Skip to main content

tv   New Day With Alisyn Camerota and John Berman  CNN  March 25, 2019 4:00am-5:00am PDT

4:00 am
out a big sigh of relief yesterday. >> two unbelievable looks that central florida had, both missed. >> couldn't believe they didn't go down. >> and the lead story, rob gronkowski retiring. we have uncovered the biggest story on earth today. thank you to our international viewers for watching, yore now talk is next. for our u.s. viewers, trump's attorney joins us life. new day begins right now. >> the president did not engage in collusion. that is proven beyond any doubt. >> i don't want a summary of the report, i want the whole damned report. >> he is exonerated. why can't democrats acknowledge that fact? >> this does not amount to a total exoneration. congress must step in to get the truth. >> shame on mueller for not having the guts to come to a decision. >> it's a shame that our country had to go through this. this was an illegal takedown that failed. >> announcer: this is new day with alisyn camerota and john
4:01 am
berman. >> good morning, everyone, welcome to your new day. president trump scoring a significant political and legal victory in a letter summarizing the special counsel's report attorney general william barr says robert mule der neller didd that the president or his campaign conspired with russia. on the question of obstruction, the mueller report did not make it me conclusions about whether the president broke the law, but it also did not exonerate him. mueller did not decide to charge the president with obstructing justice. he punted on that decision. barr and rosenstein choosing not to charge the president saying there was not sufficient evidence to support any prosecution. >> president trump was jubilant over the results of the investigation, even as he blasted it as a legal and illegal takedown that failed. and even though the mueller report kploo report explicitly says it does not exonerate the president completely are the president called it a total exoneration.
4:02 am
the house judiciary chair wants the attorney general to testify, but democrats also have questions to answer. particularly those who claim they saw clear evidence of collusion. >> joining us now one is of the president's attorney, jay sekulow. good morning, mr. sekulow. >> great to see you. >> great have you. have you had a chance to talk to attorney general barr in the past 24 hours? >> i have not. >> so he spoke to one of your colleagues but not to you directly? >> so emit represents the white house. i'm the president's private lawyer. emmitt is within the white house counsel's office. so the protocol was for the attorney general's office to notify the white house counsel when the information was being transmitted. >> did mr. flood share with you or do you know how long the actual mueller report is? how many pages? >> i do not. i don't have that information. i will see that information when you see it. again, as a private counsel we don't have the right -- it's a
4:03 am
confidential report so it goes between the -- under the regulations the report goes between the special counsel directly to the attorney general. >> and do ju a sense of -- >> and as private lawyers we don't get it. >> thank you. do you have a sense of when you and i and the rest of public will see that? >> based on the way they moved on getting this report out that they did over the weekend, i expect it to be, you know expeditiously. i don't have a time frame. there's a couple things you have to look at. you can't release grand jury material, if you do that could be credible. national security interest information that may be in there, you can't compromise our security interests. so you have a series of things that will have to be happening internally within the department of justice to evaluate what gets released. but bill barr said he wants to provide as much transparency as possible and i take him ats a word. >> on your end do you imagine having to redact anything for executive privilege, anything like that? >> that, again, would fall within the context of the white
4:04 am
house counsel in consultation with the department of justice because both of them both the doj and the white house are within the article 2 branch of government. as the private lawyers we don't inject ourselves into that. that's not what we inject ourselves. our representation was to the president. their representation is to the office office of the presidency. >> so the president was exonerated in terms of conspiracy and in terms of collusion, as we've been saying the term that people have been using with russia as were his associates and his campaign. but, as you know, it was much more ambiguous on the question of obstruction of justice. here's what it said. the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the special counsel views as difficult issues of law and fact concerning whether the president's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. the special counsel states while this report does not conclude that the president committed a
4:05 am
crime, it also does not exonerate him. do you know what robert mueller means by difficult issues of law and fact? >> i think i do. and that is in obstruction of justice cases are very fact intensive. and there's questions of law. so he finds that there are very difficult questions of law and facts here leading him to not be able to make a conclusion as the special counsel as to whether there was any obstruction here. so what he did was follow -- remember, he's not an independent counsel approximately he's within the department of justice. so bob mueller by the book did what a u.s. attorney would do. then you go to the office of legal counsel. they look at a theory as something that they could bring forward. here r hero here rosenstein decided there
4:06 am
was not enough that could meet those charges. >> well it's not accurate when he's exonerated totally. >> in categorizing the president's actions in public, there is no action that constitute criminal conduct. there kwefrs law, in fact, as the special counsel said difficult questions of law in fact which meant when they were looking at that time they could not conclude there was criminality. as you pointed out, alisyn, they did not say that the president violated or constitute and act of obstruction, they couldn't make the conclusion. they did what a prosecutorial office would do and that's refer it upstairs, so to speak. >> i appreciate that. but nor could they exonerate him. let me read you -- >> but he was exonerated. >> but this is a quote from the special counsel while this report does not conclude that the president accumulated crime, it also does not exonerate him. so for the president to say total exoneration, that's not
4:07 am
