no one knows what mueller will find or do next, just like no one knew that today mueller was indicting another person for obstructing justice in this probe, a person currently residing in russia who worked with manafort. here's what we do know, though, in this entire year here since comey first told this history under oath, the evidence and even advocacy of obstruction has been growing from these guilty pleas and indictments from people around the trump campaign to the new rhetoric, if you want to call it that, of trump allies and insiders saying maybe people should destroy evidence in this probe or defy mueller because he's allegedly going to frame people anyway. so let's be clear. we're not living through normal times. people in government and public life in the united states don't typically minimize felonies like obstruction, let alone admit to specific elements of obstruction. but what bob mueller knows after more than four decades as a prosecutor as well as head of the fbi is that if you're obstructing, if you're covering up, it's not usually because you're innocent but are lookin

what is mueller saying? seems to me he's saying if you commit a crime, i'm gonna get you. >> i think that's right. and i couldn't agree with mike any more. what happens here is this gives mueller a trial, the ability to tell the jury, here are all the things that paul manafort did. and by the way, after we charged him, he went back to the witnesses against him and he tried to get them to cook their stories so that they worked with his so that they presented an innocent version to you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, of paul manafort. juries don't like that kind of behavior by defendants. prosecutors like to have that evidence because it really helps to convince juries that the conduct that defendants engaged in was intentional, that they meant to violate the law and that they did in fact violate it. i think what mueller is doing here is he is making his case, which was already very strong at least on paper, even stronger. >> joyce, what keeps someone like paul manafort from doing a deal at this point? he's

mueller is further along than most people would think. one of the reasons i believe that is because of the discussions that have been going on over whether to interview president trump. that is clearly going to be one of the final stages of an investigation such as this. how do jim comey and his e-mail investigation of hillary clinton? july 2 they had the interview with her, july 5 he announced findings. that is the way a prosecutor will work on this but you feel he's coming to an end. host: let me invite callers to ask questions. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats a independents. you can make your thoughts or questions on twitter. -- and independents, (202) 748-8001. guest: this is the issue bill clinton faced. he was sued in the paula jones case. he challenged it it went all into the part -- to the supreme court. the supreme court decided unanimously that a president must be subjected to a civil case. the president must accept process. if called to testify the president must testify. the court made clear he the

mueller proceeds. what is happening here, the president is trying to avoid to having to talk to mueller and rudy is trying to prevent the president from talking to mueller. they're going to put as much fire on mueller now because they figure if they can topple this thing this summer and the president won't have to talk to him. mueller is in a bind. he can't conclude the investigation if the president won't cooperate. so mueller is stuck there. while they have him pinned down, they're going to try to smear him. >> so he can't conclude until he talks to the president? >> no way. he can't finish until he talked to the president. >> he can make a request but the president is not under a legal obligation to speak to him. he can request it or provide questions for the president -- >> and he can make mueller subpoena him and go there that. he can say he won't supply with the subpoena and we go to the supreme court. this can be as bad as we want it to be. >> how can comey be a witness in mueller's investigatio

why would mueller loop him in? yes, he has. manafort knows something bob mueller wants to get out of him. i find it unbelievable that manafort wouldn't have access to some information bob mueller wants. >> i think it's completely entirely reasonable to think that manafort might be the top here. as you're working your way up, you always keep going, but given what we know about donald trump and how he operates and given the connections and contacts that we know manafort has and had during the campaign, given the flip in the platform as it relates to russia and ukraine at the convention that manafort was in charge of, it could be there was collusion, but it's isolated with manafort or stopped with manafort. that's consistent with what we know so far. at least not inconsistent. and it's conceivable that he is the end game here. >> not inconsistent. dan with the big double negative. jennifer, close us out. >> it actually is inconsistent, because there was collusion in the trump tower meeting. when you offer dirt on your opponent and

we'll have more on mueller and the ig report in a moment. there is a story that is causing a five alarm fire. surrounding reports that children of illegal immigrants are being separated from their parents. no body wants children who are safely in the custody of their parents separated. no one wants that. but truth and facts matter. dhs kristin nelson responded to the claim and set it straight that the media is all too happy as usual to ignore. >> start with a few numbers and facts. in the last three months. we saw illegal immigration exceed 50,000 people each month. since this time last year, there is a 325 percent increase in unaccompanied alien children and a 435 percent increase in family units entering in to the country illegally. there is 1700 increase in the% a sylum claim and that is resulting in 600,000 cases. united states has admitted half million illegal immigrant minor and most of whom today are at large in the united states. at the same time large criminal organizations such as ms 13 violated our border and gained a deadly foot

