tv CNN Newsroom with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto CNN March 25, 2019 6:00am-7:00am PDT
pg&e wants you to plan ahead by mapping out escape routes and preparing a go kit, in case you need to get out quickly. for more information on how to be prepared and keep your family safe, visit pge.com/safety. a very good monday morning to you. it's a big one. i'm jim sciutto in new york. poppy has the week off. this is a significant moment, perhaps a turning point for the presidency and for our country on the central question that has consumed our legal system and politics for more than two years now. whether a u.s. president and his advisers conspired with a foreign power to interfere in the 2016 election. the special counsel has delivered a clear answer -- no.
the second question, however, whether the president illegally interfered with the special counsel's investigation, robert mueller was far less clear. in fact, mr. mueller wrote explicitly his report does not exonerate the president. he left that decision to the attorney general who decided in just two days that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. that decision is already sparking hard questions while president trump, however, is going on the attack threatening his critics. >> this was an illegal takedown that failed and hopefully somebody is going to be looking at the other side. >> so what now? will the president and his administration push for a new investigation, perhaps even a new special counsel to investigate the investigators? will the president feel emboldened to pardon those in his administration, including michael flynn who have pleaded guilty to federal crimes. conversely, will democrats feel
chastened and pull back on this and other probes of mr. trump? finally, will the country be more or less divided by the conclusions of robert mueller, a man respected on both sides of the political divide? we're going to tackle all of these questions and controversies with our very deep bench of correspondents beginning this hour with cnn's senior justice correspondent evan perez. so evan, a clear answer on the collusion question. a not so clear answer in fact, a divided one perhaps on the question of obstruction of justice. >> that's right, jim. i think what this opens is perhaps a new chapter in this entire saga. now, of course, members of congress want to know why robert mueller and his team were not able to reach a conclusion on the question of obstruction. is it because the president never sat down for an interview with the investigators which is unusual, obviously, despite their multiple requests. so what went on behind the scenes? obviously, bill barr in his letter sort of opens up those
questions and leaves them unanswered. one part of the letter from him -- from bill barr says the following. the special counsel's decision to describe the facts of the obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the attorney general to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. and that's an important part because it means that bill barr, who has been on the job just a few weeks, and rod rosenstein who has been underseeing this investigation since the beginnibegin ing made the final decision here and they decided there weren't enough facts to be able to reach -- to be able to say that the president had intentionally tried to obstruct the investigation. and one of the things they mentioned that bill barr mentions in his letter is the fact that a lot of the obstructive behavior, the behavior we all saw wither own eyes happened in public and had been reported publicly by the press. so it appears that that weighed
a lot into his final decision to say the president is cleared on the issue of obstruction but, obviously, this is going to be a whole new saga here with members of congress demanding to see the underlying information. and this is an exhaustive investigation. this was an investigation that went on 22 months. if you look real quick at the number of lawyers, 19 lawyers, 40 fbi agents, 230 orders for communication records. 2,800 subpoenas. it is a very exhaustive investigation that took 22 months. and i think people have to be satisfied that robert mueller did everything he could to reach the conclusion. the big question of whether or not there was any conclusion and on that he found that there was none or they were not able to establish that any americans, anybody inside the trump campaign, anybody associated with the president, knowingly conspired with the russian government to interfere in the 2016 election. that's the big takeaway for the president and where he'll finally be able to say, see, i
was telling you, no collusion. >> on this question of obstruction of justice, however, do we quo becauknow, because, o mueller looked at this for two years. barr and rosenstein looked tat f at it for two days. do we know it he pushed them in either direction to subpoena the president? did he try to force a decision one way or do we think he was on the middle as they were? >> we don't know exactly whether he was in the middle or whether this was something -- again, this is why i think these are important questions for members of congress to try to get to the bottom of. i think you can expect that robert mueller and rod rosenstein and bill barr will be called to testify in congress to sort of explain what happened behind the scenes. we do know that, you know, on the big question of whether or not the president would sit down for an interview that robert mueller and his team pondered and deliberated with rod rosenstein and his team whether or not there was enough to
