEDITION. THEY NEED THE TESTIMONY OF WITNESS X, Y AND Z BECAUSE THEY HAVE A BELIEF BASED ON 1, 2, 3 THAT IT MAY SHOW OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THAT WOULD BE A PARTICULARIZED NEED. LET’S SAY THEY LOSE. THEN IT GOES UP TO THE COURT OF APPEALS. THEN IT GOES UP TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A LENGTHY, LENGTHY PERIOD. >>ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRUCK ME WHEN I WAS LISTENING TO ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR’S COMMENTARY IS THAT HE ALMOST SEEMS, HE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE WEAKEST PART OF THE PRESIDENT’S EXONERATION, HE WAS NOT EXONERATED IS ON THE ISSUE OF OBSTRUCTION; CORRECT? SO HE ALMOST SEEMED TO BE SETTING IT UP LOOK, THE PRESIDENT DIDN’T HAVE TO COOPERATE AT ALL. THE PRESIDENT COULD HAVE FIRED EVERYONE INVOLVED IF HE WANTED TO. HE WAS REMINDING EVERYONE ALMOST THAT THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT COOPERATED EVEN A LITTLE BIT SHOULD GET HIM OFF THE HOOK ALMOST. >>WELL YES, THAT IS WHAT HE SAID, IN ESSENCE. CERTAINLY MY BROAD BASED STATEMENT BEFORE WE WENT TO JERRY NADLER, WHICH WAS THE FACT THAT I COMMENDED THE PRESIDENT AND ALL OF HIS PEOPLE FOR COOPERATING. WELL, MR. NADLER JUST TOOK IT RIGHT AWAY FROM ME BECAUSE HE SHOWED AT VARIOUS PAGES IN THE REPORT OF INSTANCES WHERE THERE WAS NO COOPERATION AND OF COURSE WE DO HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THE PRESIDENT DID NOT GO VOLUNTARILY EVER TO TALK TO THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. THAT THE PRESIDENT ANSWERED QUESTIONS NOT TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. THAT THERE ARE OTHER WITNESSES INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP JR. WHO DID NOT GO VOLUNTARILY. THEY DID NOT WANT TO EXERCISE THE SUBPOENA PROCESS. PERHAPS IT WAS NOT AS BROAD BASED AS I SAID. >>WAS THAT A WEAK ARGUMENT ON THE PART OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO SAY THE PRESIDENT HAS IN HIS POWER THE RIGHT TO FIRE EVERYONE INVOLVED HERE AND HE DIDN’T? >>I THOUGHT IT WAS A CAREFULLY CRAFTED MESSAGE ABOUT COOPERATION. HE SAID THE PRESIDENT COOPERATED TO GIVE WHAT WAS NECESSARY; RIGHT? SO WHAT’S NECESSARY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. WE CLEARLY SEE IN THE REPORT THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONSIDERED AT LENGTH AND TRIED AT LENGTH TO GET THE INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT ULTIMATELY CHOSE FOR DISCRETIONARY REASONS JUST MENTIONED AND OTHER FACTORS NOT TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA AND START ANOTHER VERY LARGE CONSTITUTIONAL FIGHT WITH THE PRESIDENT. >>WHICH IS ONE REASON WHY NADLER SAID PRIOR TO COMING OUT HERE THAT HE WILL ISSUE A SUBPOENA FOR THE FULL REPORT OF THIS UNDERLYING MATERIAL BECAUSE KEEP IN MIND, WHY DOES CONGRESS HAVE THESE INVESTIGATIONS? WHY. THEY’RE COMING UP WITH SOME LEGISLATION TO CORRECT A WRONG. SOMETHING THAT’S WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM. TO PREVENT ABUSE OF POWER AND WHAT NOT. THEY NEED TO LEGISLATE TO DO THAT. SO NADLER PREFACES IT BECAUSE CONGRESS REQUIRES THIS MATERIAL IN ORDER TO PERFORM OUR CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED RESPONSIBILITIES, WHICH IS WHY HE NEEDS TO ISSUE THIS SUBPOENA. BILL BARR CAN SAY I’M NOT GOING TO COMPLY AND CONGRESS CAN HOLD HIM IN CONTEMPT. THAT’S WHEN YOU START ANOTHER COURT BATTLE GOING. >>NANCY, THE FIRST QUESTION OF JERRY NADLER WAS THE IDEA OF IMPEACHMENT. HASN’T NANCY PELOSI BEEN THE MOST DIRECT SAYING IMPEACHABILITY IS NOT SOMETHING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT. >>ABSOLUTELY. THERE IS A STRATEGIC REASON FOR THAT. THERE’S A POLITICAL REASON FOR THAT. NADLER HIMSELF SAID TO US MULTIPLE TIMES SLOW DOWN IT’S WAY TOO EARLY TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE IMPEACHMENT. FIRST OF ALL, IT’S SOMETHING THAT YOU DO AT THE END OF AN INVESTIGATION. WHEN YOUR INVESTIGATION HAS YIELDED A FINDING THAT THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT WRONG DOING. WHAT THEY’RE SAYING IS JUST PROCEDURALLY WHY WOULD YOU PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. POLITICALLY YOU DON’T WANT TO LOOK LIKE YOU’RE JUMPING THE GUN AND THAT YOU ARE OBSESSED WITH GETTING RID OF THIS PRESIDENT, RATHER THAN PUTTING FORTH GOOD POLICIES THAT WILL HELP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. DEMOCRATS JUST TOOK CONTROL OF THE HOUSE. WHAT THEY WANT TO SHOW IS THAT HEY ALL OF YOU OUT THERE WHO AREN’T READING THE MUELLER REPORT FROM FRONT TO BACK TODAY AND CARE ABOUT HEALTHCARE AND THE ECONOMY AND JOBS, THAT’S WHAT DEMOCRATS ARE FOCUSED ON, NOT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ALONE. SO THAT’S WHY THEY REALLY TRIED TO TAMP DOWN IMPEACHMENT TALK. AND MOST DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSE WITH A FEW NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS AGREE WITH THEM. SURE, DOWN THE ROAD THEY DO BELIEVE THAT AND IN PRIVATE MOMENTS THEY WILL SAY THAT. BUT THEY ALSO KNOW THAT IT’S KIND OF A NONSTARTER POLITICALLY, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DECIDED AGAINST ANY OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE CHARGES BECAUSE YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME REPUBLICANS ON YOUR SIDE IN THE SENATE AND RIGHT NOW THAT JUST ISN’T THE CASE. >>ONE THING THAT I FOUND REALLY INTERESTING IN THAT NADLER PRESSER WAS THAT HE SAID IMPEACHMENT AMONG OTHER OPTIONS WE HAVE. ONE OTHER OPTION COULD BE CENSURE. ONLY ONE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN CENSURED. >>WHO WAS IT? >>ANDREW JACKSON. OLD ANDREW. ANDREW JACKSON. ANDY J. HE WAS CENSURED. THE SENATE, THEY CENSURED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS WITHHOLDING DOCUMENTS RELATED TO U.S. BANKS. >>WHAT SUDS CENSURE LOOK LIKE? JUST A SLAP ON THE WRIST? >>IT LOOKS LIKE THAT. EXACTLY. BUT IT’S SOMETHING, YOU KNOW. >>IT GOES BACK TO ERROL’S POINT WHICH IS TO SAY THE PRESIDENT WAS CLEARLY TRYING TO DISMISS CERTAIN PEOPLE DURING THIS TIME AND GET PEOPLE TO DO THINGS AND THE FACT THAT THEY DEFIED HIM SORT OF SAVED HIM ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. BUT NOW THESE PEOPLE ARE MOSTLY GONE AND IF HE DOES WANT TO SORT OFDISMISS OTHER, HE HAS. HE JUST DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. >>LET’S LOOK AT HOMELAND SECURITY. NOW WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH IS BECAUSE WE JUST DON’T KNOW. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT HE DISMISSED KIRSTJEN NIELSEN WAS BECAUSE SHE WOULD NOT FOLLOW HIS ORDERS. IT MAY HAVE BEEN SIMPLY SHE COULD NOT GET THE BORDER UNDER CONTROL. AND THEN THE PERSON WHO TOOK OVER FOR HER IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT HE WOULD NOT FOLLOW ORDERS. AND THEN THERE WAS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE RUMOR WAS THAT THEN HE COULD BE PARDONED IF HE JUST FOLLOWED THE ORDERS. WE DON’T KNOW IF THAT’S THE TRUTH OR IT’S NOT THE TRUTH. I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE A POSITION ON THAT. BUT THE REALITY IS THAT WHAT WE DO KNOW ABOUT PEOPLE IS THAT PAST BEHAVIOR DICTATES FUTURE BEHAVIOR. PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS LUCKY ACCORDING TO THE 400 PAGES OF THE MUELLER REPORT THAT CERTAIN THINGS HE WANTED TO DO WHICH WOULD HAVE CREATED FULL BLOWN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE DID NOT OCCUR BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE WOULDN’T DO THEM. SO IT’S ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAVE PEOPLE AROUND US WHO TELL US NO. IT’S ONE OF THE REASONS JOHN KELLY WAS SUPPOSEDLY THERE. >>THROUGHOUT THE REPORT IF YOU HAVE IT AT HOME, IF IT YOU PRINTED IT AND ARE READING IT YOU’LL KNOW THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF MANY MONTHS TOLD THE PRESIDENT NO OR KICKED THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. PAGE 95 READS THIS. DON McGAHN TOLD REINCE PREIBUS NOT TO FOLLOW THE ORDER TO FIRE SESSIONS AND SHOULD CONSULT THEIR COUNSEL. THEY DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY THEY WOULD RESIGN RATHER THAN CARRY OUT THE ORDER. LATER THE PRESIDENT FOLLOWED UP WITH PREIBUS. HE DID NOT INTEND TO CARRY OUT THE PRESIDENT’S DIRECTIVES BUT TOLD HIM HE’D GET SESSIONS TO RESIGN. SESSIONS PREPARED A RESIGNATION LETTER AND FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR CARRIED IT AROUND IN HIS POCKET EVERY TIME HE WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE. >>IS THAT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT? >>IN TERMS OF OBSTRUCTION IT’S DIFFERENT BINGO. THERE YOU GO. >>OH, YOU DO THAT. NO. IT’S A BIG CIRCLE. >>IT GOES BACK TO THAT POINT WHEN THE PRESIDENT WAS ELECTED YOU HAD ALL THESE REPUBLICANS ON CAPITOL HILL GOING WHO THE HECK IS THIS GUY. HE’S GREAT ON TWITTER BUT HOW IS HE GOING TO RUN THE COUNTRY. THE ONE POINT THEY TOOK SOLACE IN WAS THE INDIVIDUALS CHOSEN TO SURROUND THE PRESIDENT. JOHN McGAHN, JIM MATTIS, JOHN KELLY. ONE OF HIS BIG THINGS WAS YEAH, I BELIEVE THAT THE PRESIDENT WILL DO A GOOD JOB. HE’S GOT JIM MATTIS. IT’S UNCLEAR HOW THEY’RE GOING TO REACT GIVEN A NEW CROP OF FOLKS. ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS ABOUT DHS MASSACRE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT WAS REPUBLICAN SENATORS SAYING BUT WE HAD SUCH A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH KIRSTJEN NIELSEN. WE WERE KIND OF ON THE SAME PAGE. DONALD TRUMP LISTENING TO THOSE PEOPLE. >>I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY ONE INSTANCE WHERE WE DIDN’T SEE THE CAN GET KICKED DOWN THE ROAD WHERE I THINK IT’S A LITTLE INSTANCE OF HEROISM IS MR. MR. McGAHN REFUSING THE ORDER TO FIRE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL AND SAYING HE WOULD RESIGN. THAT’S AN INSTANCE OF COURAGE AND PATRIOTISM THAT I THINK OUGHT TO BE COMMENDED IN THE REPORT. BUT I WANTED TO TIE BACK TO THE EARLIER DISCUSSION ABOUT STANDING AND THE HOUSE’S POTENTIAL. , GOING TO TAKE A SECOND TO DESCRIBE THIS. ONE THING THAT WOULD GIVE THE HOUSE A BETTER STANDING IS IF THEY INITIATED AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. THAT WOULD GIVE THEM BETTER LEVERAGE TO GET THE GRAND JURY MATERIAL. >>POLITICALLY THEY DON’T WANT TO DO THAT. >>BUT LAUNCHING THE PROCEEDINGS DOESN’T MEAN YOU TAKE IT TO THE FULL EXTENT; RIGHT? YOU’RE JUST. >>SO MANY. >>BUT THINK ABOUT A COUPLE OF MOVES OUT THE BOARD HERE. SO REPUBLICANS KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS DON’T WANT TO DO IT. ONE WAY TO POTENTIALLY FORCE THEM TO DO IT IS TO WITHHOLD THE GRAND JURY MATERIAL IN THIS REPORT THAT’S GOING TO GO TO THE HILL. IN THE CONFIDENTIAL SETTING. THERE IS ANOTHER EXCEPTION TO GRAND JURY SECRECY WHICH ALLOWS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO UNREDACT GRAND JURY MATERIAL WHERE NATIONAL SECURITY IS AT STAKE. AND SO YOU HAVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYING I’M GOING TO HAND OVER THIS LESS REDACTED REPORT TO THE KEY MEMBERS OF THE HILL BUT I’M STILL GOING TO HOLD ON TO THE GRAND JURY MATERIAL. AND I WONDER WHETHER OR NOT SORT OF MOVES OUT OF THE GAME ARE LET’S SEE IF IT WE CAN LURE OR FORCE OR GET THE DEMOCRATS TO BLOW THEMSELVES UP BY LAUNCHING THIS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. >>THAT’S VERY INTERESTING. IT REALLY IS. AS GAMESMANSHIP. IT’S VERY CLEVER. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO REMEMBER IN THOSE 400 PAGES IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK THROUGH THAT PILE THERE’S NOT A LOT THAT’S REDACTED. >>YOU’RE RIGHT. WE EXPECTED MORE. >>I MEAN IT’S ALMOST SHOCKING HOW LITTLE IS REDACTED. NOW THAT DOESN’T MEAN OF COURSE THAT EVERYTHING WAS PUT IN THERE. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THERE’S WAREHOUSES I ASSUME OF DOCUMENTS IF IT EVERYTHING WERE PRINTED OUT. >>WOULD WE EVER SEE THAT? THAT WHICH MUELLER DIDN’T INCLUDE? >>WILL WE EVER SEE IT? I DOUBT THAT. >>SORT OF THE GUTS OF IT ALL. >>I DOUBT WE WILL EVER SEE IT. AND THEN IF IT REALLY IS WAREHOUSES OF IT WHO’S GOING TO GO THROUGH IT. >>THAT’S THAT UN, THE UNDERLYING DOCUMENT; RIGHT? >>WHICH CAUSES THE COLLUSION. >>THAT’S WHAT CONGRESS WANTS. THEY WANT THE GUTS. >>WELL THEN GOOD FOR THEM. GO TO THE WAREHOUSES. GO THROUGH THE BOXES. I CAN THINK OF CASES IN THE FEDERAL COURT AS A DEFENSE LAWYER IN THE DAYS OF MY PRACTICE THAT WOULD HAVE THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF DOCUMENTS. THE IDEA WAS OF COURSE WHEN THE ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY WOULD SEND IT TO DEFENSE COUNSEL THEY WOULD REALLY THINK THERE’S NO WAY THAT THEY ARE EVER GOING TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS SO THEY WOULD UNLOAD EVERYTHING. >>IT WAS A TACTIC. >>OF COURSE. >>MENTION CD. YOU KNOW THOSE COMPACT DISC THINGS. THAT’S WHAT THEY DELIVERED THE REPORT. >>I WONDER IF THAT WAS A TACTIC. TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THIS ONE WORKING. >>WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT THE GRAND JURY REDACTIONS ARE REALLY NOTHING CONSEQUENTIAL. >>WE DON’T KNOW WHAT WE DON’T KNOW. THIS IS THE THING THAT’S SO DIFFICULT ABOUT THIS. >>IT’S POSSIBLE THAT WHICH WAS REDACTED IS SORT OF BENIGN. >>WE DO KNOW THEY REDACTED INFORMATION ABOUT ON GOING INVESTIGATIONS. THERE WAS QUITE A LOT ABOUT THAT. >>WE MAY FIND OUT SOME OF THAT. WE MAY FIND IT OUT IN THE ROGER STONE TRIAL SHOULD IT GO TO TRIAL, WHICH IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WILL BECAUSE I CAN’T IMAGINE ROGER STONE PLEADING GUILTY TO ANYTHING. SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT WILL DRIP OUT IN OTHER CASES. >>THERE ARE REFERRAL CASES AT THE END THAT ARE MOSTLY REDACTS. >>YES. YOU ALSO HAVE THE INDICTMENT OF THE RUSSIANS. THE RUSSIANS, IT’S BEEN INTERESTING IN TERMS OF THE LITIGATION THAT’S GONE ON. THE RUSSIANS WHO HAVE BEEN INDICTED ARE NOT SUSCEPTIBLE TO PROCESS. THEY’RE OVER IN IT RUSSIA. SO WE CAN’T GET AHOLD OF THEM. SO THEY HIRE LAWYERS AND THE LAWYERS TRY TO GET THE DISCOVERY IN THAT CASE, WHICH IF THE DEFENDANTS WERE IN THE UNITED STATES THEY WOULD BE ENTITLED TO. THAT WOUND UP GOING INTO THE COURTHOUSE AND BASICALLY WHAT THE COURTS HAVE BEEN SAYING IS THAT WELL IF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO COME FACE THE MUSIC WE’RE NOT GIVING YOUR LAWYERS THIS MATERIAL THAT YOU’RE GOING TO TAKE BACK TO RUSSIA AND SEE WHAT WE HAVE ON YOU. >>HOW MANY CONVICTIONS HAS THERE — WE TALK ABOUT THERE’S NO CRIME, NO CRIME. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER. >>THERE’S LOTS OF CRIME. LOTS OF INDICTMENTS. >>CLOSE TO TEN PEOPLE. >>OVER 30 RUSSIAN NATIONALS I THINK. >>PAUL MANAFORT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN CONVICTED FOR WHAT HE DID IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, HE WAS CONVICTED REALLY ON THE BASIS OF HIS ACTIVITIES WITH THE PRO- RUSSIA FACTION IN UKRAINE. BUT THERE IS THAT LITTLE BIT WHEN WE DEAL WITH INTIMIDATION OF A WITNESS THAT PAUL MANAFORT AND HIS RUSSIAN FRIEND WERE THEN ALSO INDICTED FOR INTIMIDATION OF A WITNESS AND LATER WE FIND OUT THAT THAT’S ONE OF THE PRIMARY THINGS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN, COULD HAVE BEEN A QUESTION OF COLLUSION OF SOMEONE ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ABOUT SHARING POLLING DATA WITH A RUSSIAN.>>>I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WIKILEAKS. JULIAN ASSANGE, COULD HE FACE FURTHER CHARGES? >>ONE EXPECTS, HE’S BEEN INDICTED FOR CONSPIRACY TO HACK INTO A GOVERNMENT COMPUTER FOR CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. JULIAN ASSANGE DID NOT DO THE HACKING, ALLEGEDLY HE CONSPIRED AND EXPLAINED WHERE TO GO AND WHAT TO DO AND THEN HE RECEIVED IT AND DISSEMINATED IT. VERY SMART ON THE BASIS IT DID NOT INVOLVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND FREE PRESS AND SHOULD NOT EVEN THOUGH IT HAS, SHOULD NOT WIND UP WITH THE MEDIA AND PEOPLE WHO ARE ADVOCATES OF A FREE PRESS BEING IN FAVOR OF JULIAN ASSANGE AS A QUOTE UNQUOTE JOURNALIST. >>THAT WAS RELATED TO THE CHELSEA MANNING. THAT’S NOT RELATED TO THIS AT ALL. >>TOTALLY NOT RELATED. I THINK MOST LEGAL SCHOLARS, AS WELL AS LEGAL COMMENTATORS WOULD BELIEVE THAT IN JULIAN ASSANGE IS EXTRADITED IN THE UNITED STATES THAT THERE WILL BE A SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT AND OTHER CHARGES. >>ROGER STONE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MENTIONED HIM THIS MORNING. IF YOU’RE STONE RIGHT NOW, ARE THINGS LOOKING BETTER FOR YOU BASED ON THIS? >>BEFORE WE GO TO ROGER STONE CAN I JUST ADD ON TO THE JULIAN ASSANGE ISSUE. >>YEAH. >>MR. MUELLER’S, HE WAS SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT AMERICAN INTERFERENCE POTENTIALLY INVOLVEMENT WITH THE ELECTION. ASSANGE DOES NOT FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY. HE’S AN AUSTRALIAN. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DON’T KNOW, AND MUELLER MAY KNOW BUT HASN’T TOLD US OR DIDN’T INVESTIGATE BECAUSE IT WASN’T WITHIN HIS BRIEF WAS THE LEVEL OF COOPERATION BETWEEN ASSANGE, IF ANY, AND THE RUSSIANS IN OBTAINING THE HILLARY CLINTON E- MAILS. SO THERE VERY WELL MAY BE ADDITIONAL COMPUTER HACKING CHARGES THAT ARE SEPARATE FROM THE MANNING CHARGES THAT RELATE TO THIS THAT COULD COME OUT AS WE’VE SAID IF THERE’S A SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT. >>VERY INTERESTING. >>SO ON ROGER STONE YOUR QUESTION WAS? >>I JUST WONDER TODAY IF THINGS ARE LOOKING A LITTLE BETTER FOR HIM BASED ON THE FACT THAT EVERYTHING CAME OUT AND THEY SAID BUT WE STILL DON’T HAVE ENOUGH TO PROVE OBSTRUCTION. >>HE’S CHARGED WITH LYING TO CONGRESS. MAYBE THEY’RE SLIGHTLY BETTER FOR HIM BECAUSE I ASSUME SOMEWHERE THE ATTENTION WILL LIFT OFF OF HIM. SORTS OFTHE PRESS COMPANIES WILL DIMINISH SLIGHTLY. >>BUT MORE THAN THAT I’M TALKING LYING ASIDE. IS THERE ANY SORT OF CONSPIRACY MAYBE SUSPICION THERE THAT IS NOW SORT OF WATERED DOWN BY ALL OF THIS? >>I THINK ROGER STONE IS JUST A MARVELOUS FIGURE OF INTEREST. THAT HE’S REALLY COLORFUL AND SO EVEN IF ROGER STONE WOULD LIKE THINGS TO DIE DOWN, HE CAN’T REALLY HELP HIMSELF. HE REALLY LIKES TO GET OUT THERE. THE LYING TO CONGRESS IS PRETTY STRAIGHT UP. YOU EITHER DID OR YOU DIDN’T. ROGER STONE IS GOING TO TAKE THIS ALL THE WAY TO THE END IF HE CAN AND MAKE THEM COMPLETELY CRAZY BECAUSE HE HAD COMPUTERS WITH HARD DRIVES THAT HAVE I DON’T KNOW, I DON’T EVEN RECALL IF THERE ARE TENS OF THOUSANDS OR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOCUMENTS ON THEM. ALL OF THAT IS A LOT OF WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO SIMPLY LOOK AT WHILE THEY’RE PROVING A SIMPLE LIE. I DON’T THINK THE GOVERNMENT HAS ANY DESIRE TO PUT ROGER STONE IN PRISON FOR 10, 20, 30 YEARS. >>>OF ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT ACCEPTED REFUGEES, PER CAPITA SWEDEN RECENTLY TOOK IN THE MOST. >>WE DON’T KNOW HOW MANY WE’RE TAKING IN. >>WE’VE GOT IMMIGRANT PROBLEM IN EVERY CITY. >>THE ISSUE OF MIGRATION AND THE RISE OF THE RIGHT IS MIRRORED IN THE U.S. >>WE NEED A STRONG WELFARE STATE SO THEY CAN FEEL INCLUDED. >>THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT RIGHT CONTINUES TO RISE. >>ALL CULTURES ARE NOT EQUAL. >>>THESE CARAVANS BALLOON, CREATING MASSIVE OVERCROWDING AT CROSSING POINTS. IN FEBRUARY OF 2019, CROSSINGS INTO THE U.S. REACHED AN 11 YEAR HIGH. >>THEY DON’T SPEAK THE LANGUAGE. THEY DON’T KNOW THE LAWS. IT’S DIFFICULT. >>I HAVE ABOUT 150 PENDING CASES.. >>IF AMERICA BUILDS A WALL WILL THAT CHANGE HOW MUCH THE CARTEL CHARGES TO CROSS ILLEGALLY? >>>WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF A SERIOUS AND FINANCIAL CRISIS. >>HOUSING SHORTAGES NOW AFFLICT CITIES ACROSS THE NATION AS CORPORATE DEVELOPERS EVICT TENANTS AND DRIVE UP RENTS. >>WE’RE IN NEED OF 550,000 UNITS OF HOUSING BUT INSTEAD WE’RE BUILDING LUXURY HOUSING. >>IT’S LIKE I’M SHOWING YOU MY BEDROOM AND IT SUCKS. >>DID YOU EVER THINK YOU COULD BE LIVING OUT OF YOUR VEHICLE? >>NO. >>SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE I FAILED AS A MOTHER. >>>THIS IS THE SCENE IN TIJUANA TODAY. EARLIER HUNDREDS. >>YOU USED TO LIVE IN THE U.S. >>YES. >>BY ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES YOU WERE AN AMERICAN. >>YEAH.>>I GOT SHOT WITH A .38. >>YOU AFRAID OF JACOB GETTING SHOT? >>YEAH. >>AS A PARENT I’LL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET MY SON TO THE NEXT STEP. >>>AS WE’VE BEEN ANALYZING THE 400 PAGE MUELLER REPORT WE HAVE IT STACKED UP HERE ON THE DESK IT’S REVEALING NEW DETAILS ABOUT RUSSIA’S ATTEMPTS TO INFLUENCE THE 2016 ELECTION. ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH WIKILEAKS AND EFFORTS TO HACK PROMINENT DEMOCRATS INCLUDING HILLARY CLINTON. WE NOW ALSO HAVE CNET SENIOR PRODUCER DAN PATTERSON TO JOINS. YOU KNOW DAN YOU MADE THE POINT EARLIER. DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT’S IN THIS REPORT WHEN IT COMES TO HACKING. IT’S INCREDIBLE THE EXTENT THE RUSSIANS WENT TO TO NOT ONLY HACK SOCIAL MEDIA BUT THROW FAKE RALLIES. THEY HAD THEIR HAND IN ALMOST EVERY CORNER OF THE CAMPAIGNS. BOTH CAMPAIGNS. >>THAT’S RIGHT. NO MATTER WHERE YOU STAND ON THE PARTISAN SIDE OF THE POLITICAL AISLE WHAT’S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT HERE TO RECOGNIZE IS THAT NOT JUST AMERICAN ELECTIONS BUT INSTITUTIONS WITHIN AMERICA THAT UPHOLD OUR DEMOCRACY WERE ATTACKED BY A FOREIGN ACTOR AT A PRICE THAT WAS RELATIVE TO THE SCALE OF OUR ADVERSARIES AND OUR ALLIES. FAIRLY INEXPENSIVE. THIS IS ONE EUPHEMISM WE USE. COORDINATED, INAUTHENTIC ACTIVITY. WHAT THAT EUPHEMISM ENTAILS IS A FEW THINGS. COMPUTER HACKING. THE RUSSIANS, INCLUDING APT 28. ADVANCE PERSISTENT THREAT USED MALWARE CALLED X TUNNEL AND A FEW OTHER COMPONENTS TO LOG THE KEY STROKES AS WELL AS TAKE SCREEN SHOTS OF HILLARY CAMPAIGN STAFFERS AND THEY WERE ABLE TO ATTACK THOSE ACCOUNTS USING SOMETHING ATTACK THAT WE’VE DISCUSSED MANY TIMES. A VERY LOW TECH TACTIC THAT IS SOPHISTICATED CALL SPHERE FISHING. WHEN YOU SEND FAKE E-MAILS TO PEOPLE. JOHN PODESTA FAMOUSLY WAS PHISHED BY THE RUSSIANS. SEVERAL DOZEN CLINTON CAMPAIGN STAFFERS WERE ATTACKED AND ACCORDING TO THE DOCUMENTS WE SAW TODAY THEY LAID THE GROUNDWORK IN 2014 AND 15. >>AMAZING. AT THAT POINT THEY WERE JUST TRYING TO SORT OF SEW DISCORD AND THEN THEY GOT MORE FOCUSED AS THE ELECTION APPROACHED. >>THAT’S RIGHT. SO THE SECOND TACTIC HERE WAS DESIGNED TO, WE CALL IT GASLIGHTING NOW. DESIGNED TO UNDERMINE AMERICAN’S FAITH AND CONFIDENCE IN OUR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS, AS WELL AS JUSTICE INSTITUTIONS. THE FBI, THE CIA, THE NSA AND THE DIA. THOSE ARE STALWARTS OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY. >>WHAT I WAS AMAZED TO SEE WAS HOW THEY WERE ABLE TO THROW FAKE RALLIES THAT SEEMED SO AUTHENTIC BECAUSE THEY SEEMED TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE SORT OF MICROGROUPS LIKE A HISPANIC RALLY IN MIAMI MIGHT LOOK LIKE THIS VERSUS A BLACK LIVES MATTER RALLY MIGHT LOOK LIKE THIS. EVEN PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD TWEET AFTER ONE OF THESE FAKE RALLIES SAYING GREAT SHOWING IN MIAMI. >>YEAH. THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. THIS WAS THE THIRD COMPONENT OF THE COORDINATED INAUTHENTIC ACTIVITY. THAT’S WHAT WE CALL AN INFLUENCE CAMPAIGN. THESE RAN ACROSS TWITTER, INSTAGRAM, FACEBOOK AND OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA SITES. THEY’RE DESIGNED TO APPEAR AUTHENTIC EVEN THOUGH WE CALL THEM INAUTHENTIC. CREATE GROUPS, ATTRACTED INFLUENCERS WITHIN A GOP AND CONSERVATIVE CIRCLES, INVITED THOSE PEOPLE TO THE ACCOUNTS AND THEN ENCOURAGED THEM TO INVITE THEIR AUTHENTIC FRIENDS AND SEEDED THOSE WITH PROPAGANDA, INCLUDING INVITES TO RALLIES. SOME OF THESE WERE ATTENDED BY A DOZEN OR VERY FEW PEOPLE. BUT SOME OF THESE RALLIES WERE ATTENDED BY HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE. >>SO HOW DO WE LOOK AT SOMETHING ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND FIGURE OUT IT’S ONE OF THESE BS RALLIES THAT NEVER EVEN HAPPENED? MY UNCLE MESSAGED ME AND SAID IS THIS LEGIT. HE’S A 67-YEAR-OLD MAN, HE’S GOT A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT. AND IT WASN’T LEGIT. HOW DO WE FIGURE THAT OUT GOING FORWARD? >>THAT IS THE IMPORTANT QUESTION. SO ATTRIBUTION IS ALWAYS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF METHODS OF OBSCURING YOUR IDENTITY. HOWEVER WE CAN LOOK TO THE SOCIAL NETWORKS THEMSELVES AND SAY WHAT WERE THE ORIGINATING IP ADDRESSES, DO THEY HAVE A LONG TERM HISTORY, CAN WE FIND THEM IN OTHER DUMPS AND LOOK TO SEE IF THIS ACTIVITY BELONGS TO ACCOUNTS THAT ARE SPREAD ACROSS THE SOCIAL WEB AND HAVE REAL AVATARS. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE RUSSIANS ALSO SCRAPED THE SOCIAL. IT ACTS JUST LIKE A VPN. THAT’S A VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORKAND A TUNNEL BETWEEN YOU AND THE OUTSIDE WORLD, WHICH HIDES YOUR IP ADDRESS. >>2020 IS COMING UP. HAS ANYTHING CHANGED? IS THIS STILL GOING ON? >>THAT’S THE IMPORTANT THING TO RECOGNIZE HERE. LOOK, WE NEED TO DISSECT THIS REPORT AND LEARN ALL THE PARTICULARS IN REGARDS TO THE PAST. BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT DEFENDING UPCOMING ELECTIONS, NOT JUST HERE IN THE UNITED STATES BUT DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS AROUND THE WORLD THEY ARE UNDER ASSAULT BY A FEW PARTICULAR ACTORS. AND YES THE UNITED STATES ENGAGES IN SOME OF THESE TACTICS AS WELL. INCLUDING INFLUENCE CAMPAIGNS. BUT REALLY THE MASTERS OF INFLUENCE CAMPAIGNS ARE RUSSIA, CHINA, IRAN, SAUDI ARABIA AND NORTH KOREA. THESE COUNTRIES ACTIVELY PURSUE ELECTION HACKING ALL OVER THE WORLD AND WHEN WE LOOK AT 2020 WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW THE OTHER CANDIDATES TREAT EACH OTHER. DEMOCRATS HAVE USED THESE TACTICS AS WELL. AND IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT ONCE THE HACKING GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE YOU DON’T PUT THE INFORMATION, THE TACTICS BACK IN THE BOTTLE. ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS OUT THERE SO WE KNOW THE TECHNIQUES TAT CAN BE USED AT LARGE SCALE AND LOW COST. >>DAB, OTHER THAN RELYING ON LET’S SAY FACEBOOK TO GET THEIR ACT STRAIGHT AND STOP AND PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING, WHAT CAN PEOPLE DO AT HOME? IS THERE A CERTAIN SOFTWARE YOU CAN BUY THAT WILL FURTHER PROTECT YOU? I MEAN WHAT CAN WE DO IN THE NEAR TERM? >>THE THING IS SOCIAL NETWORKS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED FOR SPEED AND VIRALTY AS OPPOSED TO SAFETY AND A NUMBER OF THE PEOPLE IN TECHNOLOGY COMMUNITIES RIGHT NOW ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THAT SPEED UP THE ALREADY QUICK PACE OF INFORMATION. THE ONE THING YOU CAN DO. THERE’S NO SOFTWARE YOU CAN BUY. THE ONE THING YOU CAN DO IS SLOW DOWN OR ONLINE ACTIVITY. MAYBE SPEND LESS TIME ON SOCIAL NETWORKS. I KNOW THAT’S NOT REALLY A ONE CLICK FIX. >>THAT’S IMPORTANT BECAUSE I JUST REALIZED AND WE PROBABLY HAVE ALL GOTTEN THESE E-MAIL WHERES IT LOOKS LIKE THE BODY OF THE E-MAIL IS SOMETHING THAT INVOLVES YOUR WORK. BUT IF YOU CLICK ON THE ACTUAL ADDRESS OF THE PERSON WHO SENT IT TO YOU. LET’S SAY [email protected] THAT’S WHERE YOU KNOW IT’S FISHY. IF YOU GET AN E-MAIL YOU THINK OKAY WELL THAT SEEMS LEGIT BECAUSE THEY MENTION ME AND THAT’S MY STORY, CLICK ON THE ACTUAL PERSON WHO SENT IT TO YOU AND YOU’LL NOTICE THEIR E- MAIL ADDRESS IS SQUIRRELY. >>I JUST DON’T READ MY E-MAIL. >>TOUCHE. >>OBVIOUSLY THE DNC WAS BADLY BURNED BY THIS ALREADY. HOW ARE THEY PREPARING? WHAT ARE THEY DOING? WHAT KIND OF SECURITY MEASURES ARE IN PLACE? >>THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION. EVER SINCE THE DNC SITUATION HAPPENED BACK IN 2016 BOTH PARTIES, BECAUSE IT WASN’T JUST THE DNC. THE REPUBLICANS WERE AT RISK AS WELL. THEY TOOK SOME DIFFERENT TACTICS IN PREPARING THEMSELVES AND HOPEFULLY SECURING, BETTER SECURING THEIR MEDIA ACCOUNTS AND WHAT NOT. BUT IT’S A GOOD QUESTION. THEY DEFINITELY ARE IN TOUCH WITH THE DOJ AND WITH FBI. YOU HAVE YOUR CYBER, YOU HAVE YOUR CYBER WARRIORS OUT THERE IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. BUT I THINK THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH REMAINING DILIGENT. THIS ISN’T SEXY STUFF. YOU’RE SPENDING MONEY ON SOMEBODY TO PREVENT YOU FROM GETTING HACKED AND YOU CAN’T SEE THE FRUITS OF THAT LABOR COMING OUT. IT’S JUST SORT OF AN INVISIBLE SHIELD. BUT IT’S A VERY IMPORTANT ONE THAT THEY NEED. I THINK CAMPAIGNS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT. VIRAL IS GOOD IN THIS WORLD OF POLITICS. YOU WANT MORE CLICKS. YOU WANT MORE HITS. YOU WANT MORE EYES ON YOUR CAMPAIGN. WITH 35,000 PEOPLE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN THE DEMOCRATIC FIELD, IT’S, JUST KIDDING. NOT 35,000, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. THERE’S A LOT. THEY’RE ALL VYING FOR ATTENTION. >>I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT THE SPECTER OF WIKILEAKS. IS THAT STILL A THREAT? JULIAN ASSANGE IS UNDER ARREST BUT CLEARLY THERE WAS A LOT GOING ON IN 2016 WITH WIKILEAKS. >>THE THING ABOUT WIKILEAKS IS THAT THE VULNERABILITIES THEY PRESENT ARE KIND OF OUT IN THE OPEN. SO WHEN WIKILEAKS HAD THE TRUST OF MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MADE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR THEM TO PUBLISH OR REPUBLISH ACCOUNTS OR SENSITIVE DATA. THE CHALLENGE IS IT’S PRETTY EASY FOR ANYONE TO DO WHAT WE CALL EXFILTRATION. THAT IS TO TRICK OR PHISH YOUR WAY INTO AN ACCOUNT AND TAKE DATA AND PUBLISH IT ANYWHERE. WIKILEAKS IT DIDN’T APPEAR AS THOUGH THEY DID THE TRANSFORMATIVE WORK OF JOURNALISTS, WHICH IS THEY WILL LOOK FOR INFORMATION THAT WILL BE SENSITIVE AND REDACT IT. REPURPOSE INFORMATION THAT WAS ALREADY OUT IN THE WILD. >>HOW MANY RUSSIANS HAVE BEEN ARRESTED INVOLVED IN THIS HACKING? >>IT’S OVER 30. OUR PRODUCER HAD A GOOD QUESTION. ASK WHAT KIND OF COLLABORATION THERE IS. SAY YOU’RE A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. >>RATHER NOT ARRESTED BUT CHARGED. >>CHARGED. 30 OR SO PEOPLE. WITH ALL THE INFORMATION YOU GET AND GATHER FROM CHARGING THOSE FOLKS. WHAT KIND OF COLLABORATION EXISTS BETWEEN THE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY? >>THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I THOUGHT WAS REMARKABLE ABOUT THE TROLL FARM INDICTMENT AND THE HACKING INDICTMENT RELATING TO THE RUSSIANS IS THE INDICTMENT’S ABILITY TO PUT INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE AT PARTICULAR KEYBOARDS AT PARTICULAR TIMES. THAT LEVEL OF DEPTH OF TRANSPARENCY THAT OBVIOUSLY CAME OUT OF THE INTELLIGENCE WORK WAS I THOUGHT REMARKABLE. LENS THOSE INDICTMENTS TO SOME POTENTIAL CRITICISM ABOUT SORT OF TIPPING THE HAND ABOUT HOW GOOD AT LEAST SOME OF OUR SOURCES AND METHODS ARE. I WANT TO TIE BACK ON WHAT DAN WAS SAYING ABOUT PREVENTIVE MEASURES IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT INDIVIDUALS TRYING TO PREVENT BAD THINGS FROM HAPPENING BY CLICKING AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT’S GREAT. I’D LOVE TO SEE THE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES TRY TO DO A BETTER JOB. BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT’S LIKE THE ROOSTERS GUARDING, THE FOX GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE. IT’S IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE I THINK IT’S FAIR TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT CAN GET INVOLVED AND HELP IN A WAY AT A SYSTEMATIC SORT OF 100,000-FOOT LEVEL TO TRY TO REDUCE THOSE RISKS. I UNDERSTAND THAT. >>WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? >>THAT’S THE BIG QUESTION. IT COULD ALSO LOOK LIKE FIRST, IT COULD BE FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES THERE. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE VERY CAREFULLY. WHEN YOU HEAR THE PRESIDENT AT VARIOUS TIMES SAYING WE DON’T KNOW THAT IT WAS RUSSIA WHEN MUELLER’S REPORT TELLS US IT WAS, THE CONSENSUS VIEW OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IS THAT IT WAS RUSSIA. WHEN HE SAYS IT COULD BE SOME HEAVY SET GUY ON A BED SOMEWHERE. WHEN YOU’RE UNDERMINING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY ABOUT THESE CONCLUSIONS, YOU’RE HEADING IN IT THE WRONG DIRECTION. >>MARK ZUCKERBERG DID SAY HE’D LIKE TO SEE SOME STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO POLITICAL ADVERTISING. SO YOU HAVE TO MEET A CERTAIN THRESHOLD. >>HE ALSO KNOWS BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH AN ISSUE TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. GOES WHAT, THEY HAVE TO GET ELECTED. THESE ARE ALL PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE EVERY TWO YEARS IN THE CASE OF THE HOUSE. THEY DON’T WANT TO GET HACKED. THEY DON’T WANT TO BE VICTIMS. ALL THESE OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES UP ON THE HILL TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE OF REGULATION. WHAT MORE CAN WE DO. THEN YOU GET INTO THE ISSUE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND WHICH USERS ARE GETTING CRACKED DOWN ON AND BIAS AND WHAT NOT. WHEN IT COMES TO AI, JUST LISTENING TO THE FACEBOOK REPRESENTATIVE I THINK IT WAS TWO WEEKS AGO AT A HEARING ON ANTI-HATE IN FRONT OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. LISTENING TO THIS LOGARITHM OF HOW AI COMES UP WITH THEIR CALCULATIONS AS TO WHAT QUALIFIES AS HATE SPEECH AND WHAT DOESN’T WAS JUST MIND BOGGLING. I THINK IT’S STALKING TO LAWMAKERS THEY HAVE A SIMILAR REACTION. THEY JUST DON’T KNOW HOW TO REIGN IT IN. HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH? >>DAN, YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THE VULNERABILITIES OF AI BEING IN CHARGE OF ALL OF THIS. >>THERE’S SOME REAL CHALLENGES WITH REGULATION AS WELL AS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. I WAS JUST IN SAN FRANCISCO AND SEATTLE SPEAKING WITH TECH EXECUTIVES ABOUT THESE CHALLENGES. THEY SAY LOOK, THERE IS PERHAPS AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE. THAT IS REGULATIONS BEING PROPOSED OR THOSE IN THE BALLPARK ARE EXPENSIVE. THAT WOULD TAMP DOWN COMPETITION TO SOCIAL NETWORKS LIKE FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND INSTAGRAM. DID WOULD KEEP THE PLAYING FIELD FAIRLY EVEN FOR THEM TO APPLY BECAUSE THIS IS SO CONFUSING, THEM TO APPLY THEIR OWN STANDARDS THAT ARE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE BUSINESSES WE SAW BEING HEAVILY EXPLOIT. THE ISSUE WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS IT PRESENTS A BROAD SPECTRUM OF PROBLEMS. AI IS NOTHING MORE THAN ALGORITHMS. IF THAN STATEMENTS. THEY’RE REALLY, REALLY COMPLEX STATEMENTS. REGULATION IS A BIAS TOWARDS ONE THING OR ANOTHER. ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. AND VIRALTY AND NOT NECESSARILY FOR SAFETY. BY SAFETY I MEAN MAKING SURE WE’RE SLOW AND METHODICAL ABOUT OUR CONSUMPTION OF INFORMATION. >>THANK YOU. >>THANK YOU. >>>WE’RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK. WE’LL BE RIGHT BACK. YOU’RE WATCHING CBSN. >>>AND WE WELCOME YOU BACK. JUST TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP WE’RE EXPECTING THE PRESIDENT TO LEAVE FOR AN EASTER VACATION OF SORTS. SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN AROUND THE TOP OF THE HOUR. WHEN HE DOES, WE’LL TAKE IT LIVE. THE MUELLER REPORT IS OUT. >>WE HAVE IT HERE. YOU CAN READ IT ONLINE. ONE OF THE BIG QUESTIONS IS WHAT ARE THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THIS, ESPECIALLY HEADING INTO 2020. >>MICHAEL SINGLETON IS A REPUBLICAN POLITICAL CONSULTANT. ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, CEO FOR BLUEPRINT STRATEGY. >>HERE WITH YOU TODAY. >>THAT’S GOOD. SO I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS ARE HEARING FROM YOUR COUNTERPARTS. LET’S START WITH YOU. WHAT ARE YOUR FELLOW REPUBLICANS SAYING? >>I’VE BEEN TEXTING SOME FRIENDS WHO WORK IN THE WHITE HOUSE. TEXTING SOME FOLKS WHO WERE CLOSE TO A COUPLE REPUBLICAN SENATORS AND THEY ALL SEE THIS AS A GOOD DAY FOR THE PRESIDENT. THE PRESIDENT’S CAMPAIGN SENT OUT AN E-MAIL FUNDRAISING SAYING EXONERATED AGAIN. SO I THINK FOR REPUBLICANS THEY’RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THE ECONOMY. THEY’LL CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THINGS LIKE DEREGULATION. THEY’LL FOCUS ON JUDGES AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT ANOTHER JUDGE. RUTH BADER GINSBURG WHO MAY RETIRE AT SOME POINT. FOR REPUBLICANS THEY’LL SPIN THIS IN A WAY TO SAY SEE THIS IS DEMOCRATS CONTINUING TO TRY TO ENCROACH ON THE PRESIDENT’S ABILITY TO DO HIS JOB. >>SO REPUBLICANS SEE THIS AS A COMPLETE EXONERATION. >>FROM TEXTING A LOT OF MY FRIENDS THEY DON’T THINK THIS WILL HAVE STAYING POWER POLITICALLY. FOR THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS THIS MAY BE AN ISSUE, BUT THEY DON’T SEE RESONANCE WITH THE AVERAGE VOTER AS IT PERTAINS TO THIS REPORT. >>ANTJUANIS BITING HIS TONGUE. >>TODAY AS A WEAPON OF MASS CONFUSION. PUBLIC RELATION SHOW BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. MOST OF THE SUBSTANTIVE THINGS IN THE REPORT I THINK WERE, WE COULD NOT SEE THEM. THEY WERE REDACTED. THERE WERE SOME KEY ELEMENTS OF THE REPORT THAT WILL PUSH DEMOCRATS TO DIG DEEPER AND CHOMP DOWN EVEN MORE ON DOING THEIR JOB AS OVERNIGHT AND INVESTIGATIVE BRANCH. WHAT I CONCLUDED WAS DONALD TRUMP JR. WAS TOO DUMB TO KNOW HE WAS BREAKING THE LAW THROUGH ALL OF THIS. SO WHAT WE KNOW NOW FROM ALL OF THIS AND WHAT WE CAN CONFIRM EVEN THOUGH THE REPUBLICANS WANTED TO DENY THIS FROM THE BEGINNING IS THAT RUSSIA DID HACK INTO OUR ELECTIONS. THEY DID DO IT IN THE NAME OF HELPING DONALD TRUMP BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND I THINK THAT IS NOT DEBATABLE. WHAT WE KNOW GOING FORWARD IS THAT THIS IS NOT THE END. IN FACT THIS IS PROBABLY JUST THE BEGINNING BECAUSE WE’RE GOING TO SPEND THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, MAYBE EVEN YEARS TRYING TO CONTINUE TO FLESH OUT WHAT HAPPENED AND WHO HAD INVOLVEMENT. THE KEYWORD IN THIS WAS THIS DOES NOT FULLY EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT. THEY CAN DO VICTORY LAPS AND TOE TOUCHES AND PULL OUT THEIR MEDALS BUT THANKFULLY ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES AND DEMOCRATS HAVE THE INVESTIGATIVE LATITUDE TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER. >>BUT WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT DEMOCRAT DOS HAVE TO BE A LITTLE CAREFUL WITH HOW FAR THEY GO WITH THIS INVESTIGATION? >>I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT. WHAT I’M ALSO SAYING IS THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AND A JOB. >>I AGREE WITH THAT. >>OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATE. WHAT I THINK WE’LL AGREE WITH IS THIS WILL NOT MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR EITHER PARTY IN TERMS OF TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO BRING THEM FURTHER UNDER THE TENT. REPUBLICANS GO DEEPER IN THEIR CORNER. DEMOCRATS GO DEEPER IN THEIR CORNER. INDEPENDENTS SAY WE’LL FIND SOMETHING TO COME OUT TO THE POLLS BUT THIS WILL NOT BE IT. >>WHAT DOES A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION MEAN OTHER THAN THE OBVIOUS? HERE’S WHY. IF THEY HAD THE VOTES IN THE HOUSE TO IMPEACH HIM, THEY DON’T HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REMOVE HIM. SO WHERE DOES THIS GO? >>THE INVESTIGATION SIMPLY GIVES CONFIRMATION AND COMFORT TO SOME OF THE AMERICAN VOTERS WHO WERE STILL CONFUSED BY THIS. >>THOSE WHO ALREADY DON’T TRUST THE PRESIDENT. >>BUT EVEN THOSE ON THE FENCE AND DON’T KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS, LET’S BRING IN THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. LET’S LET HIM TESTIFY AND TRY TO FLESH OUT WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW FROM THIS REPORT. THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IN THE REPORT WERE REDACTED. >>YOU THINK SO? >>ABSOLUTELY. >>I THINK THERE WERE SOME KEY THINGS THAT CAME OUT. >>SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS. >>IT DID SHOW A LOT OF INVESTIGATION IS ON GOING. >>BINGO. >>POLITICALLY WE AREN’T IN THE MIDST OF 2020. KEY ELECTORAL STATES. OHIO, IOWA, NEW HAMPSHIRE. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THOSE PLACES WORKING FOR THREE PREVIOUS CANDIDATES. I AM JUST NOT CERTAIN, AND I’M GOING TO BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT SURVEYS INDICATE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS AND WEEKS. I’M NOT CERTAIN THAT WITH CONTINUED INVESTIGATION THAT WE WILL GET NEW INFORMATION THAT COULD POLITICALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE ENOUGH THAT WOULD ALLOW DEMOCRATS TO TARGET THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND MOBILIZE THOSE INDEPENDENT VOTERS, PARTICULARLY INDEPENDENT GOP LEANING VOTERS A ENSOME MODERATE REPUBLICAN VOTERS IN A WAY THAT WOULD PULL THEM AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENT AND INTO THE DEMOCRAT’S CAMP. >>IT’S ABOUT PROVING FURTHER THE DISHONESTY, LACK OF TRANSPARENCY. >>WE ALREADY KNOW THAT. >>YOU CANNOT TRUST EVEN THIS IT REPUBLICAN CONGRESS. >>I WOULD PREFACE THAT BY SAYING WE ALREADY KNOW THAT. >>BUT PEOPLE HAVE GONE NUMB TO THAT. SOMETIMES A GOOD POP ON THE ARM IS A REMINDER. >>I WOULD ALSO SAY OUR GENUINE CONCERNS AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME WE WERE HEARING EARLIER, THERE ARE GENUINE CONCERNS ABOUT THE BALANCE OF POWERS IN THIS COUNTRY. WHATEVER YOU TAKE AWAY FROM THIS REPORT AS A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT I THINK EVERYONE WOULD AGREE WE WANT OUR GOVERNMENT TO BE HEALTHY. WE WANT THE BALANCE OF POWERS TO REMAIN. >>ABSOLUTELY. >>DEMOCRATS FOR SO LONG SAID JUST GIVE US MUELLER AND AS LONG AS HE DOES WHAT HE CAN DO WE WILL ACCEPT IT AS IS; RIGHT? >>LET’S BE CLEAR WHAT DEMOCRATS SAY AT LEAST THE ONES I WORK WITH AND SPEAK TO. GIVE IT TO US IN DOSES AND DRAW CONCLUSIONS IN DOSES. LET’S LET THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR DO HIS WORK. WE HAD HAVE THAT PHASE. LET’S FIND A CONCLUSION. LET’S BRING HIM IN. WE HAVE TO DO THIS IN DOSES. STEP BY STEP, BIT BY BIT. NOW WE’RE SAYING LET’S BRING THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN SO UNDER OATH HE CAN TELL US THINGS THAT PERHAPS WERE NOT IN THE REPORT, TELL US WHERE HE COULD HAVE SPIN OFF AND WENT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION. THIS WAS HONESTLY TAXING ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AND I WOULD SAY TO MY PARTY BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE LISTENING. LET’S FOCUS ON THE THINGS THAT GOT US TO WHERE WE ARE IN THE MAJORITY. WHAT THE PRESIDENT CHIEF LIAR JUST SAID KELLYANNE CONWAY THAT DEMOCRATS ARE NOT DOING CERTAIN THINGS. >>I THINK THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT OVERREACH. YOU SAW SPEAKER PELOSI TALK WITH NADLER AND SAY STOP THE COMMENTS ABOUT IMPEACHMENT. WE DON’T KNOW. LET’S PLAY THIS PROCESS OUT. >>DOSE BY DOSE. >>ARE TOO GRAVE HERE. IF ELECTIONS WERE HELD TODAY, DONALD TRUMP WOULD PROBABLY BE EASILY REELECT. LOOKING AT THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS RUNNING I’M NOT CERTAIN IF IT WHOMEVER THE PRESUMPTIVIVE NOMINEE WILL BE WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO COLESS A FRACTURED AND DIVIDED PARTY TO BEAT THE PRESIDENT. >>THE GOOD NEWS, MY BROTHER FROM ANOTHER MOTHER IS THAT YOU DENT HEAR MANY 2020 DEMOCRATS FOCUS ON THIS ISSUE. >>WHICH IS SMART. >>THEY’RE FOCUSED ON EXECUTING AND FURTHER FLESHING OUT THE PLAYS THAT GOT US. >>THAT IS A TRUE. >>LOOKING FORWARD AND NOT BACK WARD. IT’S NEVER A GOOD POLITICAL PLAY TO LOOK BACK WARD. >>TRUTHFULLY REPUBLICANS, PARTICULARLY THIS PRESIDENT WANT TO HAVE A PERSONALITY BATTLE. WE AS DEMOCRATS HAVE TO GET IN THE BUSINESS OF HAVING A POLICY BATTLE. THEY DON’T WANT TO HAVE A POLICY BATTLE BECAUSE THEY FAILED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON POLICY. >>KEEP IN MIND HILLARY CLINTON ATTEMPTED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT POLICY. IT DID NOT MATTER. RUNNING AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. >>BECAUSE SHE AND OTHERS THEN GOT CAUGHT UP IN THE PERSONALITY BATTLE. SO INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT POLICY AND STICKING TO THAT WE FELL INTO, SOME OF US FELL INTO THE TRUMP OF WHAT DONALD TRUMP FELL INTO THE ACT OF WHAT DONALD TRUMP WANTED. >>I AGREE WITH THAT. I DO THINK IT’S GOING TO BE VERY TELLING TO SEE HOW YOU DEBATE AGAINST SOMEONE LIKE TRUMP. HE DEFIES ALL ODDS. HE IS THE DEFINITION OF A POLITICAL PHENOMENON. WHILE I THINK THE NORM HAS BEEN TO DISCUSS POLICY ISSUES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CANDIDATES, YOU CAN’T DO THAT WITH SOMEONE. >>EXCEPT THIS TIME. >>WHO GOES BEYOND THOSE THINGS. >>HAVE TO DEFEND HIS RECORD. HE DID NOT HAVE, YOU’RE ASSUMING THAT’S THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. >>IT IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. ECONOMY AND HEALTHCARE. >>HEALTHCARE IS NUMBER ONE. IMMIGRATION NUMBER TWO. THEN THE ECONOMY. LOOK AT THE END OF THE DAY AND WHY THE ECONOMY IS DOING WELL FOR SOME IT’S NOT DOING WELL FOR OTHERS. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO FORGET ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET. >>THERE’S ALWAYS BEEN PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET. THAT’S NOT A NEW PHENOMENON. >>YOU CANNOT GO ON THE NOTION THAT BECAUSE THE ECONOMY IS DOING WELL FOR THE TOP THAT PEOPLE ON THE BOTTOM ARE SITTING AROUND DOING TOE TOUCHES. >>I DISAGREE WITH THAT. >>THE PORTRAYAL OF THE PRESIDENT THAT COMES THROUGH HERE IS SOMEONE WHO PLAYS FAST AND LOOSE WITH THE RULES. >>ABSOLUTELY. >>HE PLAYS LIKE THERE ARE NO RULES. >>WELL, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT PLAY WITH THE RULE OF LAW REPUBLICANS? >>WELL LOOK, I MEAN THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION. I WOULD PREFACE THIS BY SAYING IF THIS WAS DURING OBAMA’S TENURE REPUBLICANS WOULD NOT STAND FOR THIS. I THINK DURING THE BUSH YEARS YOU SAW A DIFFERENT TYPE OF REPUBLICAN PARTY. I THINK AT THIS POINT IN TIME IT’S OBVIOUSLY CLEAR THAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TODAY IS THE PARTY OF DONALD TRUMP. >>SCARY STUFF. >>NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THERE. IF THE PRESIDENT WINS REELECTION THAT WOULD BE SOLIDIFIED. THAT CONCERNS ME FOR A HOST OF REASONS. EVEN THE FEW REPUBLICANS, AND I TALK TO A LOT OF FRIENDS ON THE HILL WHO DON’T LIKE THE PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF HIS MORALS OR BECAUSE OF HIS ETHICS OR BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT HE DOES NOT WALK IN SYNC TO THE CUSTOMS OF BEHAVIOR AND NORMS WE HAVE BECOME ACCUSTOMED TO. THEY WON’T SAY ANYTHING BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HAS SOLIDIFIED COALESSED AN AMOUNT OF SUPPORT WITH THE BASE THAT WE HAVEN’T SEEN IN 60 YEARS. >>BUT TO WHAT COST? >>REPUBLICANS FALL IN LINE, DEMOCRATS FALL IN LOVE. AND THAT’S A FAILURE OF OUR OWN PARTY. TRUTHFULLY THIS TODAY, THIS CIRCUS, THIS PR STUNT TODAY WILL CONSOLIDATE HIS BASE. IT’S GOING TO CONSOLIDATE OUR BASE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE AND IT’S GOING TO MAKE THE FIGHT FOR THE SQUIRMY MIDDLE IN THE COURSE OF THE ELECTION EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. THAT’S WHY DEMOCRATS HAVE TO BE LASER FOCUSED ON FOCUSING ON THE ISSUES THAT MATTER TO EVERY DAY VOTERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO TRADITIONALLY DOESN’T HAVE NECESSARILY A COMMUNITY THEY CALL HOME. >>YOU SAID WHY THIS SHOULD MATTER; RIGHT? I AGREE. IT SHOULD MATTER. BUT I THINK FOR POLITICIANS, AND ANTJUAN YOU KNOW THIS. YOU’VE WORKED FOR A LOT OF THEM AS I HAVE. THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE FOR A LOT OF THEM IS ARE SELF- PRESERVATION. >>SURVIVE AND STAY AWAY. >>IF I’M AN ADVISOR ADVISING A REPUBLICAN IN THE SENATE OR HOUSE WHILE I THINK MORALLY AND ETHICALLY THIS IS WRONG, YOU HAVE TO GET REE LENGTH. YOU CANNOT STAND AGAINST A PRESIDENT IF YOU WANT THIS JOB. THAT’S WHAT POLITICS COME DOWN TO. I’M NOT SAYING THAT’S A JUSTIFIABLE POSITION AT ALL, BUT THAT’S THE REALITY. >>HERE’S THE DIFFERENCE. DEMOCRATSWON IN 2018, AND THE DISTRICTS SOMETIMES WHERE HE WON BY DOUBLE DIGITS. THAT’S THE DIFFERENCE. NUMBER TWO, THE SENATE MAP IS A LOT SEXIER FOR DEMOCRATS THIS TIME AROUND THAN IT WAS IN 2018. SO REPUBLICANS HAVE SOME DECISIONS TO MAKE. ARE THEY GOING TO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO DOING THE RIGHT THING OR PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THIS NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY CALLED TRUMP’S PARTY. I THINK THEY HAVE REAL DECISIONS. >>I BELIEVE ABOUT 18 REPUBLICAN SEATS ARE UP FOR REELECTION. >>NOT TO MENTION GOVERNORS RACES. >>THAT’S A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN. HE’S CORRECT ABOUT HOW WELL DEMOCRATS DID IN 2018. I WOULD SAY THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. THAT IS SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND. TO YOUR MIND THOUGH, I DO THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT LEADERS LIKE MITCH McCONNELL, THEY’LL LOOK AT THIS MAP AND THEY’LL MAKE THE UNCOMFORTABLE DECISION OF SAYING THERE ARE SOME SENATE REPUBLICANS WHO MAY HAVE TO COME OUT AGAINST A PRESIDENT ON CERTAIN ISSUES IN ORDER TO WIN REELECTION. HIS MAIN CONCERN IS HOW DO I MAINTAIN POWER IN THE SENATE AND YOU’RE RIGHT, WE DO OR CAN POTENTIALLY LOSE THAT IN 2020 IF WE’RE NOT CAREFUL. >>DEMOCRATS CAN GET CUTE AND BECOME SOCIAL MEDIA STARS AND GET LIKES AND RETWEETS AND ALL THE THINGS, BUT AS QUICK AS WE MAINTAIN THE MAJORITY WE CAN LOSE THE MAJORITY IN THE CONGRESS AND GO DEEPER IN THE RED OR IN TROUBLE IN THE SENATE AND ALSO LOSE GOVERNORS RACES. IN SPITE OF ALL THIS WHAT MATTERS TO ME THE MOST, STATE LEGISLATIVE SEATS AND GOVERNORS RACES FOR THAT ONE IMPORTANT TOPIC, REDISTRICTING. >>WE’VE GOT TO LEAVE IT THERE. >>THANKS, GUYS. >>THANK YOU SO MUCH. COME BACK SOON. >>WE’LL TAKE A QUICK BREAK. WE’LL BE RIGHT BACK. YOU’RE WATCHING CBSN. >>>MOST TODDLERS WITH ZIKA VIRUS HAVE A RANGE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND MEDICAL PROBLEMS. DOCTORS ARE BRACING FOR THE NEXT OUTBREAK. >>THIS IS A HAUNTING MENACE. >>>OF ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT ACCEPTED REFUGEES AVENUE REFUGEES, SWEDEN TOOK IN THE MOST. >>WE DON’T KNOW HOW MANY WE’RE TAKING IN. >>WE HAVE IMMIGRANT PROBLEMS. >>THE ISSUE OF MIGRATION AND THE RISE OF THE RIGHT IS MIRRORED IN THE U.S. >>WE NEED THE STRONG WELFARE STATE SO THEY CAN FEEL INCLUDED. >>THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT RIGHT CONTINUES TO RISE. >>ALL CULTURES ARE NOT EQUAL. >>THESE CARAVANS CREATE MASSIVE OVERCROWDING. CROSSINGS INTO THE U.S. REACHED AN 11 YEAR HIGH. >>THEY DON’T SPEAK THE LANGUAGE OR KNOW THE LAWS. >>I HAVE 150 PENDING CASES. >>IF AMERICA BUILDS A WALL WILL THAT CHANGE HOW MUCH THE CARTEL CHARGES TO CROSS ILLEGALLY? >>THERE IS A GROWING OUTBREAK OF A MOSQUITO BORNE VIRUS LINKED TO BIRTH EFFECTS. >>SHE WAS BORN WITH MICROCEPHALY. IT’S AN EMOTIONAL JOURNEY FOR FAMILIES AND DOCTORS ALIVE. >>THERE’S NO HANDBOOK. YOU’RE LEARNING AS YOU GO ALONG. >>DOCTORS ARE BRACING FOR THE NEXT OUTBREAK. >>>WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF A SERIES AND FINANCIAL CRISIS. >>HOUSING SHORTAGES AFFECT PEOPLE ACROSS THE NATION. >>WE’RE IN NEED OF 550,000 UNITS OF HOUSING. BUT INSTEAD WE’RE BUILDING LUXURY HOUSING. >>IT’S LIKE I’M SHOWING YOU MY BEDROOM AND IT SUCKS. >>DID YOU EVER THINK YOU COULD BE LIVING OUT OF YOUR VEHICLE? >>OF ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT ACCEPTS REFUGEES, SWEDEN RECENTLY TOOK IN THE MOST PER CAPITA. >>WE DON’T KNOW HOW MANY WE’RE TAKING IN. >>WE HAVE IMMIGRANT PROBLEMS IN EVERY CITY. >>WE NEED A STRONG WELFARE STATE SO THEY CAN FEEL INCLUDED. >>THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE OF THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT RIGHT CONTINUES TO RISE. >>ALL CULTURES ARE NOT EQUAL. >>THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE HOMES OVERTAKEN BY MUD. >>GET OUT OF HERE! GO! >>THIS IS WHAT MANY PEOPLE ARE COMING BACK TO. >>THIS IS WHERE WE WILL RIDE OUT THE STORM. >>THIS IS ONE OF THE FLASH POINTS. >>THIS IS A DANGEROUS AREA. >>THIS IS WHAT FIRST RESPONDERS ARE HAVING TO GET AROUND. >>THIS IS THE MOST ACTIVE ERUPTION. >>THIS IS THE CBS EVENING NEWS. >>THERE’S A UNIQUE POWER IN TRUTH AND WHETHER THE STORY IS DOWN THE STREET OR AROUND THE GLOBE WE’LL FIND IT. >>YOU WENT RIGHT BACK TO WORK. >>I WOULD MUCH RATHER BE OUT THERE HELPING. >>WE WANT TO PUT THE POWER OF TRUTH IN YOUR HANDS. >>I’M JEFF GLOR AND WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN THE BROADCAST TONIGHT. >>ORIGINAL REPORTING. >>HELLO, EVERYONE. I’M TANYA RIVERO. >>AND I’M DAVID BEGNAUD. ADAM SCHIFF IS IN CALIFORNIA. THAT’S ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN. AND WE ARE EXPECTING THE PRESIDENT TO DEPART FOR HIS EASTER VACATION. HE’S HEADED TO MAR-A-LAGO. HE MAY COME TO THE MICROPHONE. IT’S BEEN FIVE HOURS SINCE THE MUELLER REPORT WAS RELEASED. THE PRESIDENT MADE A FEW REMARKS FOR WOUNDED SOLDIERS. >>KELLYANNE CONWAY SAID HE’S IN A GREAT MOOD AND RIGHT TALK. THE REDACTED REPORT WAS RELEASED TODAY. WILLIAM BARR SAID PRESIDENT TRUMP FACED AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION WHEN COMING INTO OFFICE. >>AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES, THERE’S SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY, PROPELLED BY OPPONENTS AND FUELED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. >>Reporter: THE PRESIDENT WAS STILL CALLING THE PROBE A HOAX. BUT HE SAID HE WAS HAVING A GOOD DAY. >>AND THEY’RE HAVING A GOOD DAY. I’M HAVING A GOOD DAY TOO. NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. [ CHEERING ] >>THERE NEVER WAS BY THE WAY AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. >>Reporter: ON THE FINAL PAGE, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WRITES IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, WE WOULD SO STATE. ERROL BARNETT JOINS US FROM OUR WASHINGTON BUREAU. WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT HOW THE PRESS WAS TREATED OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS? >>THERE’S SO MUCH TO TAKE OUT OF THIS REPORT. ONE OF THE BIG QUESTIONS THAT REMAINS UNANSWERED AS WE LISTEN TO PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING THERE WAS NO COLLUSION. THEN WHY DOES THIS 400 PAGE REPORT