what it says in here. >> well, under the department's principles of federal guidelines charging decisions would not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt obstruction of justice defense. that's what the letter from the attorney general says. what the special counsel says, alisyn, is that these were difficult questions of law, in other words, the their riff law they were prarting on was difficult, and difficult questions of fact. so when you have difficult questions of law and fact, you don't bring an action. and that's what happened here. so he really followed the guide zblooins i thi lines. >> i think it would be helpful to see more context so everyone could see what mueller was wrestling with. and you have no problem, i think, correct me if i'm wrong, with releasing that full mueller report. >> the bob mueller has made it clear, he's going to release as much of this report as can he under the guidelines. the 60 b, grand jury material, national security material, people that were looked at but
4:08 am
exonerated should not be released. that would be inappropriate under our system of justice, that's why james comey, what he did in intervening in the hillary clinton matter was incorrect and inappropriate. i think he's going to move quickly on this. i think he's moving expeditiously and you got a lot more information. i think that helped all 6 us, helped the lawyers and media so we have something we could talk about and the report will be released accord to the regulations. >> here's an important question. will you release the president's answers, the written answers that you gave to robert mueller's team? account public see tho can the public see those? >> that would not be a position where i would want to release a statement where we would release confidential communications that took place between the president of the united states and the department of justice or the special counsel's office. if i was representing alisyn m camerota and put forward a written statement and there was a defamation as to any legal
4:09 am
liability i would fight very aggressively for that information not to be released. think any lawyer would. >> but why in the interest of transparency? because we've heard so much about those written answers and they do seem to be some of what robert mueller hinged his conclusions on, why not? >> well just because as a lawyer you don't waive privileges and you don't waive -- you don't waive investigative detail absent either a court order or an agreement between the parties. and you'd have to weigh a lot of factors there and how thai fects oth that effects other presidents. it's not a simple waive your hand and we release the document. that would be very inappropriate. as i was representing you in a case and we came to a voluntary determination to submit answers in writing and then you were exonerated, i don't think that that would be material, that would be regullevant to the genl public. that will be a decision for the
4:10 am
attorney general makes but i have strong thoughts about that. >> since the president feels he's totally exonerated, he sounded when he spoke to reporters yesterday he sounded still sort of angry and as though he was looking for some sort of, i don't know what the word is, vengeance or some sort of retaliation, i guess. and he said that he sure hoped that somebody would look into the other side. what is next? what does that mean? >> well, look, i mean there's serious questions that were raised, irregularities throughout this investigation, no one denies that. we've talked about them before i'm not going to restate them again. there's a laundry list of these. i'm not going to get into whether the department of justice is investigating something else or not. but i will say this to the united states house of representatives of the united states senate and in their oversight kmafcapacities and congressional inqueries. they're not going to get 500 search warrants, 2,800 subpoenas, 230 orders of communication records, 50 orders
4:11 am
authorizing use of pen registers, 13 requests to 14 governments for evidence, and interview of approximately 500 people. and to keep that going rather than doing the people's business, i think, to me personally, would be tragic when we have the opportunity in our country right now, think there's a growing consensus on immigration reform, how about spending the time and effort on that for the american people. i think that would be a really good move. i thinking this has been fully investigate and fully vetted and concluded and i hope the congress moves forward. >> and do you feel they should also move forward on not investigating for instance the president's political rivals as he seemed to be suggesting? >> well, the congress i don't see any movement on the president investigating -- or the president's political rivals being investigated within congress i was just saying because he seemed to call for something like that yesterday. >> the president wonders -- it's a legitimate thing to ask, that is you've got -- you had a three-year investigation the
4:12 am
president, started as a counterintelligence investigation off of an unverified dossier, which without question and think we all agree, bob mueller says there was no evidence of any collusion within the russian government. >> hold on. i don't want to relate gate all of this but that's not what started this whole thing. there was what defiesa warrant says it was george papadopoulos, it was the australian ambassador was so concerned about what george papadopoulos seemed to know when he was spouting off at a bar, that they called the u.s. and alerted people because they were so concerned that george papadopoulos seemed to know that the russians had hacked the dnc. >> you're conflating the fisa issue with the counterintelligence investigation known as crossfire hurricane. >> this that is also what started it. >> well, crossfire hurricane was based in large part on the dossier and that's where the russian collusion investigation developed. i think let's be fair on that and the end result of that entire inquiry was that there
4:13 am
was no collusion. not only has the president said it, but bob mueller said it, the attorney general has said it. and to go relitigate this or reinvestigate this with the congress i think say waste of the taxpayer's money. >> i hear you and just making sure that on both sides that the president isn't calling for a reopening and a relitigation of all of these different threads. but -- >> i don't have -- i'm the private lawyer, i'm not the white house counsel, i'm not the department of justice, i'm not the person to opine on that. >> jay sekulow, we preesappreci your time. thank you for being on new day. >> a lot to discuss. we have jeffrey toobin and former federal prosecutor laura coates and sara murray. jay sekulow doesn't look like he's in any hurry to release the president's answer that's gave to the mueller team. that's significant. >> it's significant, it's not scur prizin surprising.