subpoena the president, to force him to come down and provide an interview, which is -- would have been normal in this circumstance. and would have perhaps maybe helped answer the question of what was his intent when he did some of the things we all saw, right? and so the question is, what were those deliberations like? was robert mueller sort of forced into a corner in we don't know. we do know that certainly rod rosenstein was read in on this investigation from the beginning. bill barr was probably given some briefings before this weekend, before the report was delivered. so they've had some time to think about this. of course, the president's lawyers, jim, are very happy with the result. jay sekulow has been making the rounds this morning on the morning tv shows, and here's what he had to say. >> here the decision was made by the office of legal counsel and the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein and ultmimately the
attorney general of the united states that there was no basis upon which an obstruction of justice charge could be met, and that is where the president can easily say that he was vindicated on both obstruction and collusion. >> and, of course, the answer is not quite that simple. look, i think jay sekulow is doing a very good job and his legal team have done an amazing job. they essentially threw themselves in front of the bus to save this president, sometimes from his own behavior, from his own actions that we all saw in public. and so i think you can bet that members of congress have a lot of questions that will have to be answered. >> will they be answered? evan perez, thank you. we now have barr's summary. will we see robert mueller's full report? kara skinell joins me from washington with more. and that's an important distinction. this is bill barr, the president's appointee as attorney general, distillation of a many hundred pages long special counsel's report on what timeline and what are the chances that the congress and we the public see a fuller report?
>> jim, that's right. congress -- we've heard a lot of calls over the past 24 hours for the full and complete release of this report. especially it goes to the questions of obstruction that evan was just laying out. now bill barr said that he would consult robert mueller, the special counsel on this process of making the report ready for publication. he did say in this letter to the hill that he wanted to make as much of the report available to the public as possible. and already under way at doj behind the scenes is a small team going through robert mueller's report scrubbing it for any information about ongoing investigations that robert mueller's team has referred out to other u.s. attorneys offices. and they're also looking to scrub it for any possible grand jury material. that means any material that they learned through the process of bringing witnesses before the grand jury. it is illegal to make grand jury material public so that's a component here they'll be scrubbing. there are still so many questions. we don't know how long robert
mueller's report is. we don't know how much of the material in it would fall under those two categories. do we see a report that is fulsome and one we can really get our arms around what robert mueller investigation determined and what conclusions he came to, or do we end up in a situation where a lot of this report is redacted? but we do know that the hill is going to press for this. they want the full and complete release of the report. and as evan said, they're going to call up all these key players in this to capitol hill to answer questions. jim? >> let me ask you this as well. and if you could do it in short form because i think folks at home have trouble following this, but this is the mueller investigation. russian interference in the election. there were several other investigations of this president, in short form, what are they and where do they stand now? >> that's right, jim. robert mueller had spun off that campaign finance investigation that involved michael cohen. that's handled by the u.s. attorney's office in manhattan. that investigation is still ongoing. we even saw this last week in
the -- some court filings revealed and redacted. still 20 pages redacted because of that ongoing investigation. there's also that u.s. attorney's office is following the leads that michael cohen has laid out about possible bank fraud, possible insurance fraud. new york's top insurance regulator has subpoenaed donald trump's experience broker relating to the revelations that michael cohen had made. we have the new york attorney general also investigating the trump foundation and the u.s. attorney's office in manhattan is investigating the trump inaugural committee. so there's a lot of ongoing investigations that continue. it remains to be seen how close they will get to the president, but the trump organization is still very much under the spotlight. jim? >> and the question is, what is the political patience for those investigations following this? kara skinnell, thanks. the president, not surprisingly, taking a victory lap in the last 24 hours. joe johns joining us with reaction from the white house. joe, i wonder, speaking to the sources you have inside the
building behind you there, do you foresee a president trump emboldened now by this result politically in terms of attacking his enemies, in terms of pursuing his political agend nad with the 2020 campaign? >> i'm going to tell you there's a sense of righteous indignation here at the white house about this investigation. it is also interesting, as they try to spin the investigation, and the collusion findings as opposed to the obstruction findings. but very clear the president is tweeting and has said as much that for him, this is a complete and total exoneration. but let's listen a little bit to what sarah sanders said this morning, and that will give you an idea of the message that's coming out of the white house today. >> it's also a sad reminder of the lack of accountability that started to seep into the media
