tv Erin Burnett Out Front CNN May 29, 2019 4:00pm-5:00pm PDT
the beach or that tunnel to the estate? the secret service did not get back to us on that. a u.s. attorney in palm beach was quoted as saying of the breach, it wouldn't happen today. wolf. >> brian nangs very much today. brian todd reporting to viewers. thanks for watching. erin burnett outfront starts right now. outfront next robert mueller breaks his silence saying president trump has not been cleared of committing a crime. the next move is up to congress. plus robert mueller says he will not testify. so what will democrats do? and growing pressure on nancy pelosi to move forward toward impeachment. can she stop the momentum? let's go outfront. >> and good evening. i'm erin burnett. outfront mueller speaks out for the first time on his last day as special counsel. and here is what bob mueller wanted every single american to know. >> if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have
said so. >> the power of the spoken word. that was the bottom line. if mueller had confidence president trump did not commit a crime, he'd say so, but he couldn't say so. hearing mueller say that was a moment in history and makes us wonder what president trump and his administration heard. because just listen to them. >> we consider this very much to be case closed. >> he said the case is done. >> and president tweeting those same words. the operative words. the case is closed. thank you. case closed? well that's not what mueller said, right? because mueller was crystal clear that the ball is now in congress's court. >> the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrong doing. >> and that's it. a process other than the criminal justice system. that was mueller. that process, other than
mueller, and charging a sitting president is congress. and as for why mueller did not charge trump with a crime when nearly 1,000 former doj prosecutors have said they would have based on what mueller presented in his report, mueller today was extremely clear. >> under longstanding department policy, a president -- a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. >> that's clear. he says policy, can't do it. and those few words, mueller directly contradicted what his boss, the attorney general bill barr testified under oath earlier this month. >> in your press conference, you said that you asked the special counsel whether he would have made a charging decision or recommended charges on obstruction but for the office of legal counsel's opinion on charging sitting presidents and that the special counsel made clear that was not the case. so, mr. barr, is that an accurate description of your
conversation with the special counsel? >> yes. he -- he reiterated several times in a group meeting that the -- he was not saying that but for the olc opinion he he would have found obstruction. >> mueller today was clear and barr at best misled in the answer to grassley under oath. grassley asked whether mueller would have made a charging decision if it weren't for the office of legal counsel policy at the doj to not charge sitting presidents. barr said mueller told him, no, the olc was not the reason. but today mueller proved what barr said was false. and then there is this claim from barr, again it was under oath. >> if the special counsel found facts sufficient to constitute obstruction of justice, would he have stated that finding? >> if he had found that, then i think he would state it, yes.
>> so barr says that if mueller found evidence that trump committed crime he thinks mueller would have said so. thaps he -- injury it's not perhaps. it's pretty clear he put it word think in very purposely. because mueller said he could not charge a sitting president. he added to that. he said if he could not charge trump a sitting president then he would not take the next step of publicly accusing him of a crime. >> it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. >> directly refuting what barr told grassley. and as for mueller's parting shot, he called out the president for his recent remarks. >> russian intelligence officers who were part of the russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. and that allegation deserves the attention of every american. >> of every american.
those were mueller's last words today. yet there is at least one american who is still in denial. >> it's the greatest hoax probably in the history of our country. >> the witch hunt was a hoax. >> it was a hoax. it was a witch hunt. >> abbey phillips is outfront live outside the white house tonight. abby, the white house tonight, what is their thinking. >> well erin right now the white house, they have their eyes on the iward was, as president trump puts it impeachment. just in the minutes after mueller gave his statement today. sources were telling us that president was gearing up for a fight. his message to democrats who might be tempted to head to the impeachment side of this was basically bring it on. the you president views this as something that can be politically advantageous to him, something that can help him with his base. as a source put it the president believes the american people will view impeachment proceeding as a scam and another senior
white house official told me earlier that the white house's view is that in will help them in 2020 in terms of oh, retaking the house of representatives. now that can all very well be a very poly anna view of the situation trying to spin this as a positive for president trump. but the white house is also just trying to spin what robert mueller said. sarah hawk bee sanders, white house press secretary repeatedly said that mueller should have said whether or not he would have charged president trump with obstruction of justice. and she said he had a moral obligation to do that. but as you just pointed out, mueller made it clear that he felt he could not do that because of the doj guidelines. the white house is both trying to pin this as a positive for them from a political perspective and also trying to suggest that robert mueller shirked his responsibilities by not making it clear how he felt about the obstruction part of this and that by doing so essentially exonerated the president on obstruction. we all know that's not what mueller did in this report.