4:14 am
one of the rules of life is when you're winning you're winning and why stir the pot further by disclosing these answers now 239 you were interested in full transparency, maybe you do it anyway. but it seems to me, you know, his preference would be to leave things as they are. obviously the report, some version of the is report going to come out. but whether those answers are included in that remains to be seen. >> it does beg the question if you're totally exonerated, why don't you just release what he said there. other things that came out of that interview that sekulow said that require some fact checking. sekulow insisted that the president was exxoner rated on obstruction. no. he was exonerated by barr, specifically not exonerated by mueller. and when sekulow says mueller kicked it upstairs, he said he kicked it uptears to barr, that's not clear to me. it's very possible that mueller kicked it upstairs to congress
4:15 am
right. one of the real ambiguities of the news that came out yesterday is what did robert mueller say about obstruction of justice and to whom and why? barr took what mueller said as an opportunity to opine himself along with rod rosenstein about the possibility of an obstruction of justice case. >> it's not clear that it's hits his place to. can he choose to if he wants to, but no one asked him. >> jay czech sue low seemed to imply that mueller asked barr's opinion. but that was jay's interpretation. based on what was disclosed yesterday, that was not asbla t apparent. >> laura, your thoughts? >> first of all i think it's impossible for them to get around the notioning that there's a direct quote that mueller has said it does not exonerate the president. i looked at that and it's kind
4:16 am
of a mueller maybe which is atrocious. after two years if you still have questions and you still can't thans question, it's not good enough to say, well, you decide whether or not he's committed a crime. that's one of the things you were tasked with. which is why think there must be something more behind the scenes so say that -- i find tem possible that he would say i don't feel like wrestling with a hard question, why don't you take it, barr, i'm done, i'm kind of tired. there must be something more. but the problem is we're left with one of the great triumphed of jay sekulow and his presentation is which all we have written answers of the president of the united states. there was never an opportunity, it appears that mueller was actually able to ask questions, follow-up questions, have an in-person opportunity assess whether the president did indeed have corrupt intent in any form or fashion which sounds look a very self-fulfilling prophecy. if you don't endeavor to get information you would not have
4:17 am
the information. so the report to me until i have all the context and see the basis as to why they did not pursue that action and why it went to somebody other than the person who had the duty to do so, i'm completely unsatisfied. >> why do you think mueller settled for the written answers? >> i think that's a great unanswered question. i think one issue may have been time. the fact that he knew that if he went to -- to a subpoena it would have gone to court, it would have taken many monthstor litigated through a district court, circuit court and almost certainly through the supreme court of the united states. so with an uncertain result. i don't think anyone knows for sure whether mule worry haeller won that. in addition, the issue of, you know, what he would have gotten out of it is unclear. the president is an experienced giver of testimony and he is
4:18 am
someone who could dance around these questions and he may have thought it was not worth it. but, you know, it's a good question to ask muler. >> bi also think he may not hav done that because he didn't find he evidence of an underlying crime. that's with one of the issues that they pointed thut made this obstruction case so murky is that they didn't find evidence that there were members of donald trump's campaign ore was involved including with the russians. so they may have been staring down the idea of a subpoena fight which could have taken a year or more. so with no evidence of an underlying crime and the fact we can't prosecute the president as it is and we've interviewed 500 witnesses, many of whom provided testimony about what the president was thinking and saying in a variety of these activities that may look like obstruction of justice, let's hand these facts over to congress and let them to do their part, let them make their determination. we just now have this wrink where bill washington has now weighed in on what he thinks is a crime or not.