and into democrats that have gone out for the left two years -- actually over two years, and accused the president, the united states president of being an agent of a foreign government. take a second and let that sink in. take a minute and realize how outrageous and how serious and how malicious an accusation like that is. they claim to have actual evidence. they said it was true. and they lied. >> now as evan and others have pointed out in the reporting this morning, it does appear that at least according to the attorney general the special counsel robert mueller did kind of punt when it came to the issue of obstruction of justice. and i did ask kellyanne conway, the presidential counselor about that this morning. so they're still working out that message but the one part of the message that's coming through again and again is that the president's lawyers, as well as his public relations people
are saying it's certainly true that if there is no underlying crime, there can be no obstruction. the question, of course, is, what is really in the mueller report and how much of that we're going to find out about? there's also a concern here as our jim acosta has reported that the president could overreach because we have the southern district of new york investigation, as well as everything that's going on on capitol hill. so this is just not over yet. back to you. >> but a big step, no question, joe, at the white house. thank you. republicans mostly happy with barr's summary while democrats demanding more access to the full report. for more on the latest reactions from capitol hill, let's speak to cnn congressional correspondent sunlen serfaty. so i wonder what happens next on the hill because democrats face something of a political dilemma here. do they have the capital and the patience, even among their supporters to make this all about investigations? but on the other hand, they have legitimate questions they want
answered, including how did the special counsel reach -- what evidence did he find because he did find some evidence of obstruction of justice. what happens from here? are there hearings? subpoenas? where does this go? >> well, that's a good question, jim. and certainly we can read some of the tea leaves that top democrats are sending us so far. as you noted, it's a fine line that democrats have to walk between using their oversight muscle and taking that very seriously on capitol hill, but also not deviating too far from their own legislative priorities. but at least from the top committee heads what we are hearing is that they are going to push very aggressively in this next stage of the battle, and that, of course, is the battle over the information. we have heard top democrats responding to bill barr's report calling it an insufficient interpretation. some top democrats saying the american people deserve the mueller report, not just the barr report. the majority leader -- minority leader chuck schumer and nancy pelosi saying it raises more
questions than it does answers. dianne feinstein staying it's inadquiet and demonstrates why congress needs the full report. this is the full report we've seen from democrats on capitol hill. the fact that congress needs to get its hands not only on the full mueller report but also on the underlying evidence. they say that is so essential. they need to see what mueller had in his own probe. and we have heard from the top democrat on the house judiciary committee, jerry nadler. he said it's very likely they could subpoena for the mueller report. also calls for bill barr and robert mueller to come up here on capitol hill to testify. and notably democrats, and i think we'll see this a lot going forward, zeroing in on the fact that mueller didn't exonerate trump over obstruction of justice. that will play and intensify their own investigations that are going on right now on capitol hill. jim? >> and all, as we get very close to the 2020 election as well. sunlen serfaty, thanks very much. we're staying on top of all
the evolving headlines on the mueller report. what will democrats do next? we'll ask one of those democrats right after this. -welcome to our complete freedom plan. -it's all possible with a cfp professional. ♪ -find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org. thanks to priceline working with top airlines to turn their unsold seats into amazing deals, family reunion attendance is up. we're all related! yeah, i see it. and because priceline offers great deals by comparing thousands of prices in real time, sports fans are seeing more away games. various: yeah-h-h! is that safe? oh, y... ahh! not at all. no, ma'am. nope. and more people than ever are enjoying romantic getaways. (romantic music) that's gross priceline. every trip is a big deal. you'when you barely the clip a passing car. that's gross 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. ♪ the big drug companies don't see they see us as profits. we're paying the highest prescription drug prices
in the world so they can make billions? americans shouldn't have to choose between buying medication and buying food for our families. it's time for someone to look out for us. congress, stop the greed. cut drug prices now. leave no man behind. or child. or other child. or their new friend. or your giant nephews and their giant dad. or a horse. or a horse's brother, for that matter. the room for eight, 9,000 lb towing ford expedition.