bob mueller did not volunteer. we are here because rod rosenstein decided we needed a special counsel. to the very best you can with evidence and witnesses you have but understand this is being used by political enemies to hurt donald trump. adam schiff wants to be the chairperson of the house intelligence committee. nancy pelosi wants to be the speaker of the house. they want bob mueller to do what peter strzok and hillary clinton could not do. which is beat donald trump. just be aware you're being used would be my advice to bob mueller. >>chris: i want to ask you for quick answers. should based on what you knew before what you know now from the ig's report, should hillary clinton been charged with a crime? >> i need to interview effectively. i need to ask for those questions on intent. we know she lied. we know she concealed evidence. we know they destroyed evidence. those are all circumstantial markers of intent. so i would need to interview her without going into it knowing i was going to clear like the fbi did

breaking news in the mueller investigation. new charges filed today against paul manafort, the president's one-time campaign chairman. he is facing new charges of conspiracy to obstruct justice and obstruction of justice. these charges stemming from reports we brought you earlier in the week about the special counsel looking into whether paul manafort was involved in witness tampering. also charged today, manafort's long-time russian aid, konstantin calminik. it serves as another glimpse behind the curtain of the mueller investigation where despite the near daily harassment and disparagement from the president, his lawyer and surrogates in conservative media circles, mueller's investigators are finding ed of wrongdoing. from that 32 page indictment, today "from february 23, 2018 and april, 2018, the defendants, paul manafort and konstantin kilimnik conspired to persuade with the intent to influence, delay and prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding. to help us understand the significance of these new indic

because of all that mueller already -- mueller is sort of the silent participant in all this, but it's very likely bet jonathan and i were just talking about, because of how much they cooperated, because of don mcgahn has told them, and just about probably more than half of that senior staff has been before bob mueller. do they already know enough? rudy giuliani sounds like he's speaking for a man he believes to be guilty. when he's talking about the presid being, he's ramed of a crime? >> rudy giuliani tv lawyer, emmet flood real lawyer. from a power house firm, williams and connolly, the kind you go to for a case like this. we should assume behind the scenes he's doing what any defense attorney woulddo, which is to assumehey're out to get your client and you have to protect your client. and he's thinking mainly about indictment after impeachment, impeachment is a concern, but as a defense attorney his main jo job is to keep the client out of jail. so, one thing he's looking -- expected -- i wouldn't say looking forward to, but expecting is a subpoena. because at some point now they'r

he's accusing bob mueller of a crime. if rudy giuliani has evidence of that, he needs to bring it forward now. but rudy giuliani doesn't have evidence of that. he's one of the enablers that you're talking about that ultimately will be pinned with damaging severely almost irreparably the institution ands agencies in our government. >> so, donny, i know if i had a tv show i'd be shouting my outrage on the corner. my point is this is to me the moment in law enforcement that charlottesville brought us in race, as i said to nick. it boggles the mind that there are people humming about the west wing, people who before trump came along were serious people, people like emmet flood, people like don mcgahn, people at the justice department, they hum along and let the president smear and malign d.o.j. and bob mueller's investigation. >> nick's insight is just to be close to power does something to people. here are the two things, talk about in a second. it's interesting when we talk about the base. his approval rate sergio garcia 40

you appointed mueller. you're supervising mueller. it seems like you should be recused from this more so than jeff sessions. >> congressman, i can sure you if it were appropriate for me to recuse, i'd be more than happy to do so. >> i don't know why you won't different us what we've asked for. >> sir, i certainly hope that your colleagues are not under that impression. that is not accurate, sir. >> it is accurate. we have caught you hiding information. >> if you have evidence that this president acted inappropriately, present it to the american people. whatever you got, finish it the hell up. >> said the man who spent nearly 2 1/2 years and over $7 million investigating hillary clinton and benghazi and found no evidence of wrongdoing. that was followed by more questions to rosenstein about the length of the investigation. >> is the special counsel's investigation taking too long? has he deliberately slowed his pace? >> sir, i can assure you that director mueller is moving as expeditiously as possible. >> mr. wray, are you one of those

