that is about to be the theme song for the trump white house for their response to the mueller report and for specifically how the democratic led congress will be able to to approach the potential impeachment of president trump for conduct described in that report, because whoomp there it is, we now know the exact moment the trump white house completely, oops, screwed it up when it came to former white house counsel don mcgahn. served in the trump administration, only just recently left. there's an important moment when it comes to him. the moment when the white house whoomp, really screwed it up when it comes to don mcgahn, arrived in the fall of 2017, although we did not find out about that whoomp there it is moment until months later. it was first reported last year in "the new york times." special counsel robert mueller had been appointed earlier in may 2017. then if the fall of 2017, according to "the new york times," quote, mueller's office asked to interview trump's white house counsel, don mcgahn. quote, to the surprise of the white house counsel's office, to the surpri

. there's breaking news tonight, the white house saying they may defy a congressional subpoena for the testimony of former white house counsel don mcgahn, the attorney who kept notes and already talked to mueller. they are already resisting a second subpoena for another former aide. the treasury department is ignoring another deadline for handing over the president's tax returns, and the trump organization is battling a demand to produce financial records. essentially, the administration is trying to put up roadblocks wherever they can. we'll talk tonight about those cases and others and whether they amount to contempt on the president's part, not just for congress, but also for institutions and standards of behavior dating back to the founders. whether or not this is the case is, of course, an open question. it is debatable, and we'll certainly debate it tonight, including with a nobel laureate who believes we're on the edge of no longer being a functioning democracy. we begin, keeping them honest, with something beyond almost any dispute, namely, the administration's contempt for the

with us for the latest on all that tonight and more. cnn chief white house correspondent. >> it took the president nine hours to finish the series of three tweets. this is unusual for him. >> that's right. it might be a sign that perhaps he was somewhat speechless after the release of the mueller report. he said wednesday he was holing a news conference and went past reporters without comment on the findings that were released in the redacted report. the president did late in the day post a tweet essentially finishing a tweet he started nine hours earlier and accused unnamed forces of spying or treason. like so many things the president said and has said, over the course of this administration he didn't back up the tweet with evidence or proof. >> he's saying now is it time to turn the table and it sound like taking revenge on the political opponents or on those he feels have done him wrong. >> that's right. what we have seen so far this week, i think there's a highlighted in the report. he makes these threats and engages in this bluster but you have to wonder who will follow the ord

. [applause] >> earlier today, president trump welcome to the children of white house staff and the white house press corps to the white house in recognition of "take our daughters and sons to work day," from the south lawn, this is about 15 minutes. [applause] young, beautiful people. there is nothing like it. so it is "take our beautiful children to work." sons and daughters, and it is a great honor to have you what the white house. you have made tours come you've been with the secret service, you've been with some of the great people including your parents, right? are your parents great people? i think some. -- i think so. if they are not, we got a big story. i want to welcome all the young people, great people, the future, to the white house. ands a very special day officially called "take our daughters and our sons to work date." correctthe politically term and we always have to be politically correct, right? i know your parents are very proud of you. they are very, very proud and a lot of parents are here. most of them are here and i see sarah, your beautiful kids and so many. the m

privilege could not be used to shield criminal conduct and compelled white house aids to testify. the televised hearings added to the record and helped the public understand the facts in a way that no dense legal report could. similar hearings with mueller, former white house council don mcgahn and other key witnesses could do the same today. she then calls for the house judiciary committee to appoint a respected leader to lead an impeachment investigation just as the watergate era judiciary committee did. clinton then calls for an independent bipartisan commission along the lines of the 9/11 commission to help protect our elections from future attacks like the one we suffered in 2016. she cites the new york times report that trump's white house chief of staff reportedly told the homeland security secretary that she should not bring up the russian threat to attack the 2020 election. she shouldn't bring that up with president trump because president trump didn't want to hear anything about that. and she calls that the latest example of an administration that chooses to take the mo

white house. the oversight committee demanding answers after a whistleblower warns senior officials overruled concerns about 25 people whose clearances were initially denied for disqualifying issues, including fierce about foreign influence and potential conflicts of interest. we're told jared kushner and ivanka trump were on the list. this as the house judiciary committee chairman is set to authorize a subpoena in the democrats' battle to obtain the full unredacted report from special counsel robert mueller. this hour, i'll talk with a top democrat on the senate foreign relations committee, bob menendez. and our correspondents and analysts are also standing by. first, let's go to our national security correspondent, alex marquardt. what are you learning? >> this wheistleblower we're talking about from the white house, her name is tricia newbold. she's someone i've been speaking with for several months now as she's been sounding the alarm about security clearances that have been forced through. now in a new report, she details how she compiled a list of 35 individuals whose security

>>> the president says he doesn't want white house aides testifying to congress. democrats stone walled as they look for information on russia, finances and more. >>> advanced warning of the easter bombings in sri lanka. is the threat really over? >> shots fired. >> police body cam show the frantic moments an officer opens fire on a driver. why did he shoot and what the driver's family is saying. >>> what is winning? a milestone in the sensational run for this "jeopardy" contestant. good morning, i'm michelle. >> it is 1:00 a.m. in portland, oregon where my friend, one of the great shots in basketball history happened. >> wow. >> with we start with the nation's capital. the investigations coming straight from the top. president trump telling "the washington post" he does not wasn't aides testifying. it is unnecessary. the white house fully cooperated with the mueller investigation. quote, there is no reason to go any further, especially in congress where it's very partisan. obviously, very partisan. >> trump moved to block cooperation several times, telling a former white house o

report. abc is also reporting the white house will not claim executive privilege to try to get any further redactions. this reporter is also saying what worries the white house the very most is what this man told the special counsel, fo. former white house counsel don mcgahn was interviewed by mueller for more than 30 hours into the heart of the investigation of whether or not the president obstructed justice. to that point the report suggests that the white house is concerned whether the report will have new information on how much the president tried to fire robert mueller or at least talk about it. >>> let's begin at the white house where officials are bracing for the release of the mueller report. let's go to nbc's hans nichols who is joining us now. what are you hearing, hans, about the white house, the preparation and anticipation of the release of this report, the redacted sense, that is. >> yeah. >> and can you confirm whether white house officials may have been briefed at least on what's coming logisticswise or what may be in part of the content of the report? >> reporter:

going to hold donald trump accountable. while democrats are doing business as usual, the white house is going to war, fighting every effort at oversight by the legislative branch. to them it doesn't seem to matter who has the law or the constitution on their side. with every power play, republicans are testing the proposition that the democrats won't have the guts to fight back. today was the second deadline from the house ways and means committee for the treasury department to turn over the president's tax returns under a law that gives the committee's chairman access to any taxpayer's information. treasury secretary steve mnuchin is continuing to stall, saying he needs till may 6th to make up his mind about whether to comply. a white house spokesman said compliance is not going to happen. >> look, as i understand it, the president is clear. once he's out of audit, he will think about it. he's not inclined to do so at this time. he turned over hundreds of pages during the campaign. everyone knows he's a very successful billionaire. he had a lot of success in the business world. people