but this is the white house's view of the situation going forward. and they're clearly spoiling for a fight with congressional democrats, erin. >> certainly hoping for if. okay thank you very much abby. now democratic congressman gerry connolly sitting on the houseover sight committees. he tweeted today there was no evidence. the president saying thes case is closed. is the case closed? >> no, not by a long shot. and i think you are -- your coverage just now really laid out well why that's not true. clearly the white house and the attorney general have misstated the facts and have misstated what mueller in fact found in his very extensive and thoroughly researched report, which may be why mueller decided to break silence for the first time in two years and actually appear before the press and the public to issue his own statement today, which i thought was a bombshell, especially the line you highlighted, erin.
if we thought the president had not committed a crime we would have said that. >> so -- so let me ask about that. because he then continued to see the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system. to hold the president or, you know, the sitting president accountable. i'm curious on how you interpret that. is there any other way to interpret that, congressman than you, congress have to open impeachment hearings? >> yes, i think he is inviting us to open impeachment. i think he said that in the report, too. remember, he laid out clear evidence of not one violation of obstruction of justice but ten. and he all be o but said the president did cross the line and commit a crime, but i can't charge him because the department of justice won't let me. with respect to saying the only avenue is impeachment, i believe that's false. i don't accept the fact that ha
sitting president cannot be indicted. there is nothing in the constitution that says that. and. >> but nonetheless he didn't diet and barr has chosen not to. so you are where you are. it's congress or nothing now at this point while he is still in office, right? >> yes. so what do you do about it? >> well, we have a number of investigations underway right now. and we are in the courts contesting the issuance of subpoenas for documents and witnessemore will undoubtedly be issued. i believe the appellate courts will uphold the district court rulings, both of which were in complete agreement with the house and the inherent investigative powers of the legislative branch. and i think the administration risks contempt of court not just contempt of conkprie. i think absolutely triggering a
constitutional crisis. >> well, you heard -- you heard what abby was saying that the president is thinking -- sources are kelg telling cnn he says let's do it on impeachment. the fight will end up on our side. american people will see it as i guess the big question here is do you -- do you think he is right that this would motivate his base? it will be good for him that -- that you have maybe a constitutional obligation but then you sls political considerations as impeachment is a political act and that the politics of in are bad and that's why you wait? >> i think if democrats define this solely as a matter of political judgment we will not impeach donald trump, because politically it's not advantageous and it could hart democratic prospects next year. on the other hand, if you remember that you took an oath to defend and protect the constitution and you define this as what's my duty given the facts that are in front of me,
including what mr. mueller said just today, i think that's a much closer call. and irrespective of the political fallout one has an obligation to the constitution. so i think increasingly democrats are moving in that direction. and are willing to risk the political fallout if that's necessary. we're not there yet. but we're getting awfully close. >> so i'm trying to understand what happens here next with mueller. now you have the doj and the special counsel's office, you know, copping out and saying, you know, there is no daylight here. you know, the confusion in the water -- the blood in the water continues to swirl. mueller said today, though, that this is it. this is all he is going to say and go ahead and read my report sbigs is see page 33, say page 453. he says he is not answering anything else. do you still want him to testify
before congress? >> absolutely and it's not his call whether he has to testify or say anything else. his report does not just speak for itself. there are a lot of questions raised by the report itself that need answering. and there are interpretations of his report that he wrote that only he can answer. the idea that a report this consequential that took two years by a special prosecutor of such prominence is not accountable to the public and said all he is going to say and somehow zip it up is just not going to cut it. mr. mueller will testify. he will be compelled to testify. and he will be accountable to the american people. >> all right. congressman connolly, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> my pleasure, erin. thank you. >> and next robert mueller referring to evidence being used against coconspirators in the russia investigation. who is he talking about? plus he spent millions to push for trump's impeachment does the report help make the push.