nobody knows what robert mueller is going to do excepert mueller. so, what does this tell us about the degree of fear that trum legal teamas? i've heard that what scares them the most is mueller's silence. >> look, i've spent my career looking for indicia of guilt in people and studying behavior and i have to tell you, that what we're seeing are the actions of a guilty party. a guilty party saying, i didn't do that, but if i did then it -- >> here' how i'd argue in court? >> i should have done it anyway because i can do what i want. what we're seeing is not somebody exercising their legal rights. this is indicia of guilt. that is what guilty people say and what guilty people do. >> they're nodding. former cia director john brennan making a similar point this morning. we'll talk about it on the other side. >> his tweets are not the tweets of an innocent individual so i think it really demonstrates how desperate he is getting, grasping at straws and rudy giuliani well. neither rudy nor his boss feel k encumbered by facts. they're trying to get whateve

mueller filing this motion. it argues that paul manafort should be jailed or have his bail revised because of new alleged witness tampering. this is, by all accounts, a surprise move. no one knew up until mueller said this, that there was alleged witness tampering going on. and it comes at the same time that trump's lawyers admit they put out false statements denying that trump wrote that defense of don jr.'s meeting of the russians with trump tower and those same lawyers admitting that trump can commit the crime of obstruction because he's the president. and all of this is happening, and i'm not going to let this go, because it is so important. this is all happening while the current president has been making the truly bizarre claim that he can pardon himself. but pardons are for criminals, for people a convicted or think they need protection from likely conviction for their crimes. now, trump's defenders have argued that any focus on obstruction is a kind of a sour grapes for a lack of collusion evidence. at i

that pressure has now been directed to the mueller investigation. the report provides no basis for the gop to challenge the legitimacy of the mueller investigation. it must continue unhindered. it's deeply disturbing that the republicans remain obsessed with undermining our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. republicans need to end this and focus on what matters, protecting our democracy. just this week, special counsel mueller said that the election meddling operations are still occurring. yet yesterday the house gop failed to appropriate a single dollar to protect our elections. they refused to hold a full committee hearing on election security and homeland or house administration committee. congress takes an oath of office to support and defend the constitution and to protect the american people. democrats are honoring that oath with real actions to secure our elections. and i repeat, we found no evidence, says the inspector general. we found no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors are affected by bias or other improper

if however they've been interviewed by bob mueller, if bob mueller has already been able to draw conclusions on certain issues, that will weigh very heavily in whether we

his buddy, robert mueller, to begin his investigation or witch hunt. the ig also found is fbi director comey was insubordinate and totally mishandled the clinton investigation. legal scholar jonathan turley, a democrat, is now saying these findings in the ig report exonerate trump from any obstruction of justice charges which means they should all end and end now. take a look. >> to me, obstruction claim involving comey was always difficult but after the ig, it's become virtually income principal because the ig said that comey was insubordinate, that he deviated from policies. he violated fbi policies. all those are a good reason to fire james comey. so the problem that's going to come up for the critics of president trump is that this dog just won't hunt when you've got both the ig and the deputy attorney general saying he deserved to be fired. you can't assume everything against him. there is another interesting aspect here. if mueller was really going after obstruction based on come comey, then rosenstein would have to recuse himself. rosenstein sai

that pressure has now been directed to the mueller investigation. the report provides no basis to the g.o.p. to challenge the legitimacy of the mueller investigation. it must continue unhindered. it's deeply disturbing that the republicans are possessed with undermining our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. republicans need to end this and focus on what matters protecting our democracy. just this week special counsel mueller said the operations are still occurring yet yesterday the g.o.p. failed to appropriate a single dollar. they refuse to hold the full committee hearing on election security and homeland or house administration committee. congress takes an oath of office to support and defend the constitution and to protect the american people. democrats of honor that go through with real action to secure elections. we found no evidence by the inspector general. we found no evidence at the conclusion by the department. rather we determined that they were raised on prosecutors assessments were wrong in the past department practice. i yield

none of what mueller is looking at relates to any of it. they're just trying to put up a bunch of flim flam. donald trump is just a flim flam artist trying to sell more snake oil, and this is another way to package the same snake oil he's been selling to the public through rudy giuliani for the last week. >> nick, you've got to let go a little. release what you're thinking here. as you go over to charlie. what about comey? how does he address the firing? or the legal team. i'm sorry. >> so this is part of the argument that the president trump has done nothing here for which he can be accused of violating a congressional statute against obstruction of justice. remember both nixon and clinton were accused of that. of the it was a different kind of obstruction. it was witness tampering or perjury, sort of stuff outside of a president's official exercise of his constitutional authorities. and so they're saying here, look, removing a subordinate is something a president can do because the constitution gives him the authority, just like they say