strapped with student debt for decades. >> sometimes it depends on what you study. >> sometimes it depends on what you study. thank you so much. i appreciate you joining me today. >>> that wraps us up this hour. i'm stephanie ruhle and i'll see you at 1:00 p.m. with my partner ali velshi. coming up now, more news with hallie jackson. >> i am hallie jackson in washington where the most powerful person in congress is pumping the brakes on the question that could define the rest of president trump's first term. nancy pelosi telling democrats that the house will investigate the president, but she's not committing to impeachment, at least not yet. we'll talk to one democrat who was on that conference call sounding the alarm about what not impeaching could mean down the road. >>> 2020 democrats, by the way, they're also split on how to handle this. watch. >> if there are people in the house of the senate who want to say that is what a president can do, then they should have to take that vote and live with it for the rest of their lives. >> if the house brings the impeachment proceedings before us, we will deal with them. >> subpoena the people who were mentioned in that report and bring them forward. >> i believe congress should take the steps towards impeachment. >> i think he's made it pretty clear that he deserves impeachment. >> i'm also a leader to the house and senate to figure that out. >> our team is here with that story and the many others we are bringing you over the next 60 minutes. i want to bring kick it off with hans nichols. a level of nonchalant but on his twitter a different story. >> i don't think it's studied indifference. what we have from the president is a conist isn't mant message, number of tweets per minute seem to be picking up. 12 this morning. what you're hearing from the white house is this tension on whether or not they want to welcome in impeachment or they think this is completely unfair. as your reporting indicates, the president thinks impeachment may help him. the tension inside the white house on this is almost played out on capitol hill, as well. have a listen to how some leading republicans also seem to be of two minds about impeachment. >> when you impeach, you often end up unwittingly strengthening the executive branch. >> nancy pelosi is not in charge of the democratic party. the radical left is in charge. i expect that there will be impeachment proceedings against president trump. >> i think the american people have had quite enough of it and it's time to movin' o. >> seems like rudy giuliani focusing on don mcgahn and questioning his credibility and don mcgahn could be a crucial witness if he testifies before the house. hallie? >> someone we're talking about later in the show, hans, thank you. >>> let me bring in jared huffman of california. thank you for being on the show after what is your conference call with your caucus last night. >> thanks for having me. >> are you satisfied with the outcome of that call? the house speaker and house leadership has said that we will aggressively investigate but not commit to impeachment. >> look, for now, i think there's broad unity in the democratic caucus on what the next steps need to be. there may be some different views on what we should call those next steps. i'm very comfortable with calling them part of an impeachment inquiry or impeachment proceeding. and others feel like it needs to, we need to avoid that term. but we all want to move forward with a full throated investigation and full accou accountability. i think that's the important point here. >> is it fair as i'm listening to your answer, congressman. you're saying this is really a matter, you're on the same page of what you want to do just not what you want to call it? >> in the short term, perhaps so. most of my colleagues, including leader pelosi have said that that investigation may lead to impeachment and they're not taking that off the table. so, i think there is even unity in that next step, as well. but we certainly have some colleagues that don't even want to contemplate the possibility that we may have to fulfill our constitutional obligation and move forward with an impeachment. i think we likely will have to do that. but functionally the next steps are the same regardless of what you call it. >> on impeachment, on this topic. you told my colleague leeann it's bad for the country if congress punts. i want to play what bernie sanders who is in the upper chamber had to say about this. >> if for the next year, year and a half all the congress is talking about is impeaching trump and trump, trump, and mueller, mueller, mueller and we're not talking about health care and all the issues that concern ordinary americans. what i worry about is that works to trump's advantage. >> why do you think senator sanders is wrong on that, congressman, if you do? >> well, i'm not saying he is wrong. look, we're not going to talk only about impeachment and mueller. we are going to talk about health care. we are going to talk about infrastructure and prescription drug costs. we have to walk and chew gum. no doubt about it. i b but i think we are up to that task. you don't punt your constitutional duty in a historic moment that landed in your lap like it because you think the politics are dicy. you have to do your job and sometimes that job requires doing multiple things at the same time. >> politics may be dicien othyo one, congressman. folks think impeachment could help the president. impeachment proceedings could strengthen his hand. >> i would say there is no way they could know that. frankly many of them are saying that in a self-serving way. so, i really think instead of trying to read the partisan tea leaves of how this cuts in 2020, we should follow the facts. we should do this full throated investigation. we should read the constitution and remember that our founders anticipated a moment like this and they put the constitutional remedy of impeachment in the congress for a reason. we can't just punt that. there is a real downside to that. and i would say to these folks, think about the political risk and the political downside of not doing our job under the constitution. that could be very dangerous and politically unwise, as well. >> california congressman jared huffman, thank you very much forric waifor waking up early and coming on with us. >>> president of brilliant corners research and strategies and betsy woodruff and politics reporter for "daily beast." guys, thanks for being here. cornell, let me start with you. your reaction to what you heard from congressman huffman? >> i think the congressman is spot on. look, you have to separate the politics from this. they have a constitutional duty to be a check on the president. look, and this goes back to the founding fathers. madison was very clear when criticism of too much power and the corrupting influence and the presidency and madison said congress has the power to impeach. if there is a corrupt president, congress should impeach. that has nothing to do with the politics of this and the politics of this should not enter into a conversation about what their constitutional right is. now, look, on the politics side, i don't think it's bad politics for democrats to be doing their constitutional job. >> you made the point, as you ucu talk about some people want to separate the politics from this. joe halockhart is one of them. top clinton aide in the '90s that says there is a bigger prize than impeachment. keeping president trump in office is the best way to cement trumpism's hold and trying to remove the president anywhere but at the ballot box. the politics would be a piece of this, no? >> to me, the politics, listen. donald trump has not expanded at 46% of the electorate that voted for him. i'm more concerned about the 54%, 53% of the electorate or so that is not ever going to be for this guy. how do we bring them together around one democratic candidate? i think that's the politics of it. not the politics of impeachment. >> hallie that was some interesting parsing of the definition of impeachment. you either do it and pursue the articles now or you don't. >> and his argument, right, was semant semantics, right? move to investigate aggressively is one man's impeachment proceedings beginning, right? >> you want to investigate now and potentially impeach later and that is the ground that it looks like house democrat leaders are landing on because a major divide between conviction and political pragimatism between, you know, members. i think there are some who believe the offenses are serious enough and set a dangerous house precedent and others like bernie sanders think this would play into the president's hands in 2020. >> this is where elizabeth warren is making an argument where she's going on offense in terms of this impeachment conversation and implying that an impeachment vote could do damage to republicans. should take that vote and have to live with it for the rest of their lives. the implication there is that republicans who vote not to impeach trump or senate republicans who vote not to convict could pay a political price, as well. it shouldn't be examined in terms of good for democrats and bad for democrats and irrelevant to everyone else. >> none of the democrats are arguing with her on the substance. some are saying she's wrong to pursue impeachment. >> politico has a new headline how theiry're ignoring impeachmt chatter. they purposely do not have a strategy in place for what to do should democrats move forward beyond these what dems are calling aggressive investigations and into impeachment territory. >> that's exactly. one thing that republicans will privately point to is that bill clinton's polling numbers went up after the impeachment concluded itself and he stayed in office. >> not just relevance. president trump is using that talking point with friends and allies himself. >> look, the polling numbers are helpful. the evidence bears out. bill clinton went on to be one of the most influential former president and be lotted as an elder -- >> final thoughts to you on that point. >> i don't like the comparison because donald trump is not bill clinton. right. he's never had that skill. the impeachment sort of frenzy is not one and, look i have been at iowa, south carolina, new hampshire over the last month and grassroots democrats. this is not the front burner of their conversation. health care, kitchen table issues the front burner of this issue. however, take donald trump's name off the mueller report and put barack obama's on that report and republicans would be falling over themselves to impeach president obama. the hypocrisy of this is sickening. >> cornell, we'll have to leave it there. thank you for joining us. we have a lot more to get to including some breaking information just coming into us. the white house instructing an official not to comply with the house subpoena, even as democrats demand that former white house counsel don mcgahn turn over more documents. the white house, scapegoating has begun. >>> plus, a busy tuesday on the trail. dueling campaign events are set to begin any second. we're going to take you there as they kick off. and as our team drops some new reporting this hour, all but confirming that pete buttigieg with his rivals digging for dirt. minerals. boost® high protein. look for savings on boost® in your sunday paper. >>> we have new information to bring you now. the former campaign chairman is officially as of today in prison. according to them, paul manafort has been transferred from jail to that prison in pennsylvania to serve his 7 1/2 year sentence. his expected release date christmas day 2024. >>> here's something we have been planning to talk about today. the guy who over saw the white house set to show up for a deposition today after house democrats subpoenaed him. here is what we are talking about. carl cline is not showing up because the white house told him not to go. klein used to oversee the clearance process and granting clearance to two dozen white house aides. so, why the administration block him from talking? they say democrats are trying to get info protected by executive privile privilege. we'll talk about what is next for one of the star witnesses of the mueller report don mcgahn in a minute but let's start by bringing in greg bauer and a remember foer u.s. attorney and betsy woodruff and, greg, let me start with you. does the white house. >> it's dubious and the optics are terrible, but my understanding is that there is an issue or dispute with respect to whether he could have white house counsel there along with izh his personal counsel and the committee chair is saying you cannot have white house or agency counsel there. that will not hold. i think in my experience we typically allowed witnesses to bring in committees that allowed witnesses to bring personal counsel and agency counsel if they so chose and the committee simply didn't care and more interested in getting the testimony. we'll have see how this plays out. >> if it is executive privileges, does that change the game in your view? >> i think what needs to happen is that the committee needs to allow the committee to bring white house counsel with him and see how it goes. if white house counsel is too eager or too aggressive to prevent answers to questions, therein lies the rub and that could be a potential problem. >> you have been reporting on this, as well. >> one important element of this is that carl kline wants the white house to be on hand for his deposition. there was another staffer in that office, trisha newbold who is the whistleblower and she did not bring in white house lawyers and she did not have to. the first amendment protects your right to talk to congressional investigators with whoever you want or don't want to be in there. carl kline wants his personal lawyer and lawyers from the white house to raise any executive privilege claims and he has been in touch with the white house about it and agreed with the white house. if those white house counsel lawyers can't go in for the deposition, it is not going to happen. >> this is a critically important potential important investigation that there are security clearances with the president who did or did not do and who did or did not overrule whom when it came to granting when career staffers thought they shouldn't have them. >> eager to see the president and the white house invoke executive privilege because they haven't done that yet and playing this game where they don't invoke, but they use it as, you know, a justification for not complying with the investigation. and, by the way, we should note. that the white house is still allowing democrats in the oversight investigation of the president's financial records and the ways and means of the investigation of the tax return and the president is saying, come get me. >> we haven't talked about yet, but we want to see you by may 21st publicly talking to us and issued the subpoena against him and republicans are pushing back on that saying that subpoena is premature. >> well, i don't see any way that don mcgahn doesn't testify. >> in an open, public setting you think? >> right. i don't see any way that is not the most compelling testimony we have seen on the hill in a long time. the president, of course, being the president has caused this potential spectacle because if he had left well enough alone with the mueller report, not that it was good for him, but he has questioned mcgahn's credibility and mcgahn's counsel has pushed back on that. not only is mcgahn incentvised to set the record straight, the committee has an opening to need to set the record straight by bringing him in for live testimony. >> mcgahn was in the center of this mueller report, specifically volume two resisting what he felt was an instruction by the president to go and try to have this special counsel fired. the president called mcgahn and directed him to have robert mueller removed and mcgahn did not carry that out for fear of triggering another saturday night massacre. >> i was just going to say, look, mcgahn, no way mcgahn was misleading with respect to the mueller team and no way that he was confused. he simply told the truth. i'm sure. what is ironic about this, of course, is mcgahn has been one of the favorite of the president's base. to now turn on mcgahn and suggest he is not telling the truth. it makes no sense at all. >> one thing that is important about the mcgahn it stands in contrast with so many that didn't want to talk to mueller. mcgahn could have taken the don jr. strategy and he didn't. instead, he talked for upwards of 30 hours and the fact of that is historic. >> i'll tell you, a question, too, among folks that i have talked to in the west wing who wondered why he was allowed to do that in the first place. greg, always great to have your expertise. thank you for coming on. >>> 2020 democrats digging for dirt, not on president trump but pete buttigieg. how much the party and the candidate underestimated one of their own potentially. >>> the king of off the cuff and the queen. they met before. but this time her majesty is giving a state visit. going back to the doctor just for a shot. with neulasta onpro... ...patients get their day back... ...to be with... ... family... ...or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study... ...neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17%... ...to 1%... ...a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver... ...neulasta the day after chemo... ...and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome... ...have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing... ... or allergic reactions to your doctor right away in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes... ...fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect... is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor... ...about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. ...when a plan stops being a plan and gets set into motion. today's merrill can help you get there with the people, tools, and personalized advice to help turn your ambitions into action. what would you like the power to do? today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest. >>> we have a lot of live action on the campaign trail right now with harris, sanders and warren all out in new hampshire and south carolina. all fresh off a town hall showdown overnight and things maybe didn't go exactly as according to plan for amy klobuchar she ran into a jeb bush please clap moment of her own. >> the president needs to be a lot quieter but send a signal that we are prepared to national interest of the country to get back in the business of creating a more peaceful world. please clap. >> and every single time i have run, i have won every single congressional district in my state, including michele bachmann's. okay. that's when you are guys are supposed to cheer, okay. >> and on the topic of clapping, how about some clap backs for pete buttigieg. his opponents are scrambling to dig up dirt on the 37-year-old mayor who is really on nobody's radar as a serious presidential contender until the last few weeks. josh letterman is here with his exclusive reporting and vaughn is traveling and betsy and sahil are back with me, as well. josh, let me start with you. what are you finding and what are you learning? >> because pete buttigieg came out of no where he had not had the due diligence done on him as was done on elizabeth warren and people who were going to run and every political group and campaign on the republican side and democratic side had books ready to go with everything they ever said footnoted