and voters make it clear what they want from washington when it comes to impeachment on the campaign trail. >> i think it's time to move. i mean, it's just time to make a decision. get that butterfly! you know those butterflies aren't actually in the room? hey, that baker lady's on tv again. she's not a baker. she wears that apron to sell insurance. nobody knows why. she's the progressive insurance lady. they cover pets if your owner gets into a car accident. covers us with what? you got me. [ scoffs ] she's an insurance lady. and i suppose this baker sells insurance, too? progressive protects your pets like you do. you can see "the secret life of pets 2" only in theaters. do youe(low battery sound.) want a charge? yeah (battery charging.) ♪ how ya like that? ♪ how ya like that? ♪ how ya like that? ♪ how ya like that? ♪ how ya like that? ♪ what you think of me now? thank you so much.
pnc bankand relief from symptoms caused feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear. bleech! aww! awww! ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft for the win win. for everything that i give, i get so much in return. join our family of home instead caregivers and help make a world of difference. home instead senior care. apply today.
play it cool and escape heartburn fast with new tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tum tum tums tonight robert mueller refusing to testify before congress. here is mueller speaking publicly the first time in two years saying he is done talking publicly about the russia investigation. >> the work speaks for itself. and the report is my testimony.
so beyond what i have said here today and what is contained in our written work i do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation. >> a senior exactic strategist not buying that telling cnn mueller should be subpoenaed the day he leaves the doj. as you heard congressman connolly it's clear they are going to do that period, full stop. he is no longer a doj special kbp or special counsel. he is gone. today was his last day. john dean, juliette kayyem, the assistant secretary of the department of homeland security under president obama and david gergen who advised four presidents, including two who were in a situation similar to this, nixon and clinton. let me start with you, john dean. is it mueller's call to decide whether or not he testifies? he is saying i justant won't do it, not going to do it, guys. >> it is not his choice. it's congress's choice.
if he is asked he will probably do it voluntarily. but if he don't want to do it voluntarily. they can subpoena him and force the issues. subpoena it is an awkward way to do it. but his testimony is also hearsay. you could also get a lot of what he could say from other witnesses where he could shine a bigger light in sort of an overview. >> i mean, david, here is the question. you heard congressman connolly, right he said he is coming i don't care whether he wants to be here or not he is coming. nancy pelosi said she wants him to come. however gerry nadler had originally threatened to subpoena backed away. here is pelosi and nadler. >> yes, i think it would be useful for him to testify before congress. >> are you going to subpoena mueller to testify then? >> mr. mueller told us a lot of
what we need to hear today. >> hmm. >> well, the emphasises seep changing. they are going to call him become but i think they want time to pass. let's see thousand settles out. they want to see how mueller plays with the country. they don't want to be seen as harassing him. >> they want him to come voluntarily. they don't want the obnoxious us see page 33 or 42. >> the drama when he comes will be high. whout without him and mcgahn it's hard to have hearings that are magnetic that draw americans in which is what she wants to do before moving to impeachent. >> and when mueller refers to there being alternate process outside the criminal justice is it system if he refers to congress then you would need him and don mcgahn and others to speak for the american people to hear. juliette, the white house, you know, here is the comment today. here is the response to mueller. >> there was no real news in
there. he reiterated the points he already made in the report. and we agree with them. there was no collusion. there was no conspiracy. and we consider this case closed. >> just to belabor the painful point. the collusion and conspiracy are two things. saying there is no conspiracy is a legal teerm which mueller did. collusion is a separate matter. is this the beginning or the end. >> i think it's still the middle. some of it is going to depend on what nancy pelosi decides. some of it depends on whether mueller wants to be a hostile witness or voluntarily go before. but in idea that the white house regardless of what happens is all of a sudden going to have a eureka moment and say, goodness, yes, there was collusion and we did talk to the russians over five dozen times. and there are ten points of obstruction ever justice is not going to happen. you know, sort -- at this stage sarah sanders is background noise in this. but injury the sort of disconcerting part of what she
said has to do with how mueller ended the press conference. i want to remind everyone about volume one. he did say there were multiple systemic efforts to interfere in our election. and that allegation deserves the attention of every american. that is how he chose to end that press statement. and this white house just, like, acts like that's not even said, that this is not a national security challenge, not just for 2016 but of course for 2020. >> david. >> listen, the administration is also putting out word that there is an alignment of view nas mueller and barr are close together. we need to deal with that issue because it's very railroad clear that mueller broke from barr today. and. >> yes. >> and barr said he cleared him there was no obstruction. i've decided there is no obstruction. and along comes mueller and says no we did not clear him and we are not clearing him because, you know -- he made it quite clear they broke on that major issue. he also through emphasis made it clear he takes the russian interference much more seriously than the white house does.