>> as far as we know, strictly mueller's team and the president's lawyers, but it is clear mueller's team is probably not the leak. his entire career has been to adamantly not believe in leaks, that's been his policy. they've never leaked to my knowledge anything during this investigation. almost all leaks have come from the other side. let's face it, on the other side, donald trump has a history of leaking almost everything, so the idea that they would leak the memo which does in fact read like a case to be made in the public as rudy guiliani is saying, this is a case to make to the public on why the president should not be impeached. in this case, this is part of their campaign to win hearts and minds. i guess it more likely came from the president's team. >> interesting this moemo appeas to confirm he played a role in writing that letter. previous comments by jay sekulow, one of the lawyers that wrote that memo to mueller. >> the president was not involved in the drafting of the statement and did not issue the statement. it came from donald trump jr. that's what i can tell you bec

i do think robert mueller will issue his report this summer. he doesn't want to interfere with the midterm elections that is why jim comey was criticized to post to the elections that is a constitutional rabbit hole. so we will produce a report this is different from the starr report a few years ago. it required him to write a report and then sending that to congress. so the special counsel governing this matter and then he could just sit on the no requirement to make it public but then he also has to comply with grand jury secrecy rules and and it makes you wonder if we ever will see a full report in public because of the classified nature and secrecy.d d s for their consideration because president trump has made it clear he doesn't want that report to go. forward. you are on thein with nelson cunningham go ahead. >> caller: >> comparing this to clinton and nixon and so forth but that is a contrived situation to make a list like something happenedha and now we want the president to determine on the interview. that doesn't even make sense. who

director mueller knows that. i recognize we're out of time, but director mueller and i learned about this issue at the same time, and we learned about it from -- the inspector general brought it to our attention after he discovered it, i believe it was last july, so it was our understanding that the inspector general was conducting an investigation of mr. strzok. so the fact director mueller didn't spend a lot of time questioning him, i think that was probably appropriate because that was the inspector general's job. i don't think it took director mueller very long after seeing those text messages to decide what was the right thing to do. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, for his questions. >> this month i wrote to both of you regarding the apparent outing in the media of a confidential human source involved in the early stages of the russia investigation. i understand that while i was on the floor just now, one of my republican colleagues had the gall to

what does it tell what you about mueller and his teams are most interested? >> they're clearly looking at trump, russia and the president and this branching out into the president's business dealings and other people, you know, michael cohen is also a very big subject, not directly for this investigation but he also has his own legal troubles, he is a long-time confidante and fixer of the president. i think they're afraid of the president walking into the room and saying anything, and giving robert mueller ammunition to go and look for other areas. >> what's your sense of how much this conversation has changed? it's a letter from several months ago as jeff pointed out just a moment ago, the configuration of the president's legal team has changed a lot since january of this year. what's your sense of how complementary the thinking is between that legal team and where they are now. >> the president wanted a more aggressive legal strategy and public legal strategy. we've seen the president over the course of this investigation consistently working to undermine i

but then after mueller got this letter from trump's lawyers in january, what's the next thing mueller did? he indicted mikhail bystrov, mikhail burchik, aleksandra krylova, sergey polozov, maria bovda, robert bovda, dzheykhun ogly, vadim podkopaev, gleb vasilchenko, irina kaverzina, vladimir venkov, yevgeny prigozhin, the internet research agency, concord management, concord catering. who the heck are those people? 13 individual and three corporate defendants all in russia. all indicted by robert mueller. and it was a surprise at the time, in february. in some ways it still feels surprising. i mean, immediately there were two big reactions, right? one is, wow, this is a sweeping indictment. it's what they call a speaking indictment. look at how this lays out what russia did in terms of interfering with our election. indictment was this great piece of storytelling in terms of this crime that had allegedly been committed against the united states. but then there's the practical legal analysis. why bring this indictment against all these russians? none of these people are ever going to e