so they knew how to go after them in the campaign. now, with pete buttigieg surging into a tie with jin new hampshi that digging and find some lines of attack useful against him. they are digging through his record as mayor and trying to get their hands on any type of document they could find as well as anything they may have said or written at harvard and his work at a consulting firm that is not particularly popular within the democratic party and they're seeing what there might be that would stick against pete buttigieg. >> and republicans, too? >> that's right, hallie. the rnc also didn't have a major operation tracking pete buttigieg. so, they have been working with the indiana state republican party who has been tracking him closely, at least since the time that pete buttigieg ran that campaign for dnc chair. they have been working with the local party tracking his parts as tenure as mayor and how african-americans have faired in south bend and how they handled the definition of abandoned houses in the city and other issues related to the opening of a crisis pregnancy center that discouraged abortion. trying to find things that might be potential vulnerabilities to use against pete buttigieg. >> speaking with a rival democratic campaign member who said buttigieg is a mayor that nobody knows anything about and a free pass on a lot of stuff. people don't know a lot about him, so he can be whatever people want him to be. >> buttigieg had a rise and this crowd with the stakes so high. especially surrounding this police chief get straight to the issues of racism and law enforcement. this is a monumentally important issue which is among the most important voting blocs in the democratic party. a lot of talk with his potential strengths with white midwestern voters and if you're a democratic candidate in this primary and you're not making a compelling case to how you can win african-americans voters, you're not going to be a serious candidate. >> who is making a serious case is kamala harris and vaughn hillyard is out with her in new hampshire. bernie sanders someone who harris is going up against, had an interesting discussion at this town hall last night when he talked about voting rights for jailed felons and imprisoned felons. i want to play a little bit of that and ask you how harris is reacting to that this morning. well, we don't have the sound bite, but that's what senator sanders talked about was this idea to allow felons to be able to have voting rights even in prison. she is a former attorney general and a former district attorney and has she responded and talked about this at all? what can you talk to us about from a policy perspective? >> kamala harris followed up bernie sanders on stage last night, hallie, and asked specifically that when it comes to sexual predators or terrorists who are incarcerated and she has long been an advocate for those who are formally incarcerated to regain the right to vote. when it comes to those questions of those currently incarcerated, she said that is a conversation that should take place. i want to say, you know, you are talking about the kamala harris and she spent the weekend in south carolina and this is over at keen state college where the students are doing their finals this week but i wanted to introduce to you here. we'll make joel run over this way here on this morning here. i want to introduce you to jack and eva. sorry, a daughter and father combo here and the discussion was taking place between mayor pete buttigieg and senator kamal a a harris. how do you convince him to come over to the harris? >> every night at dinner i hope to be framing my debate cleverly and for me senator harris has been a frontrunner and clear on immigration and health care and the rights of the lgbtq community and for me she's articulated for argument so well in committee hearings and also on the campaign trail. for me, she's my frontrunner. >> cdad, jack, i'm putting you n the spot. being a mayor from south bend, what is it that you're drawn to him? >> i think he's very articulate and instead of trying to complicate things with going over policy at this point, i think he has a policy person. i think he's trying to work on just generally letting people q know who he is about. >> back to you, hallie. >> your sneakers and your running shoes and the whole jog situation, vaughn, love having you. thank you. >> the man of the morning here. >> go, joel, appreciate it. >>> someone else putting out a lot of othese policy proposals is senator elizabeth warren r regularly on a weekly basis. in her plan 95% of students would qualify and wipe out debt for 75% of those who have it. this includes families earning $100,000 a year could cancel $50,000 worth of student loan debt. how can you pay for it on this wealth tax. 2% on families making more than $2 million. this is serious policy stuff and you're seeing democratic candidates dive more into the weeds here. >> also something that puts republicans in a challenging spot. because now that warren has brought this question of student debt relief to the forefront, people on the right have to say, what is the policy proposal that we have to try to attack this problem that is affecting millions and millions of americans in a huge way. it certainly is not a partisan problem. its arer ea problem across the board that affects millions of americans. when it comes to the democratic primary and the role that that plays. are voters going to care more about an inspiring message and vision or prioritize some of these more detailed media proposals. >> joe biden looking ahead to a potential announcement at some point on our reporting and we now confirmed that the former vp will be in monday for a campaign event. so, he's doing it and we know that he has some sort of rally going on monday in pittsburgh. >> joe biden is also going to have to take policy positions on some of the big issues of the democratic field. he is riding high on perfect name recognition and an ost noa don't think he how figured out how he can going to handle that. >> we have more news to get to. >>> programming note, by the way, speaking of andrea mitchell, she is talking today with senator kirsten gillibrand. >>> royal news alert, gang. no not about the new royal baby. although we do remain on meghan markle baby watch. we did get a note of queen elizabeth. i was with you there for the president's last working visit to the uk. he was not warmly received. now heading there during a particularly tricky time as it relates to what is going on in london. >> yeah. there are almost always protesters out on the street in this city, as you can imagine. and they're already promising to be back out when president trump is here with the first lady june 3rd to the 5th for this official state visit. this very different from a irk withi working visit. it is filled with pomp and ceremony. the president and first lady will be guests of the queen. they will stay at one of her palaces, usually buckingham palace. sometimes windsor castle where he met with the queen last july and also in edenboro, scotland. we'll get those details to come. we do know the dates and this much from the white house. we understand that the president will be on this state visit the 3rd, 4th and 5th of june. on the 5th he will head down to portsmith, england and then on the 6th we'll head over to france for more d-day commemorations. but as you mentioned, a really tricky time here in this country. it is still in this slow motion crisis with brexit. the deadline extended now to october and theresa may's party is really sort of crumbling before our eyes and she may, in fact, face a leadership challenge within the next couple of weeks. everything could be different, hallie, in six weeks' time. >> excellent point. kelly in our london bureau, thank you. >>> we want to show you live some protests outside the supreme court back here at home as the nation's high court takes on its highest profile case this year. whether or not to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census. why this is such a big deal and why you should care, next. >>> a new claim of responsibility for the string of easter day terror attacks in sri lanka as we start to learn more about the hundreds of lives lost, including at least four americans. those emotional stories, next. e to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. >>> new developments from slee lau sri lanka. as of now u.s. officials say no evidence isis was directly involved and sclee launsri lank officials and 300 killed and hundreds more hurt in the explosions and today we're learning more about some of the victims. stephanie gosk brings us those emotional stories. >> reporter: karen was a fifth grader who dreamed of being a neuro scientist. the 11-year-old who had taken time off from washington, d.c.'s prestigious sidwell friends to study in sri lanka now among the youngest victims killed in the bombings. >> he was a very special young man. very special. >> reporter: he was having breakfast with his mother and grandmother at a hotel when a suicide bomber blew himself up at the buffet. he texted his dad just minutes before the attack. >> now he's never going to be a teenager. he was going to do great things for the world and the terrorists have taken something from this world. >> reporter: most of those killed on sunday were sri lankans attending easter services, but the capital colombo is an international hub for business and tourism. the lobbies of three luxury hotels were packed with foreigners. more than 30 people from a dozen different countries lost their lives. the 40-year-old from denver described by friends as big hearted and selfless was traveling for work. writing on facebook just before he left. and the fun begins. love these work trips. 24 hours of flying. see you soon, sri lanka. he checked into his hotel shortly before the attack. >> i just kind of feel numb. like he's not gone or i'm going to wake up and the nightmare is going to be gone and he's going to be there. >> reporter: denmark's wealthiest man and his wife lost three of their four children. the family was on vacation. and authorities confirm a sri lankan celebrity chef was killed. her daughter who also lost her life posting this photo moments before the blast. a simple caption. easter breakfast with family. >> it's difficult to watch. difficult to hear those stories. nbc stephanie gosk reporting there. the state department says in addition to the four americans killed in the bombings, several more were seriously hurt. their names have not been released. given how many lives were lost, so many more stories to tell. devastated family and friends now left to grieve. >>> we're going to stay on top of that story and also staying on top of something else right now. the biggest case of the supreme court's term being argued before the justices at this moment. whether or not the administration can add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. so, you might hear that and think, so what. think again. we are live outside court with the protests and how this could affect your life soon. kraft for the win win. ♪ ahhhh! ♪ we're here. ♪ ♪ >>> we want to take you live now to the supreme court where right now justices are hearing arguments on their highest profile and most controversial case of this entire term. this is a big deal that could affect how much of your tax money could come back to your town and all resolves around nine words, a question. is this person a citizen of the united states? the trump administration wants to add that to the census and if you're wondering, hey, why should i care? because those nine words might end up making a big difference to the roads you drive on, the schools your kids go to and the way districts, maybe yours, are redrawn. the representation you have in congress. here's why it matters, people against this move, 18 states, d.c. a few big cities and immigration rights groups and they all argue the question on citizenship makes immigrants, even legal immigrants more reluctant to respond to the census. what kind of undercount are we talking about here? an estimated 6.5 million people might not respond throwing off the census count to determine how tons of federal money ends up distributed. even former census bureau directors under republicans and democrats say this move is a bad idea. but the trump administration doesn't think so. they're saying, hey, this question has been asked for decades back in the 1800s and 1900s and the commerce secretary who oversees the census says the data is important to enforce the voting rights act. keep in mind the voting rights act is around for 50 years and in all that time you know what was newt ot on the census, this citizenship question. mariana, this activated demonstrators who are coming out in these organized protests today. tell me what you're seeing and what you're hearing. >> hallie, protesters who oppose this citizenship question being included in the 2020 census starting to gather here outside the supreme court led by organizations and they will be joined by plaintiffs once oral arguments are over. and why is there so much heat around this question? this is about presentation and the u.s. house of representative and also about hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding. i want to get to you. your organization issic atual a plaintiff in the new york case being heard today. can you tell me why for you personally is this question so important. what is the magnitude of it? >> this question will affect families like mine. families that are mixed like mim a daca recipient. it would put into jeopardy us being underrepresented. >> reporter: those who are in of including the question, we shouldn't know how many people total there are, but we should know how many citizens. they argue there's no correlation between including this question and an under count. >> the census question, the citizenship question puts our census and democracy at stake. experts have said that this would lead to to underkoununder. we should not include the citizenship question. >> reporter: thank you so much. so, yes, the issue of these mixed status families, certainly brings to light the challenges behind this question. the fierce debate. keep in mind, the supreme court justices won't be reaching a decision. that's expected to come later in june. because the census, this questionnaire, not only that, but a guide to a language in 59 languages. a huge logistical undertaking that's hinging on these questions needs to be printed out on july 1st. >> good point. thank you. >>> i'm joined by the illinois attorney general. illinois is one of the states suing the federal government over the census citizenship question. thank you so much for coming on the show. >> thank you for having me. >> why do you believe the trump administration is wrong in the argument it's making, this information is needed in order to enforce civil rights laws? >> since our nation's inception, it's contemplated that the numeration would be numeration of all people, citizens and non-citizens. to be consistent with our constitution and >> to ask doj to indicate they needed the information for etvoing rights enforcement. i question how much of a priority that is for doj in the first place. secondly, it was recognized as pretext at the district court level. >> what would be the impact on your state if, in fact, the supreme court come june ends up ruling against you? >> in addition to the potential impact on resources distributed on all of the areas i enumerated before. my state is one that's in jeopardy of losing maybe one or two congressional seats. and an undercount impacted by asking the citizenship question could impact the apportionment of districts in my state. >> thank you for coming on and talking about that. i'm sure we'll have you back over the next few months. >>> we'll be right back with what our sources are saying. first, we want to take you to new york city where white house advisor and the president's son-in-law has just arrived to take the stage for the time 100 summit. this will be the first time he's spoken publicly since the mueller report was released. we're watching that, we'll bring you any news the second it happens. bring you any news the second it happens. erfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank... ...but not for long- so hurry in! next on the agenda. priceline will partner with even more vegas hotels to turn their available rooms into amazing deals. ladies' weekend delegates, how do you vote? (wild cheering) just going to count that as a yes. the nightclub djs? (music plays) sample: yes... y-y-y-yes... can you just... turn that down? and magician delegates, how do you vote? ( ♪ ) that is freaky. the motion passes! more great deals from priceline. that is freaky. the motion passes! and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study, brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor, since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported. tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. >>> for the first time since the mueller's report has been released, we want to listen ipto the time 100 summit right now. >> thank you for opening with the soft stuff. when the whole -- >> i'm a reporter, it's my job. >> that's okay. it's good. when the whole notion of the russia collusion narrative came up, i was the first person to say i'm happy to participate with any investigations. i thought the whole thing was nonsense to be honest. we ran a very untraditional campaign, and we had a lot of outsiders coming in. in the beginning we couldn't get a lot of the people from washington to work with the campaign. normally in politics you have people who are known by the different entities. we were unknown to everybody. our focus during the campaign was on the candidate, the message. we built a very entrepreneurial campaign and made good decisions along the way which is what enables us to be successful. i think at this point i've done three house interviews. i did nine hours' worth with the special counsel. if you look at my statement from july, explaining all these different things, i think that everything i said has proven to be true. it's been thoroughly investigated. going back to the stuff, too, you take a lot of these things in retrospect. lindsey graham told me i had the greatest text messages of all text messages when i said get me the hell out of it. the media has spent a a lot of time focusing on it. you look at russia did, buying facebook ads. it's a terrible thing. i think the investigations and all of the speculation that's happened has a harsher impact on our democracy than a couple facebook ads. i spent $160,000 on facebook every three hours on the campaign. if you look at the magnitude of what they did, the ensuing investigations have been way more harmful. >> it was a lot more than facebook ads and russian operatives were organizing real events. it had a real world impact on their social media campaign. not only that, but russia was actively hacking and stealing documents that they then released at certain key points during the campaign. one of the things that doesn't sit well with the public is why didn't the trump campaign openly say russia, we don't need your help. we don't want your help. please stop. >> first of all, in the campaign we didn't know that russia was doing what they were doing. >> by october 6th the u.s. intelligence services made the assessment public that russia was involved in a social media campaign to influence the election. >> if you look at my perspective, we were ritrying t decide where are we buying more television, more digital