>> yes. >> and this white house is not paying attention to the serious underlying issue. >> obviously, john, he made it clear he can't charge a sitting president because of the opinion, right he put great weight in that. even he said even more clearly -- this was directly in opposition to barr who told chuck grassley i think he absolutely would have said he had all this information that was bad even if he didn't charge purely said no way, right. mueller said if i was going to accuse one someone of a crime i was going to charge and i couldn't charge who i wasn't going to accused. this opens the door to what is next. today mueller the continued to say this when he talked about not dieting trump. >> yeah. >> the opinion explicitly -- explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. among other things, that evidence could be used if there were coconspirators who could be
charged now. >> every word, john, he said today was carefully selected. so when mueller throws open the door to, if there were coconspirators who could be charged now. using a legal tee using a legal term and conspirator. and opening the possibility to additional charges. >> he indeed has. that's a very good point, erin. what he said is he wants to keep the evidence fresh and he wants to make sure he's got it all. we don't know what's in those 12 referrals. those could be coconspirators involved in there. but he also made it railroad clear, i think, that when trump is no longer in the white house that he could be very much subject to charge by another prosecutor saying in the southern district or someplace like that, that he really had a case that was worth looking at here. >> final word, juliette. >> i just think -- i know there
is a lot of questions about mueller and i sort of worry that we think he is giving as you eureka moment. and i think what he tried to do and you can criticize or not is to say look there is a process process issue next either criminal or political with impeachment. i'm not part of the process anymore. i'm the substance guy. i provided volume one. plenty of evidence about bad things russians did. volume two. plenty of evidence about obstruction of justice. and so i just think the democrats have to think carefully about how aggressive they want to get against mueller. maybe he should be the substance guy and everyone else has to be the process people. >> all right. faum thank you very much. the man made a name for himself calling for trump's impeachment putting hundreds of millions behind it. tom steyer with a new message for nancy pelosi he is my guest. plus the justice department insisting to difference between what bill barr and robert mueller said about charging a sitting president. but here are hear the words for yourself.
and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. how sexy are these elbows? ask your dermatologist about cosentyx. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist.
democratic congressman telling cnn members are growing restless. house speaker nancy pelosi refunding to move forward. megadonor tom steyer is upping the pressure in a new video to congress today. >> we just heard the summary of the mueller report from robert mueller himself. and he set the story straight and said there is nothing i can do about it under the constitution. it's up to congress to act. so let's be clear. congress, do your job. >> outfront now tom steyer founder of the need to impeach superpac. good to have you with me. you got the statement today process ten minutes. mueller came out, said his piece. do you think in leads to a major shift in democrats in congress? >> oh, i think that mr. mueller was unequivocal that if he could have said the president was innocent he would have said it. he said he was unequivocal that he couldn't charge him. and he was unequivocal that it