as far as what he's doing there, trying to discredit the mueller investigation. you know who we haven't heard from other than court documents is robert mueller. i think it's going to be very difficult to depict robert mueller as insane or needing to be committed to a psychiatric hospital when we haven't even heard the guy speak. >> kevin, that's -- amen to what jonathan just said. bob mueller has proven time and time again through every twitter news cycle that he does not care what anyone is saying about him. also proven time and time again he's not operating on anyone else's timetable but his own. he kept this investigation completely in its own lane beyond all of the political noise coming from yes the left as well as the right. that this is intensified politicized this. he's saying no, he's doing this on his terms, completely separate and independent of all of the outside noise. >> kevin and jonathan, thanks for kicking this off. we'll be back with you in a little bit to talk about scott pruitt and more. next i'll talk to a former prosecutor about how much lon

mueller does things by the book. he's a republican, he's worked in two administrations and i think he's going to continue to act in that fashion. >> the president, do you believe, is sending clear messages and clear signals with this option of holding out pardonso individuals as we've seen in recent days? >> there is no question about it. and not only is he holding out the prospect of a pardon, but they have made -- the president and his allies, a number of false statements with respect to president's power to block prosecutions. president said he could power him -- pardon himself and mr. giuliani said the president could in effect shoot comey and they made preposterous statements but it is again a part of a strategy where they stonewall and stonewall and stonewall and then they try to see if they could find some kind of contradiction and by the end they see if could get away making a small cob concession. >> and w have i have. a question on a different subject and very sensitive issue, the secretary of education, be

today robert mueller also indicted konstantin kilimnik. these charges are related to the charges manafort is facing regarding his foreign lobbying work before he joined the trump campaign. and breaking tonight the legal team has responded to these charges. from a scant record the special counsel conjures a sinister plot to corruptly persuade two of mr. manafort's former business associates to perjure themselves in the upcoming trial in september. the new charges should be seen for what it is, an attempt to derail the modified conditions of rae lease at the 11th hour. there's no reason to believe the newest charge has increased the flight risk. joining us now barbara mcquade, an msnbc legal contributor. and matt miller former spokesman for attorney general eric holder. barbara, first to you in this argument that manafort's lawyers are trying to make, they're trying to say not only is there very little evidence that mueller's team has produced, a couple text messages that were short text messages but also in talking about or filing this it c

that is part of mueller's job. it can come not just from russia, but other countries that might have tried to influence this election or what happened after the election. >> on the' of what's going to be another big day on your beat, we appreciate you staying up and talking to us tonight. thank you very much. >>> and coming up for us, trouble for a big name dem in the show me state, because there was more to her recent road trip than she showed her constituents. that's when we continue. when i received the diagnosis, i knew at that exact moment, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ... we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the tre

from bob mueller. it may be on both collusion and obstruction of justice, it may be on other issues as well. and this is where rob rosenstein comes in and he's a very important figure. it will be his decision whether that report is shared with congress, where it's shared with the public, or whether it's buried. i think it should be shared with the public. it certainly need to be shared with congress. i think bob mueller, there's no constitutional bar to an indictment of a sitting president. but i would think even if the evidence rises to that level, he's more likely to present that evidence to the justice department than seek an indictment and ask 12 lay jurors somewhere to decide the fate of the republic. mike: we promised we'd get out to church on time or at least to the hill. so just 30 seconds, you have a great summer tradition with your son, now 15 years old, a road trip, sometimes a train trip, right? what's coming up this summer? mr. schiff: we were just having that conversation over dinner last

you appointed mueller. you're supervising mueller. seems like you should be recused from this more so than jeff sessions. >> whatever you got, finish it the hell up. >> i don't know why you won't give us what we've asked for. >> certainly, i hope your colleagues are not under that impression. that is not accurate, sir, and -- >> it is accurate. we have caught you hiding -- >> mr. chair, if you have evidence of wrongdoing by any member of the trump campaign, present it to the dam grand injure jury. >> my job is to make sure we respond to your concerns. i have appointed mr. loesch. i appreciate your concerns. >> again, i think the house of representatives is going to say otherwise. >> your use of this technique -- >> mr. chairman, can we be permitted to answer the question? >> mr. jordan, i am the deputy attorney general of the united states, okay. i'm not the person doing the redacting. i am responsible for responding to your concerns as i have. i have a team with me, sir. it's just a fraction of the team that's doing this work. whatev

th of mueller's job. it can come not just from russia, but other countries that might have tried to influence this election or what happened after the election. >> on the' of what's going to be another big day on your beat, we preciate y talking to thank you very much. >>> and coming up for us, trouble for a big name dem in the show me state, because there was more to her recent road trip than she showed her constituents. that's when we continue. it's all about the double ii's with xiidra... ...the only eye drop... ...approved for the signs... ...and symptoms of dry eye. because dry eye can mean... ...more than... ...just dryness. xiidra may provide lasting relief... ...starting in two weeks. one drop in each eye, twice a day. don't use if you are allergic to xiidra. common side efs include eye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when applied to the eye, and unusual taste sensation. don't toainer tip toyour eye.. ...or any surface. after using xiidra, wait 15 minutes... ...before reinserting contacts