4:19 am
>> laura. >> i was going to say, that's absolutely true and agree the notion there may not be evidence there. but the problem that i are is that the mueller report or the mueller summation as relayed to us through barr does not answer the questions, nor does it say specifically at this point that it wants it to go to congress. the way it's written, for there is no evidence then he should state that. if there is evidence to clear the president, he should state that. if is he exonerated. the reason it's a problem is because it continues to loom like a sword of damma clees over the president and over the electorate's ability to say that no one is truly above the law. it's that unsettled question for me particularly given the fact that bill barr has already told the president through his what's being called an audition, i don't want to be pejorative towards him for that. but he's said in an 18 rb, 19-page letter what his views on obstruction were. he put in information to
4:20 am
substasubstan tate what he already believe or was there more? the president should not feel exonerate rerd should feel irritated that it's still out there and the american people should not feel as though they can totally have the question resoflr resolved whether the head of the executive branch was involved in obstruction of justice. >> it's important to remember how clear the obstruction was justice. bill clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice. this it is something uniquely within the ability of president to do as head of the executive branch. to so it say very serious question. >> what would martha stewart tell you about not be able to be charged without an underlying crime? >> the notion put forward that it is almost impossible to charge someone with obstruction of justice without an underlying crime is simply not true. it's not justice department policy. as you point out, martha stewart
4:21 am
was never charged with insider trading but she was charged with lying and obstruction of justice. >> i only know that because i read your article. >> i appreciate that. >> thank you very much. coming up in our next hour, we have white house press secretary sarah sanders joinedisanders joining us. >> we have a barr report, we don't yet have the mueller report. but the barr veshs versirsion t that there may have been smefds of obstruction of justice. what will democrats do with this and how will they respond now when they say there is not enough evidence to charge the president with conspiracy or coordination. that's next. at hilton.com, i can choose from all their different hotel brands... like a doubletree for my cousins.
4:22 am
a homewood suites for my uncle. a hampton for my sister and her kids. and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. can i get a..? thank you. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. book at hilton.com but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself. woman: this is your wake-up call. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis,
4:23 am
month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. vo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman: help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira.
4:24 am
right here. right now. all of you. how you live,
4:25 am
what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity, the future of awesome. one of the key quotes from william barr's summation of the mueller report is this. the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinate with the russian government in its election interference activities. so what does that mean? how will congress receive that information? how will the democratic
4:26 am
controlled house now receive that information? joining me now is democratic congressman david cicilline. he's a member of the house judiciary committee. congressman, thank you so much for being with us. did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinate with the the russian government in its election interference activity. i know you will want to speak about obstruction, i promise we will get to that. but on the issue of coordination and conspiracy here, presumably given 40uhow many witnesses the mueller team talked to, is that not now conclusive on the issue on what has become to be known as collusion? >> yeah, i mean, think that language certainly suggests that it is. obviously we really need to see mr. mueller's report to understand the context of that statement because you could imagine, for example, that he concluded that there was insufficient evidence to meet burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. but still substantial evidence
4:27 am
to support the claim. i hate to sort of guess because we haven't seen the report and supporting documents. by think it's clear that the conclusion of the special counsel was there was insufficient evidence to move forward with prosecutions which we know means a certain standard was not met if the doesn't mean of course that there was no evidence of collusion or conspiracy between members of the trump campaign and the russians but maybe not sufficient to meet that burden. but, again, we shouldn't be forced to guess. it's important we see the actual report and the supporting materials so we can make our own judgments. >> we should see the report. but does it clear him of that? does it clear him of conspiracy and coordination in your mind, legally? >> yeah are i think clearly clears the president from the special counsel assuming that quotation accurately captioned the contents of the report. >> we do want to see the full report here but given the sheer amount of evidence that witnesses they spoke to, there are questions now being raised
4:28 am
about what some democrats have said in the past in this investigation. and just let me play you an exchange between alisyn camerota and your chairman jerry nadler from a few months ago. listen. >> it's become very clear that the trump campaign concluded with the russians in trying to subvert the election. >> how is that -- wait, wait, hold on. >> the question has been. >> how can you say that so definitively that they've concluded? >> well, the fact that -- the fact that manafort and trump junior met with russians agents who told them they want give them dirt on hillary clinton as part of the russian attempt to help them and they said fine. it's clear that the campaign clued and there's lots of evidence of that. >> clear the campaign concluded, yet robert mueller's team yesterday we now know that they don't feel there's the evidence to charge the president for conspiracy or coordination. and you just said by all indications that clears the president.