is up to congress to act. so do i believe under the circumstances after waiting for two years with people in congress saying, wait for the mueller report when the sphynx himself speaks. i think congress people need to listen. >> when he said i cannot charge, at least he viewed the rules as he could not charge. and he was not acheding someone of a crime if he could not charge. and there is another process for dealing with a sitting president, right he is talking about congress. all of that fair, as you say. congressman connolly was just on earlier this show and did say, look, fair opens the door for impeachment but he is not there yet because they are doing the other investigations. subpoenas other ways, the scatter shot method as opposed to a full-on impeachment frontal. are you concerned when you hear thiem still going down the other path of multiple investigations? >> well, certainly erin i think there is a question about timing and urgency here. because the president has said he will not respond to any
subpoenas, that he is not going to offer anyone from the administration to testify. and then in fact he won't deal with congress about anything as long as they're attempting oversight of his administration. so, sure, it sounds to me like a very pro tracted exercise whereas impeachment gives congress special powers, brings it into focus and let's the american people see on tv just the way we saw mr. mueller today what the truth is. and that's what we need, the american people to see the truth. >> so the two people who are most important in congress on this obviously the speaker, nancy pelosi, it's her decision and the chairman of the house judiciary committee gerry nadler who would initiate impeachment proceedings and hearing. they both sponed today to what mueller had to say and here they are. >> getting the facts to the american people or getting the truth for the american people, where any will lead us we shall see nothing off the table. >> with respect to the kbeefrpment question all options are on the table and nothing
should be ruled out. >> all right. they've got the story straight. but when you hear that all options are on the table, does that disappoint you or do you feel that's progress? >> i don't think that that is close to what's necessary honestly, erin. because i think there is a timing question here. we have to get the show on the road. we have to have these investigations done on tv under the banner of an impeachment inquiry. i don't think there is any way rrnd around that. i think delay serves the president very well. allows him to kick the can down the road and get to the place where impeachment is off the table after a while. >> a senior white house official told cnn today that impeachment is a great way for us to win back the house, tom. are you concerned about that, that -- i understand you're making a moral imperative, a principled point. but what about the politics of this. >> first of all i think it's a question of right and wrong and what representative connolly said about an oath to the constitution. but secondly i believe the
american people cross the board respond to the truth, respond to people's taking principled stands and doing the right thing. and i've never understood the idea of a politician like mr. trump saying being accused credibly of being a criminal of obstructing justice, putting himself ahead of the american people somehow is good for his reputation. this is a guy who has told over 10,000 lies. i don't know why suddenly we'd start bleefrg him now. >> so if the cost is political, say the kwoft is the house or the white house, is it still worth it? >> well, i just don't believe that's true. i think that's an unfair question erin to be honest. i believe that in fact the american people would respond incredibly positively to someone who steps up and tells the truth, takes a principled stand. i don't believe for a second -- i believe the cost of not acting could be the white house for exacts. i believe the cost of not acting could mean that speaker pelosi loses her speakership. i believe the american people are ricking for people who will
do the right thing and step up and tell the truth and put politics aside. that's what americans in my mind respect and what they value. >> all right. tom steyer, i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you, erin. >> and next, the justice department issuing a statement, saying, bob mueller did not contradict the attorney general bill barr. but we have both of in re words on tape. and you can hear for yourself. they are not on the same page. plus impeachment proceedings on the minds of the 2020 candidates. but is that what voters want to hear about? >> do you want to hear the 2020 candidates talking about that? >> i think that should be at the toep of their list.