>> if mueller's team is interested in bringing mr. manafort on as a cooperating witness, i think now is the time. the leverage is high. and i think we all know that by virtue of mr. manafort being president trump's campaign manager for more than just a minute, as we say, he undoubtedly can bring important information to the table. >> you say if, though, glenn. and you use words carefully. do you get a sense that he may not want to for reasons that you just mentioned? >> i'll tell you, as a career prosecutor until two weeks ago, i'm always pretty careful about the cooperating witnesses i do business with because if i -- if i were to bring him on board and put mr. manafort on the stand, he would be cross-examined with, well, sir, you were tampering with witnesses so you're willing to do anything to get a deal for yourself or to get yourself out from under the hammer that is now hanging over your head. so it would be difficult, i think, to build up his credibility. it can be done. mueller's team will do it, but it will be a challenge. >>

>>> next, the secret memo to mueller. will that bombshell letter from the president's lawyers lead to an eventual showdown in the supreme court? from the oval office to the world stage, has president trump given kim jong-un a propaganda victory? plus, primary colors. why tuesday's elections may be crucial in hopes for a blue wave midterm. good day, everyone. i'm alex witt here at msnbc world headquarters in new york. let's get to what's happening right now. the new details from that 20-page memo sent to special the part where the trump legal team makes an apparent admission about the president's role in drafting a letdter on air force one to explain donald trump jr.'s meeting at trump tower. they say the president dictated a short but accurate response. personal lawyer rudy giuliani says previous comments from another lawyer about the president's handling of that incident were ill informed and that this inconsistency is another reason why the president should not sit down with the special counsel. here's what giuliani tol

when this 20 dash page memo hit the mueller team, was that like water off the duck? >> i would imagine they sat around, made copies, got the coffee out and started reading through it and heads started shaking. again, i'd assert they probably concluded this is the best they can come up with, we're okay. this may be well headed to the supreme court. this notion that you can't subpoena a sitting president, the sitting president can't commit a crime or can't obstruct justice, we may be headed to the supreme court, but i'm pretty darn confident that mueller will win the day on this, because justice will win the day. >> yeah, in the last hour lawrence tribe was saying -- and stood in front of the supreme court three dozen times. he said this is not going to go anywhere. any of these issues of obstruction and executive privilege. >> and the supreme court has answered similar questions in the past. united states versus nixon when the administration, the president, through his lawyers asserted that he is not susceptible to a criminal subpoena to get his recordings. the suprem

if you are, evan, it's impossible to get director mueller or special counsel mueller to respond to any of this. he does his speaking only through court documents, right? >> that's right, you don't hear very much except "no comment" from the special counsel's office. i do think the problem here, the pete strzok problem, the fbi department sent those inappropriate texts, those things have done a job here to undermine what mueller and what the fbi have been doing. i think you cannot get away from those facts. and so the fbi and the justice department are under an obligation to try to answer the questions from members of congress, but i do think that sometimes if you watch these hearings, these are co-equal branches of government. if you want to do a civics lesson, it doesn't mean that congress has super powers over the executive branch, it just means they'll have to duke it out and maybe congress will never be satisfied so long as this investigation is still going on, because they're not really going to get all of the answers they think they're entitled to while this investigation is stil

you appointed mueller. you're supervising mueller. it seems like you should be recused from this more so than jeff sessions. >> congressman, i can assure you if it were appropriate for me to recuse, i'd be mother than happy to do so. >> i don't know why you won't different us what we've asked for. >> sir, i certainly hope that your colleagues are not under that impression. that is not accurate, sir. >> it is accurate. we have caught you hiding information. >> if you have evidence that this president acted inappropriately, present it to the american people. whatever you got, finish it the hell up. >> said the man who spent nearly 2 1/2 years and over $7 million investigating hillary clinton and benghazi and found no evidence of wrongdoing. that was followed by more questions to rosenstein about the length of the investigation. >> is the special counsel's investigation taking too long? has he deliberately slowed his pace? >> sir, i can assure you that director mueller is moving as expeditiously as possible. >> mr. wray, are you one of t