own mind. next on the presidency, white house historical association historians matthew costello and lindsay chervinsky talk about their jobs and the history and preservation of the executive mansion. senior historian of the white house historical association. i have read you wrote or said that the white house touches on almost every facet of american history. what did you mean by that and give me some examples? matthew: i always see the white house as a place where you can study american history through a wide variety of perspectives and lenses. if you are interested in the people, and you can learn more about the people who live there, the people who work there, the people who built it, the people who ever a paired it, if you are interested in looking let -- at things like artifacts, serial culture, paintings, fine arts, decorative arts, the white house has all of those things as well. politics, policy obviously, that is the big one people think about. culture, ors of pop political culture, understanding the white house is a symbol for american democracy. and how that symbol has ch

marriage on the 6-3 opinion in the lawrence case that struck down the anti-sodomy law. he was appointed to the supreme court by ronald reagan. with kennedy gone from the court, the key vote is expected to fall to brett kavanaugh. will he continue justice kennedy's legacy and carry on the embrace of the lgbtq community by the constitution bill of rights? that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. all in with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight on all in -- >> any other person who had engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted. >> impeachment talk continues. >> it affects the path of fact finding takes us there. we are not there yet. >> the white house openly defies house democrats. >> it's called presidential harassment. >> elijah cummings on his latest escalation with the trump administration. then -- >> is he going to accept that in 2020? >> tom perez on the republican indifference to the mueller report. plus, the lawyer who argued the census case joins me live. joe biden's big announcement about his big announcement. and is donald trump about to get another primary opponent? >> people asked me to give this serious consideration. >> all in starts now. >>> good evening from new york in for chris hayes. democrat igic leaders are resisting calls to open impeachment after the mueller report presented strong evidence that the president committed obstruction of justice. in a long conference call last night, speaker naps and other house leaders urged members to stay the course and stick with the plan of investigating the president through the various committee probes already under way. that, democratic leaders say, is how they are going to hold donald trump accountable. while democrats are doing business as usual, the white house is going to war, fighting every effort at oversight by the legislative branch. to them it doesn't seem to matter who has the law or the constitution on their side. with every power play, republicans are testing the proposition that the democrats won't have the guts to fight back. today was the second deadline from the house ways and means committee for the treasury department to turn over the president's tax returns under a law that gives the committee's chairman access to any taxpayer's information. treasury secretary steve mnuchin is continuing to stall, saying he needs till may 6th to make up his mind about whether to comply. a white house spokesman said compliance is not going to happen. >> look, as i understand it, the president is clear. once he's out of audit, he will think about it. he's not inclined to do so at this time. he turned over hundreds of pages during the campaign. everyone knows he's a very successful billionaire. he had a lot of success in the business world. people see what he is able to accomplish. there is nothing nepharious there at all. >> for the record, the commissioner testified that an audit would not bar someone's tax returns from being released. they called the first major witness to testify on the mueller report, sending a subpoena to don mcgahn, the former counsel whoa gave key evidence in the white house investigation. when asked about the subpoena, they would not rule out invoking executive privilege to stop him from testifying. that's one of the ways they are fighting congressional subpoenas. yesterday the president and his business sued elijah cummings, chairman of the oversight committee to block a subpoena for financial records from the accounting firm. a nuf is without precedent in receipt history. now they are withholding a key witness of white house security clearances. the white house told karl kline who overruled career staff to grant a clearance to jared kushner, not to comply with the subpoena unless a white house lawyer could come with him. today when kline was due to give testimony, nobody showed up. and now house oversight is considering whether to hold him in contempt of congress. they are waging a campaign at massive resistance of school integration in brown versus the board of education. democrats are trying to uphold the law with all deliberate speed as the supreme court put it, trump and his cronies are stomping all over the constitution and daring anyone to try to stop them. i'm joined by the chairman of the house oversight committee, chairman elijah cummings who was just sued by the president. >> good to be with you. >> let me get your reaction to the lawsuit, this unprecedented lawsuit, suing you, your committee, for requesting donald trump's financial and business records. >> well, joy, first of all, i was not surprised because this administration has done everything in its power and use every means necessary to block the congress from getting the information we need to do our job. not only are they blocking witnesses from coming forward, joy, but they have not given us one document upon our request. they basically -- the american people said in the last election, we want to hold donald trump accountable, but joy, it's impossible to hold them accounta believe if we don't get information and he is trampling on the constitution, no doubt about it. >> josh marshall, i use the phrase massive resistant and they are flatly refusing to comply with ordinary requests across the board. it's not a difference of degree, but of kind. it's an impeachment-worthy refusal for mandated framework of american government. impeaching the president or the officials refusing to comply, how can democrats cause this white house to comply with the article one power's request? >> the number one thing we are going to do next with regard to mr. kline who did not appear today is that we will hold a vote of our committee shortly to hold them in contempt. we will check with house do you know if congressional counsel to see where we go from there. the fact is, the republicans really do need to cooperate with us. make sure that this president does not trample on the constitution. the thing about it, joy, is when we allow these things to happen, basically what the congress is doing is to republicans in the congress, allowing president trump to take away our power and in turn, take away the power of our constituents. >> the question i think that a lot of people have, chairman cummings, is democrats clearly want to hold trouchl account and they are subpoenaing documents through the normal course of oversight. republicans made it clear that they are not going to help you. they are not going to defy this president to defend their branch of government. what else can democrats do? what can democrats do? letters? what can democrats do? >> what we have to do is what we are doing now. we have to take the mueller report, which by the way is a road map for a lot of investigations and do what chairman nadler has already done. make sure that we subpoena the un redacted mueller report and bring in mueller and barr to hear what they have to say. i understand that he is also subpoenaing mcgahn, but keep in mind it is recent article this is evening say that the white house will be even going against that. they are doing a blockade. we have to do our research. keep in mind there is still 14 areas that mueller referred to the new york u.s. attorney's offices. that very well may involve the president and do involve the president. keep in mind we have trump's testimony. what we have got to do is get all of the information. that's one of the things that speaker pelosi said she wants us to be careful. we want to be transparent, but with integrity so the american people can buy into it. the american people have got to help us to force this issue to make sure that the president is obeying the law. >> do you understand why a lot of democrats, a lot of people in the bay say the democrats are being deliberate in playing by the rules, but the other side ms. thrown the rule book out the window and burned it. andrew johnson was impeached by violating and firing the secretary of war. one violation of that law and he was impeached by the house of representatives. do you understand why a lot of democrats say what is the democratic house waiting for? >> joy, i understand completely. a lot of us are torn. if this president continues down the path they are going, we won't have a democracy. we understand that. at the same time going back to speaker pelosi, all she is trying to do is make sure we get all of our ducks in a row. nobody is saying this thing may not end up in impeachment, but we realize impeachment is a very serious thing and we are going to do whatever we have to do. first we have to do our research and we doll it exceedingly well. >> when can the american people expect to see robert mueller testify and will it be public? >> i expect it will be public. i'm not sure exactly when mr. nadler has that scheduled. but again, what i would expect though is that the white house will continue to fight anybody coming before the congress. in other words, they basically would do away with the congress and there would be no dpng it were this white house. i want to say to the public, understand we are laser focus ode what we have to do. we realize that people are impatient and they anxiously want to see this president impeached. on the other hand they have to understand if we are going do that, we are also going to deal with all of the issues like the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs and the aca, the affordable care act and preexisting conditions and things of that nature. we are doing all of those things, too. we are going down two lanes. >> i know you have the committee working on things regarding drug prices and that's important to the american people, but is it not possible to work on the drug price issue and things you mentioned and pursue the impeachment lane if the white house is simply trying to negate the existence of the united states congress. >> no doubt about it. we are often saying that we are definitely doing both. i think all the other committees are doing both. in other words, we are doing things to affect the american people. we are also dealing with the whole idea of exposing this president as he does harm to our country. again, joy, keep in mind, we do not have -- there is no way we are going to get 20 votes in the senate. we can indict him, but what does the senate do? i believe there will come a point in time where the evidence will be so overwhelming when you look at the mueller report that the public will say you know what, this man, president trump does not reflect our values and we are tired of the lies and tired of him instructing people to lie and tired of the deceit and then i think they will look and see what they have gotten from him. higher taxes for the middle class and say wait a minute, a lot of the things, most of the things he said he was going to do, he did not do. >> my final question to you, republicans back in the 1990s believed that bill clinton deserved to have the mark of impeachment on him. they were not successful in removing him, but they wanted that mark on him. do you believe that donald trump deserves to have the mark of impeachment and indictment, whether or not he would be removed? >> i think he does. if you just read the mueller report in and of itself, let's be clear, when you look at the mueller report, the 10 items that mueller pointed out with regard to obstruction, if you take any one of those, anybody in the united states they know of would probably already be indicted, except the president of the united states. >> congressman elijah cummings, thank you very much for your time. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> for more on what democrats should do about the stonewa stonewalling, i'm joined by the former cabinet secretary to president obama and couple to the house oversight committee. editor in chief of the national memo who covered the clinton impeachment has a calmness for the new york observer. thank you both for being here. if in fact the white house defies subpoenas for the duly requested testimony of being kline regarding the clearances issued to jared kushner for the former and he's not even currently white house counsel f they refused to allow those men to testify in front of congress, what legally can the house oversight committee do? >> we're know exactly what they should do because we know what the republicans did to obama officials in 2012. they held eric holder, then the attorney general in contempt in the course of an investigation in which the white house produced 7,000 pages of documents and made witnesses available. if whether kline does not testify, he should be held in contempt of congress. the treasury secretary, steve mnuchin defied an order to produce the president's tax returns not withstanding the statute said he shall furnish them with ways and means. >> we're never had a president defy a subpoena in that way before. richard nixon at the end of the day, produced the take place. he never forced the country to test the proposition that a president can refuse to follow the law. if steve mnuchin refuses to follow the law, what sanction can be applied? can these men and the sergeant at arms being sent over to get the tax returns? practically what can be done to make them comply? >> the issue is, chairman cummings said is going to the house counsel's office and have legal remedieremedies. the contempt is referred to the justice department for prosecution. trying to prosecute a cabinet member for contempt is sch challenging. congress has to assert a role as a coequal branch of government. that's not just about punishing this president, but establishing clear guardrails of democracy for future presidents. >> joe, i asked the questions to get to a point. there may not be built into our constitutional framework a way to cause the president of the united states and his cabinet to comply with the law. there is no sanction. the justice department is run by one william barr. does anyone think that william barr would prosecute for contempt of congress a member of the administration of the president for his -- he submitted a job interview and saying the mueller prosecution is bogus. >> william barr proved he is part of the conspiracy to cover up crimes by the president. he had a good reputation, somewhat undeserved, but he had it until recently and that's gone now. people understand that bill barr is a servant of the president and not of the law at this point. you are right about that. >> then what is the reach of the law? the challenge here is that the democrats are doing the right thing when it comes to the system. the way the system is intended to work. they subpoena documents and issue letters and requests and ask people to appear. the white house said no, make me do it. there is no mechanism in the law to make them do it. >> there isn't a mechanism except that you may end up in the supreme court with something like this. >> with john roberts and two appointees of donald trump. >> john roberts is an institutionalist who wants to protect the reputation of the court. he is both ways on that. what trump is doing now is worse than what nixon did. when nixon was president nks he sister first asserted executive privilege over the don mcgahn of his administration. he gave up on that. he stopped asserting executive privileges and how we learned about the tapes and as you know, dean testified at great length. what trump is doing is more lawless than nixon. when criminal matters are being investigated, you could not assert executive privilege on behalf of the president. ultimately that case would have gone to the supreme court had nixon not given up that. may be where we go with this. then you may have a president who disobeys the ruling of the supreme court. >> then what? >> at that point impeachment, i think, is really unavoidable. then you have someone who discarded completely his oath to uphold the constitution. in view of many of us, trump did a while ago. in the view of the country, you have a showdown with the republican party. they also tell us they do and usually want to uphold it when a democrat is president, not a republican. that would be the ultimate test. >> there in lies the challenge. where can the american people get confidence that if this were to happen, donald trump seated the courts with his adherence and stacked the supreme court with two more of his adherents. the justice department is under his command and the republican party is under his command. why should the american people have confidence that there is anything left in the law or any of the branchs of government that make this president comply with the law? >> joy, i think it's easy to get cynical about where we are, but you have to believe in the foundations of our democracy. the idea that we have rule of law. a president wants to test all of that, but you have to believe that the democracy. >> why do we have to believe that? donald trump said that the production of his tax returns will not be done. there is a law that said it must. don mcgahn will not testify even though he is duly compelled to do so. why do we have to have koj fidence in the law. donald trump controls it. donald trump controls the law. william barr is the attorney general of the united states and the republican party decides whether he is removed from power. and the supreme court has five conservatives on it. why should we trust the law? >> i'm a cynic, but the constitution withstood 230 years through depressions. i have to believe that the foundations will withstand this president. we are in uncharted territory right now. >> why should we believe that the republicans at some point are going to wake up and decide they want to uphold the constitution rather than doing what they have been doing since 2016. dutifully support donald trump in whatever he does. >> there are a lot of reasons to doubt that they will. most of them. there would be a few who might feel a twinge of conscious about trampling over the constitution with donald trump, but it's hard to say. >> what if they don't? >> that's what we have elections for. by the way, that's what people go into the streets about eventually. if everything else fails. hopefully this can be resolved in a peaceful way. it should be and must be. by election if no other way. impeachment, it may get there. it's correct to walk this in the deliberative fashion that the democrats are doing. it's also good to have people pushing for impeachment. it's fine to so have both. speaker pelosi has to navigate that. it's a good look for the democrats to take their time to investigate everything and educating the public as to what the mueller report and all the other negative information about the president is. they understand why this is unavoidable and not a political lark for the democrats. >> it's not a political lark if people are defying subpoenas s. appreciate you both. republicans seem united in their response to the mueller report. just keep quiet. dnc chair tom perez on the silence from the right. just ahead. z on the silence from the right just ahead and i don't add up the years.. but what i do count on... is boost®. delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. look for savings on boost® in your sunday paper. title x for affordable natbirth control and reproductive health care. the trump administration just issued a nationwide gag rule. this would dismantle the title x ("ten") program. it means that physicians cannot tell a patient about their reproductive health choices. we have to be able to use our medical knowledge to give our patients the information that they need. the number one rule is do no harm, and this is harm. we must act now. learn more. text titlex to 22422 the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. >>> the five conservative members of the supreme court a pour poised to allow the trump administration to add a controversial question on citizenship to the 2020 census. it's controversial partly because as the justice sonia sotomayor said "there is no doubt that people will respond less because of the census. that has been proven in study after study." the people who respond less to that question are noncitizens. when