what! she's zip lining with little jon? it's lil jon. even he knows that. thanks, captain obvious. don't hate-like their trip, book yours with hotels.com and get rewarded basically everywhere. hotels.com. be there. do that. get rewarded. ...to give you the alrprotein you needin ensure max protein... with less of the sugar you don't (grunti)g i'll take that. (cheering) 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar ensure. for strength and energy. plaque psoriasis get clearer. with moderate to severe and stay clearer. most patients who saw 90% clearer skin at 28 weeks
stayed clearer through 48 weeks. don't use if you're allergic to tremfya®. tremfya® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya®. stay clearer. janssen can help you explore cost support options. etsy is the place to the things we hold on to. sold by real people
and made for all of life's moments. our belongings don't just show what we care about. they show who we are. shop etsy.com when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org
breaking news, the department of justice insisting that bob barr and bob mueller in lock step. they do have the first name but that appears to be the end. because the words of both men speak for themselves. listen to mueller when he explained why he did not charge president trump with a crime. >> under longstanding department policy, a president cannot be
charged with a federal crime while he is in office. >> but, this is what the attorney general has said about in very issue. >> in your press conference, you said that you asked the special counsel whether it would have made a charging decision or recommended charges on obstruction. but for the office of legal counsel's opinion on charging sitting presidents and gnat special counsel made clear that was not the case. so, mr. barr, is that an accurate description of your conversation with the special counsel? >> yes, he reiterated several times in a group meeting that he was not saying that but for the olc opinion he would have found obstruction. >> grassley asked whether mueller would have made a charging decision if it weren't for the olc. barr and mueller are -- are not on the same page. joe lockhart served as press stekt for bill clinton and david
riff kin served under president he is reagan and george h. w. bush and known barr 30 years. joe you're with me. let me start with you. start with the one issue here of the olc's importance in mueller's decision whether or not to make a charging decision. >> right. mueller couldn't have been clearer that at a point in the investigation, probably the very beginning, he was hamstrung by the -- by the policy that you could not indict. and if explains every decision. people wondered out loud why didn't he subpoena the president and force his testimony. he knew he wasn't charging him from the beginning. why did he need the testimony? what he laid out was volumes of evidence of where the president did obstruct justice. he laid out evidence of where there was collusion but did say there was insufficient evidence to prove a conspiracy. he didn't say there was no
collusion. he just said there was insufficient to make a charge there. and then he just tossed the whole thing into congress's lap to figure out what to do with it. >> what do you say david on this issue? at best it appears barr is in misleading in the answer to grassley who specifically asked whether mueller would have made a chargeening decision if it weren't foshag the decision of olc. >> the viewers need to understand it's not a statement by the doj. it's a joint statement by the special counsel and do jochlt. >> well special counsel no longer works for the doj. >>en a the special counsel's he is office is being shutdown but the statement is made in mueller's name. you got to appreciate one thing. mr. mueller did not reach a prosecuteual determination relative to obstruction. he did reach it relative to conspiracy or collusion. but ocd opinion that prevents indictment of a sitting.
somehow caverned opheim why would he reach a conclusion on the conspiracy with russian et cetera. the fact the matter is pitchersome the fact that the oc was a factor in the consideration but the the factor. he no way contradicted bar. the attorney genre barr had free conversations where he orally assured that was not case. he passed the buck to barr. barr looked at over ten episodes laid out relating potentially to obstruction. >> david, did make it clear. >> including. >> under longstanding department a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. >> that is a correct. >> but it's a black and white statement that's clear he doesn't care whether he was guilty or not guilty he is not going to charge him. >> under your logic he could have reached no prosecutial determination for purposes of conspiracy or the russian because he do not couldn't charge the president with it either. >> actually hold on joe i could argue the on sit what you are saying the fact he was willing to say someone not was not
kplarjd in one case but couldn't be in the other is more damns i would have charged i could argue that as you did. >> you cannot have it both ways. he just chose not to make a prosecutial determination in one case and nog to do with the oc opinion and passed the buck to barr. he made another case. by the way i'm sick and tired of hearing this business about he could not affirmative cli that the president was innocent. that's never a function of any prosecutor. it's practically impossible. and constitutionally flawed. everybody is presumed to be innocent. the job of the prosecutor is to decide whether or not he or she amassed sufficient evidence to charge. not whether or not he or she. >> except for joe what he said he could not definitelyively say the the president could not commit a crime. >> and that is the point. i think the rest of us are sick and tired of this sort of non-sensical argument that -- and it's circular. what he said was clear. which was because it's unconstitutional to charge a
sitting president with a crime he could not do that. but what mueller did was he went to great lengths to bend over backwards to be fair to the president. he said which he didn't have to say. he said there wasn't enough -- there was insufficient evidence to prove a conspiracy to collude. he didn't say there wasn't collusion. but that was something that was fair to the president. he second then today went out and side that it would have been unfair to the president for him to charge -- to lay out the case and said he committed -- to accuse because the president then didn't have a assured forum to defend himself. so the idea of him being fair is now being twisted back oornd that -- i want to play this exchange, t- david as well for you, right. this is a claim starting again with barr earlier this month again under oath. here is the attorney general. >> if the special counsel found facts sufficient to constitute obstruction of justice, would he have stated that finding?