if however they've been interviewed by bob mueller, if bob mueller has already been able to draw conclusions on certain issues, that will weigh very heavily in whether we think that needs further investigation. but there may be certain matters, and money laundering may very well be one of them, where even bob mueller has not looked into it. because he's not been given the scope. now, i don't know that that's the case. i would hope that bob mueller is investigating the issue of money laundering. what i learned as a federal prosecutor is you follow the money. but the president has done everything possible to deter bob mueller from doing that by trying to draw a red line. i don't think the president has any right to draw any red lines and i think they should be ignored. if it arises within the russia investigation, it ought to be investigated. mike: last question. you mentioned you were the u.s. attorney in los angeles, as a former federal prosecutor, someone who is watching the investigation. from what you've seen, from what you know, from what you read, what is the most likely outcome? mr. sc

>> i can come it will depend on what bob mueller has been able to do and whether bob mueller has been able to finish the job. i think we should reserve judgment on what more will be necessary until we see what moore has already been done. >> it sounds like if you get the majority, if you have subpoena power it sounds like there are people you want to hear from that you have heard from you plan to pursue that? >> there's shortly people wanted from that you get a complete investigation without hearing from. if, however, they been interviewed by bob mueller, if bob mueller has already been able to draw conclusions on certain issues, that will weigh heavily in when we think that needs further investigation but there may be certain matters and money laundering may very well be one of them or even bob mueller has not looked into it. because he is happen given the scope. i do know that is the case and that hope bob mueller is investigate the issue of money laundering. what is owned as the prosecutor is you follow the money, but the president has done everything possible to deter bob mueller

but then after mueller got this letter from trump's lawyers in january, what's the nex thing mueller did? he indicted mikhail bistrov, mikhail ber chic, alexandra viloffa, sergei polizov, maria bofda, robert bofda, jake lynn vodi. vadim pod koppaev. gleb vassal chechko. irina kavezina. vladimir venkoff. evgeny prigozhin. the internet research agency. concord management. concord catering. who the heck are those people? 13 individual and three corporate defendants all in russia. all indicted by robert mueller. and it was a surprise at the time, in february. in some ways it still feels surprising. two big reactions, right? were one is wow, this is a sweeping indictment. it's what they call a speaking indictment. look at how this lays out what russia did in terms of interfering with our election. indictment was this great piece of storytelling in terms of this crime that had allegedly been committed against the united states. but then there's the practical legal analysis. why bring this indictment against all these russians? none of these people are ever going to end up stepping foot in

that pressure has now been directed to the mueller investigation. the report provides no basis for the g.o.p. to challenge the legitimacy of the mueller investigation. it must continue unhindered. it's deeply disturbing that the republicans remain obsessed with undermining our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. republicans need to end this and focus on what matters, protecting our democracy. just this week special counsel mueller said that the election meddling operations are still occurring. yesterday the house g.o.p. failed to appropriate a single dollar to protect our elections. they refused to hold a full committee hearing on election security, in homeland or house administration committee. congress takes an oath of office to support and defend the constitution and to protect the american people. democrats are honoring that oath with real actions to secure our elections. and i repeat, we found no evidence, says the inspector general, we found no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors are affected by bias or other imprope

i don't understand why mueller is still around. we shouldn't have to wait two more years for the i.g. to tell us the obvious that the mueller investigation was compromised as well. arthel: how would you in general characterize the i.g. report. >> i give it a c in the sense it got all the facts out. but a failure in terms of clusion to provide the political leadership reason ton the mueller operation. arthel: what if there is no conclusion. >> i think he made a political decision not to derail the mueller operation by highlighting the fact that peter strzok made all these comments about president trump and all these other fbi agents made these comments about president trump, and this i.g. was not willing to say that compromise the investigation despite the obvious conclusion that it did. arthel: the conclusion did not say that. i want to ask you questions about fbi deputy assistant director peter strzok for the record and fbi special counsel, lisa page. should they have been fired immediately? >> they should be criminally investigat