attorney general william barr says the special counsel found no evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and russia. president trump says he wants investigators to target those who started the russia probe in the first place. let's discuss more with robert ray. robert, if i could begin with you. you have direct experience in an independent or special counsel investigation here. let's get to the remaining question. the obstruction of justice question which based on barr's reading of the report, mueller said he found evidence on both sides but let barr make the decision as to whether there was sufficient evidence to prosecute for obstruction of justice. did he do the right thing? >> i think so because i think it was important for the country and in the public's interest for
the department to speak with one voice on that issue. and i think because of the fact that investigating a president and making a prosecutorial judgment about presidential conduct in the obstruction of justice statutes by bob mueller's own admission creates some difficult questions both of law and of fact that ultimately that's one where the attorney general has to speak. >> okay. susan hennessy, is it an issue in terms of confidence in the decision that this is an attorney general who, friprior his appointment by this president, wrote publicly that he believed an obstruction of justice claim against the president were fatally conceived? >> i think bill barr is entitled to the presumption of good faith. that said it's not clear from the summary that that is what robert mueller intended. bill barr's summary said robert mueller declined to make a traditional prosecutorial
judgment and laid out the evidence and created a substantial record and offered the legal arguments on both sides. now that sounds a lot like, for example, jaworski's road map in congress in watergate. really indicating that perhaps the special counsel didn't intend for bill barr to make this decision but intended to place this decision before congress. so essentially i think what may have happened is that after mueller created a report intending for congress to render its judgments, in part because the president couldn't be -- can't be indicted in part because of the very difficult article 2 questions, the attorney general then essentially inserted his own judgment. now that's not necessarily inappropriate for him to do so, but it's also not conclusive on the question. there's no indication that that's what robert mueller intended to do either. >> that's an interesting interpretation. i wonder if you disagree -- >> i don't really disagree with that. that's about right. i guess the only point that i would add to it, though is that understand that we're in a different environment than an independent counsel environment.
this is a special counsel who is derived from the authority of the attorney general and acts within the department of justice pursuant to department of justice -- >> more restrictive than the regulations ken starr operated under. >> under the statute which has since lapsed which we're not operating under any longer and immediately upon the expiration of that staatute, then attorney general janert reno put these regulations into effect. this is the first occasion we've had to use them. it's been there for 20 years. now we're using them. and i think on a prosecutorial judgment, it needed to be made. congress ultimately will have the question that house democrats have to decide whether impeachment proceedings are appropriate but a prosecutorial judgment was made and it was important for the country to have the benefit of that judgment and not just simply, well, a sitting president can't be indicted and we'll not reach that question. >> you agree with susan that mueller's intention and again that's trying to get inside his head, but based on the reading of the report that mueller's
intention was to leave the obstruction of justice question to congress as opposes to bill barr? >> i think it's ambiguous. someone said on one of the interviews this morning ultimately that may be for robert mueller to disclose when and if he testified before the congress or for bill barr to be able to disclose to congress how exactly that worked. >> susan, one thing that barr nets and robert noted this before we got on the air here is that the fact that the special counsel did not find evidence f collusion is relevant to the obstruction question because it gets to the point, if there was no underlying crime, that is conspiring with a foreign power to interfere in the election, therefore, you can't establish intent legally to charge with corruption. is that fair? is that a fair judgment in your view? >> so it's not -- they aren't -- i think it's a little overstatement, i guess i would say. it's not that it's entirely irrelevant but it's not dispositive on the issue.