4:29 am
there is a dichotomy there. those two things are not -- can't be true. >> i think -- no, i think they both can be true. look, it may well be the case, and we're guessing because we haven't seen the report, that the special counsel has concluded there's insufficient evidence to charting president or members of his campaign with conspiring with the russians. and at the same time there is evidence that, in fact, conspiracy or collusion occurred at some level. you look at the meeting at trump tower that chairman nadler referenced. this clear evidence that's in the public domain that members of the trump team met with russian operatives of who committed to sharing dirt on hillary clinton. we know paul manafort shared polling data with a russian asset. there are facts that are in the public domain which are inconsistent with that conclusion which is why we need to see the report to find out what the special counsel's talking about. but i think to chairman nadler's pointers exactly right, those are facts which we know are true in the public domain which are evidence of conspiracy between individual and russian
4:30 am
operatives. this is why seeing the context and the context of this conclusion is really important. >> is it possible there's evidence of this but, again, it's not criminal? that even if these meetings did take place it didn't break a law? >> that's one other option is that there was in fact conspiracy or coordination but the special counsel didn't believe it rise to the level of criminality. but, again, that's the urgency of seeing the report. >> i understand that. but one of the issues here is that democrats in particular so many people have said for so long, he woog go to put our faith in robert mueller in what he produces in terms of the investigation particularly into conspiracy and coordination into collusion. now he has done his investigation and has conclude we've seen a part of it, albeit a very limited part of it and the question is now what will democrats do about it? if the house judiciary committee is going to hold hearings going forward, based on what you know now, do you think you should leave the collusion issue aside and focus on something else? >> yeah, i mean, look, based on
4:31 am
the reporting i think that's the sort of place i would lean. but, again, it's a really impossible determination to make without actually reading the report, reeding tading the conc of mr. mueller. it's unfair to expect anyone to write it off completely. it's clearly if mr. barr is reporting that accurately, it seems as if they concluded there's not sufficient evidence to charge folks that may be of less interest. but we still have a responsibility to make sure we protect the integrity of our democracy and make sure we don't allow the russians or anyone else to attack us again. so we may still have some responsibility to examine the conduct at issue here even if it doesn't rise to the issue of criminality. we have a broader responsibility. >> there is the issue of obstruction of justice, and it's a huge thing. we have seen presidents impeached for it before. >> two of them. >> it is a major. >> that's right. >> major issue here. and william barr tells us specifically that robert mueller
4:32 am
did not exonerate president trump on that issue. so how will congress investigate that matter? >> yeah, this is the most disturbing development, in my vie view, of the release of this four-page document. this is the attorney general of the united states, in my view, attempting to shape the narrative on the obstruction of justice claim because he gives a report basically this has been an issue that's been examined by the special counsel for 22 months. he lays out the evidence of obstruction, he doesn't make a conclusion but goes out his way to say the president is not exonerated in this regard. and mr. barr in 48 hours turns tha that around and says, oh, nor i looked at and it he's exonerated. mr. barr applied for this job in a memo that he says the president of the united states can't be charged with obstruction of justice. so he's sort of fulfilling that commitment, apparently by making
4:33 am
this conclusion and trying to zhai shape the debate. it is important for to us see what mr. mueller collect and why he collected evidence and put it in the report there's obstruction of justice and didn't make a final conclusion of exoneration. i think it's alarming because this was a decision that the special counsel was supposed to make because he's independent from the president. we don't want this determination being made by the attorney general who's appointed by this president and some could argue was appointed specifically because of his view on the expansive power of the executive and the likelihood that the president can't ever commit obstruction of justice. >> jay sekulow just said he would fight, he would personally fight notion of the president releasing the answers, the written answers to the questions from robert mueller. will congress, will you seek to get those answers? >> yeah, look, think we have a responsibility to make sure the truth comes out in its entirety. and to get not only the mueller
4:34 am
report, but all the supporting materials that -- that it relied upon. the american people paid for this investigation, it's about their democracy, they have a right to know the truth and see all the zblefds davevidence. >> david, thank you so much for being with us. >> my pleasure. what is president trump's mindset this morning after robert mueller said there was no collusion? a former insider tells us what people are saying inside the white house today. they're our parents...