DETAIL 10 INSTANCES OF PRESIDENT TRUMP TAKING ACTIONS TO CURTAIL OR RESTRICT THE INVESTIGATION IN SOME WAY. THAT’S AN OPEN QUESTION WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANSWERS TO YET. AS FAR AS THE TREATMENT OF THE PRESS, ONE OTHER THING THAT CAME OUT OF THE REPORT IS THAT THERE WERE MULTIPLE OCCASIONS IN WHICH SARAH SANDERS MISLED THE PRESS, LIED TO THE PRESS IN DEFENDING THE PRESIDENT. THE EXAMPLE BEING THE DAY AFTER JAMES COMEY WAS FIRED AFTER FBI DIRECTOR IN A CHAOTIC MOMENT WHEN HE WAS DELIVERED A LETTER. SANDERS WAS ASKED BY STEVEN PORTNOY. I THINK YOU HAVE ADAM SCHIFF SPEAKING. >>HE’S ADDRESSING THE MUELLER REPORT. LET’S LISTEN. >>AS WE REPORTED SOME TIMING A AND AS THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY DISCLOSED. THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE CAMPAIGN BY THE RUSSIANS TO INTERFERE IN THE ELECTIONS IN 2016. THAT INTERFERENCE TOOK MANY FORMS BUT MOST SIGNIFICANTLY IT TOOK THE FORM OF AN EFFORT ON SOCIAL MEDIA TO DIVIDE THE COUNTRY AND PUSH OUT FAVORITE NARRATIVES AND TO ASSIST THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY A MASSIVE EFFORT OUT OF ST. PETERSBURG. AND IT ALSO EMBARKED ON AN EFFORT TO HACK AND DUMP E-MAILS FROM THE DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN OF HILLARY CLINTON, FROM JOHN PODESTA, AND OTHER EFFORTS THROUGH THE HACKING AND DUMPING EFFORT TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME IN THE ELECTION. THESE EFFORTS WERE DESIGNED TO HELP ONE PARTY, DONALD TRUMP. THERE WERE ALSO EFFORTS THROUGH ANY NUMBER OF MEETINGS BETWEEN RUSSIANS AND TRUMP CAMPAIGN PEOPLE TO EXERT A COVERT INFLUENCE OPERATION MOUNTED BY THE RUSSIANS THAT CONTINUED DURING THE CAMPAIGN AS WELL AS AFTER THE CAMPAIGN. AND I WANT TO MAKE SEVERAL POINTS ABOUT THESE FINDINGS. FIRST, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DID A GRAVE DISSERVICE TO THE COUNTRY BY MISREPRESENTING SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF THE MUELLER REPORT. BY ATTEMPTING TO PUT A POSITIVE SPIN ON THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S FINDINGS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS NOT THE PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL LAWYER ALTHOUGH HE MAY FEEL HE IS. HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HIGHEST LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN THE LAND AND REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. BUT WHEN HE GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PRESIDENT COOPERATED AND HE DIDN’T. AND WHEN THE PRESIDENT DEPRIVED THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OF HIS OWN VERBAL TESTIMONY. THAT MISLEADS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. WHEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL REPRESENTS ON THE OBSTRUCTION CASE OR SUGGESTS THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DESIRED HIM TO MAKE THAT DECISION, THAT THE SPECIAL COUNCIL WAS NOT MINDFUL OF THE OPINION THAT A SPECIAL COUNCIL CANNOT INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT. WHEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MISCHARACTERIZES THE REPORT IN THAT WAY HE DOES A DISSERVICE TO THE COUNTRY. A FEW THINGS LEAP OUT ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS ON THE ISSUE OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THE REPORT OUTS MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS BY THE PRESIDENT TO MISLEAD THE COUNTRY, TO INTERFERE WITH THE INVESTIGATION, TO URGE OTHERS TO LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. TO URGE THOSE OF HIS STAFF TO FURTHER OBSTRUCT THE INVESTIGATION. THEY WERE NOT REFUSED OWING TO A GOODWILL ON THE PRESIDENT’S PART. THESE ACTIONS HAVE A MATERIAL IMPACT ON THE INVESTIGATION. AND THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WAS DEPRIVED OF INFORMATION OR THE TIMELY ACCESS OF THAT INFORMATION AS A RESULT OF THINGS THAT THE PRESIDENT DID AND SAID. IT MADE OUR JOB IN OUR COMMITTEE THAT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT AS IT DID THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S INVESTIGATION. THOSE ACTS OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE — THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. AND IT’S CLEAR THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WANTED THE CONGRESS TO CONSIDER THE REPERCUSSIONS AND THE CONSEQUENCES. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL BELIEVED THAT NO ONE WAS ABOVE THE LAW AND THAT INCLUDES THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S ACTIONS WOULD MAKE THE PRESIDENT SUCH THAT HE CANNOT COMMIT THE CRIME OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. IF HE HAD FOUND EVIDENCE EXONERATING THE PRESIDENT HELD HAVE SAID SO. HE DID NOT. HE LEFT THAT ISSUE TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES. ON THE ISSUE OF CONSPIRACY, AND IN CONTRAST TO WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PRESENTED, EACH OF THE ACTS I ENUMERATED IS NOT ONLY SPELLED OUT IN THIS REPORT, CORROBORATED IN THIS REPORT. BUT ADDITIONAL CONTACTS AND ACTS ARE ITEMIZED. IT GIVES US MORE INFORMATION THAN THE PUBLIC KNEW ABOUT THESE ELICIT CONTACTS. WHETHER THEY RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. AND HE DID NOT CONSIDER COLLUSION BUT WHETHER THE FACTS AMOUNTED TO THE CRIME OF CONSPIRACY. AND ON THAT ISSUE, IN FACT, IN THE CASE OF THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING, HE FOUND THAT WHILE THERE WAS EVIDENCE, HE COULD NOT ESTABLISH TWO PARTS OF THE CRIME. HE COULD NOT ESTABLISH WITH ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE EITHER THE WILLFUL ATTEMPT BY KUSHNER OR DON JR. OR MANAFORT TO VIOLATE THE LAW. THAT’S A FAR CRY FROM SAYING THERE’S NO EVIDENCE. NOTWITHSTANDING TESTIFIED ON THIS ISSUE INVOLVING TRUMP TOWER AND OTHER INTERACTIONS LIKE THE POLLING DATA THAT WAS FAR MORE ONGOING THAN WE KNEW, THAT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL COULD NOT ESTABLISH A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF A JURY. LET ME SAY TO SUM UP, AS I SAID SOMETIME AGO. WHETHER THE ACTS ARE CRIMINAL OR NOT. WHETHER THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WAS CRIMINAL OR NOT OR WHETHER THE CONTACTS WERE SUFFICIENTLY ELICIT, THEY ARE UNQUESTIONABLY DISHONEST, UNETHICAL, AND SHOULD BE CONDEMNED BY EVERY AMERICAN. THAT’S THE SUBJECT OF CONDEMNATION. AND THAT’S HOW WE SHOULD VIEW THE MUELLER REPORT. >>DID THE MUELLER REPORT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS ALL YOUR QUESTIONS REGARDING CONSPIRACY OR COLLUSION? OR DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? >>THERE ARE SECTIONS THAT ARE REDACTED AND SOME THAT GO TO FACTS THAT ARE NOT BEING PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC. OTHER SECTIONS THAT ARE ALMOST COMPLETELY REDACTED GO TO THE PROSECUTORIAL JUDGMENT. WHEN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL LOOKED AT TESTIFIED, WIKILEAKS AND THE CONTACTS BETWEEN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND WIKILEAKS. THE SECTIONS ON THE EXERCISE OF THAT PROSECUTORIAL JUDGMENT, WHY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL CONCLUDED, HAVE BEEN LARGELY REDACTED AND WE NEED TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION. WE’LL BE SEEKING THE COMPLETE AND UN-REDACTED REPORT SO WE CAN DO PROPER OVERSIGHT. AS THE SPECIAL COUNSEL MAKES CLEAR IN THE REPORT, THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE FINDINGS ARE NOT COMPLETELY INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT. THAT THERE WERE FBI AGENTS EMBEDDED IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S TEAM WHO WERE HOOKING AT THE ISSUE OF COMPROMISE OR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE. THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HAS REQUESTED THAT MUELLER COME AND TESTIFY. WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT WAS FOUND IN TERMS OF COUNTERINTELLIGENCE EFFORTS, ANY EFFORTS BY THE RUSSIAN TO MAKE USE OF PERSONS, PARTICULARLY THOSE AS. >>THE PRESIDENT TWEETED OUT GAME OVER? IS IT GAME OVER? AND HAS YOUR OPINION CHANGED AS A RESULT OF WHAT YOU READ TODAY? >>IT’S CERTAINLY NOT GAME OVER. THERE’S A LOT MORE THAT’S REDACTED IN THIS REPORT AND FELT THIS REPORT ONLY GOING TO WHAT IS CRIMINAL OR NOT CRIMINAL. OTHER ACTIONS THAT MAY HAVE COMPROMISED THE PRESIDENT MAY OR MAY NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT. WE NEED TO FIND OUT THE ANSWERS. BUT WE WILL BE GUIDED BY THE GOOD, INVESTIGATIVE WORK. IT IS NOT OUR INTENTION TO REDO ALL THE PAINSTAKING WORK AND IT WOULDN’T BE POSSIBLE FOR US TO DO SO. THERE WERE A, THAT WE DO NOT HAVE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE FACTS THAT ARE NOW ESTABLISHED BY THIS REPORT ARE DAMNING. WHETHER THEY COULD OR SHOULD HAVE RESULTED IN THE INDICTMENT OF THE PRESIDENT OR PEOPLE AROUND HIM, THEY ARE DAMNING. AND WE SHOULD CALL FOR BETTER FROM OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE STANDARD CAN’T BE YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT AS LONG AS YOU CAN DECLARE AT THE END OF THE DAY, I AM NOT A CROOK. [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >>KELLYANNE CONWAY CLEARLY HASN’T READ THE REPORT. ALL THE FACTS ARE NOT ONLY SPELLED OUT BUT IN FAR GREATER DETAIL THAN I HAVE. THIS IS COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO INVENTED ALTERNATE FACTS AND SHE IS CONTINUING TO CLING TO ALTERNATE FACTS. [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >>WE’VE MADE TWO REQUESTS OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. FIRST THE REQUEST FOR THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE FINDINGS AND THE UNDERLYING EVIDENCE. AND IT’S VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAS — WE HAVE ALSO ASKED FOR HIS PHYSICAL TESTIMONY. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DID SAY THAT HE WOULD NOT OPPOSE THAT AND WE FULLY EXPECT THEM TO COMPLY WITH BOTH OF THOSE REQUESTS. IN TERMS OF BARR, I THINK HE’S DONE A DEEP DISSERVICE TO THE COUNTRY. AND FRANKLY, HE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN CONFIRMED WITHOUT COMMITTING TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THE INVESTIGATION. HE APPLIED FOR THE JOB BY WRITING A 19 PAGE MEMO. HE MADE GOOD ON THE JOB APPLICATION AND WHAT HE HAS DONE THUS FAR. I THINK IT WAS A GRAVE ERROR BY THE SENATE TO CONFIRM HIM WITHOUT DEMANDING HIS RECUSAL. [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ] >>IT’S A DISSERVICE TO THE COUNTRY AND TO GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS UNWILLING TO DO WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD. NOT THE FIRST TIME HE HAS RENEGED ON A COMMITMENT. WHEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVIEW SOMEONE IN PERSON, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO THE TRUTH. AND THAT WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. AS I SUSPECTED AND SAID WHILE THIS WAS GOING ON I THOUGHT IT WAS A MISTAKE NOT TO SUBPOENA THE PRESIDENT. >>THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DID SET OUT HIS CONSIDERATIONS, AND THE PRESIDENT WOULD FIGHT IT. AND HE WOULD HAVE TO LITIGATE IT. >>FORGIVE ME, I GOT HERE A LITTLE BIT LATE. IF YOU’VE ALREADY ASKED THIS QUESTION, I UNDERSTAND. DOES WHAT YOU SAW IN THE REPORT RISE TO THE LEVEL WHERE IMPEACHMENT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED? >>WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE FULL REPORT. CERTAINLY WHAT BOB MUELLER HAS REVEALED ON THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ISSUE IS THE MOST CONCERNING. THAT INVOLVES THE PRESIDENT’S FALSE HOODS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. HIS EFFORT TO DETER PEOPLE FROM COOPERATING WITH THE INVESTIGATION. AND BILL BARR IGNORED IN HIS PRESS CONFERENCE. ALL OF THAT IS DAMNING CONDUCT BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. AND I THINK WE NEED SOME TIME TO LET THIS SINK IN AND UNDERSTAND THE FULL REPERCUSSIONS OF HAVING A PRESIDENT WHO LIES TO THE COUNTRY AND MISLEADS THE COUNTRY AND FREQUENTLY ON A DAILY BASIS. BUT THIS WAS AN ATTACK ON AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY AND AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND THAT A PRESIDENT WOULD TELL REPEATED FALSE HOODS AND WOULD NOT SIT DOWN AND ALLOW THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO ASK QUESTIONS. IN HELSINKI HE WOULD TAKE VLADIMIR PUTIN’S WORD OVER HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES. ALL OF THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CONGRESS AND THE COUNTRY. PICKUP. >>>SO RIGHT AS CONGRESSMAN ADAM SCHIFF WAS TALKING, WE HEARD THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS LEAVING THE WHITE HOUSE. THERE WAS A PODIUM SET UP, BUT HE DIDN’T STOP. >>THAT IS SURPRISING. HE DOES LIKE TO TALK. >>ESPECIALLY ON A DAY LIKE TODAY. >>BUT ADAM SCHIFF HAD A LOT TO SAY. THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS MAY NOT BE DETERMINED TO BE CRIMINAL. HE CALLED THEM UN-PATRIOTIC. >>WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF IT? >>I JUST WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO IT. AS I WAS LISTENING I WAS ALSO READING, AND WHAT ADAM SCHIFF IS SAYING IS PRECISELY WHAT WAS LEFT. AT THE END OF THE REPORT, IF I CAN READ IF I MAY, THE CONCLUSION THAT CONGRESS MAY APPLY OBSTRUCTION LAWS WORDS WITH OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND AMBULANCES, AND THE PRINCIPLE THAT NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. AND THEN THAT’S EXACTLY WHERE ADAM SCHIFF AND JERRY NADLER. WHAT TO DO WITH THE FACTS OF THE MUELLER REPORT. TO LOOK AT HOW WE LOOK AT OUR INSTITUTIONS. >>THAT MEANS THIS IS FAR FROM OVER. >>THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING. WHEN THE MUELLER REPORT WAS FILED, THAT WOULD BE THE BEGINNING TO THEN GO FORT AND ACT UNLESS THERE WERE DEFINITIVE CONCLUSIONS THAT PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO SAY IT’S OVER. AND THERE ARE NOT. >>AND ADAM SHIFT ACCUSED WILLIAM BARR OF MISCHARACTERIZING THE REPORT. >>THEY’VE BEEN ALL OVER TWITTER SAYING THAT SEMI-LY. AND IF YOU LOOK AT HOW REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS ON CAPITOL HILL HAVE BEEN REACTING, I’VE SEEN THESE SORT OF HEADLINES, NO COLLUSION. >>AND NO OBSTRUCTION. >>SYNDICATION ON THE COLLUSION FRONT. AND ALSO ON THE OBSTRUCTION. WHAT WAS INTERESTING. ADAM SCHIFF IS A UNIQUE FIGURE IN THIS WHOLE INVESTIGATIVE SAGA. HE’S A FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY. AND WHEN I WAS ON THE JEWISH COMMITTEE YEARS AGO. HE LED AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL AGAINST TWO JUDGES. HE’S TAXICAB I A TRIAL THROUGH TO THE MATTE AND HE KNOWS HOW LONG THE PROCESSES CAN TAKE. AND WHEN HE WAS ASKED WILL THIS HEED TO IMPEACHMENT, WE’RE NOT FROM YESTERDAY. IT TEAKS MONTHS THE MONTHS AND MONTHS. AND COULD COINCIDE WITH THE ELECTION. >>WE’RE LOOKING AT MARINE ONE HEADED TO ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE WHERE THEY WILL TAKE PRESIDENT TRUMP TO MAR-A-LAGO. MICHAEL GRAHAM IS IN BOSTON AND HE’S A CBSN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR AND A REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF ALL OF THIS? >>THAT DONALD TRUMP IS A HAPPY MAN. HE WAS NOT MARCHED OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE IN HANDCUFFS. >>HOW ARE REPUBLICANS RESPONDING? WE JUST HEARD ADAM SCHIFF AND REPUBLICANS ARE NOT BIG FANS OF ADAM SCHIFF AND HOW ARE THEY RESPONDING IN GENERAL? >>YOU HAVE THE TRUMP SUPPORTERS, AND THEY SEE THIS NOT JUST AS A WIN FOR TRUMP BUT AS A SETBACK FOR THEIR NUMBER ONE ENEMY WHO IS NOT RUSSIA, NOT THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS, BUT THE MEDIA. IF YOU SPEND ANY TIME LISTENING TO TALK RADIO, THEY ARE GLOATING AT A STORY THAT WAS WRONG FROM THE BEGINNING. THE REPUBLICANS WHO YOU MIGHT CALL AS PART OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OR WHATEVER, THEY HAVE NOTED JUST HOW DISTURBING IT IS TO SEE SO MANY FALSE STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDENT AND FROM THE PEOPLE AROUND HIM ALL BROUGHT TOGETHER IN ONE REPORT. IT’S HARD NOT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE TRUTH HAVE A DATING RELATIONSHIPS A BEST. HAVING IT ALL PUT IN ONE PLACE THOUGH IS TOXIC AND HARD TO LOOK LIKE. AND TEAM TRUMP IS STILL ON BOARD. THEY JUST WANT TO WIN. >>HAVE YOU READ THE REPORT? >>I’VE BEEN READING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT IT. WE’RE COMPILING ALL THE COMMENTS FROM THE CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT. SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS, ONE PART THAT I KNOW THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT HAVE FOCUSED ON THE PART, PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT THE SENTENCE FROM MUELLER, WE DID NOT, WE ARE NOT EXONERATING TRUMP. THE ONE THAT BARR QUOTED AND THEN THEY GO BACK AND SAY HE’S NOT INNOCENT. AND THIS REALLY BOTHERS HIM. THE IDEA THAT YOU WOULD PUT THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON ANY ACCUSED. THERE’S A SENSE, THEY ARE REMINDING DEMOCRATS WHETHER IT’S A JUDGE, BRETT KAVANAUGH OR DONALD TRUMP, THE PREMISSES OF INNOCENCE IS A LOT BIGGER THAN ANY ONE PRESIDENCY. >>DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF THAT. >>I REALLY DO THINK THAT EXACTLY WHAT MICHAEL ACCESS. IN A CORRAL KISS IS QUESTION IS GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY. IT’S WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN PROVE SOMEONE GUILTY OF A CRIME. AND IF YOU THINK OR BELIEVE THEY ARE GUILTY AND YOU CAN’T BELIEVE IT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. YOU MUST ACQUIT. THAT IS OUR SYSTEM OF JUSTICE. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MUELLER REPORT IS MUELLER’S PEOPLE WERE IN A STATE OF, THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE WHO LIVED IN THE SPECIAL COUNT’S OFFICE WHO BELIEVED IN DEEDS. THERE WERE OTHERS WHO FELT DIFFERENTLY. AND THEN ROBERT MUELLER GAVE THE AT THE TO ROB ROSENSTEIN AND THEY MADE A DECISION THAT THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH TO GET A CRIMINAL CONVICTION BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS ROBERT MUELLER CAN, >>ERROL BARNETT IS IN WASHINGTON. WHAT DID THE REPORT SAY ABOUT THE LENGTH THE ADMINISTRATION WENT TO LIE TO THE PRESS IN THE COURSE OF THE PRESS INVESTIGATING? >>THERE’S A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE FROM PRESS SECRETARY SARAH SANDERS, THE DAY AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP FIRED JAMES COMEY. AND SHE WAS ASKED BY OUR STEVE PORT ANNOY, WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THOSE TELLING US THAT THEY’VE LOST A CHAMPION. SARAH SANDERS SAID THAT I’VE BEEN HEARING THAT THEY ARE GLAD COMEY IS OUT. IT DETAILS HOW THE SECRETARY SAID THAT WAS NOT ACTUALLY, SHE COULDN’T PROVE THAT WAS TRUE. AND THEY FOUND THAT WHAT SHE SAID WAS NOT BACKED UP BY ANY KIND OF EVIDENCE. IT WAS SOMETHING SHE SAID IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT. AS WE DON’T TO AFTER HE ASKED THAT RESPOND, SHE GAVE THE SAME ANSWER TO THE BRIEFING ROOM. IT SPEAKS TO THE EFFORTS NOT JUST FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP GETTING THOSE AROUND HIM TO DO HIS BIDDING BUT HOW DIFFICULT IT WAS FOR THE TOP MESSAGING STAFF AT THE WHITE HOUSE TO KIND OF BE ON THE SAME PAGE WITH THE PRESIDENT WHEN IT’S NOT BACKED UP BY FACTS. IN MANY WAYS, THIS HAS DAMAGED THE CREDIBILITY OF NOT JUST PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE WHITE HOUSE BUT OF THE COMMUNICATION THAT COMING FROM THERE. THE SPECIAL COUNCIL REPORT WOULD SUGGEST THAT’S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. >>I WANT TO REMIND THE VIEWERS HERE, JAMES COMEY WAS TEACHING A CLASS IN CALIFORNIA TO YOUNGER FBI AGENTS WHEN BEHIND HIM, BECAUSE THE NEWS WAS ON BEHIND HIM, THAT’S HOW HE LEARNED HE WAS FIRED. THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS NOT HOW OUR INSTITUTIONS SHOULD WORK. HE TURNED AROUND AND WENT IN ANOTHER ROOM AND HE HAD TO GO BACK TO WASHINGTON IN DISGRACE. >>SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP SAY AND WE LOVE THAT WE’RE NOT DOING IT ANY MORE. WE’RE LOVE THAT WE’RE UPENDING. >>PRESIDENT TRUMP LOOKS TO BE A DISRUPTER. I SAY THIS BECAUSE HE HAS OFTEN ADMITTED THAT. AND WE KNOW IT FROM STEVE BANNON. THE MORE CHAOS AND DISRUPTION, THE MORE YOU CAN CHANGE WHAT’S GOING ON. >>CAN WE BRING IN MICHAEL GRAHAM. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW THE PRESS IS THE ENEMY FOR A CERTAIN GROUP OF TRUMP’S BASE. SO IT KIND OF GOES BOTH WAYS DOESN’T IT? >>OH, SURE. AND I WOULD BE LESS KIND THAN YOU. SARAH SANDERS LIED, COMPLETELY LIED. AND TRUMP SUPPORTERS WOULD TURN AROUND AND SAY IF YOU LIKE YOUR DOCTORS, KEEP YOUR DOCTOR. AND THEY ROLLED BACK TO. THE DIFFERENCE IS NOT POLITICIANS. I’M A MEMBER OF THE PRESS IN MY OWN WEIRD WAY. THE HEAT, THE ANGER I GET WHEN I TALK TO. LIKE ADAM SCHIFF, IT’S HIS JOB TO MAKE HIS CASE. BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THE MEDIA ARE NOT FAIR ARBITERS. WHEN YOU TELL THEM THAT SARAH SANDERS LIED TO THE PRESS, WELL, THAT’S BECAUSE THE PRESS LIKES ABOUT TRUMP ALL THE TIME. I THINK MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA, PARTICULARLY SOME OF THE NETWORKS, THEY REALLY SOLD THE COLLUSION STORY ALMOST. DID WE DO THIS IN A WAY THAT LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN FOR US TO OPEN THE DOOR. >>WE ARE LOOKING AT AIR FORCE ONE SITTING ON THE TARMAC. THE PRESIDENT AND THE FIRST LADY HAVE ALREADY BOARDED. PRESIDENT TRUMP DID NOT SPEAK TO THE CAMERAS. IS IT THAT HE DOESN’T WANT TO GLOAT? THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A BIG DAY FOR HIM. YOU WOULD THINK HE’S HE’S WATCH TO >>NO MATTER HOW WE CUT IT. >>HIS CAMPAIGN MANAGER’S STATEMENT THAT WE READ EARLIER IN THE DAY ACTED AS IF THERE WAS NOT AN UNFLATTERING CLAUSE IN ALL OF THE 400 PAGES. >>HOW MUCH OF TRUMP WORLD WILL READ THE ENTIRE REPORT? >>HOW MANY AMERICANS ARE GOING TO READ IT? IT’S A HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT. >>WHAT’S THE ANSWER? >>NOT MANY. >>THEY’LL THEY’RE GOING TO TURN TO RUSH LIMBAUGH, FOX NEWS, ET CETERA. AND YOU ASKED ABOUT THE GLOATING. THE PRESIDENT TWEETED OUT THE GAME OF THRONES THING. >>GAME OVER, HE SAID. >>BASICALLY, THIS IS BATTLE AND I AM THE CONQUEROR. THE SMART PLAY IS TO BE QUIET AND LET YOUR BASE HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE YOU’RE GOING TO HEAR FROM. AND LET THE OTHER PEOPLE DO WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO. I AM NOT INDICTED. THERE IS NO CHARGE. THAT PART OF THIS IS OVER. AND I’M STILL FIGHTING. I THINK THIS IS ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE SILENCE HELPS TRUMP. TRUMP IS SO BAD AT BEING FIRED. HIRE, I HAVE NEVER SEEN A LID AS TIGHT ON AN INVESTIGATION IN WASHINGTON, D.C. USUALLY THERE’S LEAKS ALL OVER THE PLACE. BUT NOW, NOW IT’S ALL COMING OUT IN THE PUBLIC. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? JERRY NADLER GETS TO FOLLOW UP ON THESE QUOTES. WHO KNOWS? MAYBE HE’S CALL SARAH SANDERS. AND COME UP BEFORE THE CAMERAS AND WE CAN HEAR HIM SPEAK TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES. >>JEFF SESSIONS. >>JEFF SESSIONS. HE HAD COLORFUL DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DAY THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP FOUND OUT ABOUT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. >>AND KELLY ANN CON WAY SAID I LOVED IT. I NEVER SAW THAT. HE WAS WITH HIM EVERY DAY AND BEAUTIFUL IS IN THE EYES OF THE BE MOLDER. F. BASED ON WHAT RICKY JUST SAID, THE 400 PAGE MUELLER REPORT, DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE ALWAYS FELT THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP DOESN’T PLAY BY THE RULES AND HE’S AN UNTOWARD CHARACTER ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BELIEVE THAT. AND THOSE WHO ARE TRUE SUPPORTERS WILL REMAIN IN THAT LANE BASED ON THE REPORT. THE MANY TRUMP RALLIES AND EVENTS THAT I’VE BEEN TWO, WHEN I, THIS STUFF DOES NOT REGISTER. AND AMERICANS ARE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT HEALTHCARE, THE COST OF LIVING, THEIR JOBS THAN THEY ARE ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT AND THE SPECIAL INVESTIGATION. >>THIS IS PERHAPS THE END OF THE BEGINNING. AND NOW A NEW THEME AS WE APPROACH 2020. WE’LL SEE DEMOCRATS AND PERHAPS THE HOUSE INVESTIGATIVE BODIES WILL TRY AND CONNECT THE DOTS AND RUN THE THREAD THROUGH SOME LINES CHAFF OPENED HERE. AND OTHER DEMOCRATS WILL GOING TO WANT TO GET ON WITH BUSINESS. WHILE PRESIDENT TRUMP WE USUALLY CHARACTERIZE. IF THERE WAS NO COLLUSION AND NO CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, THE PRESIDENT NOW IS UP AGAINST WHOM? IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT KIND OF TWEETS WE SEE FROM HIM AND WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. I THINK IT’S THE END OF THE BEGINNING, AND NOW WE’RE IN 2020 MODE. >>LET’S ASSUME THAT TRUMP WORLD DISMISSES ALL OF THIS. IS THERE A FEAR AMONGST TRUMP SUPPORTERS, THOSE IN CONSERVATIVE MEDIA, THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE ENOUGH FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO RALLY THEIR BASE AND KNOCK HIM OUT. >>HIS APPROVAL RATING IS 24%. THE TODAY THAT IT BEGAN WAS 42%. THIS HAS CHANGED NOTHING. EVERYONE IS STILL ON THE SAME TEAM. HIS CHALLENGE IS THE SAME ONE HE HAD. HOW DO YOU MAKE YOU 45 OR 46% OF THE POPULAR VOTE TRANSLATE INTO A WIN. >>IT’S THE SQUISHY MIDDLE THAT EVERYONE HAS TO FOCUS ON. WE’RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK AND WE’LL BE BACK WITH MORE NEWS ON THE OTHER END, YOU’RE STREAMING CBSN. >>>THERE ARE GROWING QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THE PRESIDENT OVERSTEPPED HIS AUTHORITY FOLLOWING THE RELEASE OF THE REDACTED MUELLER REPORT. >>WHAT ARE THE HEADLINES FOR YOU, ZEKE? >>THE BIGGEST HEADLINE AS YOU WERE DISCUSSING IS HOW THE PRESIDENT’S AIDES SAVED HIM FROM HIMSELF. THE INSTINCTS HAVE ONLY DEEPENED HIS EXPOSURE. THIS REPORT WAS DIVIDED UP INTO TWO VOLUMES. VOLUME TWO DIDN’T NEED TO HAPPEN. THAT WHOLE INCH AND A HALF OF THAT 3-INCH STACK HAPPENED BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT TOOK ALL OF THOSE ACTIONS. >>VOLUME TWO OF THE ENTIRE MUELLER REPORT IS A RESULT OF THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO VOLUME ONE AS IT WERE. >>EXACTLY. AND WE’VE LEARNED FROM REPORTING AND ALSO FROM SOME OF THE INCIDENTS DOCUMENTED IN THE REPORT THAT WE HADN’T HEARD BEFORE. HOW THE PRESIDENT’S AIDES SORT OF JUMPED ON THE GRENADES THAT THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF WAS PULLING THE PIN ON. HE WAS TAKING ACTIONS DAY BY DAY THAT WERE THREATENING HIS VERY PRESIDENCY AND OUR SYSTEM OF DEMOCRACY AND PEOPLE AROUND HIM WERE SAVING HIM. THE THING THAT SAVED THE PRESIDENT AT THE END OF THE DAY WAS PEOPLE NOT OBEYING HIS DIRECTIVES, AND THAT’S REALLY STRIKING. >>GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT FIRED SO MANY PEOPLE. I AM THINKING OF THE GOOD FOLKS FROM LOUISIANA WHO ARE WATCHING THIS AND HAVE EITHER TURNED OFF THE TELEVISION OR TIRED OF US GOING ON AD NAUSEAM. AND THINK THAT IT’S VERY SIMPLE. THEY FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION, SO MOVE ON. WHAT IS YOUR LEGAL TAKE ON THAT OPINION? >>IT’S MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. AND I UNDERSTAND THE INSTINCT TO WANT TO TUNE OUT BASED ON THE PRE-REPORT PRESS RELEASE AND THE STATEMENTS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT HAVE BEEN DECLARING LOUDLY. NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION. NO EXONERATION. BUT THE PROBLEM AND TANYA, I THINK YOU WERE LEADING US INTO THE QUESTION, HOW MUELLER WAS LOOKING AT THE OBSTRUCTION CASE. AND HE SAYS HE’S BOUND BY THE OPINION THAT HE CAN’T INDICT A PRESIDENT. HE’S A COMPONENT OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. AND THE NEXT PART OF THAT IS WELL, IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO EITHER CHARGE THE PRESIDENT WITH A CRIME. BELIEVE IT OR NOT. THE WAY PROSECUTORS VIEW A TRIAL, THAT’S A CHANCE FOR YOU TO VIEW YOUR NAME. BECAUSE HE COULDN’T INDICT MR. TRUMP, MR. TRUMP WOULDN’T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAR HIS NAME. I’M NOT GOING TO STATE IN MY REPORT THAT MR. TRUMP COMMITTED A CRIME. I’M BOUND NOT TO SAY THAT IN MY REPORT BECAUSE HE’S NOT GOING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAR HIMSELF. I CAN STATE IF I REACH THAT CONCLUSION, I COULD SAY THERE WAS NO OBSTRUCTION. THAT WOULD CLEAR HIM. THE POLLS TIES HIS ABILITY TO AFFIRMATIVELY REACH THE CONCLUSION AND ALL HE DOES IS LAY OUT TESTIFIED. AND ALL OF US ARE LEFT WITH DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT MR. BARR AND MR. ROSENSTEIN WHEN THEY WROTE THEIR INITIAL LETTER, THEY MADE THEIR OPINION. >>SHOULD CONGRESS HAVE MADE THE DETERMINATION? THAT’S THE QUESTION? >>I THINK WE’RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS CONDUCT AND NOT ALL OF US ARE LAWYERS AND CONGRESS IS NOT GOING, WOULDN’T CONDUCT A PROSECUTION, THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY BE LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE IMPEACHMENT LENS WHICH ISN’T A STRICTLY LEGAL PROCEEDING. AND ALL OF US NEED TO LOOK AT THE CONDUCT AND SAY SHOULD THE PRESIDENT HAVE HAD TO HAVE AIDES SAVE HIMSELF. >>TO THAT POINT YOU AND I ARE BOTH JOURNALISTS, NOT ATTORNEYS, NANCY PELOSI AND THE OTHERS DON’T HAVE THE VOTES ON CAPITOL HILL IF THEY WANTED TO IMPEACH HIM, CORRECT? >>NO, THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. AND IF THE HOUSE WERE TO BRING UP ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT, THE PRESIDENT IS NOT GOING TO BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE. THE CHALLENGE FOR DEMOCRATS GOING FORWARD IS HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO ON ONE HAND THE DESIRE TO CONTINUE PROSECUTING THE PRESIDENT AND THE REST OF AMERICA THAT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ON. AND WE HAVE A RECENT POLL OUT RELEASED THIS WEEK THAT DOES SHOW THAT WHILE THE PLURALITY OF AMERICANS WOULD LIKE THE INVESTIGATION TO CONTINUE. A LOT OF AMERICANS WANT US TO PUT THIS TO BED NOW THAT WE HAVE THE DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE, THAT WAS WHAT STARTED ALL OF THIS FOR A LOT OF AMERICANS. APPROACHING THE 2020 ELECTION, THEY WANT TO PUT THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION BEHIND THEM. THAT’S THE DELICATE BALANCE THAT THEY HAVE TO STRIKE. >>AS A RESULT OF THIS INVESTIGATION, THERE WERE NUMEROUS GUILTY PLEAS, SO DOES THIS AT LEAST PUT TO BED THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PROBE AS A WITCH HUNT? >>IT CERTAINLY DOES. THIS IS NOT A WITCH HUNT AND NOW SAYING IT’S VINDICATION FOR HIM. THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS AND HE HAS BEEN FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE PRESIDENTIAL’S ATTORNEYS KNEW THAT WAS NOT ABOUT CRIMINAL LIABILITY MOST LIKELY FOR THE REASONS YOU JUST DISCUSSED. IT WAS ULTIMATELY GOING TO RESULT IN IMPEACHMENT, A POLITICAL PROCESS. SO MANY OF THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS HAVE BEEN ABOUT SHAPING THE POLITICAL PROCESS, WHAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC AND WHAT LAWMAKERS DO AND SAY ABOUT ALL THESE PROCEEDINGS. BY AND LARGE, THE PRESIDENT’S RHETORIC HAS SHAPED THE WAY A LOT OF AMERICANS VIEW THIS PROBE. >>AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR, BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW, AND I REALIZE YOU HAVEN’T READ ALL 400 PAGES, BUT WOULD YOU PROSECUTE? >>I’D NEED TO READ MORE. BUT THERE ARE VERY CONCERNING ISSUES ABOUT OBSTRUCTION. BECAUSE MR. MUELLER WAS SORT OF PRECLUDED FROM CONSIDERING BUT THEY ARE DIFFICULT ISSUES, AND WHEN YOU WOULD OBVIOUSLY SEEK TO PROSECUTE AN IMAGE OF THE STATURE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP. YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE THE MOST CONVINCING AND BEST EVIDENCE AVAILABLE. I THINK IT IS A VERY CLOSE CALL. >>A CLOSE CALL. >>THANK YOU. >>OUR COVERAGE OF THE MUELLER REPORT CONTINUES AFTER A BREAK WITH FULL ANALYSIS ON RED AND BLUE. WE WILL SPEAK WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP’S FORMER LAWYER, TY COBB. YOU’RE STREAMING CBSN. >>THIS IS BIGGER THAN OPENING UP THE BORDERS. >>THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT FIRE CREWS WERE AFRAID OF. >>THIS IS WHERE THE EYE WALL IS. >>THE ANSWER IS THIS. >>>22 MONTHS OF INQUIRY, 37 INDICTMENTS, AND A 448 PAGE REPORT. RED AND BLUE STARTS NOW. >>NEARLY ONE MONTH AFTER SEEING WILLIAM BARR’S FOUR PAGE SUMMARY OF THE MUELLER REPORT, WE HAVE A MORE THAN 400 PAGE REDACTED VERSION OF IT. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DELIVERED IT TO CONGRESS ON CD- ROMS BEFORE POSTING IT ONLINE. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PREVIEWED THE REPORT FOR A SECOND TIME AND HE SAID MR. TRUMP HAD FACED AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION WHEN COMING INTO OFFICE AND HIS FRUSTRATION ABOUT THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION WAS NORMAL. >>THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS FRUSTRATED AND ANGERED BY HIS SINCERE BELIEF THAT THE INVESTIGATION WAS UNDERMINING HIS PRESIDENCY PROPELLED BY HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND FUELED BY ILLEGAL LEAKS. >>THE PRESIDENT WAS CALLING IT A HOAX ON TWITTER EARLIER. PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID HE WAS HAVING A GOOD DAY. >>I’M HAVING A GOOD DAY TOO. NO COLLUSION. NO OBSTRUCTION. THERE NEVER WAS, BY THE WAY AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. >>THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS CRITICIZED FOR WHEN HE DIRECTLY QUOTED DOLLARS REPORT. ONE OF THEM WAS THIS, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL STATES THAT WHILE THIS REPORT DOES NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME, IT DOES NOT EXONERATE HIM. NOW WE KNOW HOW THE REST OF THAT GRAPH WENT. IT SAID, IF WE HAD CONFIDENCE AFTER A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE WE WAS SO STATE. BASED ON THE FACTS AND APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS WE ARE UNABLE TO REACH THAT JUDGMENT. THE EVIDENCE WE OBTAINED ABOUT THE PRESIDENTS ACTIONS AND INTENT PRESENTS DIFFICULT ISSUES THAT PREVENT US FROM DETERMINING THAT NO CRIMINAL CONDUCT OCCURRED. ACCORDINGLY WHILE THIS REPORT DOES NOT CONCLUDE THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME, IT DOES NOT EXONERATE HIM. IN A MOMENT WE WILL GET REPORTS FROM AROUND WASHINGTON AND SPEAK WITH THE LEGAL EXPERTS WHO HAVE GUIDED US THROUGH THE MOTHER INVESTIGATION CENTS ITS INCEPTION. BUT FIRST I’D LIKE TO TURN TO TY COBB WHO REPRESENTED PRESIDENT TRUMP IN MATTERS CONCERNING THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION AND HE JOINS ME ON THE PHONE. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US. >>NICE TO BE WITH YOU. >>WHAT DID YOU MAKE IT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S FINDINGS AND HOW DID WILLIAM BARR’S INITIAL SUMMARY OF IT COMPARE? >>I THINK THE INITIAL SUMMARY COMPARES FAVORABLY WITH THE REPORT. THE INITIAL SUMMARY FRANKLY WITH THREE PAGES LONGER THAN THE REGULATIONS REQUIRE. THE REGULARIZATION’S ONLY REQUIRE A NOTIFICATIONS TO CONGRESS THAT THE REPORT HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS. PLUS IT IS TOTALLY DISCRETIONARY WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT PROVIDES ANY OF THE REPORT AND HE’S NOT OBLIGATED LEGALLY TO DO SO. HE ELECTED TO DO SO BECAUSE OF THE EXTREME PUBLIC INTEREST. >>WAS IT AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL NOW THAT YOU’VE SEEN THE REPORT? >>VERY MUCH SO. >>WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU DISCUSSED THIS WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP OR HIS LAWYERS? >>I HAVE INTERMITTENT DISCUSSIONS WITH SOME OF THE LAWYERS. I HAVE NOT BEEN REALLY INTO FIGHTER PILOT SEAT SINCE I LEFT THE WHITE HOUSE LAST JUNE. >>PRESIDENT TRUMP’S ATTORNEY SAID IN AN INTERVIEW EARLIER HE GOT AN EARLY VERSION OF THE MUELLER REPORT ON TUESDAY. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT? SHOULD HE HAVE SEEN IT THAT EARLY? >>CERTAINLY. THE LAW IS CLEAR THAT UNDER THE ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT, SOMEONE WHO WAS THE SUBJECT OF A REPORT LIKE THIS HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND COMMENT IN ADVANCE. AND LIKEWISE, IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT PERSONAL COUNSEL SEE IT SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL ABOUT ANY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE CLAIMS THAT MIGHT BE MADE. IT IS HIGHLY UNUSUAL THAT EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE WAS NOT INVOKED. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COOPERATIVE AND TRANSPARENT APPROACH THAT THE WHITE HOUSE SELECTED FROM THE START BY VOLUNTARILY PRODUCING EVERY WITNESS AND ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS. HAD THE WHITE HOUSE NOT WAIVED EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON VOLUME 2 BECAUSE ALMOST ALL OF THE INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. >>I DO WANT TO PLAY WHAT WILLIAM BARR SAID EARLIER ABOUT WHITE HOUSE COOPERATION WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. >>THE WHITE HOUSE FULLY COOPERATED WITH THE INVESTIGATION PROVIDING UNFETTERED ACCESS TO CAMPAIGN AND WHITE HOUSE DOCUMENTS, DIRECTING SENIOR AIDES TO TESTIFY FREELY, AND ASSERTING NO PRIVILEGE CLAIMS. AT THE SAME TIME THE PRESIDENT TOOK NO ACT AND THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES NECESSARY TO COMPLETE HIS INVESTIGATION. >>I’D LIKE TO POINT OUT THE PRESIDENT THAT PROVIDE WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON RUSSIA -RELATED TOPICS BUT NEVER SAT DOWN FOR AN INTERVIEW WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL ARE ANSWERED QUESTIONS RELATED TO OBSTRUCTION. DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE AND IS THAT AN EXAMPLE OF FULL COOPERATION? >>YES IT IS. THE LEGAL STANDARD IS WHETHER OR NOT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL HAD ADEQUATE INFORMATION FROM OTHER SOURCES AND COULD DEMONSTRATE A COMPELLING NEED FOR THAT. AS THE REPORT CONCEDES, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL DECIDED NOT TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA BECAUSE THEY HAD SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FROM OTHER SOURCES. >>CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT THE PROCESS WAS LIKE WHEN YOU WERE IN THE WHITE HOUSE OF HANDLING QUESTIONS FROM THE SPECIAL COUNSEL? >>CERTAINLY. PEOPLE WOULD BE ASTONISHED TO KNOW HOW COLLABORATIVE AS OPPOSED TO ADVERSARIAL IT WAS. EVERYBODY HAD AN INTEREST IN DOING THIS PROFESSIONALLY AND APPROPRIATELY FOR THE COUNTRY. THERE WERE DISAGREEMENTS, BUT THEY WERE NEVER PERSONAL. THERE WERE NEGOTIATIONS, AND ONCE IT WAS AGREED WHAT WOULD BE PROVIDED, THERE IS EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN QUICKLY. ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED IN A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS OR SO, ONCE AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED AS TO WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE DESIRED. THE WITNESS INTERVIEWS WERE CONCLUDED, WELL, LET’S SEE, I THINK I WAS FIRST ASKED FOR WITNESSES IN MID-TO LATE AUGUST. ALL OF THE INTERVIEWS OF A COUPLE DOZEN WHITE HOUSE EMPLOYEES WHO TESTIFIED WERE COMPLETED BY EARLY JANUARY. >>IT IS NICE TO HEAR THAT IT WAS HARMONIOUS. PUBLICLY IT APPEARED ADVERSARIAL. THE PRESIDENT WAS CALLING THE INVESTIGATION OF WHAT, WHICH ON. HAVING SEEN THE REPORT NOW AND HOW MANY CHARGES AND INDICTMENTS AND GUILTY PLEAS HAVE COME OUT OF IT, HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION? >>I NEVER SAID IT WAS A HOAX AND I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR BOB MUELLER AND MANY ON HIS TEAM. AND TO HAVE NO, I HAVE KNOWN BOB SINCE 1983 WHEN WE WERE BOTH FEDERAL PROSECUTORS IN DIFFERENT OFFICES. I HAVE A HIGH REGARD FOR HIM. I THINK THE RESULTING REPORT IS PROFESSIONAL, THOROUGH, AND HE HAS PROBABLY 10 TIMES THE TOOLS IF NOT 100 TIMES THE TROLLS TO INVESTIGATE THAN CONGRESS DOES. AND I DO NOT THINK HE COULD’VE DONE A MORE THOROUGH JOB WITH THE THOUSANDS OF INTERVIEWS, SUBPOENAS, AND MILLIONS OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED. THE 500 WITNESSES THAT THEY TALK TO ALSO >>I CAN JUST IMAGINE THE BOXES AND BOXES OF INTERVIEW NOTES THAT MUST BE SOMEWHERE. >>A LOT OF DEAD TREES. >>WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >>MY PLEASURE. >>LET’S BRING IN CLAIRE, RICKY, KIM, GABBY, AND ERROL. CLAIRE IS A ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY. RICKY IS A CBS NEWS LEGAL ANALYST AND SO IS KIM. ABBY IS A WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR POLITICO AND CBS CORRESPONDED ERROL BARNETT IS WITH US FOR THE ENTIRE HOUR. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF TY COBB’S INTERVIEW THERE? >>FIRST OF ALL I’D LIKE TO SAY I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR TY COBB AS A LAWYER. I THINK HE IS TOWING THE PARTY LINE. I THINK THAT HE IS SAYING WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR HIM TO SAY SINCE HE HAD BEEN INVOLVED AS THE PRESIDENT’S LAWYER. BUT THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION WE KNOW FROM THE MUELLER REPORT WAS QUITE DIFFERENT. IT GOES BACK TO YOUR QUESTION THAT IT WAS NOT AS HARMONIOUS AS TY COBB WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE. TY COBB MAY HAVE TOTALLY COOPERATED WITH THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION AND I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THAT. WE DO KNOW FROM THE MUELLER REPORT ITSELF, SIMPLY BY LOOKING AT THE ONE INCIDENT AMONG MANY INVOLVING DON McGANN THAT AT SOME POINT OBVIOUSLY THE PRESIDENT WAS SO IRKED WHY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S TO USE MR. TRUMP’S WORDS, A HOAX AND A WITCH HUNT, THAT HE ORDERED DON McGANN AS WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO FIRE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. DON McGANN CAME TO THE LEVEL OF ACTUALLY PACKING HIS BAGS AFTER CALLING ANOTHER LAWYER TO SAY, WHAT SHOULD I DO? AND HE WAS READY TO RESIGN AND PACK IT ALL UP AND GO. AND SO, IF YOU FIND THE PRESIDENT TRUMP BY VIRTUE OF THE MUELLER REPORT WAS EITHER EXASPERATED OR FRIGHTENED ABOUT THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION, THAT IS HARDLY HARMONIOUS. >>YOU CALLED McGANN’S ACTIONS HEROIC. I’D LIKE TO GET TO THAT IN A MOMENT. WE HEARD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TALK ABOUT THE PRESIDENTS MINDSET WHEN IT CAME TO MAKING A DECISION ON OBSTRUCTION. HOW MUCH DOES THE CONTEXT ACCOUNT LEGALLY? >>WELL, THE NEED TO BE AN INTENT TO OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION. AND HERE I THINK THE QUESTION HAD TO DO WITH MOTIVE. IT IS MORE FOR IT WOULD PERSUADE A JURY AND WHY WOULD MR. TRUMP TAKE THE STEPS TO IMPEDE THE INVESTIGATION IF HE WAS NOT WORRIED ABOUT WHAT ROBERT MUELLER WOULD FIND? THAT IS A JUDGMENT CALL. I HAVE BEEN READING CAREFULLY OVER THE LEGAL STANDARDS IN THE MUELLER REPORT ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THE STANDARDS REQUIRE AN ENDEAVOR TO TAKE A STEP THAT IS LIKELY TO AFFECT AN INVESTIGATION. SO MAKING AN ATTEMPT TO FIRE THE PROSECUTOR AND THEN YOUR COUNSEL REFUSES TO, THAT WOULD SEEM TO SATISFY THOSE TWO ELEMENTS. THERE IS A WRINKLE WHICH IS CLEAR FROM THE REPORT BUT NOT CLEAR FROM WILLIAM BARR’S DESCRIPTION OF THE REPORT WHICH IS THAT MUELLER WAS AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO INDICT HIM. HE SAID I’M NOT GOING TO MAKE A CONCLUSION IN A PUBLIC FILING THAT EVEN IF WE WERE TO INDICT HIM UNDER SEAL IT WITH THE. IT IS NOT OKAY TO BASICALLY INDICT SOMEONE WITHOUT ACTUALLY INDICTING THEM. YOU EITHER DO IT, OR YOU DON’T DO IT AND SINCE I CAN’T DO IT, I WANT. THE PROBLEM IS A BIGGER CONSTITUTIONAL ONE FOR THIS COUNTRY. DO WE HAVE A PRESIDENCY THAT IS ABOVE THE LAW? THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR MR. MUELLER OR MR. TRUMP. IT IS AN ISSUE FOR MR. BARR BUT HE HAS A BROAD VIEW OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER. IT IS AN ISSUE FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. THIS TURN OF EVENTS MEETS A MORE POWERFUL PRESIDENCY AND A MORE POWERFUL PRESIDENCY MEANS PEOPLE GET LOST AND THEIR RIGHTS GET TRAMPLED ON AT SOME POINT. >>AND ULTIMATELY AN ISSUE FOR CONGRESS. I WANT TO GO BACK TO LAST OCTOBER WHEN TRUMP SAID HE HAD NO INTENTION OF SHUTTING DOWN THE MUELLER PROBE. >>WILL YOU PLEDGE, PLEDGE THAT YOU WILL NOT SHUT DOWN THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION? >>I DON’T PLEDGE ANYTHING. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING THAT. I THINK THAT IS A VERY UNFAIR INVESTIGATION. THERE IS NO COLLUSION OF ANY KIND. >>YOU WANT PLEDGE? >>WHY SHOULD I PLEDGE TO YOU? >>AS WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THE MUELLER REPORT SAID IN JUNE 20 17th OF PRESIDENT DIRECTOR DON McGANN TO REMOVE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. úSO WHAT DO YO COMPARISON? >>WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH LAWYERS AT THAT POINT AND WAS VERY CAREFUL IN WHAT HE SAID TO LESLIE STAHL. AT THAT MOMENT HE DID NOT HAVE AN INTENTION. OF COURSE THAT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND NOW WE KNOW THAT APPARENTLY EARLIER WE KNOW FROM THE MUELLER REPORT HE TOOK A DIFFERENT POSITION WITH MR. McGANN. >>AGAIN, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DIFFERENCES THERE. >>THAT WASN’T THE ONLY TIME WE LEARNED THAT SOMEONE MISLED THE PUBLIC. HERE IS WHAT SARAH SANDERS SAID IN 2017 ABOUT JAMES COMEY. LET’S LISTEN. >>RANK AND FILE WITHIN THE BUREAU LOST FAITH. A SPECIAL AGENT INSIDE ROAD US AND SAID THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE BUREAU IS IN FAVOR OF DIRECTOR COMEY AND THIS IS A TOTAL SHOCK. THE REAL LOSERS HERE ARE 20,000 FRONT-LINE PEOPLE IN THE ORGANIZATION BECAUSE THEY LOST THE ONLY GUY WORKING HERE IN THE PAST 15 YEARS WHO ACTUALLY CARED ABOUT THEM. WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO THESE RANK-AND-FILE FBI AGENTS WHO — >>WE HAVE HEARD FROM COUNTLESS MEMBERS OF THE FBI THAT’S A VERY DIFFERENT THINGS. IN FACT, THE PRESIDENT WILL BE MEETING WITH ACTING DIRECTOR McCABE LATER TODAY TO DISCUSS THAT VERY THING. THE MORALE OF THE FBI AS WELL AS MAKE AN OFFER TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE FBI IF HE FEELS THAT IS NECESSARY. >>AND THE REPORTS SHE WAS ASKED ABOUT WHERE SHE GOT THIS INFORMATION AND WHAT DID SHE KNOWLEDGE? >>AT THE END OF THE DAY THE REPORT SHOWS THERE WAS NO ISSUE OF MORALE AT THE FBI AS IT RELATED TO THE LEADERSHIP OF JAMES COMEY. IN FACT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL NOTES IN THIS REPORT THAT AFTER THAT PRESS BRIEFING QUOTE CENTER SPOKE TO THE PRESIDENT AND TOLD HER SHE DID A GOOD JOB AND DID NOT POINT OUT ANY INACCURACIES. SANDERS TOLD THIS OFFICE HER REFERENCE TO HEARING FROM COUNTLESS MEMBERS OF THE FBI WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE. SHE RECALLED THAT HER STATEMENT IN A SEPARATE INTERVIEW THAT RANK-AND-FILE FBI AGENTS HAD LOST CONFIDENCE IN COMEY WAS SOMETHING SHE MADE IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT THAT WAS NOT FOUNDED ON ANYTHING. SO THIS IS BEING INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT SARAH SANDERS ON THAT OCCASION ON MAY 10 LIGHT TO THE PRESS THAT SHE SPOKE ABOUT A LACK OF SUPPORT FOR COMEY AT THE FBI. WHAT IS INTERESTING THAT SHE IS MAKING THIS EXCUSE THAT MAYBE IT WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE THAT DAY. THE FOLLOWING DAY SHE WAS ASKED A SIMILAR QUESTION BY FOX NEWS AND GET THE SAME RESPONSE. IT IS CLEAR BASED ON THE SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT THAT SARAH SANDERS IN HER EFFORT TO PROTECT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S DECISION TO FIRE JAMES COMEY WITHOUT TELLING THE TRUTH. THERE IS A REAL CREDIBILITY ISSUE WITH THIS WHITE HOUSE. PRESS BRIEFINGS HAVE DECREASED DRAMATICALLY. THERE IS NOW AN ISSUE AS FAR AS CAN SARAH SANDERS BE TRUSTED WHICH HE STANDS AT THE PODIUM AND SPEAKS ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT. >>AS WE’VE NOTED BEFORE, LYING TO INVESTIGATORS IS A CRIME BUT NOT DEPRESSED. KELLYANN CONWAY SAID THIS WAS THE BEST DAY FOR THE PRESIDENT SINCE HE GOT ELECTED. DOES THE WHITE HOUSE THINK IT CAN MOVE PAST THIS PROBE QUICKLY? >>I THINK THERE IS A LOOMING QUESTION OF HOW PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL MOVE FORWARD FROM THIS. WE HEARD FROM KELLYANN CONWAY WHO SAID THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST DAYS OF HIS PRESIDENCY SO FAR. PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID IT WAS A GREAT DAY FOR HIM. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONTENT OF THIS REPORT, THERE ARE NUMBERS AND NUMBERS OF PARAGRAPHS AND QUOTATIONS ATTRIBUTED TO OFFICIALS THAT ARE VERY EMBARRASSING FOR THE PRESIDENT. YOU HAVE OFFICIALS THE ALLEGING THE PRESIDENT TRUMP QUOTE ASKED THEM TO DO SOME CRAZY STUFF AND I’M NOT USING THE RIGHT WORD BECAUSE I CAN SAY IT ON AIR. YOU GET THE POINT. OTHERS SAID THEY WERE EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS HE TASKED THEM WITH. THERE WAS BROUGHT OBSERVATION THAT IF A LOT OF THESE WHITE HOUSE AIDES HAD CARRIED OUT WITH THE PRESIDENT WAS ASKING OF THEM, HE MAY HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. THOSE ACTIONS WERE SO EGREGIOUS. WE DO THINK THAT THERE IS GOING TO COME A POINT WHERE WE WILL HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT ABOUT HOW HE FEELS SEEING ALL OF THESE FORMER AND CURRENT WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS SPILLING THE DETAILS OF ROBERT MUELLER AND HIS TEAM. THAT COULD CREATE TENSION THAT WILL OVERSHADOW THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT FEELS THIS IS A COMPLETE EXONERATION. >>HOW WILL THE WHITE HOUSE LEVERAGES GOING INTO 2020? >>WERE SEEING THAT PLAY OUT TODAY. THE CAMPAIGN SAID THIS WAS A TOTAL VINDICATION OF THE PRESIDENT AND THAT NOW THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS NEED TO TAKE TIME TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS EVEN LAUNCHED ON LEGITIMATE GROUNDS AND WHETHER THE INVESTIGATORS NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED AS A PRESIDENT HAS TREATED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE PAST WEEK. I THINK THEY WILL TURN THIS ON ITS HEAD AND CLAIM IT WAS THE PRODUCT OF CORRUPTION ACROSS INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES AND THE FEDERAL INVESTIGATIVE BRANCH. THAT WILL BECOME A REGULAR TALKING POINT WE CAN EXPECT THE PRESIDENT TO HIT ON IN 2020. >>IS THERE A PRECEDENT BEING SET HERE? WHAT LESSONS WILL FUTURE PRESIDENTS TAKE AWAY FROM THIS REPORT? >>I THINK THE ONE THAT CATCHES MY EYE RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HOW SEVERAL PEOPLE PREVENTED THIS FROM BEING WORSE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP. JAMES COMEY DIDN’T FIRE SPECIAL COUNSEL. ON THE OTHER HAND, PRESIDENT TRUMP GOT CAUGHT UP IN THIS IN PART BECAUSE OF FOLKS AROUND HIM USING BAD JUDGMENT. FRANKLY, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE ON OCCASION. YOU HAVE PAPADOPOULOS WHO TOOK THE BAIT WITH THE RUSSIAN DIRT. YOU HAVE MANAFORT, KRISHNA, AND TRUMP JUNIOR TOOK BAIT AT THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING. FLYNN LIED ABOUT HIS RUSSIAN CONTACTS. COHEN ALSO LIED ABOUT THE TRUMP MOSCOW TOWER MEETING AND ABOUT INVOLVED IN MODEL PAYMENTS. AND SO WHEN YOU LIE AS WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW YOU CAN LIE TO THE PUBLIC, THAT IS NOT A CRIME. IF YOU ARE LYING ON SOMETHING THAT A FOREIGN ADVERSARY KNOWS YOU’RE LYING ABOUT, THAT CREATES POTENTIAL LEVERAGE THAT THE RUSSIANS CAN USE AGAINST YOU. THE STORY THAT COLIN AND WAS SOLD TO CONGRESS, THE MOSCOW TRUMP TOWER DEAL WAS OVER AND TRUMP SAID I HAVE NO BUSINESS IN RUSSIA. MR. TRUMP’S REQUEST ON THE AIR DURING THE CAMPAIGN THAT THE RUSSIANS HACKED HILLARY CLINTON’S EMAILS, THESE ARE, I WOULD SAY, INSTANCES OF BAD JUDGMENT. AND ADVISING CLIENTS ABOUT STAYING OUT OF TROUBLE, I WOULD ADVISE FUTURE PRESIDENTS, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATION OF THIS DEPTH AND INTENSITY SURROUNDING YOU, DON’T DO THESE THINGS. >>JERRY NADLER SAYS HE WANTS ROBERT MUELLER TO TESTIFY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. RICKY, WHAT QUESTIONS WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE HIM ANSWER? >>THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION FOR ROBERT MUELLER IS TO GO BACK TO THE ACTS OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE PEOPLE IN THE SPECIAL PROSECUTION OFFICE WHO BELIEVED THAT THERE WAS OBSTRUCTION, AND IF THERE WERE MULTIPLE ACTS OF OBSTRUCTION, WHAT WERE THEY? AND THEN THE FOLLOW-UP OF COURSE IS WHY DID HE DECIDE HE WOULD LEAVE IT UP TO CONGRESS? AND IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, IF I MAY, THIS IS IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S REPORT. IT IS SAID QUOTE OUR INVESTIGATION FOUND MULTIPLE ACTS BY PRESIDENT TRUMP THAT WERE CAPABLE OF EXERTING UNDUE INFLUENCE OVER LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS INCLUDING THE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE AND OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATIONS. THE PRESIDENT ENGAGE IN A SERIES OF TARGETED EFFORTS TO CONTROL THE INVESTIGATION AND HIS ACTIONS FOR DISCOURAGEMENT OF COOPERATION WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND SAID SESSION OF FUTURE POSSIBLE PARTNERS. THAT DOESN’T SOUND LIKE EXONERATION TO ME. THAT SOUNDS LIKE CARA IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IF YOU WANT TO STAY OUT OF TROUBLE, DON’T GET INVOLVED WITH TAMPERING OF ANY PART OF AN INVESTIGATION. IF YOU ARE RUNNING FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, AND SOMEONE FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY HAS DIRT ON THE OTHER CANDIDATE, PLEASE CALL THE FBI. IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE OBVIOUS. >>THERE WERE A SERIES OF BAD ACTORS OR IGNORANT ACTORS AROUND THE PRESIDENT. AT THE SAME TIME THERE WERE ACTORS AROUND THE PRESIDENT WHO SAVED HIM FROM HIMSELF. >>ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL OF YOU. AND COMING UP, JEFF FLAKE SHARES HIS THOUGHTS ON THE MUELLER REPORT. HE JOINS US AHEAD ON RED AND BLUE. YOU ARE STREAMING CBSN .