>> if he had found that then i think he would state it, yes. >> okay. he was under oath. the word think is really important there. because listen to mueller today. >> it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no no court resolution of the actual charge. >> david, those two things are not consistent. >> those things entirely consistent. he is no way contra convenient veen was the attorney general said. >> so bill barr. >> the attorney general is on the record three occasions he was told by mr. mueller that the oc opinion was not the decisive factor as lawyers but for. >> with the olc david if he found things that were really bad he would have laid them out even if he didn't charge. >> he did. >> barr sawed says he would have done that mueller says today it would be unfair to accuse someone of a crime if i'm not charging. >> those two things you tell me how they're consistent. >> you are confusing two things. the second volume of report lays
out ten ins tans that potentially taken other constitution uses of ma may be used as indisia of obstruction and the report lays out interpretation a and bment process he done it in ten cases that's what he has done. a. b he chose not to make a prosecutorial documentation as who you to oit up. he said it in the report. said it again today. he passed responsibility to attorney general barr who did so with deputy rosenstein and obviously other officials process. there is no inconsistenty you have to separate the assertions of factual findings and prosecutorial determinations. that simple. >> i think you have to separate reality from fantasy. and that's fantasy talk. >> no it's lawyer talk. >> when just said isulate early false and incorrect. >> let me finish. i think the reason that mueller is bending over backwards now to protect barr is that he -- he is an institutionalist and barr has done serious damage to the
department of justice but mueller has no interest in that fight. what he has an interest in is what he start the with today which is today we are losing sight of the important thing, the russians undermined our democracy and the president won't ac knowledge it much less do something about it. >> we're not -- >> and that is a central point that he wants but he was very clear on the second point. which is he was not able to indict the did the most fair thing which was to lay out the obstruction without saying that -- that he was charging him >> what it added up to. >> let me make one simple point. >> he left. >> choose. >> he left it for congress. >> choose your moisten you make mueller look like a saint yet this is the same mueller who said today that general barr is acting in good faith. sir are you really suggesting that if bafr perjured himself as you seem to imply that that's what mueller would do he would give -- because he is an institutionallist he would give barr cover you can't have it both ways. >> sir not having it both ways. i'm explaining why i think.
>> you think what. >> that mueller covered up for barr yet weshtd respect. >> i don't think he is covering up for barr. he is choosing not of it the fight with barr zba fight what fight. >> the most. >> barr testified under oath and in three occasioning mueller told him that. >> and he he misled the country and the congress and isabella aed pour of his kbeem. >> the next the calls for impeachment getting louder on the campaign trail. >> we need to begin impeachment proceedings. >> plus mueller breaking silence. as jeanne found out, the internet went wild. banking eas, like... zelle. to conveniently send money to your babysitter. for overtime. or pinacle, to tap into your organization in the office, on the go, or in the stop-and-go. pnc - make today the day.
with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ a migfrom aimovig. to be there for the good...
and not so good. for the mundane. the awe-inspiring. the heart-racing. the heartbreaking. that's what life is all about... showing up. unless migraine steals your chance to say... "i am here." we aim to change that. that's why we created... aimovig. a preventive treatment for migraine in adults. one dose. once a month. aimovig is proven to reduce the number of monthly migraine days. for some, that number can be cut in half or more. the most common side effects are pain, redness or swelling at the injection site and constipation. it doesn't matter what each day brings. so long as you can say... "i am here." aim to be there more. talk to your doctor about preventing migraine with aimovig.
tonight, two more 2020 candidates calling for impeachment proceedings to start. senators cory booker and kirsten gillibrand both saying that special counsel mueller's news conference convinced them that congress must launch impeachment hearings. kyung lah is "outfront." >> and we need to begin impeachment proceedings. >> reporter: on the campaign trail, senator kamala harris reacted to robert mueller, calling a congressional response a constitutional duty. >> what was the message that mr.