4:35 am
neighbors... loved ones. living with diseases like cancer, epilepsy, mental health conditions and hiv. maybe you're one of them. but new medicare rules could deny access to the latest, most effective therapies... therapies that keep them healthy. are medicare cuts that save less than one percent worth the risk to millions of patients? president trump promised to protect medicare... we need him to keep his word.
4:36 am
you'when you barely the clip a passing car. minor accident -no big deal, right? wrong. your insurance company is gonna raise your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen. maybe you should take that pen and use it to sign up with a different insurance company. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
4:37 am
4:38 am
president trump sounded angry moments after the attorney general released his summary of the mueller report. >> it was a complete and total exoneration. it's a shame that our country had to go through this. to be honest, it's a shame that your president has had to go through this. this was an illegal takedown that failed. and hopefully somebody's going to be looking at the other side. >> all right. joining us now is cliff sims. he was the director of white
4:39 am
house message strategy and author of the team of vipers, my 500 extra order days in the trump white house. good morning, cliff. >> good morning. thanks for having me. >> i know you've had an opportunity to speak to some of your former colleagues over the past 24 hours. what are they saying? >> the mood is exuberant, relief, feeling vindicated for those of us who worked in the campaign and then the white house there was always this cloud, there was even you're going out and people find out you work for trump or you wear a trump jacket and people start shouting things at you and saying you're a traitor and your president's a traitor and all these different kinds of things. working there is a stuff environment and then you add that on top of it, you don't realize until you leave which i have the benefit of having left and having hindsight on this, just how stressful that was. to see this come out that there's no evidence of collusion really feeling vindicated in that. so it's a good day for america, frankly, but also a good day for a lot of us who work for the president.
4:40 am
>> some of the reportings that the president himself was relieved. i think it's interesting because even if you are certain of your innocence, you never know what the prosecutors are going to find. and so i can imagine if the white house, correct me if i'm wrong, that while people were confident, i assume, in the president claiming that he -- that there was no connection, you couldn't be sure. >> well, sure. and i think that was where he was coming from. if you're him in this situation and ever since the day you got elected basically people have been saying that you were in cahoots with a foreign power to get there, of course there's frustration and anger and questions about what about some random low-level staffer? you know, the george papadopouloss of the world and what happened there? it's strus frustrati it's frustrations that boil over and that's why what the president has said publicly matches privately what he's said and he's always been angry about
4:41 am
this. that's why you see him after the news comes out saying we need to see, you know, what was the genesis of this? we know the dossier and some of the other things that happened. but i think that frustration boiling over and saying the people who put me through this for the last two years, they deserve to have a little bit of a look under the hood and see what their real intentions were behind that. >> but just to be clear, robert mueller was appointed because president trump fired james comey. so who put him through it? >> well, i think that the whole investigation proceeding that moment is what we're talking about. what was the genesis of this? what was the reasoning behind this? i've kind of been a news observe be e observe on this and i've heard them say that there's all this evidence of collusion and robert mueller who two days ago they had robert mueller superhero action figures saying that he's a hero and now they're saying, well, we don't know about this.
4:42 am
we're going to have to see the whole thing and they can't take the guy's word for it. i think there's a lot of hypocrisy in this whole thing. i'm not afraid to criticize the president where it's justified. but if you're going shoot straight there are say moment where the president deserves to feel vind gated and frustrated that he's been put through this and based on the mueller report, completely unjustified. >> when the president feels frustrated, as i think we heard in him talking to the reporters that we just played, what does he do? what does he mean when he says i think somebody should look into the other side. what's he going to do next? >> i think what we've seen to this point is the president normally vents about these things. he doesn't take a lot of proactive kind of action in terms of his abilities of the froze direct this, that, or the other. it's more like somebody needs to look into that and he normally is looking into the department of justice saying somebody needs to look into this. and i think if you're him,
4:43 am
there's some justifiable pr frustration where you've said there's all thefds of collusion and now the underlying premise of all of this it doesn't exist nin . and so i think he's saying is somebody going to look at the way i've been treated the last two years. >> i guess the bottom line is will he be looking for political payback? yes, he's frustrated but is he going to be looking for political payback and who's going to pay that found of flesh? >> the people i've talked to over the last 24 hours talk about what this means for 2020 and where we go from here. and think you are going to see him use this as a political bludgeon. and a lot of democratic -- after the news came out, beto o'rourke came out minutes after the report came out and says i still think there was collusion. it's almost like conspiracy theory now that has hijacked the
4:44 am
political party. i think the main thing is using this in the election in 2020 in the campaign to remind people, this is their whole premise for beating me because the economy arizona great, i defeated isis, go down the list of accomplishments. they said there was collusion and they said the russians put me in office not you. that's what you can hear going forward to 2020. >> thanks for the insight and how people inside the white house are feeling today. >> thank you. >> john. a rocket fired from gaza hit home near tel aviv. the prime minister of veil is taking immediate action. we have a live fort worth israel next. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself.
4:45 am
this isn't just this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving
4:46 am
simple. easy. awesome. stay connected with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. this is a very difficult job. failure is not an option.a. more than half of employees across the country bring financial stress to work. if you're stressed out financially at home, you're going to be too worried to be able to do a good job. forward to 2020. israel next. that keep them satisfied. it is the people that is really the only asset that you have. put your employees on a path to financial wellness with prudential. bring your challenges.
4:47 am
it is time for name business now. recession fears return to wall street overshadowing the post mueller bounce that many had expect. chief business correspondent kristine romans joins us now with more. >> hi there, guys. there's a recession signal flashing in the bond market that has stock investors nervous. worst day friday since early january amid fears of the recession. the dow dropped 460 points. s&p closed down almost 2%. the nasdaq dropped 2.5%. the worry emanate from the bond market. yield or three year treasuries rose for the first time over ten-year since seven. it's typically halloween seen as a sign that long term is fading. it's a predictor of u.s. recession in decades. it spooked investors for a week. there is risk with the dow' more
4:48 am
than 9%, the s&p up 12%, nasdaq almost 15%. you have the trade wars and a resolution not certain yet. the treasury secretary, bob lig highs lighthizer goes for trade talks. israel is blaming hamas for a rocket strike on a house just north of tel aviv that injured seven people. prime minister benninetanyahu i talking there. >> reporter: first light when a rocket was fired that land on the roof of this home behind me
4:49 am
it sent shrapnel into cars behind me and damaging other homes in the area. according to emergency responders, seven people were injured, two women were moderately injured as well as two young toddlers injured by shrapnel. benjamin netanyahu is in washington. he has said he will meet with president donald trump and then he will return to israel. he's had consultation with the heads of security here and he says israel will respond forcefully to this rocket fired from gaza so he's on his way back shortly. in terms of what israel has done, both crossings into gaza has been closed, the fishing around gaza has been limit and tlat point we await the response. the strength of the rocket, this is the farthest a rocket has been fired from gaza since the end of the 2014 war. and the timing. first light is not when they are fired. they normally come in the middle of the night. that raise the question of who fired this and why. the stay was hamas inside of
4:50 am
gaza but we have not heard a statement from hamas yet. we're waiting to see israel's response. it will approach in the next few do republican lawmakers still want to see the full mueller report? 420-0 the house voted to release the full report. do they still want it public? we'll ask a republican member of congress, next. ♪ ♪
4:51 am
our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest.
4:52 am
(danny)'s voice) of course you don'te because you didn't!? your job isn't doing hard work... ...it's making them do hard work... ...and getting paid for it. (vo) snap and sort your expenses to save over $4,600 at tax time. quickbooks. backing you. president trump and his allies say he's been completely exonerated after the special counsel investigation found no conspiracy or coordination between his campaign and russia. the attorney general's decision
4:53 am
on obstruction of justice or statement on obstruction of justice is under scrutiny this morning. joining me is republican congressman michael walls from florida. always a pleasure to have you on "new day." you were 1 of 420 members of the house of representatives that voted to release the full mueller report. >> yeah. >> this monday morning, do you still feel the full report should be made public? >> sure, absolutely. and i think attorney general barr made it clear in his report that he's working to make it public. that, number one, he's working through grand jury rules and number two, through national security concerns to make it public. i voted unanimously with every other member to make it public, and i think that's something we should do. john, can we just take a step back for a moment. i'm a combat veteran. i've served all over the world in some pretty difficult locations. and i think this is really a win for democracy. there was so much hand wringing and breathless reporting on a
4:54 am
dictatorship and would, you know, would rule of law prevail. i think it has prevailed. the american system has prevailed. we can't take for granted this doesn't happen all over the world where a head of state is hit with very, very serious allegations, bordering on treason, frankly, and we have another part of our government do a full investigation, but now we have to accept the findings of those investigations. at the end of the day, as americans, we need to take a step back, and this is a big win for our democracy. >> given the democratic result as you say here, and given the thoroughness of the mueller investigation, was it correct for the president over the last 20 months to personally attack robert mueller. >> i have always said let's let the investigation play out. that applies on both sides. how many people up until yesterday are still calling for impeachment, are still saying there's collusion, are pounding the table that it absolutely
4:55 am