93 thoughts on “Mueller report: Justice Department releases special counsel report, live stream and analysis

  1. Years of investigations, MILLIONS in public money WASTED and the racist Hollywood, Dixiecrat, globalist left could NOT PIN so much as a PARKING TICKET on the GREAT, invulnerable USA President, Donald J. Trump.

  2. Trump had his hand in the Cookie jar, the cookie being Russia , he just didn't get the cookie out of the jar,! But Yes he had his hand in the jar!! He's still Freaken Guilty by Association, He is informed & called the shots & gave the approvals!

  3. Mueller should be charged with treason. Our President is above the law. If you do not like it return the election to the citizens. Electoral ballots are a HOAX. WHEN THERE IS NO LONGER A SECRET BALLOT WE WILL BE ABLE TO CONTROL ACCOUNTABILITY.

  4. People who undermine our President need to be held accountable. They cannot take back their accusations. They cannot return the Americans good faith in our President. Those that undermine distract our Presidents attention and time litterally robbing us of our monetary investment in our system of government. At the very least these individuals should pay fines as restitution.

  5. CBS needs to just stop. They have maintained such a biased view while reporting on this administration theyre not even trying to be subtle anymore. They called for the probe ,they got the probe,the probe proved no collusion,and now theyre trying to build something out of that by going sentence by sentence and twisting statements to prop up their false narrative since they have no hard evidence. CBS is controlled by the liberal dem party and now they along with their party are taking this to a level that is so ridiculous theyre just at the point where they are embarassing themselves now. Just pathetic and sad. MAGA! Trump 2020!!!