barr's letter even indicates that. you can obstruct an investigation into something that turns out ultimately not to be a crime. people go to jail for that all the time. certainly we don't know -- the president of the united states would not have been aware of what every single member of his campaign, other individuals associated with him might have done. and so the question here, or the idea that because he himself wasn't implicated in this in any way, that means he couldn't have then later obstructed. it's factually false. it's sort of a legal matter. i think it does go to the question of sort of motivation and judgment. that said, it is something that echoes strongly that original memo that attorney general bill barr wrote prior to becoming the attorney general. it's a strong indication that he is essentially taking the legal reasoning that he had formed prior to seeing any of the underlying evidence and applying it to this set of facts. >> final question because the other public position that bill barr has, this goes back to the george h.w. bush administration, where barr recommended then
president bush pardon the folks who were charged out of the iran/contra scandal. and i wonder if you see that as a possible next step here, that -- >> i don't know about that. i do think that we may see some effort by the president to declassify certain information so that an investigation presumably from the senate judiciary committee led by lindsey graham can be pursued regarding what was going on within the obama justice department that led ultimately to using the steele dossier in order to obtain a warrant from the fisa court. now i understand, although don't know, that the president was intending on taking that course and was advised by the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein that if he did that prior to the conclusion of the mueller investigation, that would be perceived or could be perceived as an effort to obstruct justice. now that gives the president a little more latitude to declassify what otherwise he would not have been politically able to do. >> understood.
of course, republicans still control that committee. thanks for v s very much, roberd susan hennessy. william barr says it's case closed on collusion. what's the strategy moving forward for the democrats and their many investigations. just moments from the opening bell on wall street. investors are watching for signs a recession could be on the horizon. plus worries over slowing global economic growth. we'll be right back. ♪ you should be mad they gave this guy a promotion. you should be mad at forced camaraderie. and you should be mad at tech that makes things worse. but you're not mad, because you have e*trade,
who's tech makes life easier by automatically adding technical patterns on charts and helping you understand what they mean. don't get mad. get e*trade's simplified technical analysis. we want your sandwich to arrive freaky fresh®, so we only deliver within 5 minutes of our stores. and not... farther. ...he's new. order at jimmyjohns.com. because sandwich. this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. 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. -jamie, this is your house?
-i know, it's not much, but it's home. right, kids? -kids? -papa, papa! -[ laughs ] -you didn't tell me your friends were coming. -oh, yeah. -this one is tiny like a child. -yeah, she is. oh, but seriously, it's good to be surrounded by what matters most -- a home and auto bundle from progressive. -oh, sweetie, please, play for us. -oh, no, i couldn't. -please. -okay. [ singing in spanish ] -please. -okay. ♪ behr presents: tough as walls. that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. behr ultra, a top-rated interior and exterior paint. paint, prime, protect - all in one. now that's some great paint! find it exclusively at the home depot.
out the risk in that strategy because of the credibility hit they are already taking after months of statements like this one. >> you can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence. >> it's clear the campaign colluded. there's a lot of evidence of that. the question is was the president involved? did he know about it? >> clear evidence? joining us to speak about this, how democrats move forward. congressman ro khana. thanks for taking the time this morning. >> thanks for having me on. >> so first big picture here. the special counsel cleared the president and his advisers on what was the most central question and that is whether he or members of his team conspired with a foreign power to interfere in the 2016 election. a clear answer, no. i'm curious, do you believe that democrats unfairly held this allegation over his head for two years without sufficient evidence to back it up? >> jim, i don't.
there are two reasons. first the mueller report concludes unambiguously that the russians tried to interfere in our election that they wanted donald trump to win. it was very fair for the american people to have an investigation to look into that. second -- >> but not with the president's help. he's very clear about the russians interfering without the president's or his advisers' help. >> that's true. there was not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the president conspired with the russians, and i take mueller's report at face value. i haven't read it, but if that's the conclusion, i think we have to rely and trust on mueller's judgment. but it's very important that mueller did not exonerate the president on obstruction of justice. in fact, after two years of investigation, mueller said he couldn't make a determination, and it's highly concerning that what mueller couldn't do after two years, the attorney general thinks he can do after two days. so -- >> i want to get -- i do want to get to the obstruction point
because there are two important findings. on the question of collusion. just hours after barr's summary came out, the chairman of the house intelligence committee who you know well, adam schiff, he said that he has seen, quote, significant evidence of collusion. what is that significant evidence? >> well, i can't speak for chairman schiff. what i can say is that there's a different standard for mueller which is to look beyond a reasonable doubt and what constitutes a crime versus whether there were any efforts behind the trump administration or the -- i mean the trump campaign to work with the russians. but i report haven't seen that evidence. i'm just going to go on the mueller report. i'm more focused on the russian interference and i'll take mueller's conclusions at face value. i have tremendous respect for his integrity. >> but if such a senior member of your party has said that and you saw jerry nadler make a similar comment, again, just within the last 24 hours,
shouldn't the democratic leadership release such evidence so that folks know what lead them to make such public allegations against the president? >> jim, i think that's why we're calling for the release of the mueller report. if the mueller report has evidence that there were certain ties with russia, then it will come out. and if not, the mueller report is going to be definitive. so that's exactly the reason why we need the mueller report and the documentation released so that the public can make a determination. >> okay. on the obstruction issue, you're right, and as we've reported for the last half hour, the mueller team, the mueller report was less definitive on obstruction. saying it found evidence on both sides, left that decision to bill barr. i'm curious if you believe that was the right decision. should it not be congress' decision and there is an interpretation that perhaps that's what robert mueller intended. should it be congress' decision rather than bill barr's as to whether there's obstruction?
>> the only person who thinks it's bill barr's decision is bill barr. my understanding is that robert mueller presented both sides and the evidence on both sides. he had the humility not to want to make a determination on that, given the stakes for the country. and my sense is he intended for congress to debate that and congress to make that judgment. it's our constitutional responsibility. so the person who i think is in the wrong here is bill barr who gave himself the authority to make a determination when it seems that when mueller wants us to do is have that debate in congress. >> okay. let me ask you now, let's set aside the law for a moment and talk pragmatism and politics here. one thing we've noted at this network is that democratic candidates on the campaign trail for 2020, they're not getting asked a lot about -- or at all at times about the russia investigation. and cnn's most recent polling on voters' priorities, we'll put these numbers up on the screen but i'll read them to you since
you can't see them, is the russia investigation ranks at the bottom, well below the economy, health care, corruption, gun policy, immigration, president trump himself, trade policy and taxes. i should note this came just before the most recent midterm elections. but indicative. i wonder from your perspective, do you think it would be smart for democrats to move on from the russia investigation and focus on legislative priorities now? >> well, jim, we are focused on lifting priorities. and i completely agree. what people care about the most. what people care in my district is how are they going to get good-paying jobs? how are they going to get health care? what we are doing with gun violence, especially in light of these awful suicides that we're hearing about of the parkland kids. what are we doing about the environment? this is what matters to people on a day-to-day basis. and the democrats have an agenda on this. this doesn't mean we stop doing our constitutional duty of oversight. we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and i think people expect that.
>> do people want you to do the chewing gum part of this? it just strikes me the polling is so clear here. there's exhaustion. i'm sure you've talked to folks. i speak to folks out in the fields, in restaurants, in airports who say, listen, enough already. i'm curious if you're hearing the same thing and concerned that democrats are going to overplay investigations and lose voters as a result. >> i'm not because nancy pelosi has been so careful and deliberate about this. she said there will never be a rush to removing the president through impeachment. what she has said is we need a legislative agenda but that we need to look into things such as, are there abuses of office or financial fraud which the southern district of new york is looking into. did people in the administration benefit because of policy and what are their ties overseas? that's natural oversight. it was done in the obama administration. it was done in the clinton administration. that's the job of congress. and i think the american people understand that it's why we have a separation of government.