people respond less, it skews things like congressional representation and funding for the next decade. the question is this. is suppressing that response from immigrants the very reason that commerce secretary bill wur loss claimed that the department of justice asked him to include the question, but as "the washington post" reports, e-mails a e-mails and depositions showed ross discussed the issues urging a crack down on undocumented immigrants. some showed that he initiated contact with the justice department officials, not the other way around. for some reason, chief justice john roberts and other justices seemed to move past why three federal district judges had banned the trump commerce department from adding the question. it seems like a shocking and cynical justification to keep it. robbers told new york solicitor general barbara underwood whose state sued to block the question that the data is critical it for enforcing the voting rights act. you will recall robbers voted to gut a key portion calling it unnecessary. racism is over. ari berman wrote that the legal career has been a decades long k crusade as a reason to twist the census to donald trump's anti-immigration aims is interesting. if the supreme court allowed them to remain, little question that the voting rights of many americans will be undermined. two people at the oral arguments today. director of the aclu's voting rights project who voted against arguing in front of the supreme court today. president and ceo of the leadership conference on civil and human rights and former head of the department of justice's civil rights division. how surprising was it to hear john roberts voice the idea that the reason to add the question was to strengthen the voting rights act? >> not all that surprising. the government has been saying that's the reason why they added this question. as you noted, they were intent on adding it long before anyone suggested the idea that it might be helpful for purposes of a voting rights act. the voting rights act is not a priority of this administration. they hadn't brought a single lawsuit to enforce the voting rights act. the notion that they wanted to change the census to help enforce voting rights is ludicrous. >> in your oral argument, sit back at their claim because it makes things more accurate. explain. >> that's right. he said it can't apartment response. that was false. they predicted that 6.5 million people won't respond and what that means is the data is less accurate. when they say we need this data for the voting rights act, you will have a much less accurate census when 6.5 million people don't respond. it will harm rather than help them. >> a "washington post" piece today, ita talks about the potential under count. experts calculated this it could undercount as many as 6.5 million people and cause harm to immigrant populations. california could lose as many as three congressional seats. do you suspect that's what this is about? stripping congressional seats and representation from large blew populations? >> i do. i want to say he did a phenomenal job in the supreme court. the nepharious agenda behind this question has been revealed through the litigation that led up to the supreme court argument today. there is little hiding the fact that wilbur ross was communicating with steve bannon in the early days of the administration to add this question and the rational allegedly that the trump justice department under jeff sessions needed the census citizenship data in order to robustly enforce the voting rights act was blatantly a ruse. every aspect of this administration has been anti-immigrant. the steve bannons and chris kobaches of the world want to change thou happens and want citizens only to be counted. in the census, it is written into the constitution. the constitution makes clear that the federal government has a constitute every 10 years to count every person in this country. not every citizen, but every single person in this country. the fact that study after study shows that the addition of the question will undermine the ak r c accuracy of the count, it's actually kind of striking and it's a signal of where we are today around the politicization. >> it goes without saying when the constitution was written, the enslaved african population were not citizens. they were three quarters of a person. is there any recourse? say this goes through because the pessimistic believes they are going to allow the trump administration to add a citizenship question. what then? >> i want to hold things up on that. people thought the affordable care act to get struck down. it's a little early to say something like that. the evidence in this case is really strong. adding this question is going to wreck the census which is a pillar of our structure. i have to think that if uh justices care about the evidence, they are going to listen. as you note, we might not win. that's the case every time we go in front of the supreme court. we have to double down on our efforts to make sure that everyone gets counted. you hear sometimes people talk about we just might not respond to the census if this question is on there. that's the worst thing we can do. that's what steve bannon and chris kobach wants. they want an under count and to receive fewer political representatives and less resources and we can't let them win. >> wow. what a day. thank you both very much. appreciate your time. thank you. up next, dnc chair on the troubling response to the mueller report. e troubling response to the mueller report pay as much for. as not safe drivers! ah! that was a stunt driver. that's why esurance has this drivesense® app. the safer you drive, the more you save. don't worry, i'm not using my phone and talking to a camera while driving... i'm being towed. by the way, i'm actually a safe driver. i'm just pretending to be a not safe driver. cool. bye dennis quaid! when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless. itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking "slow turkey." talk to your doctor about chantix. is it to carry cargo... greatness of an suv? or to carry on a legacy? its show of strength... or its sign of intelligence? in crossing harsh terrain... or breaking new ground? this is the mercedes-benz suv family. if you've never seen yourself in a mercedes, you've never seen these offers. lease the gla 250 for just $379 a month at the mercedes-benz spring event. hurry in before april 30th. you inspired us to create internet that puts you in charge. that handles anything. that protects what's important. and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi. this is xfi. simple, easy, awesome. >>> there are no two people more different than lindsey graham during the clinton era and modern day lindsey graham. >> you don't have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic. if this body dearlies your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds. >> there was no collusion and obstruct of a crime that never occurred. that was bizarre to me to begin with. >> the republican response faced with presidential lawlessness. even congress itself has been mainly silent. as a damning new ad by a group of renigate republicans points out, do not adjust the volume on your tv as you take a look. >>> democrats are calling on republicans not to repeat the tactics from the last presidential election. the democratic national committee pledging not to weaponize stolen private data with chairman tom perez writing an open letter to the democratic chair woman. i'm calling on you to put country above party and pledge that the committee will do the same. here with me now is tom perez, chairman of the democratic national committee. thank you very much for being here. >> always a pleasure. >> the response from the rnc to your pledge that the democrats will not use tacked material in the upcoming election and asking republicans to do the same. the republican spokesman pointed to mcdaniels's priest comment, saying that mcdaniel made it clear where he stands in a breech of our organizations regardless of parties and a friend to all of us and should come together as americans. it's important to do all we can to safeguard our elections. is that good enough? >> of course not. if i were in a court of law at the justice department, i would say objection, your honor, nonresponsive. this is simple. if a foreign adversary steals information that's private and tries to traffic is, to anyone, you should say no. period, this is not about right versus left. that's the simple proposition here. we know what happened in 2016. the russians hacked the dnc and hacked into john po testa and others and used that stolen information because they wanted to help donald trump and hurt hillary clinton. we are saying that candidates shouldn't participate in such activity. this is a lay up or should be a lay up, but apparently not for ms. mcdaniel. >> or for the tv lawyer, rudy giuliani. former follow prosecutor. here's what he said on cnn regarding the thing you were just speaking about. >> there is nothing wrong with taking information from russians. >> there is nothing wrong with? >> depends on where it came from. people get information from this person or that person. >>> you advising those who are running for president to be prepared to have information from foreign adversaries used against them and what will be the plan of the democratic party or the national committee in the event that that happens? >> we are at war right now. it's a cyber war. unfortunately our kmocommander chief is immasculated because he was a victim of that. we have just completed the third training of candidates to make sure that they understand the weaponization or the potential weaponization of data. we are absolutely preparing for a repeat of 2016. why? because there were no consequences to the russians from this administration. they welcomed it. you saw all the obstruction that occurred with this president. i think it behooves us to absolutely have all hands on deck on cyber security. that's what we are doing not only at the dnc, but for the candidates. we hired a top flight team of cyber experts and others in the ecosystem. this isso democracy on the ballot. the nonresponsive answer of chair woman mcdaniel and the absurd statement of mayor julian whoa is a former prosecutor who ought to know better. a 10-year-old would know better, joy. you don't traffic in stolen information. >> it's not just data. the aspect is important, but you had the chairman of the trump campaign, paul manafort share good old fashioned polling data with a russian oligarch. hand it over to him. that data on crucial states. michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania and minnesota. is the party prepared that the candidate, donald trump will simply run the same playbook again. it's not about cyber security. the mueller report found they were not involved in the hacking portion, but disseminating the information that resulted and the attempts to sow discord on social greed encouraged on the right. don't you think donald trump might run the same playbook again? >> there is absolutely that danger. what's clear from this administration and what's clear throughout the entirety of his business practices is that they will lie, cheat, and steal. they doll anything to win. they have so eroded institutions of democracy, that is why there is health care on the ballot and we will continue to point out that the democratic party is the party fighting to save your health care. the republicans are fighting to take it away. so many other things. our democracy is on the ballot. joy, you are right. we have to be prepared for lying, cheating, and stealing. they have an approach to under mining our democracy that is shameful and we are organizing everywhere. that is why we are preparing for every eventuality. we won in 2018 across this country in historic manners. i am have been sober about the realities of the upcoming campaign. they will try to suppress the vote wherever they can. they will try to cheat, they will try to weaponize things. that's what we are preparing for at the dnc. that's unfortunate. our democracy is truly on the ballot and i'm confident we can win. it saddens me to no end. this is not who we are and not the party of lincoln. the party of lincoln has officially died. the party of trump is not a party that represents our democratic values. >> tom perez, thank you so much for your time. appreciate it. >> always a pleasure. >> coming up, is there another primary challenger ready to take on donald trump. the governor who could make things interesting. just ahead. ould make things interesting just ahead you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. you know that look? that life of the party look. walk it off look. one more mile look. reply all look. own your look with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. so, give that just saw a puppy look and whatever that look is. look like you with fewer lines. own your look with the one and only botox® cosmetic. own your look ♪ when you have nausea, ♪ heartburn, ♪ indigestion, ♪ upset stomach, ♪ diarrhea... girl, pepto ultra coating will treat your stomach right. ♪nausea, heartburn, ♪ indigestion, upset stomach, ♪ diarrhea... try pepto with ultra coating. featuring three new dishes that are planked-to-perfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank... ...but not for long- so hurry in! (burke) at fso we know how ton almost evercover almost anything. even rooftop parking. strange forces at work? only if you're referring to gravity-and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ >>> the republican governor of maryla maryland, larry hogan generated buzz about a possible primary challenge to donald trump. >> a lot of people have been approaching me, probably since around the time of my inauguration in late january. people asked me to give this serious consideration. i think i owe it to those people to do just that. >> trump faces one challenger, former massachusetts governor bill held and could face another ohio governor, john saysic. hogan is a sitting governor and a popular one with a sky high approval rating in a blue state. he referred to trump as dear leader and criticized the rnc to give trump undivided support in 2020. >> i'm for building the republican party into a bigger tent that can appeal to more people. i think we are doing the opposite right now. the republican party is shrinking the base down to only a certain percentage of white males. >> trump remains extremely popular with republican voters, but appears weakened in the wake of the mueller report. he tied an all time low of 39% and never not for a day of his presidency had the support of the majority of americans. trump is likely to survive any and all primary challengers, they could have an impact even if he loses. when a sitting president faces a serious primary opponent, the incumbent is weakened and ultimately loses to their opponent in the election. he could be focused on focus on challengers when never trump republicans coalesce around a candidate. trump's name may not even be on the ballot. 18 state legislatures introduced bills requiring a candidate to release his or her tax return fist they want to appear on the ballot. breaking news from "the washington post." the president has just spoken to robert costa and provided rational for not cooperating with congressional investigation investigations. we will tell you all about it next. ns we will tell you all about it next key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. you need decision tech. openturning 50 opens theuard. door to a lot of new things... like now your doctor may be talking to you about screening for colon cancer. luckily there's me, cologuard. the noninvasive test you use at home. it all starts when your doctor orders me. then it's as easy as get, go, gone. you get me when i'm delivered... right to your front door and in the privacy of your own home. there's no prep or special diet needed. youit is not for high riskm, to collindividuals,ple costa including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer. . >>> we have breaking news related to our top story tonight. the white house's utter refusal to cooperate with congressional investigations. donald trump said that he is opposed to any current or former white house aides testifying before congress. trump said that since the white house cooperated with the special counsel's investigation, quote, there is no reason to go any further, especially in congress where it's very partisan. obviously very partisan. joining me now is rose lyndh helderman "the washington post" political investigative report and coauthor of the new book "the mueller report." thank you very much for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> the president has expressed his view that he doesn't have to comply and anyone associated with him doesn't have to comply with congressional subpoenas. what about the people to whom those vupz being issued, people like don mcgahn? are they in agreement with this? he says they don't have to that they don't have to? >> i think those people are trying to figure it out right now. we understand from someone close to don mcgahn that he's going to let the process play out. he's going to hear from the committee, hear from the white house, and then figure it out. we were told by someone close to mr. mcgahn that he doesn't want to be in contempt of congress but doesn't want to be in contempt of the ethical and legal obligations because he's a former white house official. >> are there obligations you know of just in your reporting that would prevent a former white house counsel from implying with a duly issued subpoena. >> if the white house objects, they will say his testimony is stoudge executive privilege and the president has asserted his executive privilege. that's tricky legal argument because don mcgahn already testified to bob mueller, and the white house agreed to allow his testimony to become public with the publication of the report. ultimately if the white house chooses to assert that privilege, this will be decided by a judge, and we could be looking at a fairly lengthy court battle. >> just to read from the report here that you coauthored, white house lawyers plan to say they will be asserting executive privilege. trump maintained that the white house counsel's office has not made any final decision whether it will block congressional testimony, but that he oppose cooperation with house democrats who he claimed were trying to score political points against him. do you know of any precedent for a president saying because he believes the opposing party to score political points that he can assert anyone who has worked for him in the past or present doesn't have to comply with the law or a subpoena? >> there's actually a fairly recent precedent where harriet meyers under george w. bush was subpoenaed by congress and the white house tried to prevent her from testifying. that case was litigated and there was a ruling that went against the white house, but the matter continued on appeal. ultimately it wasn't really fully resolved prior to president bush leaving office and the new administration settled the case. so there isn't a fully binding court precedent on this issue. but what we've had so far is that suggestion from a judge that the white house may not win on this front. >> rosalyn, thank you very much for your time. thank you. i'm joined by jason johnson, msnbc political analyst, and marissa. marissa, i'm going to start with you. the president of the united states saying that he will essentially opposite anyone in his administration now or formerly in his administration from implying wicomplying. >> even nixon gave up tapes when he was subpoenaed. i think his aides are going to have some interesting times ahead of them while they work with their lawyers to decide what their own obligations are. it is sort of interesting to say that there are now executive privilege when they obviously waived executive privilege before with respect to being interviewed by the special counsel. so i'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out. >> you clerked for a supreme court justice. can you think of any precedent in law that a president does not have to follow the law simply because he doesn't like the other party? >> there's nothing that is obvious that comes to mind. of course the president does have executive privilege and what will be interesting is is the president asserting new executive privilege or is he trying to do with ones made public already. >> jason johnson, where do the democrats go from here. they keep issuing subpoenas and letters and asserting they're going to do the process of oversight and they keep getting told, make me, by the way. >> they need to subpoena some backbone and then combatant it througho -- implant it. you need to stop other things happening in congress. you need to stop the funding that goes to anything this president has to do. all of this leads back to what we've been talking about since the mueller report came out last week. this president exists to obstruct the normal function and constitutional fu