  6. Anyone that believes he's innocent needs to have their head examined. If you actually read the report you can't possibly deny his guilt on many levels and occasions unless you have a below 100 IQ.

  7. So, we know, that Trump team didnt showed all material to the Counsel of Mueller, because they encoded it beyond repair.
    we know, that the dirtiest guy in the Trump team, who could frame the president easily, were catched telling lies to the Counsil to protect Trump position and were sentenced for jail for these lies.
    we know, that Trump tried to close the counsel of Mueller 11 times and were prevented by his team to make this, because this would be an illegal act by Trump.

  8. ID LIKE TO take this moment to Thank all if the DEMOCRATS WHO WORKED so Hard in this investigation! THANK YOU FOR FAILING YET AGAIN!! THANK YOU FOR HELPING PPL WAKE UP AND SEE THE REALITY OF THE CROOKED DEMOCRATS AND BRINGING THEM ONBOARD THE TRUMP TRAIN!! TRUMP 2020!

  9. I agree rhylour, he did obstruct justice. He did try to interfere with legal investigation. He say he could of fired Mueller and that too would of been obstruction of justice. All excuses are just that excuses. Denials do not change the facts.

  10. WMD all over again, and again, and again. There isn’t a shred of legitimacy remaining in the political system or the mainstream media.

  11. Because if you claim your innocent and turns out you are…. they than can claim obstruction… lol… what justice was obstructed, since there is no crime?? LMAO at you idiots !

  12. =0) you aren't trying hard enough. Everyone that disagrees with you is lying and covering things up. Orange Man Bad Bad Bad. Spend the next six years looking; the truth is out there! Hire Fox and Mueller! Hire some witches, Unicorns, Leprechauns. Be the change you are looking for. Spend absolutely all your time on it, and if you work hard enough at it you'll get it done!

  13. The most expensive bundle of toilet paper ever produced by man – a fraud from beginning to end. If they refused to investigate the Clintons for receiving a 145 million+ payment from a Russian group, then they are corrupt cops. If they did not investigate the phony dossier that started all this mess, then they wasted money. What exactly did the Clintons do in return for the money? A complete phony "get trump" effort that failed.

  14. So emails that clinton wrote helped lose her the campaign and that justifies an investigation into current president for 2 years?
    Maybe our elected officials should start to do actual work instead of arguing things to a halt constantly.

  15. To me as a foreigner, the disrespect shown towards this President and the full blown attacks are simply unfathomable. If you dig into any ones past some dirt would certainly come out. This applies to anyone including Obama or Hillary. Gotta give it to Trump to weather through all of this. I dont understand why the people voted for him are STILL silent

  16. Lame Scream Media… I feel so sad for those who swallowed for 2 years the hash they were slinging.. Plz visit "the epoch times", for in-depth reporting.

  17. The same talking pie-holes who were upset that AG Barr could say there was no collusion within 48 hours with the hundreds of pages to read…those same pie-holes just read it a few hours ago (fast reading pie-holes!) and are already spewing out analyses. The Left is so stupid and so slanted and so hateful.

  18. why go on and on and on get over it
    DEM henchman Muller couldn't even recommend charges. pathetic …….even more pathetic them DEMS don't even look at Hillary who must be investigated for her role in collusion with her backers against Bernie Sanders! " hello" how can't you mention 30000 emails secret top secret, bleach bit server smashing phones and media after receiving a subpoena, that's not applicable if your a DEM is it ?? you can blame Hillary if she had not sidelined Bernie, he would have beaten Trump. ……..idiotic………

  19. No surprise here. Mueller exonerates Trump. The truth is Mueller is a serial offender. He was the one who whitewashed the whole 9/11 inquiry, now the Russian interference on Trump election. This report "exonerates" Trump the gangster and his cronies while this is the biggest case of treason in the US history. Mueller should be trialed for treason and jailed for life. No one should trust anything coming out of the USA, definitely not the White House or the DOJ.

  20. I'm listening to two experts, a former NSA high official and a former CIA analyst on Wilmer Leon's program the critical hour. Their conclusion upon which they agree, Muellers report is trash. No facts, suppositions, inuendos, unverified 3rd party sources. Totally worthless.

  21. Spin in your on sin! Please give me a break your news station needs yo wake up and you should be a ashamed of yourself

  22. CBS, I used thank highly of you but the last several months ,I'm very disappointed in the stupidity you have been displaying.

  23. Thank you, Rachel Maddow…The United States is a very
    powerful nation, it would be quite expensive, would take a lot of time and
    effort to try to destroy it head on, but what if a way could be found for it to
    be achieved from the inside with the same exact end? Page one, act one…I know,
    a la Helen of Troy? let’s just very cheaply aid in the election of a typical narcissistic
    greedy American stooge, then just sit back and let him do all the dirty work
    for us as we watch from a far, hopefully without laughing out loud…’wake me
    when it’s done’…Page twenty, end of act ten, The End…

  24. Let this not distract you from the fact that theirs many Russian operatives in the comment sections of every News report on the Mueller report downvoting and defending the corruption of this presidency. Don't let these people distract you from the true implications. Remember that the report is public and you have access to it.

  25. The whole damn thing with the Russians was ALL set up by Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party. It is so obvious I don't see how reasonable people can not see the truth. It is all a shame and I can't wait to see the "ax" fall.

  26. Small Iowa Company Disrupting a multi – billion dollar industry? ever seen that advertisement by "everquote"?

  27. This is what we call TRAITORS at the W H like Barr and all the clown's how say trump didn't do anything like help Russia with MONEY for all CRIMINALS that go around killing good people
    We the people of the greatest country how don't need anything from MURDERS and evil countries.
    We the people don't need to say anything bad. Evildoers will always come out and show how they
    Looking out for.
    The truth will set the country free so let it out!
    They have all shown there evil. We must NOT let them win AMEN

  28. Yes your news Network and others would blame him even if it was you hallowed Hillary Clinton. Your news Network is a shame. You let your political stand point stand in front of what is right. That is why you back socialism. If socialism come to America it will be a bad turning point for our nation

  29. Btw, Conway is a brilliant person. Easily the most employable human being on the planet. We are giving out woman of the year awards to men and this lady is walking around exercising loyalty, brilliance, courage, and consistency every single day under a lot of pressure and attack. Whether you are dem or republican you have to admit she is amazing and sharp as they come!

  30. "Mueller did not exonerate President Trump" Democrats and Fake News keep on repeating. Mueller is not a POPE, to exonerate anyone. You either PROSECUTE, or you shut up.

  31. Stupidity. Obstructing Justice on a crime that did not happen, a crime created from nothing by democrats.

    Wow, more typical red neck liberal democrat bull crap fake news. Nadler is a f#cking redbeck Democrat idiot.

  32. If the Democrats had any brains they would urge Hillary Clinton to sue James Comey in civil court for acting beyond the scope of his employment as a prosecutor in 2016 when he repeatedly gratuitously slandered Hillary Clinton after declining to prosecute her for anything. They could then march up to the White House and urge President Trump to sue Barr and Mueller for the same thing and launch a bipartisan attack on blabbermouth prosecutors.

  33. The media owes America an apology. They purposely misrepresented the facts knowing full well that they were lying to the public.

  34. AMERICA HAS BEEN SOLD OUT JUST LOOK AT THE NEWS NETWORK AND YOU KNOW IT HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT LIERS PRESIDENT DONALD J TRUMP IS BRING AMERICA BACK TO THE PEOPLE THAT THE EVIL SATAN PUPPET LOVERS HAVE STOLE FROM THE PEOPLE

  35. deranged.dems.are.going.to.keep.up.their.futile.assininity.until.this.govt.is.officially.lowered.to.the.level.of.a.third.world.banana.republic…we.need.adults.in.our.govt….not.deranged.children.which.is.exactly.what.dems.act.like

  36. Wasnt this all about the Clinton campaign sabotaging the Bernie Sanders campaign and then blaming it on Russia?? That IS how this whole thing started, correct?

  37. At the state department well minded business stop undermining the Constitution of the United States maybe we can get some kind of vertigo in here you know he was interfering with the investigation and you know he had collusion and he had an affair just because Marla don't want to step up to the plate and state the two accusation it don't mean that he said exhilarated are saturated or whatever the word is I tell you one thing if you could convict Nixon a Clinton on such small charges and you commit convicted them all I don't know why you trying to get a present or past and the Russians a pass cuz I wanted y'all it's in the same game together it's just a big ol scam wasting taxpayers money where you at investigating in the first place you just wasting time it got us or no run when you know you ain't going to come up with no conclusion because you not good lawyer still begin with inappropriate and you don't know nothing about Nobles going to be there is 15 or 20 classes in that you could have use so so the state department must be running United States as long as they have to tell you

  38. Democrats had 8 yrs under President Obama. Too many lies and flip flop decision. Corruption in Uranium One and the Benghazi. But still the Democrats supporters pretend it never happen under a Democrats control government.

  39. If the Democrats don't try to impeach Trump they are going to lose the election that's the only way they can beat Trump

  40. Mueller was put in the special prosecutor position for one reason.
    LOOK for a reason… any reason to charge Pres Trump for ANY crime.
    Failing that, threaten harm to his family, or supporters… bring them down!
    Make no mistake…….Mueller is a snake!
    There needs to be serious consequences!
    There WILL be!

  41. Robert Mueller was either threatened or bribed either way I was waiting for him to handcuff the whole corrupt family

  42. Russia Russia Russia. No Trump didn't collude with Russia. Don't believe in something just because you want it to come true

  43. The homosexual hyenas in the media are going crazy trying to figure out another lie that might work.

  44. Trump drop your pants, drop to your knees & WORSHIP YOUR OWNER JOSEPH STALIN JR……….SADLY YOU'VE FRIED YOUR BRAIN W/ 20 YEARS OF SNORTING ADDERALL METH!!!

  45. So F U democrat ….
    Greatest show on planet.
    Where the clowns go learn,
    to become a politician !
    As usual…..
    Nadlerrrr
    is the biggest clown !

    At end of the day !
    If you help traitors ,
    you a traitor …..
    For Life….

    No mercy
    Reelected 45

  46. So in other words he pretty much says even if he wasn’t the president he still wouldn’t have been charged because they found no crime committed by the president. So he is saying what we already knew

  47. You know…when I'm innocent and the report that fully exonerates me is available, I do everything in my power to prevent anyone from seeing it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *