Skip to main content

tv   CNN Newsroom With Ana Cabrera  CNN  March 24, 2019 2:00pm-3:00pm PDT

2:00 pm
necessity for the entire mueller report to be revealed. it needs to be a transparent process. 80% of the american public wants this to happen, including republicans. the u.s. house of representatives unanimously passed a resolution calling for the report to be released in its entirety. >> all right. we've just lost our connection with denny heck, but a very important development unfolding right now. wement we want to welcome our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer in washington. only moments ago president trump reacted to the summary of robert mueller's findings, claiming he was totally exonerated, calling it an illegal takedown, the entire russia investigation that failed. that's from the president of the united states. robert mueller did not find that president trump, his campaign, or his associates conspired with russia according the attorney general, william barr. barr also says mueller did not have enough evidence to
2:01 pm
prosecute what's called obstruction of justice, but could not exonerate the president completely. manu raju is on capitol hill, where we're getting more reaction. it's rather intense right now. what's the latest? >> yeah, democrats in the house are making it very clear they are not satisfied with this four-page letter from bill barr. they're demanding the full release of the entire mueller report. they also want the underlying evidence that has led to bob mueller making these conclusions. they want that provided to congress, provided to the american public, and you're hearing from top democrats on down, house majority leader steny hoyer just putting out a statement, demanding full release of the report. the chairman of the house judiciary committee, jerry nadler, made it clear he wants to bring bill barr before his committee to hear his public testimony. he said in light of the very concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the justice department following the special counsel report where mueller did not exonerate the president, we'll be calling
2:02 pm
attorney general barr in to testify before house judiciary in the near future. now, it's still unclear exactly how much of the report bill barr plans to release. he said in that four-page letter that he does plan to release -- his goal was to release as much as i can consistent with applicable law. he doesn't say how much that's going to be. democrats clearly are not satisfied, pushing for much more. republicans say this is a complete exoneration for this president. they're saying democratic efforts to probe into russia collusion, probe into obstruction of justice, which house democrats are planning to do, should be abandoned now that the mueller investigation did not find any crimes that were committed in those regards. nevertheless, democrats say the first step here is to get the full mueller report. that will be their road map going forward. the question is will the department comply, and if not, will subpoenas come? democrats are warning that's the next step. >> all right. stand by. i want to play for our viewers
2:03 pm
who may just be tuning in here in the united states and around the world, the president's reaction only moments ago, just before boarding air force one on a flight from florida back here to washington. he stopped and made less than a minute statement. >> it was a complete and total exoneration. it's a shame that our country to go through this. to be honest, it's a shame that your president has had to go through this for before i even got elected, it began. and it began illegally. hopefully somebody is going to look at the other side. this was an illegal takedown that failed. and hopefully somebody's going to be looking at the other side. so it's complete exoneration, no
2:04 pm
collusion. >> jeffrey toobin is with us. let's get your reaction, jeffrey. these are historic moments right now. >> well, it certainly is. the allegation that the trump campaign, that donald trump himself worked with russia, supported russia in russia's efforts to elect him president has been repudiated by this report. that is an unambiguous conclusion. what started this investigation, what prompted rod rosenstein to name robert mueller as the special counsel in the first place was the firing of james comey as director of the fbi in 2017. the question of whether that was obstruction of justice, whether the president was firing james comey in an effort to hinder or stop the investigation of him.
2:05 pm
that has been resolved in an ambiguous way in this report, frankly, because under circumstances that are frankly unclear, mueller turned that question over to his superior in the department of justice. it does not appear he concluded one way or the other about whether the president obstructed justice. the attorney general did conclude that there was no obstruction of justice. as he said in this letter, it did not ab solve hsolve him of . that's certainly worthy of further investigation. >> very important, indeed. our political contributors are here. let's go down the line and get your reaction. it's pretty stunning, all these developments. >> i think there's a lot of democrats that wrote checks about campaign collusion that robert mueller did not cash. so i have questions for the democrats and the trump campaign. for the democrats, namely people like adam schiff and senator
2:06 pm
blumenthal, who said they have evidence of criminality and wrongdoing, what set of facts were looking at that robert mueller did not? let's be out with this information already. for the trump campaign, why all the lies? why all the lies regarding contacts with russian officials? in the bill barr memo, it says that many russian affiliates made offers of campaign help to the trump campaign that they did not act upon. maybe that's why they lied. or maybe it's the reason michael cohen is going to a jail cell and they're trying to protect his business interests. i want answers about that too. >> wolf, i think this is going to be deeply disappointing and unsatisfying to a number of democrats, but i think it's important to remember that this is not how democrats won in 2018. nobody ran on impeachment. nancy pelosi is not saying we should impeach. she wasn't saying that a week ago, wasn't saying that two weeks ago. there's a lot of questions that are unanswered coming out of this four-page document that we've seen democrats clearly indicating they're going to
2:07 pm
pursue. including the fact he was not exonerated, president trump was not exonerated on obstruction of justice. there are also a lot of questions that i think democrats have about the lack of explanation for the trump tower moscow meeting, for the sharing of polling. so this will continue as it was going to before. the obligation or the role of mueller was always to investigate and then pass it along. that's exactly what's going to happen. >> there has to be a credibility reckoning for these democrats. adam schi iff especially. all assured the american people they had evidence. it's been fashionable lately to say they came with receipts. they promised this for two years, and it's been completely blown up today by the special counsel's report. that's number one. number two, it strikes me that what mueller has proven beyond a shadow after a doubt is russia interfered with our election, that trump had nothing to do with t and it all occurred on obama's watch. we need an accounting of how we
2:08 pm
failed at this at the end of the last administration and how we're going to stop it in the future. i think that's what a lot of folks want to know. how did we fail? how do we stop it? >> i agree with you. and number one on my list of questions is why then did mitch mcconnell obstruct the idea of a bipartisan notification to the american people? you like to make this talking point about how it happened on obama's watch. >> it's not a talking point. >> it is a talking point. >> it's a fact. >> it was mitch mcconnell who stood in the way of notifying the american people. on the one hand, this is good for the country, frankly, because as someone who participated in this election and worked for hard in this election, the idea that the russians, we know they obstructed all of our hard work, that was very troubling. so i think for america, this is a good thing, but certainly there are a number of questions that remain. i think the most important thing, frankly, is what happens next. barr has left very much open how much information he will now give to congress. and i think, not to make a pun,
2:09 pm
but the bar is very high for him because if you believe that the president has been exonerated, then there's absolutely no reason to give congress everything they've asked for so this thaek answer both amanda and scott's questions. >> pamela, you're getting new information. >> we're learning that the process of scrubbing mueller's confidential report has already begun at doj to see what else could be provided in this memo released today by bill barr. he did say he wanted to work with special counsellor mueller to figure out what else could be released, while keeping an eye on grand jury information, classified information. that process is under way, according to my colleague laura jarrett. the next phase is important. yes, he's going to be potentially releasing more information, but this enters a whole new chapter. one chapter is closed. we know today robert mueller found no collusion. that's something the president had been saying for nearly two years, as long as this investigation has been going.
2:10 pm
it is a win for the president. obstruction is a little messier when you read this. however, bill barr, his attorney general, essentially exoneratinexonerates him. >> and rod rosenstein. >> who i was told is staying on as sort of a heat shield for bill barr. bill barr is this hand-picked attorney general who wrote a memo saying that the obstruction probe was fatally misconceived. so now this new chapter is a fight over disclosures from the report. the white house has been bracing for this. it knows the order of battle and is preparing for a subpoena fight with the democrats who have already threatened that. also, pardons. what is the president going to do? his attorneys have said that once this probe is over with, that is when he's going to look at pardons, consider them. you heard him today say a lot of people were hurt through this investigation, as shimon pointed out. raises the question, what's he going to do next? >> the whole issue of pardons clearly coming into focus. the president said a lot of people have been hurt in this illeg illegal takedown.
2:11 pm
>> wolf, i think one of the important points here for the president certainly, even people around him, in late 2016, early 2017 advised him to accept that the russians did interfere in the election and what you've heard for the last two years is his refusal to even budge on admitting that. now, we have yet another finding here from the special counsel that did, again, says it did happen. i think one of the reasons why the president did that, he didn't want to give an inch because he did not want to essentially concede he had any help in the election and put himself in a place where, again, what we find in this investigation would undermine his election. here we have another finding from the special counsel that it did occur. obviously no americans were involved in that process as part of a conspiracy. again, the president at some
2:12 pm
point might want to have to admit that it did happen. he was elected. we don't know, obviously, what role, what difference it made to have the russian interference, but it did happen. >> such an important point. you said no u.s. person or anyone related to the trump campaign knowingly coordinated. that's an important point. one of the reasons why everybody has been thinking that there was fire with the smoke is because of the president's actions or inaction. yeah, he's been tough on some issues related to russia, but rhetorically, the bully pulpit has been absent with regard to russia. absent. in the face of russia meddling in american elections. the statement here says they actively were able to get in to the dnc's e-mails, that they were able to meddle more effectively to hurt hillary clinton. republicans who worked along the
2:13 pm
trump campaign said russia tried but just weren't successful on their side. regardless of how you look at it, they're the ones who should come into focus now, particularly as we go into the next election. >> abby phillip is getting more reaction at the white house. what else are they saying? >> for months and months, the trump campaign has been essentially waiting for this moment to figure out how they're going to use -- deal with the mueller report as they go into 2020. now today they issued this statement calling it a total vindication for president trump and suggesting that the democrats have lied to the american people. wolf, the last line of their fairly lengthy statement on this, really, i think, incapsulates the message from the trump campaign to the american people going into the 2020 election. the american people should take notice the democrats have lied to you while president trump has been hard at work building a booming economy and making you safer. so there's a twofold argument here. the president has been focused on the economy, focused on safety and security.
2:14 pm
democrats have been pushing collusion, what they called a collusion conspiracy. this is how they're going into 2020. one of my colleagues, betsy cline, just spoke to a senior trump campaign official a few moments ago who said this is going to be one of the tools they use to try to woo moderate voters going into this next election. moderate voters have been pulling away from president trump for a long time, particularly in the suburbs. it's one of the factors that helped democrats win the house of representatives. it's really an open question right now whether that will actually be effective. but from the trump campaign's perspective, they believe this is an open door for them to say the president's been treated unfairly these last two years. there was no underlying crime of collusion, and they're going further on the obstruction issue, as you all have been discussing. that's not as clear in the letter from bill barr. they're saying this is a total vindication from the president, and they want to use this as a way to restart a conversation with moderate voters about what
2:15 pm
president trump has been up to as president and perhaps push those moderate voters away from democrats. they're suggesting that democrats have been blind sided by their inability to deal with the 2016 election and have been pushing conspiracy theories. so a really interesting window into how they're already, as of this very moment, pivoting to 2020 and feeling very hopeful about what it means for president trump to move over this hump of the mueller probe that he's been kind of waiting for all these months and these last two years, wolf. >> significant development, indeed. james clapper is joining us right now, former director of national intelligence. in additi anxiety anxious to get your reaction. what do you think? >> well, it's actually more forthcoming than i thought it would be, but it certainly leaves a lot of unanswered questions. of course, like everybody else, i'm curious about mueller's decision to defer to the department of justice on a
2:16 pm
determination about exoneration. clearly the white house and president already are spiking the ball in the end zone. i guess with some justification. >> well, they're making the point that there was no collusion, and in the mueller report, there clearly is evidence there was no collusion, that no one from the trump campaign conspired or colluded or cooperated with the russians to interfere in the u.s. election. that's pretty significant. forget about the obstruction of justice for a moment. >> it is significant. you know, i think in a way, even if you're an opponent of trump, that is reassuring. that's a good thing for the country a country in any event. >> i'll read another line that makes that point. bill barr, the attorney general, in his letter to congress, he quotes from the mueller report saying, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. what's also significant, as you
2:17 pm
well know, you were the director of national intelligence at the time, there was a lot of evidence that the russians at the highest levels were trying to interfere in the u.s. election. >> exactly. one of the things that this mueller -- this summary does, i don't know about the actual report, but the summary makes that point, reaffirms once again and discusses the russian interference and the two dimensions of it, which was the disinformation campaign and the hacking. it's a shame that the president continues to refuse to call that out or to acknowledge what the russians did. he's been consistent about that since we briefed him in the last administration on the 6th of january, 2017, about the russian interference. this report reaffirms those findings. >> i went back and re-read earlier this afternoon that report you released on january
2:18 pm
6th, 2017, during the transition that you made available to the then president elect donald trump. you concluded in that report that u.s. intelligence, with high confidence, said that the russians had three goals in mind in interfering in the election. one, to denigrate hillary clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. two, help donald trump's election chances. and three, undermine public faith in u.s. democracy, to sow dissent, in effect, hered in the unit -- here in the united states. looks like the russians got what they wanted. >> they did. they were imminently successful. that kind of interference is continuing. we can look forward to it again in 2020. >> your successor, dan coats, told congress a few months later that the russian cyber operations will continue to target the united states and its allies. it's still going on as we speak
2:19 pm
right now. that was the whole investigation. the mueller investigation was designed to determine what the russians were up to and then also go into whether or not americans were helping the russians and apparently the bottom line is there was no evidence that criminally americans were helping the russians. >> that appears to be the case. i know when i left the government in '17, we certainly didn't have any direct evidence of collusion then. i think we all had faith. i certainly do, did in bob mueller. if there was evidence there, he would report it. and there wasn't. that's a good thing. it's a good message for the country. >> james clapper, thanks so much for joining us. always important to get your perspective. appreciate it. >> thanks, wolf. >> let's continue, amanda. what do you think? this is going to be a political
2:20 pm
issue. there's no doubt about that. the republicans and democrats -- on conclusion, the democrats have a weak case. on collusion, they may have something to argue. >> i think there's something to explore in the way donald trump governs. he's had a strangely positive relationship towards russia. now we know it's not because there was collusion, but this memo states there were multiple offers from russian affiliated individuals to assist with the trump campaign. here's why i want the report to come out. what knowledge did donald trump have of those offers of assistance? and did those offers, although not acted upon in a cooperative way, influence his policy towards russia? >> jen? >> i think the point that a lot of people have raised, there's a fitness of his role as president here that we should question. over the last two years, he's done absolutely nothing to prepare for the intervention of the russians that's ongoing, that will likely be a part of 2020. that speaks to whether he is behaving as a president should, never mind speaking positively about vladimir putin and having
2:21 pm
secret conversations that aren't read out. i do think there's an important warning for the democrats here. abby was reporting on how the white house is thinking about this. the reality is russia and this entire probe did not even register on internal polls for democrats across the country. it was not an issue anybody was talking about on the campaign trail. we should not change that now. and that's a warning to presidential candidates, other people running in tough elections. there are other issues to be running on. let this play out on the hill with the judiciary committee. that's where it should sit for now. >> the president made a 50-second statement we all heard before boarding air force one to fly back to washington. it may still happen, but i was sort of surprised. you would think after two years of this kind of investigation he wouldn't alert the tv networks and say, i'm going to address the nation from the oval office later tonight. >> may suspicion is they're getting their ducks in a huddle to make a big splash this week. the campaign, the white house,
2:22 pm
there's no question where they're going to head with this. it's going to be, how can you trust a word these democrats say when they so willingly and recklessly lied to the american people for two years about collusion? you've got a president here who's delivering on jobs, delivering on this, delivering on criminal justice and that. it's a very simple argument. i suspect they're going to start making it tonight, monday, and they won't stop making it until this campaign is over. and guess what, you raised the word fitness. a lot of americans are going to say, how fit are the democrats to run the country if we can't even trust them to tell us the truth about something so serious. >> i hope they use adam schiff in ads and that's the best thing they have because we'll win. >> nancy pelosi was very wise to take a step back some time ago and say, talk about what she was going to do, what the agenda was going to be and to show that frankly on capitol hill, democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. all these other investigations -- this is my advice to the democrats. have the fight about getting the evidence.
2:23 pm
let those investigations continue, but show your agenda is for the american people. i think nancy pelosi was wise to put that out, particularly knowing the way this was going to come down is exactly what i would have predicted, which is what happened. on friday, we learned we were going to get a summary, which meant that from the beginning, barr was going to be able to set the narrative in the first critical 24, 48 hours of this story. we all have lots of questions, but most americans, when are they going to tune in and hear those questions? what they wanted to hear was, was there collusion, what did the russians do, something about obstruction of justice, right. so for the democrats to stay focused on the issues, i completely agree with jen. but that doesn't mean -- remember, we still have, what, ten other investigations that are still ongoing. so this is still going to hang over the trump administration, no question. again, the democrats are going to have to just show they can walk and chew gum at the same time. >> but karen, the democrats and
2:24 pm
republicans still have the highest regard for robert mueller. >> absolutely. >> everyone was saying, let's wait to hear what robert mueller has to say. let's not come to any conclusions. robert mueller has now completed his nearly two-year investigation. and he's come to conclusion. >> we don't know what those conclusions are. we know what bill barr says those conclusions are. >> we know one of those conclusions is there was no collusion. >> again, this is a memo. jeffrey toobin made this point. this is a mem my that was created by rosenstein and barr, two people who we already know were immaterial my katplicated obstruction. rosenstein was implicated in the firing of jim comey. this is their read of what's in the report. we have not seen the full report. and we've been talking about some of the questions. >> are you alleging they are lying? >> no, i'm saying that this is their spin on what's in the report. i want to see the report. >> they actually quote from the report. >> the quote from the report, i'll read it. this is from the mueller report that the attorney general quoted
2:25 pm
in his letter, page two, in the section russian interference in the 2016 u.s. presidential election. this is a quote from mueller. the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. that's a direct quote. >> okay, but there's also the direct quote that says while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. >> that's on obstruction of justice, not on collusion. on collusion, mueller is firm, no collusion, as the president has said for two years. no collusion. >> right, exactly. it is black and white. there was no collusion. i don't think you can be clearer than that. he's quoting directly from the mueller report. >> he knows it could be made public one day. bill barr wrote this knowing full well f it gets to that, a federal judge could demand the report be made public. bill barr, i imagine, was mindful when he wrote this. that's probably part of why he
2:26 pm
and rosenstein basically cleared him on obstruction, saying his conduct wasn't obstructive. they put in that line there that mueller didn't feel that way, that he wasn't exonerated, which raises a lot of questions. >> i think a lot of people are going to raise questions about rod rosenstein. he wrote the memo to explain the firing. >> but in fairness, when he wrote the memo saying comey should be fired, he was referring to what comey did to hillary clinton. he wasn't referring to what the president of the united states was doing. he was saying what comey did was disgraceful to hillary clinton, saying he wasn't going to charge hillary clinton, but here's all the dirt on hillary clinton. to do that only days before a presidential election. that's what rod rosenstein was saying at that point, which the democrats totally agreed with at that point. >> and we know he was directed to write that memo. >> he was asked to write a memo. he clearly was citing what james
2:27 pm
comey, the then-fbi director, did to hillary clinton and damaged her campaign. >> but we also know directly from president trump, who said that he fired jim comey in part because -- >> that's what the president said. >> he said it. >> i'm just trying to be fair to rod rosenstein, what he wrote in that memo. >> if there was some kind of conspiracy, let's say, at the department of justice or the fbi to not bring charges and kind of word it this way, i think there would be ways people would come out and talk about it. look, i think we saw that during the clinton investigation. the fbi, there were people very unhappy she wasn't going to be charged. we saw that. there was a process. the department of justice did not feel there was enough to pursue charges against her. what comey did, much different than what we see here from bill barr. >> against justice department regulations. >> so bill barr found a way to tell us the findings of this investigation without giving us the dirt. we know there's plenty of dirt
2:28 pm
in this report that they could have expressed. he found a way -- and i do think that credit needs to be given to bill barr for doing it this way. there was a lot of questions about whether or not he was going to release information. he told us on friday he would. he kept his word. this is pretty detailed. >> as far as rod rosenstein is concerned, you also have to give him credit for doing what he had to do, to make sure given the fact there was so much confusion about the way the president carried out the firing of james comey did create this whole suspicion that he was trying to obstruct, trying to bury the russia store. i think rod decided to do the right thing, which is to appoint someone independently to look at this. the president said it was 13 angry democrats. turns out these 13 angry democrats, as he likes to call them, did an honest investigation and found that there was no collusion. the president, in some ways, brought this upon himself with the way he conducted himself. >> i just want to point out
2:29 pm
where there are issues and where there needs to be further investigation on issues that the special counsel came across. we've seen that being farmed out. it's been handled by other u.s. attorneys, fbi agents. those are not going away. as far as this investigation, for mueller, it's done. there are no more indictments. this idea that there may be sealed indictments somewhere, that's over with. now we look forward to what is next, how much more information gets out, and what's going to map in new york. >> kellyanne conway just tweeted this. we'll put it up on the screen. congratulations, president trump. today you won the 2016 election all over again. and you got a gift for the 2020 election. they'll never get you because they'll never get you. that was the tweet from kellyanne conway. >> i feel like that's a little inside joke between them. a little awkward. the important thing is what i've already turned on here. if they want to run on this report, the democrats should still run on health care and the economy and other issues that
2:30 pm
helped them win in 2018. they may try, but we didn't have success in trying to do that early on in 2018. so that continues to be an important warning. as much as we can applaud members of the department of justice, and that's good for the constituti institution and good for america, but there also is a role and obligation and a responsibility by democrats who are leading the committees in the house to leave no stone unturned and to try to answer some of the questions that are unanswered here. that's an important part of the process as well. >> if the democrats are going to run on other issues, not only should they forget about impeachment, flnancy pelosi already said forget about impeachment. there's got to be bipartisan report. but does it mean that these various committees, should they forget about that and focus in on substantive issues where they can work with the president, infrastructure for example, and
2:31 pm
get things done for the american people? >> not exactly that, but i think we can -- i think a lot of democrats should take a page from the mayor play book where he talked about issues that we should really focus on that the american people care about. the reality is many people looked at donald trump, thought he was gross and disgusting, and still voted for him any way. that still may be the case today, so let's focus on what we're strong at, which is health care, the economy, and a lot of these issue where is we can have a good battle. now, there are questions about his fitness to be president, to be commander in chief, to deal with foreign policy issues. those are character issues that i think are still part of the argument. >> you raised the issue of whether they should continue other investigations. i'm sure they will, but their anchor around their necks now is whatever they do on other investigations is always going to be clouded by the fact they got this one so wrong. promising evidence of collusion for two years, having mueller blow that up, now all the rest of these investigations, a lot of people are going to say, well, are you selling us a bill of goods on that the way you did
2:32 pm
on the collusion statements you made? i think the rest of their investigations are going to be tainted moving forward. >> but who's a lot of people though? i think the american people, let's treat them with intelligence. if the president broke the law, they're going to want to know that, regardless of how he broke the law or what the law was. i think they deserve to know that. >> we can talk about the politics of this, but kellyanne's tweet congratulating the president for winning, let's look at how he won. he blasted, he weaponized the investigation. he refused to sit down for an interview. that will have consequences for every president under investigation to come. so yes, it is a political decision. do the democrats give up on the obstruction ball, so to speak? because bill barr essentially says that's wide open. we didn't make a determination on that, but there's evidence, so democrats, if you want to pursue it, go ahead. but are they so burned on this, they give unand say we're not going to play that game because we can't beat the president? >> let's ask an influential democrat. chris coons is joining us on the
2:33 pm
phone right now. what do you think? now that this report is out, now that robert mueller himself has concluded there was no collusion, is it time for the democrats to curtail or step back from these other investigations? >> wolf, i don't think that should lead us to the conclusion that other investigations into misconduct by the trump organization, the trump campaign, the trump inauguration are invalid or should be curtailed, frankl curtailed. frankly, if anything, i think the fact the special counsel refused to reach a conclusion one way or the other about whether president trump committed obstruction of justice means that more than ever we have a responsibility to get access to those materials and to conduct a thorough review of it. i'll remind you, special counsel mueller and congress have different charges. mueller's charge was very narrow. frankly, i think it is a good
2:34 pm
thing that mueller did not conclude that our president conspired with a hostile power in the conduct of his campaign. mueller's report, at least the summary we've gotten from barr, leaves wide open both the question of obstruction and makes it clear that other investigations should proceed. i'll remind you, the mueller investigation led to 37 indictments and a series of guilty pleas and convictions, including the president's campaign manager, national security adviser, and personal attorney. it's hard for me to see how that is a complete exoneration. it strongly suggests that at the most senior levels, folks in the trump campaign had a whole series of inappropriate contacts with russians and then lied about it. if there was nothing for them to hide, why did they do so much lying and misrepresenting? and why do that to the extent that you've now got a half dozen
2:35 pm
senior people with convictions or guilty pleas? i do think i have trusted all along that special counsellor -- counsel mueller would do a complete investigation and supply materials so we in congress can do our job. >> you're absolutely right. he said the president was not completely exonerated on the issue of obstruction, but he also said, and the report quotes mueller, a man you greatly admire as saying this, quote, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. that's a hard and fast statement. >> that's right. that's how i read it.
2:36 pm
and i think that's a significant conclusion, but given the open question about obstruction, i still think congress needs to have access to the full report. >> are you ready to say, senator, there was no collusion? >> i want to see the full report because at the very least, the trump campaign at the highest levels had unprecedented and inappropriate contacts with the russians. but i think it is a good thing for the country if the mueller investigation concluded that our president didn't directly conspire with a hostile foreign power. >> it wasn't just the president. bill barr was quoting from mueller himself saying there was no collusion, there was no coordination, no conspiracy between the trump campaign. that means others too, besides the president, and the russian government in these illegal -- in russia's election interference activities. i guess the bottom line is, do
2:37 pm
you still have complete confidence in robert mueller? >> i see nothing that would undermine my confidence, even though this is a striking result. i think there was abundant evidence or suggestions of high-level, frequent, and inappropriate conducts with russians in the trump campaign. i think robert mueller is a career professional in law enforcement and someone who i have no reason to doubt or question. >> and specifically on this whole point when he says there was no collusion, the president goes way beyond that, saying no collusion, no obstruction. the president also said, we just heard him say this whole investigation was an illegal takedown that failed. that's the president's words. he said it was a shame that the united states had to go through
2:38 pm
this. it was a shame, he said, he had to go through this, and he felt badly for all these individuals who had already been charged and convicted, potentially hinting at a possible series of pardons. what's your response? >> ikds not more strongly disagree. i don't think it was a shame that the country had to go through this. i think if anything, it shows our commitment to the rule of law, that no one, including the president, is above the law. frankly, i think the president would have been well served not to have spent so much time in the last year criticizing, critiquing, harassing robert mueller mueller and his investigators. he would have been better served to let it play out, as his attorne attorneys initially advised him. i think the president may be claiming complete exoneration, but the folks who have had to plead guilty or who have been convicted i think speak loudly otherwise. >> the president clearly feels sorry, feels sad about those
2:39 pm
individuals. i don't think any of us should be surprised if eventually at some point down the road people are pardoned as a result of all of this. senator coons, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you, wolf. >> elie honig is joining us now, used to work at the u.s. attorney's office in the southern district of new york. the mueller investigation is over. mueller has concluded no conclusion. as far as obstruction of justice, he's left that whole issue up to the attorney general and the deputy attorney general. he says there's not complete exoneration, but he deferred to the attorney general, bill barr, and the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein. a lot of other investigations in the meantime are continuing, including in new york where you used to work for the u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york. what are they up to? >> so wolf, there's no question about it, nobody should be spiking the football just yet. as you said, there are many pending investigations, and i think by far the most potent threat to the president and the people around him comes from my
2:40 pm
old office, the southern district of new york. we already know the southern district has convicted michael cohen. we already know they're deep into the hush money payout, the campaign finance case. we saw that search warrant earlier this week or last week which reminded us just how much the information the southern district has. we know they're digging into the inaugural committee, the trump org. there's a couple important advantages that situate the southern district deferently than robert mueller. first of all, there won't be any politic political blow back on the southern district like there may be on congress. that's not going to apply to the southern district. second of all, mueller had a narrow mandate. southern district can go anywhere the evidence takes them into the finances, wherever the evidence goes, the southern district will go. last, the southern district has a long and well-deserved reputation for being nonpolitical, for being relentless, and for being tenacious. this is the no over for the southern district by any means. >> if the u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york decide they want to charge the president of the united states
2:41 pm
with a crime, wouldn't they first have to go to at least the deputy attorney general and probably the attorney general himself to get authorization for that? >> yes, wolf. i don't think the southern district will try to indict the president directly while he's in office. that is a long-established doj policy. as much as the southern district prides ourselves on being independent, they will not openly balk an exhausting policy. if we're talking about people around the president, high-ranking people in the trump org, i think that would have to go up the chain to the deputy attorney general and probably the attorney general. we're talking about a different set of crimes here. we're talking about primarily financial crimes. i think the evidence will be a lot more black and white than it might have been on collusion, corruption, obstruction. so you could well have a different outcome. >> did mueller do the right thing in deferring to the deputy attorney general and the attorney general to decide whether there was enough criminal intent, enough hard evidence to go after the president on the issue of obstruction of justice? >> i'm not entirely sure, wolf. look, i have the highest regard
2:42 pm
for robert mueller that i could possibly have for any prosecutor. i was surprised that he punted. look, there's no other way to put it. he punted the obstruction of justice decision. what prosecutors do all the time is we make very difficult razor-edge decisions. he could have at least gone to the attorney general with a recommendation. i'm surprised he went to the attorney general and said, i have no recommendation, you decide. let's remember, william barr has a very specific, and i think, extreme view of obstruction of justice. he said in his memo that he submitted to doj unsolicited before he was attorney general that mueller's theory of obstruction was fatally misconceived, and he had said in a prior interview that mueller's theory of obstruction was, and i quote, asinine. so i don't think we should be surprised that william barr came out where he did, given that he had openly stated he completely disagreed with mueller's view on obstruction. >> so let me get more legal analysis. so from the legal perspective, where do we go from here?
2:43 pm
>> well, i think these other investigations will obviously continue, and i would just say with respect to the southern district of new york, they do report to the attorney general. so whether or not they have additional evidence that is against the president or his inner circle, that information, if they're going to prosecute, that's going to go up to the attorney general, certainly if it involves the president. i think we just need to keep in mind that the southern district of new york still does reside within the justice department. as far as the two matters that are described in the attorney general's letter, i think we have ongoing senate intelligence investigations that still are looking at russian influence. i think the conclusions drawn by the special counsel's office will perhaps help chairman burr if his report is leaning towards also identifying that there was no so-called collusion or connection between the trump
2:44 pm
campaign and the russian government or russian surrogates involved in influencing the election. and i think on obstruction, there's going to be a big fight with the hill. on obstruction, congress is going to ask for certainly the report but also more underlying information. i also just want to comment for a minute, wolf, on the interview you had with senator coons, just to draw the distinction between the way that senator coons characterized bob mueller and his investigation. senator coons was probably surprised by some of the result in this let eveter, but he stil exhibited a respect for the special counsel and his investigation. contrast that with the president's statement that it was an illegal take down that failed. even though there are circumstances and favorable information in the attorney general's letter to the president, he still can't stop himself from attacking the justice system and attacking the process in an independent review of activities. >> yeah, he said the whole thing was basically illegal.
2:45 pm
elliott, let me get your sense where this all is heading in the immediate future. >> yeah, i think what we really need, though, is we really need to see robert mueller's underlying findings. i think there are a number of unanswered questions here. many people, many americans, many lawyers, people who run investigations, are curious as to why, for instance, the president wasn't interviewed or even, you know, donald trump jr. or other individuals who were close to this. so that's one fundamental question that i think we really need to think about here. ultimately, this question to not address -- for mueller not to address the obstruction question and to echo elie's word, punt it to barr. i have it in my notes, punt is the word i have as well. it's an odd decision when he could have just remained silent on it. or the attorney general could remain silent on it. so why was that decision made? that might have been, as we talked about in the last hour, wolf, perhaps a sign to
2:46 pm
congress, opening the door to congress investigating this. as senator coons said a moment ago, congress has a different charge than law enforcement. pardon me, than the legal system. congress, number one, isn't held to the reasonable doubt standard. number two, they are assessing the propriety of the conduct. they are assessing fraud, waste, abuse, and all other things in the administration. again, before you even get to this lofty question of impeachment, just what's appropriate for the president of the united states? so i do think -- you know, we should -- the american public, people may not see this, but we should split this out into two different things. what happens in courts and what happens in congress. but again, there's a huge public interest in the findings of this report being made public. congress itself has voted 422-0, 80% or 90% of americans have been polled to say they support the release of the findings. for all those reasons, many of us need to see what's in it
2:47 pm
rather than the four-page document from the attorney general. >> everybody stand by. shimon, you know a lot about the southern district of new york, the u.s. attorney there. where's this heading? >> i would say -- and as we've been reporting, i think this is something that still consumes the president and consumes the president's attorneys. they are concerned about the southern district of new york. they are still in the middle of this campaign finance violation where the president's been implicated. it is the department of justice, just for everyone to keep in mind, that's implicated the president in that crime, right. it's not like it's some other -- he's an unindicted co-conspirator. it's the department of justice that's decided not to bring charges on the obstruction issue. those investigations are very much ongoing. that's going to be a big focus going forward for all of us, certainly a lot of reporters, the american people will want to know what's going on there. they're a tough office. they do not let things go. the fbi in new york, they're
2:48 pm
tough. they have certainly investigated a lot of political corruption, local political corruption, state political corruption that we don't hear about. those fbi agents are the ones that are doing this investigation in new york. they're a tough group. so the other thing want to make one point is i do think more is going to be made public. i think bill barr is showing us what he intends to do, what he did today. the other thing that's probably going to hold some of this up are those other investigations like in the southern district of new york. i think once we start learning about those and those charges are brought forward and there are indictments, then we may learn more about what's in this report. keep in mind, there are still ongoing investigations, and bill barr is saying this is one of the reasons why he needs to wait to make a lot of this public. >> remember in the documents that came out this past week on michael cohen, there were 20 pages of redactions in the hush money payment scheme where the president is a co-conspirator. so certainly the legal cloud still hangs over the president,
2:49 pm
but certainly this was a huge cloud lifted today for the president and his team. his legal team, who have been fighting until the very end for the president not to have to sit down with robert mueller, and they won on that. >> manu raju is on capitol hill and has a statement from the democratic leadership in the house and senate. >> that's right. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer just issued a joint statement about the mueller report. they said that the fact that the special counsel's report does not exonerate the president on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public without any further delay given mr. barr's public record of bias against the special counsel inquiry. he's not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report. they're referring that he has been critical of the inspection.
2:50 pm
he made a memo about the obstruction of justice aspect. he said he wasn't ready for what mueller was looking into. that's what they're saying. democratic lieaders say that bar sent to capitol hill today raises as many questions as it answers. and they say that obviously for the president to say he is completely exonerated contradicts what mueller said and mueller said according to bill barr's letter that he was not completely exonerated even if they were not going to move forward with the prosecution of a crime. nevertheless, the point of the democratic leaders are making they want the full report public as soon as possible without delay. that is their underlying message. they're trying to say they're not putting much stock into what bill barr is telling congress. >> a strong statement. >> a strong statement. and it underscores a point karen was making earlier today. it's an important one.
2:51 pm
maybe it goes -- it's obvious but we should underscore it. what we have here is the trump appointed attorney general setting the narrative. i mean, he literally wrote it. he's setting the narrative with quotes and other parts of the mueller report, but the idea that he sent it to congress. he put it out in the public. he's making clear that this is what he wants everybody to come away with. and we don't know the substance underneath all of these conclusions. we don't know how they got to these conclusions, because we haven't seen the report. and so what you just heard from manu with the joint statement from the democratic leaders on capitol hill is an attempt to pull back control of that narrative. it's in the going to be easy. let's be honest. it is not going to be easy for democrats to do this. it's a conclusion, and it could be a while before we see the full report, and the hope among
2:52 pm
republicans is by the time they get there, everybody will have moved on. >> i think bill barr wrote this letter with exactly that in mind. look, this is the process. this is a law that congress passed. this is a system and a process that the congress established. and so it is up to the discretion of the attorney general to distill and summarize what robert mueller found in his investigation. you can bet they wrote this letter. you know he wrote this letter knowing in the end at some point mueller's findings are going to be made public. he wants to make sure this can be supported by that, and i think just knowing how bill barr operates, i think that's exactly what was his guiding force. that might have been why we've been waiting a few extra days than what we initially anticipated. i think it's important. i think members of congress have every right to ask for this and to bring robert mueller up to testify and explain why he
2:53 pm
stopped short of reaching a conclusion of obstruction. while find out what was the discussions behind the scenes about that. and i think that's a very important part of the process as well. >> and scott, the bipartisan overwhelming unanimous vote in the house of representatives, 420 to 0 asking for the mueller report to be made available to congress and the public. where is that headed? >> i don't know a republican that doesn't want this whole report to come out. they want it to come out. bill barr says it's my intent to release as much of this as i can. every republican i've spoken to says we should have the report. head cruz said it on cnn this morning. i suspect it will come out. i don't have a problem with mueller answers questions. he spent a bunch of money and two yore years on this. i think the american people want a full set of answers. it's appropriate. >> do you agree when they say we want everything? >> yes, but it says in this letter 500 witnesses were
2:54 pm
interviewed. i do not agree that this congressional process should be allowed to drag innocent people through the mud. there's a reason they weren't put into a real court. and we shouldn't use the court of public opinion to besmur. the reputation of others. >> there are other investigations going on. we may still see some folks in court, scott. >> i think it's important to remind people that the reason the statute was changed was because there were intimate details about clinton's relationship are lewinsky. that was a lot for the public. that's why it was put in place. that is different from whether the public deserves to know the details of whether or not a president obstructed justice. all the discussions and conclusions about the russia investigation. there should be redactions for sources and methods not to put people at risk. >> for classified information. >> yes. but there's no reason for the rest of it not to be released.
2:55 pm
when barr says he wants to release as much as possible, democrats are skeptical. he's a trump appointee and he's endorsed the firing of comey. we don't know how long the report is. mueller wasn't consulted in the letter. there's reasons there's questions being raised. that's part of the role of the opposing party. that's what they're doing. >> donald trump is the catch me if you can president. he engages in a lot of questionable, unethical behavior. when it comes to the russia investigation, but we found here it was not criminal. but this isn't over. there are prosecutors chasing down virtually every organization he's been a part of, and somehow through bluster, blockading, politicizing the investigations, he won this one. we'll see if he gets away with it again. >> i think it's fair to say he talked about quite a bit on the campaign trail in 2016. this is how his business career has played out as well. when someone is going to sue him, he countersues and he drags it out.
2:56 pm
right? this is very much as you said, this is the catch me if you can. this has been his strategy for a very long time. and it's worked for him. the question becomes will it continue to work for another two years. >> the white house has a lot of power here. i think it's important for people to remember. even though the democrats are going to push and they're going to subpoena, the white house has a lot of control over the time line, and they can push and wear out the clock. that's probably what -- >> and already with the congressional investigations they've been slow-walking. their responses to the request, they haven't been come plying with the requests. >> they slow walk the request for an interview with the president. i mean, look, and they've been undermining the process. i think that is something we should take away from all this entire process. the president essentially was trying to undermine and trying to impede this thing even though obviously there was no finding of on strzbstructiobstruction. we should look at the way the president behaved during the entire process. and it was not good. it was not a good way for a
2:57 pm
president to behave when you have a legitimate investigation that needed to get answers, and all he did was try to find ways publicly to obstruct it. again, not in a criminal way, but in ways that we all could see. those -- that's not a way for a president to behave to undermine his own government. >> and reading this and seeing this and the whole obstruction issue, now you understand why the president's team did not want to fire mueller, why did not want him to do anything that would -- they were very concerned. it's clear about the obstruction issue. >> the president's lawyers? >> yeah. and now we understand why. they didn't want him answering questions about that. and remember, there was all this talk. is he going to fire mueller? now we understand why. >> well, that and as we talked about last hour with rudy giuliani and jay sekulow, the notion of stopping the president from doing an interview, written
2:58 pm
or otherwise on obstruction. it was a game changer. it was. it was a game changer. >> are the democrats on the hill, you know the hill well, going to be sort of gun shy right now about going too aggressively against the republicans given the report. >> they came out aggressively saying you were wrong. you know, you were completely out over your skis from the beginning, and you just need to stop. in order to try to make clear to the american public and also to the democrats who now have the subpoena power in the house, okay, just take a breath before you do that. there's no indication that democrats in the house are going to do that for the reasons we were talking about with sn and y. the things they're looking at following the money, other issues related to the trump administration. the inaugural committee. >> and bill barr's letter gives the democrat a little bit of wiggle room.
2:59 pm
it gives them enough runway for them to continue to do some of these things. >> because of the one line the special counsel states that while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. that's the specific line from robert mueller. >> you know, we know that they deliberated for nine hours yesterday and today. if i was putting a bet on it, i would think page three of this memo was what a lot of that dlib r ration was about. and including that line. if you read it, it's sort of messy the say this is. look, it's basically saying the special counsel didn't exonerate him on obstruction of justice, but if you continue reading bill barr is attorney general and rosenstein exonerated him. they said his behavior outlined by mueller did not constitute obstructive conduct. >> and on mueller not having anything to do with what we're reading is important. >> i think it's important. >> they wanted to keep it separate.
3:00 pm
>> and why -- your reporting is ev even -- he didn't read the letter and approve it. >> in the letter friday he said it would be mueller's principle conclusions. that's not the case. on page three he didn't have a principal collusion. it's barr's that there wasn't obstruction of justice. >> everybody stand by. this is cnn breaking news. >> i want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i am wolf blitzer in washington. after nearly two years, we now know the main conclusions of robert mueller's russia information. a four-page single-spaced summary was released by the attorney general of the united states, bill barr. part of the report reading and i'm quoting now. the investigation did not kid not establish that members of the


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on