. first, let's bring in our senior white house correspondent, pamela brown. a lot to unpack in all of this. let's go through the major, major details. >> that's right. this is more than 400-page report, and this mueller report lays out in excruciating detail how white house officials essentially saved trump from himself in the obstruction probe, and at times painted an unflattering picture of the trump campaign and the conspiracy probe, but stopped short of accusing the president of criminal wrongdoing and determined while the trump campaign expected russia's help, there was no coordination between the two sides. the more than 400-page mueller report shows just how much the president feared the special counsel investigation when he first learned about it. quote, the president slumped back in his chair and said, oh, my god. this is terrible. this is the end of my presidency. i'm f'd. tonight, we're learning why. the special counsel's report saying, quote, a thorough fbi investigation would uncover facts about the campaign and the president personally that the president could have understood

get rid of jeff sessions or have him take over the investigation, telling his white house counsel to lie about attempts to remove mueller, dangling pardons and criticizing his former lawyer michael cohen while he was cooperating with prosecutors. some congressional democrats are now demanding the start of impeachment proceedings. others in the party remain unconvinced. and they will hold a conference call monday to discuss the next step. cnn's white house correspondent boris sanchez is in west palm beach near the mara-lago report and suggesting it all be redactsed and it is a fight with the justice department. >> a fight that will likely end up in court. house judiciary chairman jerry nadler filing a subpoena to get the full unredacted report, and including portions that are redacted because it contains sensitive grand jury information. the department of justice firing back putting out a statement that nadler's subpoena was premature and in the meantime the president is furious about details in the mueller report and according to sources the president is angry because of some of the

out for the white house to hand over the president's tax returns. and as of now, there's no hint the administration is ready to comply. the white house continuing to stonewall congress in its growing attempts to investigate the administration. the president on a number of fronts, from the way security clearances were approved for at least 25 people, despite red flags in the vetting process. to how the president instructed officials to get in the way of the russia investigation. cnn's manu raju is on capitol hill. abby phillip is at the white house. at this point, where do things stand in this growing battle between congressional democrats and the white house. >> the white house is taking steps to deny democrats their requests on multiple fronts. yesterday, the trump organization took legal action in federal court here in washington to prevent the house oversight committee from getting records related to the president's past finances, and in the aftermath of that, the white house instructed a former official, carl kline, who now works at the defense department, not to comply with

american history tv, all weekend on c-span3. easterfirst white house egg roll was in 1870 eight, posted by president rutherford b. hayes. president trump and first lady melania post this easter egg roll on monday. next landscape historian jonathan pliska about the easter egg role. we talked to him at the decatur house, the home of the white house historical association, which published the book. this is about 30 minutes. >> jonathan pliska, you've worked with the white house historical association to write a young readers book about the white house easter egg roll. before we get into history, tell me about it today. how large is it in 2018? jonathan: it would be larger than it is except the popularity is so high and everybody wants to be a part of this that they generally cap the attendance at 30,000-35,000 people. >> where is it held today? donovan: it is held on the south lawn of the white house. that is what i like to call the president's backyard. >> are the eggs real eggs? jonathan: they are sometimes real eggs. they use wooden eggs. >> they are collectibles. jonathan: defi

anxiety at times about don mcgahn's koomgs along with other white house witnesses but part of the president's strategy to let them cooperate in part so mueller could get answers from witnesses other than the president. because if the president were to do that interview he likely would have not told the truth and committed perjury. in terms of what don mcgahn said in 30 some hours of interviews with mueller and his team, we simply don't know. i would love to know that information. perhaps someday we'll find out. clearly mcgahn was present for so many moments including deliciouserations in the white house about firing comey and so many of the president's outbursts over the last two years about forney general jeff sessions, rod rosenstein and others he was trying to get rid of at various moments. >> the standoff between the house judiciary -- it's actually six committee chairs that banded together to demand the unredacted report. the moment they have sort of the wind at public opinion at their back. frankly every republican in their house voted for the full release of the mueller rep

month for close to 100,000. >> dana: john roberts starting us off live at the white house. john? >> reporter: dana, good afternoon. president trump is headed to california on friday where he will visit the border. i am told that unless things change between now and then, there's a good chance that our southern border with mexico will be closed by the time the president makes that trip on friday. in the mean time, secretary of homeland security, kirstjen nielsen, with a statement this morning saying that the crisis at the border is worsening and the dhs is forced to take dramatic steps to deal with it. here is what dhs is doing in the near term. they are going to reallocate 750 customs and border protection personnel down to the border to assist the border patrol. lot of them will be moved out into the field. that number may increase to more than 2,000 in the coming weeks. they will also immediately command the migrant protection protocol that deals with people claiming asylum who are returned to mexico pending theired ed adjudication. apprehensions at the border have skyrocketed

white house event for the wounded warrior project when the mueller report dropped. listen to his reaction. >> hey, i'm having a good day too. it was called no collusion, no obstruction. >> there never was, by the way, and there never will be, and we do have to get to the bottom of these things, i will say. this should never happen to another president again. for the record, the special counsel did not clear the president of obstruction. in fact, he determined mr. trump attempted to influence the russia investigation only to be thwarted by staffers who refused to carry out his orders. we get more from kaitlan collins at the white house. >> christine and boris, the president is down in palm beach for the holiday weekend. yesterday when he was leaving the white house, he did not answer questions from reporters, even though aides had said both publicly and privately they expected him to take a victory lap now that the mueller report was out. one reason that could be is that this report shows that the president tried to derail the special counsel's investigation but he wasn't as able