happened. and yet now, we have a report that everyone put so much faith into and now you're watching people pivot away from it and start looking towards other things. mind you, to your point, before the full report is even made public. they are already kind of dismissing it. to the second point, it's worth noting how thorough this investigation was. i didn't even fully realize it. 19 attorneys over 40 fbi agents, analysts, accountants, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 witnesses, 13 countries that we reached out to, and, of course, over two years of investigations. so at some point, enough is enough. we have to accept the findings, and i think as a country, we need to move on. >> some of the findings in here, and these are among the findings probably most important to you given your service record here is william barr the attorney general lays out how robert
4:56 am
mueller found that the russians tried to attack our electoral process on two different fronts. one with misinformation and two by hacking into the democrats. and that shouldn't be overshadowed in whatever political debate there is over whether there was collusion or not. >> sos there two key pieces there from a national security perspective. one, look, our democracy and the heart of our democracy, our electoral system is absolutely under assault. not just by the russians but by other state actors such as the chinese as well. and they are doing it in two ways. one, a misinformation campaign where through social media and other mechanisms on the one hand, they are supporting a trump rally. on the other hand, supporting a black lives matter rally and just trying to foment discord in our democracy. then a government-funded, government-directed hacking campaign to expose misleading and expose, you know, obviously embarrassing information on the
4:57 am
path -- on the part of the different candidates. that absolutely has to be stopped. i call on the trump administration to call it out. i will say, and i will give credit. i have been personally briefed, i'm on the intelligence subcommittee of the armed forces committee. i've been personally briefed on what the intelligence community and the defense department did in 2018 and is continuing to do heading into 2020. they deserve a lot of credit. we did not have the same issues in '18, and i think we're going to be in good shape going into 2020, but we're absolutely under attack. >> there always seems to be a discrepancy between the intelligence community attitude about the russian attacks on the u.s. electoral system and the president's public proannouncements on it because they appear very different in tone and substance, wouldn't you agree? >> i'm hoping once -- now that we've moved beyond this investigation and he is not being personally accused of colluding with a hostile foreign power, which i think clearly there was no collusion, and at some point we need to accept
4:58 am
that and move on, i'm hoping that tone and rhetoric will change. but i also saw many members of the democrat party yesterday on your show saying nothing is -- on cnn saying nothing is being done about the attacks on our democracy and that's just untrue. i don't think they're fully informed. a lot is being done and very successfully. i think your viewers need to understand and appreciate that. >> i have two last questions for you. number one, the four-country caucus that you were a part of here. i'm very interested in any kind of bipartisan effort here. you were gathering with other veterans to try to focus on issues that every member can agree on. >> yeah, so, look, where do we go, going forward here? and i think everyone needs to decide. i think the democrats need to decide. are they going to spend the next few years tearing down this president or are we going to spend it governing. i co-founded along with two democrats and another republican a caucus called four-country. we're about mission. we're about country.
4:59 am
we're all combat veterans. i can tell you the enemies' bullets could care less about political party, about race, religion, creed. they only care if you're an american or not. that's the ethos we're bringing. we still disagree on a lot of issues but how do we get to a point where we can have a beer at night, find common ground and how to move the country forward. that's what this caucus is all about and what i ran on and what i'm ball. that's what every veteran and every member should be about. we put our lives on the line for this country from day one and we should be about for country. >> if we can't agree on beer, congressman, what can we agree on? congressman michael waltz, thanks so much. white house press secretary sarah sanders joins us in just minutes. "new day" continues right now. good morning and welcome to your "new day," monday, march 25th, 8:00 in the east, and a very different day for the
5:00 am
country and for this white house. william barr has presented to the american people his analysis of what robert mueller found in his nearly two-year investigation. any quotes from the report that the robert mueller team found no evidence that anyone in the trump campaign or connected to the trump campaign coordinated with or conspired with the russians. now the mueller report specifically and explicitly did not exonerate him on the issue of obstruction. mueller chose not to tell us whether he thought the president committed criminal obstruction though he laid out evidence we're told on both sides. the attorney general william barr tells us he did not think the president obstructed justice. >> the white house and president trump's allies may be declaring victory, but the political fight may be just beginning. democrats vow to subpoena the full mueller report. they demand to see the evidence that the mueller team gathered. and just moments ago

30 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on