mueller was sending to you, a sitting member of congress? >> i think what is clear is that i think it's a fair inference from what we heard in that press conference that bob mueller was essentially referring impeachment to the united states congress. >> reporter: a steady stream of 2020 democratic candidates rapidly jumped in with reaction. senators cory booker and kir stkirsten gillibrand both previously stopped short of launching an impeachment inquiry. today, booker said congress had a legal and moral obligation to begin proceedings. gillibrand said in her statement, it's time. elizabeth warren, among the first of the candidates to call for impeachment proceedings, reiterated that call. >> these are impeachable offenses. >> your reaction to mueller today, sir? >> front-runner joe biden ignored questions from reporters about mueller's news conference. in a statement, he stopped short of calling for impeachment proceedings to begin, saying, quote, no one would relish what would certainly be a divisive
impeachment process, but it may be unavoidable if this administration continues on its path. and bernie sanders, who has warned impeachment hearings could hurt democrats and help trump in 2020, also did not explicitly call for impeachment proceedings, but said he would support the decision of the house judiciary committee. the mueller news on the minds of south carolina voters. >> at this point, you would like to see the country move forward on these proceedings? >> i think it's a matter of national honor, yes. >> and did you want -- do you want to hear the 2020 candidates talking about that? >> i think that should be at the top of their list. >> i respect the time it's taking to make those decisions, but i think it's time to move, it's just time to make a decision. >> reporter: now, those were two voters at one of kamala harris' town halls here in south carolina. but after weeks of seeing harris interact with these voters in a number of these early states,
weeks upon weeks and town hall after town hall, most voters simply ask her about health care. they ask about immigration, her position on abortion rights. today, there was a slight shift. she did take a question and you heard her there, erin, talk about the impeachment process needing to begin. >> all right, kyung, thank you. next, jeanne on the moment the world waited two years for. >> good morning, everyone, and thank you for being here. (paul) great. another wireless ad. so many of them are full of this complicated, tricky language about their network and offers and blah blah blah. look. sprint's going to do things differently. and let you decide for yourself. they're offering a new 100% total satisfaction guarantee. try it out and see the savings. if you don't love it, get your money back. see? simple. now sprint's unlimited plan comes with one of the newest phones included for just $35 a month. so switch now. for people with hearing loss, visit sprintrelay.com
tonight, the most silent man in washington speaks. here's jeanne. >> reporter: this is a guy so tight-lipped that one network called it breaking news when he uttered the words, no comment. >> will you testify before congress, sir? >> no comment. >> would you know his voice if you ever heard it? have you ever heard him speak? >> reporter: for two years, he's been the greta garbo of special prosecutors, always in silent films, never talkies. leading to the questio, can garbo talk? >> she could and did. >> give me a whisper. >> reporter: some wondered in advance what robert mueller would sound like, thinking barry white-esque, read one tweet. someone else thought it'd be like sam eliot. >> catch you later on down the trail. >> reporter: or what if robert mueller has a higher voice than
jared kushner, whose own voice was long a target of speculation. >> what does his voice sound like? >> my main business is real estate. >> reporter: jared found his voice. >> it's working and it's very exciting. >> reporter: but when robert mueller finally spoke, he spoke about not speaking again. >> now, i hope and expect this to be the only time that i will speak to you in this manner. >> reporter: am i the only one who thought robert mueller's voice would sound like ian mckellan! you shall not pass! >> reporter: did anybody else expect robert de niro's voice to come out of mueller's mouth? >> wait a second! >> reporter: after all, de niro played mueller. >> no collusion, no obstruction, so. ♪ don't stop me now >> reporter: not since monica lewinsky has everyone been talking so much about someone who wouldn't talk. >> her voice, just heard it. we haven't heard her voice. >> reporter: and even though mueller talked, he wouldn't
answer. >> no questions. >> reporter: some people are never satisfied. i don't like hearing mueller's voice. i like the mystery. >> the greatest oz has spoken! >> who are you? >> reporter: the great mueller then resumed his place behind the curtain. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> thanks for watching. anderson starts now. good evening. for the first time since being named special counsel, robert mueller spoke today publicly about the russia investigation and his report on it. everything about it was extraordinary, in particular how unpretentious and dutiful and serious mr. mueller was. there was no grandstanding, no puffed chest, no croning about his accomplishments and how hard he worked and how hard the job was. there was no hurtling insults at anyone, even those who have been systemically trying