. joining us to cover both ends of pennsylvania avenue, we are joined by vivian salama, white house reporter for the wall street journal and sam brodey, congressional reporter for the daily beast. today's wall street journal story is about secretary nielsen's departure as secretary of homeland security. you are traveling with the president and -- you traveled with the president and secretary to california on friday. was there any tip this was coming? vivian: we have been expecting this for months, and yet secretary nielsen was somewhat of a survivor of this administration. she has gone through quite a , managing to win over the presidents confidence -- president's confidence. she was in a good position but i will tell you that in the last couple of days and especially when the president started to ramp up rhetoric about immigration and trying to close , other sources around town started to reach out to me, saying are you hear any -- hearing anything about her future. i remember reaching out to a source that was close to the secretary and asking what is the status and that person said not thi

president, trying to find out whether the white house played it fast and loose at all with top security clearances. right now, hundreds of officers are rushing south as president trump threatens to close the border and cuts off aid to some central american countries. critics warning, that could cause an economic disaster here at home. >>> plus, george clooney and sir elton john leading worldwide outrage over one islamic nation's new medieval anti-gay law that involves death by stoning. >>> welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. we begin with the politics lead. president trump, may i introduce you to democrats with subpoena power. we could soon see the first subpoenas directed at the trump white house by house democrats this week. house judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler of new york will authorize one for the full unredacted mueller report. and the underlying evidence. the committee, we're told, will also vote to authorize subpoenas for five former top white house officials. but we're not even sure chairman nadler will be the first democrat to officially subpoena the white house,

president creating more problems for himself when he calls his former white house counsel a liar? >> don mcgahn is a really good guy. >> pay appreciate that the president does have a concern for christian values. >> a trump supporting evangelist calls for mayor pete to repent. william barber is he to respond. all in starts now. >>> good evening from new york. i'm ali velshi for chris hayes. the man who has been leading the democratic primary polls since they started is officially in the race. after waiting for 19 other candidates to enter the field, vice president joe biden officially announced his candidacy in a video basically saying his entire reason for running is donald trump. specifically, trump's comments after the white nationalist rally in charlottesville. >> he said there were "very fine people on both sides." very fine people on both sides? those words, the president of the united states assigned a 85 spreading hate and those standing against it. i knew the threat to this nation was unlike any i had ever seen in my lifetime. the core values of this nation are standing

whistleblower reveals two dozen white house officials were granted a security clearance after being denied access by career professionals and the president wants an immigration czar after he threatens to shut down it the border. "the 11th hour" on a monday night starts right now. good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters. in for bryan williams. day 802 and we are now less than one hour away from the operal 2nd deadline set by top house democrats for the release of the unredacted mueller report. it's highly unlukely the justice department will neat deadline. house judiciary chairman escalated the confrontation over the release of the spouns oal's findings. nadler says his committee will vote wednesday to authorize the subpoena to get the riri port and tonight the chairman was asked how that vote might go. >> i assume he will be issuing subpoenas soon. >> will they join you in your effort? >> in today's "new york times" nadler slammed barr's four-page smagz, writing quote by offering us his version of events in lieu of the report, the attorney general undermines the work and ini

the white house. >> bill: we have gotten a few details. here is what we can expect today. the a.g. and deputy a.g. will brief at 9:30 eastern time. congress is delivered the report in cd form between 11:00 a.m. and noon eastern. the justice department then says it will allow some lawmakers to review a hard copy without certain redactions. then at some point after that the redacted report will be made available to the media and we'll all speed read. >> sandra: we have fox team coverage for you this morning. former independent counsel ken starr will join us moments if now but we begin with catherine herridge live at the justice department. what are we expecting at this news conference now just 30 minutes away? >> good morning. a short time ago we had an on the record briefing from the justice department spokesperson confirming that the attorney general william barr will address the issue of executive privilege. the reason that matters is some of the most sensitive interviews within the white house including the white house counsel don mcgahn were governed by the office of legal coun

wall street journal." do we have that headline? thank you. about how the white house is standing behind the stephen moore nomination. you never have to stand behind something in a headline unless there is a reason to think a nomination like that is in trouble. since president trump first nominated stephen moore and described him publicly as a respected economist, it has emerged sort of sequentially and with increasing awkwardness that, a, he is not an economist. b, he owes over $70,000 in unpaid taxes to the irs. c, he was recently held in contempt of court for not paying over $300,000 in child support and alimony. d, mr. moore apparently lost his last job as a newspaper columnist thanks to an ethics dispute with his paper about giving paid partisan speeches which is a thing he was not supposed to do while having that kind of a job. e, the political action committee where he worked had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in fec fines for legal violations occurring during the time he was in charge of that pac. i mean, i don't know how far we're going to get down through the al

the white house back in the starr report day when we were reading it live on cable television, not recommending we go back to that, and i think it's important that we take our time and take a breath and that we read things. my biggest question is whether we will do that here, and i hope americans -- what's interesting to me yesterday watching barnes & noble and other companies telling americans, we'll make this available to you instantly. it would be nice if people read it, took a breath, took a walk, talked about it and friends and family and colleagues. we don't live in that world. think about what we have been going through the last couple hours. let alone the last two years in reading tweets every day attacking the investigators. attacking the justice department, the democrat saying things about the president that they can't back up yet. so both sides are guilty players. we could make a judgment on who's done more of it, but both sides are guilty players, and now we're going to get the results of an investigation led by a man who with he began the investigation, everybody said

. day 824 of the trump administration and this white house is fighting back on two fronts, pushing back against the mueller report while also resisting house democrats' efforts to investigate this president. tonight "the washington post" reports that trump not surprisingly is opposed to having you current and former white house staff testify before congress. most especially his former white house counsel don mcgahn who has emerged as one of the stars of the mueller report. robert costa of "the washington post" spoke with the president tonight by phone.os "the post" quotes trump as saying, and we quote, there is no reason to go any further and especially in congress where it's very partisan, obviously he very partisan. and again costa and his colleagues also report, quote, the white house plans to fight a subpoena issued by the house judiciary committee for former white house counsel don mcgahn to testify. the administration also plans to oppose other requests from house committees for the testimony of current and former aides about actions in the white house described by mueller's

he make a formal statement or even take questions once the report is public? >>> white house consultant. there's a new report out that justice department officials have had numerous conversations with white house lawyers about the special counsel's conclusions in recent days. how much did they reveal to the president's team? >>> two reports. the justice department reveals that some members of congress will get to see a less redacted version of the mueller report than the one that's made public. will that satisfy democrats demanding to see everything. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. you're many t you're in "the situation room." >>> we're following a lot of breaking news on the trump administration's roll out of the redacted mueller report from now. the justice department confirming that william barr will hold a news conference at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning to discuss the report and will take questions. tonight president trump says he may hold his own news conference after barr speaks. the justice department revealing that a seco

putting out this video. gh claimin a cs iver caught.ise denied, including two senior white house officials, were overturned by t searching for t of a rapper. he was set to meet with the lapd just today to help stop the violence. lebron james, steph curry, john legend all paying tribute. >>> also tonight, mick jagger's health scare. the major tour put on hold. >>> the major fire erupts, workers raced outside. firefighters rushing to get nearly two dozen employees and customers to safety. >>> and the 6-year-old boy who collapsed and died an hour after this baseball photo was taken.a? >>> go a beac a ofou athome ton. and we begning w formerpresident joe ore declaring a run f president, the mountingni s womanasmeforward,ei alleti,id acknowles of public , but adding he never believed he acted inappropriately. first, it was a former nevada politician who claims biden kissed her head during a campaign event. and tonight, a second woman, a former congressional aide, said biden got too close to her, as well. abc's mary bruce leading us off. >> reporter: tonight, joe biden's would-be campaign is fac

more. cnn chief white house correspondent. >> it took the president nine hours to finish the series of three tweets. this is unusual for him. >> that's right. it might be a sign that perhaps he was somewhat speechless after the release of the mueller report. he said wednesday he was holing a news conference and went past reporters without comment on the findings that were released in the redacted report. the president did late in the day post a tweet essentially finishing a tweet he started nine hours earlier and accused unnamed forces of spying or treason. like so many things the president said and has said, over the course of this administration he didn't back up the tweet with evidence or proof. >> he's saying now is it time to turn the table and it sound like taking revenge on the political opponents or on those he feels have done him wrong. >> that's right. what we have seen so far this week, i think there's a highlighted in the report. he makes these threats and engages in this bluster but you have to wonder who will follow the orders? one of the big take aways from this week

from texas to alabama. >> and the white house says congress isn't smart enough to understand president trump's tax returns. >> i'm a proud son of south bend, indiana, and i am running for president of the united states. >> mayor pete buttigieg just launched his 2020 race for the white house, a busy weekend and a busy morning ahead. good morning, everyone, welcome to "early start," i'm christine romans. >> i'm boris sanchez in for dave briggs. it's monday, april 15th. 4:00 a.m. on the east coast. a stunning comeback for the man who once dominated the sport of golf. tiger woods clinching his fifth masters at age 14. he overcame scandal, serious back problems and a tightly packed leader board, his first major title in 11 years, his first green jacket since 2005. >> christine, boris, can you imagine being world famous at something but your kids have no idea, they can't imagine, they have to take your word for it or see it on video because they never experienced it themselves. that was the case for tiger woods case, sam and charlie. he wanted to see what he was capable so they cou

south lawn of the white house for the 141st annual easter egg roll, the war within donald trump's mind over the russia investigation raged on. trump telling reporters gathered to cover the holiday event that no one on his staff ignores his orders and he's not the tinyiest bit angst about getting impeached. >> are you worried your staff is ignoring your orders like the mueller report portrays? >> no one ignores my order. >> are you worried about impeachment? >> as is often the case with trump, the facts tell a different story. the president and his former white house counsel, don mcghan are locked in a nasty back and forth over mcgahn's testimony. don mcghan e midtermimerging as guardrail to trump and star witness to mueller. mcghan was cited in the mueller report more than 100 times. the white house staffers bracing for retribution from the president. some of the witnesses named in the report that have quit the white house, but rely on mr. trump fear his ire. they're calling to seek clues about mr. trump's state of mind. mcghan was targeted by the president's lawyer, rudy giuliani

nonanswers. namely, what has he told the white house about the contents of the mueller report? barr refused to answer whether the president and his lawyers may already know more than congress and the public about what's inside the report. barr did tell lawmakers they'll have a redacted version of the report soon, within days. democrats in congress want more. they are vowing to issue a subpoena for the full version. >> meanwhile it appears the irs will miss the deadline today that was set by house democrats to turn over six years of president trump's tax returns. treasury secretary steve mnuchin sparred with democrats over the demand and revealed his department has been in touch with white house lawyers about the president's taxes. he then got into it with maxine waters over the hearing's length. >> joining us now, david gregory and sun mi nrkn kim from "the washington post." we'll see the report within days. we knew that. the other headline was when barr refused to answer whether or not he has been talking to the white house about the contents of the report. let's play the exchange.