and frank figliuzzi, who has worked for robert mueller among others in the past. gentlemen, welcome to you both. frank, reading this reporting tonight about -- in "the new york times," what stands out to you? >> a couple of thoughts, brian. first, witness tampering is a very serious offense because it goes to the heart of our justice system and the credibility of the system. and in reading the charges, we're seeing a man here, paul manafort, who just seems to have utter contempt for the system. it's very typical for your bond conditions in the federal system to say, by the way, you can't have contact with witnesses in this case. not only did he have contact with witnesses, he had contact with multiple witnesses, and he did it using encrypted applications is what we're hearing. so that itself could show the intent to corruptly communicate and alter the statements of witnesses. the witnesses themselves came forward and reported it, so they're cooperating. so we've got here somebody who is acting a whole lot like maybe he doesn't care, and maybe because he thinks a p

that is part of mueller's job. it can come not just from ssia, but other countries that might have tried to influence this election or what happened after the election. >> on the' of what's going to be another big day on your beat, we appreciate you staying up and talking to us tonight. thank you very much. >>> and coming up for us, trouble for a big me dem in the show me state, because there was more to her recent road trip than she showed her constituents. that's when we continue. with tripadvisor, finding your peect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all thtels for your stay! tripadvisor ches over 200 booking sites... to show you the lowest prices... so you can get the best deal on the right hotel for you. dates, deals, done! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com ♪ when i first came to ocean bay, at saw was despair. i knew something had to be done. hurricane say really woke people up, to showing that we need to invest in this community

and he wants special counsel robert mueller to investigate. yesterday congressman adam schiff released a letter he sent to the committee's chairman devin nunes two weeks ago asking him to give mueller the transcripts of the interviews the committee conducted during its investigation. in the letter schiff wrote, these materials may be important to mr. mueller's investigation and shed additional light on the issues of collusion and obstruction of justice. i also have concerns that certain witnesses may have testified untruthfully before our committee and believe that mr. mueller should consider whether perjury charges are warranted in light of the additional evidence in his possession. congressman schiff told nbc news he thinks donald trump jr., roger stone and erik prince are among those who should be investigated for potential perjury. all the house intelligence committee's interviews were closed-door. according to schiff the committee was supposed to publically release the transcripts after chairman nunes ended the investigation in march but

mueller thinks he is a stone cold thug. this no-knock warrant, the three superseding indictments and now trying the send him to jail today successfully. mueller thinks manafort has the goods on somebody and he is trying to make him spill it. >> all right. phil rucker and harry litman thank you for getting us started on a friday. >>> when we come back, the audacity of liars. fact checking donald trump and rudy giuliani's lies about the inspector general report. >>> also ahead, the travesty of children being separated from their parents. new reports on who is to blame for the crisis at the border. it isn't the bible. >>> and trump's love for authoritarian leaders and their grip on power. we'll be right back. ♪ how do you like me now now that i'm on my way ♪ ♪ do you still think i'm crazy standing here today ♪ ♪ i couldn't make you love me applebee's 2 for $20, now with steak. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. the blade quality you'd expect from gillette... at a price you wouldn't. the new gillette3 & gille

yes, mueller doesn't care. you know, i can't emphasize enough, he is not -- among prosecutors of all stripes, it just so happens the man is a demi god. it's not simply he's a very competent professional. he really is the prosecutor of his generation. that said, there has been a lot of people who have lamented that he doesn't have something of a p.r. strategy and have observed as can is, at least for now some inroads are being made by this rhetorical strategy for lawyers and judges and prosecutors, it's surreal that should be happening. not only are the arguments poor, but the facts are even poorer. but to john's point that they're poking little holes, it's true. these are really picayune points. they're being made in a overblown sophomoric rhetoric, staggering, conspiratorial and territorial. it seems to me it may be hitting home, but you're right. until the point comes where mueller speaks and then he's going to speak volumes. >> natasha, let me give you the last word because you wrote about this today. you ac

mueller is to conduct? >> i will agree with the deputy attorney general's comments already. >> he said that it would be part of it. so, in agreeing with him, we have established. so, we've established two things -- our government and the american people were attacked, and our democracy was attempted to undermine, and that part of that investigation should be. so, i just wanted to ask the chairman, if he would, i'd like to enter this, because, mr. rosenstein, it doesn't matter. they want you. they want to impeach you. they want to indict you. they want to get rid of you. because in getting rid of you, they want to stop the two fundamental questions that we already agreed to. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> and that is, they want to undermine this investigation. so, mr. rosenstein, good luck. we're in the minority. >> the chair recognizes himself for purposes of asking questions. deputy attorney general rosenstein, we recently learned that your department is interpreting the judiciary committee's subp