exposure. president trump may be showing anxiety about the mueller report, but some white house officials are really worried, fearing the president's wrath if the report reveals damaging details of their cooperation with the special counsel. >>> follow the finances. the white house digs in as congressional democrats demand the president's tax returns. records from banks that loaned money to the trump business and financial documents from his longtime accounting firm. >>> and sister acts. has kim jong-un carried out another shake up within his regime. did his sister and close confidant, who was so visible at the failed summit with president trump, suddenly fall out of favor? i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> this is cnn breaking news. >> breaking news, parisians are holding a vigil right now after a raging inferno gutted the iconic notre dame cathedral. now the struggle has begun to salvage the cathedral's priceless treasures. donors have already pledged $700 million to restore the landmark and the french president, emmanuel macron, says he wants the cathedral rebuilt w

former top white house official over security clearances. this all started from a -- when a white house staffer tricia newbold came forward and has told top investigators top white house officials overruled clearance concerns on not one or two people but about 25 people to get security clearances. she claims the concerns that popped up during background checks ranged from fears of foreign influence to possible drug use. so what does this all mean now? let's get over to the capital, man kn manu raju is there. >> house oversight chairman elijah cummings has made this a priority for his committee to investigate the security clearance process at the white house, raising concerns about officials such as jared kushner and ivanka trump who apparently had got their security clearance approved, overruled and pushed through by the president despite concerns within the white house. this whistleblower who elijah cummings called a whistleblower, tricia newbold does not identify anyone by name, but says there were 25 individuals that she listed since 2018 who were allowed to get their security

sanctuary cities with the release of detained migrants. the white house proposed the idea to the department of homeland security to retaliate against democrats who oppose his border wall, but homeland security lawyers apparently killed the plan saying it would likely be illegal. let's get more details on this with senior u.s. justice correspondent evan perez joining us now. evan, what are you hearing about this plan? >> well, this is a plan that was considered inside the homeland security department. it came from the white house, and at one point even president trump raised it and was pushing for the secretary of homeland security, kristen nielsen, to carry it out. the idea was to alleviate some of the pressure on very full capacity -- very full facilities that had a lot of people in them by essentially bussing immigrants to what are known as sanctuary cities. these are cities in the united states that do not cooperate in turning over illegal immigrants to the homeland security department, to immigration authorities. and so the idea was to punish some of these cities, which are l

as a vindication. others seem concerned it will paint an unflattering look at the white house. >>> stories of heroism emerge. >>> felicity huffman will go to jail for her role in the college admission scandal. prosecutors have alerted others they could be next to face charges. good morning. welcome to early start. >> nice to have you here. i am christine romans. it is 5:00 a.m. in the east. authorities are searching for this woman. they say she is infatuated with columbine high school. threats led to lockouts tuesday at denver area schools, including columbine where a mass shooting occurred in 1999. >> she has made some concerning comments in the past. she has expressed an infatuation with columbine and the events, the shooting there that happened. she was last seen out toward the foothills. we have been trying to find her ever since. >> to put things in context, the timing is important. the 20-year anniversary of the shooting in 1999 lands on saturday. hundreds of schools in about 20 districts in and around denver are closed today. we have more from cnn's scott mcclain. >> reporter: polic

to the panelists. it's been very exciting. [applause] tonight, the white house correspondents association dinner here in washington, d.c. at the same time, president trump will be holding a rally in green bay. the white house correspondents dinner first. good morning. guest: good morning. host: as background for our viewers, tell us what the white house correspondents dinner is, how long it has been around, and why it is important. house the white correspondents association has been around for about 100 years. they have an annual dinner. promote goodly to journalism and to give scholarships to needy student journalists and to promote the cause of good reporting. it has become this huge weekend of parties and political intrigue with lots of different shindigs around it. it has ballooned into a four-day affair. normally, if i'm not mistaken, the president attends this dinner. president trump is not attending and has not attended since winning the white house. why is president trump not going to this dinner? it is a verys boring dinner that was mean to him. last year and in previ

. >>> happening now. breaking news. refusing to comply. the trump administration and white house refused house democrats' demands for the president's tax returns. testimony from a former official and more, prompting new threats of subpoenas and contempt charges from angry lawmakers. >>> revenge is tweet. president trump unleashes a twitter torrent laden with frustration, anger, and defiance, painting himself as the victim of democrats and the news media. what sparked this new tirade? >>> impeachment calls. democratic white house hopefuls taking part in our cnn town halls weigh in on impeaching president trump. some are leaning toward it. will they push their party to hold the president to account? >>> and midnight train to russia. north korean dictator kim jong-un is heading to his first-ever meeting with russian president, vladimir putin. will their summit produce an alliance against american interests? i'm wolf blitzer, you're in "the situation room." >>> this is cnn breaking news. >> we're following breaking news. two new showdowns between the trump administration and house democrats

question was added to the census. the white house also is fighting subpoenas related to trump's financial records. white house security clearances, and the mueller report. the chairman of the house oversight committee elijah cummings is accusing the administration of massive unprecedented obstruction now. pan house speaker nancy pelosi's office is responding this way. saying in level of secrecy should alarm all americans. at the same time the president adds this. >> i have been the most transparent president and administration in the history of our country by far. >> by far. the most transparent in history. this is a president who hides his tax returns, doesn't release them at least. white house visitor logs, phone calls with world leaders. and refused to sit down with bob mueller. let's not forget the fact that food is the 44th day without a press briefing from the white house. that is a record. and the president's defense department and state department are also dialing back briefings. in fact next month will be one year since a pentagon spokesperson briefed the press on camer

caucus, we don't have to go to articles of impeachment to obtain the facts. the white house is making it clear they'll fight these efforts every step of the way. elijah cummings threatening a vote to hold a former adviser in contempt of congress after the white house told him not to comply with the probe. today, white house adviser jared kushner claimed the investigations into russia's 2016 campaign activities and speculation they spawned for the past two years have been more damaging to our democracy than the attacks themselves. >> frankly, the whole thing is a big distraction for the country. you look at what russia did, buying some facebook ads to sew dissent, and it is a terrible thing, but i think the investigations and all of the speculation happened the last two years had a much harsher impact on our democracy than a couple of facebook ads. i think they spent about 160,000, i spent $160,000 on facebook every three hours. you look at what they accomplished, the ensuing investigations have been way more harmful. >> bring in peter baker, chief white house correspondent for

. thank you for watching. deadline white house with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. this is what a white house you said siege looks like. democrats naming names and setting dates for oversight hearings. the house oversight committee moving this afternoon to hold the former white house official in charge of security clearances in contempt for refusing to appear at a hearing to investigate the white house process for granting security clearances. that office under scrutiny for, among other things, granting jared kushner access to the nation's top secrets over the concerns over the cia and over the objections of career staff. based on reporting of the "new york times," over the objections of former white house chief of staff and former white house counsel don mcgahn. the officials car klel klein, lt pawn in the stonewalling with congressional democrats. white house telling klein not to appear before that committee. speaking of don mcgahn, the chairman of the house judiciary committee issued a subpoena for him. mcgahn has emerged as robert mueller

twitter account. >> we have missed an opportunity. >>> president trump opposes white house aides testifying to congress and already the white house is stonele with walling r related to the mueller report. they are fighting a subpoena for former white house counsel don mcgahn. president trump says there is no reason to go any further, especially in congress where it is very partisan, obviously very partisan >> no don mcgahn. no officials to testify on security clearances and no tax returns either, at least not yet. the treasury department missed a deadline to turn them over the oh the house ways and means committee. steve mnuchin will make his final decision by may 6. you have to believe it's almost certainly a no. that will make this a serious legal issue. it could be up to the courts to decide. all of this is taking place on what we might call biden eve. former vice president joe biden is expected to finally formally enter the democratic race for president tomorrow. what impact will it have on the contest? more on that ahead. ab lby philip is live at the whe house. >> the presid

in the white house raising a national security alarm about who was walking its halls. according to her 25 officials had their clearance denied only then to get the green light from senior officials at the white house. these details are coming in from the white house oversight committee which just revealed her details in the memo. this whistle blower is tricia w tricia new bold. conflicts of interest, financial problems even drug use and criminal conduct were some of the issues. newbold told the committee she was talking as a final resort. quote, she says i would not be doing a service to myself or my country if i sat back knowing the issues we have could impact national security, and i feel that right now this is my last hope to really bring the integrity back into our office. a source says ivanka and jared kushner were among these. has the white house responded to this woman's claims at all? >> nothing so far. brooke, this letter was sent to the white house counsel. we've heard from him before on this. he's argued he believes the power to grant and deny these security clearances r

the great generals. i've spoken to many generals here right at the white house, and many people thought of the generals, they think that he was maybe their favorite general. people were there protesting the taking down of the monument of robert e. lee. everybody knows that. >> the fact of the matter is robert e. lee was a great tactician, was not a great person. robert e. lee was a slave owner and a brutal slave master. thankfully he lost that war, and find it kind of interesting, the president is now glorifying a loser. he always said that he hated loser. robert e. lee was a loser. >> so white house counsel kellyanne conway picked up yesterday where the president left off insisting trump had condemned white nationalism while claiming his charlottesville remarks were dark near perfection. correct me if i'm wrong here, we have not heard an outright condemnation from the president when it comes to white nationalism. so much of this is jumping off of what took place in charlottesville in 2017. >> the fact that we're relitigating the civil war is one indication that speaks to how cr

raised eye brobrows heren asked if the president has seen the full report. >> did the white house see the report before you released your summarizing letter? has the white house seen it since then? have they been briefed on the contents beyond what was in your summarizing letter to the judiciary committee? >> um, i've said what i'm going to say about the report today. >> let's get straight up to manu raju on capitol hill today. the democrats pressing and pressing. i assume they're frustrated the attorney general was not ready to give and give. >> reporter: yeah, this is going to set the stage for what could be a drawn-out fight between house democrats and the justice department after the attorney general made very clear, he is not planning to provide congress with the full unredacted mueller report, as democrats have demanded. and he said that he has no intention of going to court and getting a court order to release the grand jury information, which democrats have also demanded. now, he tried to throughout the course of this morning's hearing, defend the four-page letter that outline

washington post" is ever to be in the white house again. you understand? >> the white house denied, and continues to deny, involvement in any wrongdoing. >> there are few signs that watergate is stirring any concern in the electorate. >> does a thing like the watergate affair give you any second thoughts? >> no. no. doesn't bother me at all. >> he's the most qualified man for the job. i'm going to vote for nixon. >> this is your vote and years from now, i just hope you can all look back and say it was one of your best votes. thank you. >> four more years! four more years! >> president nixon will be re-elected in a landslide. ♪ >> i, richard nixon, do solemnly swear that i will faithfully execute the office of president of the united states, so help me god. so help me god. >> and president nixon taking the oath of office for his second term. well, it's turned out to be a rather cold, blustery day here in washington. the windchill factor is pretty -- pretty low. coming in from the north as that wind is. >> here comes the president's car. the president being proceeded by a drum corp