>> congressmanro khanna, good to have you on this morning. >> thanks for having me on. in president trump says he's exonerated after the mueller report found no collusion. legally, he's in the clear, but is he still in jeopardy politically? (mom vo) we fit a lot of life into our subaru forester. (dad) it's good to be back. (mom) it sure is. (mom vo) over the years, we trusted it to carry and protect the things that were most important to us. we always knew we had a lot of life ahead of us. (mom) remember this? (mom vo) that's why we chose a car that we knew would be there for us through it all. (male vo) welcome to the all-new 2019 subaru forester. the longest-lasting, most trusted forester ever.
this just in to cnn. the supreme court declined to take up a mystery grand jury case related to the mueller investigation. let's go live to cnn's ariane. not taking it up means it proceeds, right? >> it proceeds at a lower court level. the supreme court is not going to hear this case. it was a mystery company, and we know at one point it was related to the mueller investigation.
and we know that federal prosecutors had began looking at it which suggests perhaps the mueller team referred this to these federal prosecutors but again, this case, jim, has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning. we got court papers that were blacked out. at one point we didn't even know the identity of some of the lawyers. but what we do know is that last year, a federal grand jury subpoenaed this company that's foreign owned. the company said it would not comply. it lost in the lower courts. it asked the supreme court to take it up. the supreme court said today that it would not. so that, for the company, is the end of the line as far as the courts go. >> arinae de vogue, thanks for staying on top of it. in the mueller report is raising more questions than it answers, especially given that mueller stopped short of exonerating the president of obstruction of
justice. let's speak to the author of "the threat matrix." garrett, great to have you on. we've been talking about this investigation for some time and you've been very deep into it. to be clear here, the special counsel was definitive on the issue at least of russian collusion. collusion with russia, conspiracy, whatever word you want to use. by any determination, that is a relief and a win for this president, is it not? >> well, jim, i also think, by the way, it's a win for the country. you know, i think we sort of look at this too closely sometimes in political terms only. but the fact that the president of the united states did not collude with our leading traditional adversary to -- in the midst of the 2016 president election by all measures is good for the united states as a whole. and i think that that's one of the things we have to mark and may be too strong of a word to say celebrate since that should never be the assumption. but the fact that both -- we saw
that there is no provable collusion here, and that mueller was allowed to finish out his investigation on his own terms is also, i think, important to mark at this point. maybe those two things are setting the bar too low but it's important to mark that. >> for sure. for the rule of law, there was great concern throughout that the mueller investigation was under threat that the president might fire him, throw up other road blocks. so very fair point. second issue, of course, from the -- at least barr's summary of the special counsel's report is that mueller was not clear on whether there was obstruction of justice, saying there was evidence on both sides. i just want to share a tweet that john dean who served as counsel to the president nixon during water gate and pleaded to a crime there said the following. having to read william barr's june 2018 memo critiquing mueller's obstruction investigation and now his summary it's clear that richard nixon would not have been forced to resign his office if barr had
been attorney general. barr wants a potus above the law. is that an undue criticism there that barr, who long criticized an obstruction of justice cause against this president prior to his appointment in effect ran defense here? >> and i think the answer is we don't know until we see the report. you know, i do think it is quite notable for someone who at -- is as conservative traditionally by precedent as robert mueller, the fact that he went out of his way in the report to say that the report does not exonerate the president is probably as close as we're going to see bob mueller get to a comey-esque statement from comey's press conference in july 2016 about hillary clinton and the e-mails. mueller was sort of never going to come out and attack someone virulently for noncriminal behavior but it's worth noting
he did go out of his way to say that it didn't exonerate him. >> and it's a good point, that moment comey in 2016 where he said it doesn't meet the prosecutorial bar but then called it reckless, et cetera. mueller is no comey in this case. garrett graff, thanks very much. we know we'll continue the conversation. the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu is promising swift action after a rocket strikes a home in israel. we'll have a live report from there, next. n... come on...come on... come on... (buzzer sounds) to keep your sandwich freaky fresh®, jimmy john's only delivers within 5 minutes of the store... no! and not farther. it's nothing personal. it's because sandwich. this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. 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.
hmm. exactly. and doug. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? oh. well, we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance, because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. [ loud crash ] yeah. he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
. >> today israel is blaming hamas for a rocket strike that hit a home near tel aviv. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu announced overnight that he is cutting short his visit to washington today increasing tensions of the high stakes in israel. there have been multiple attempted attacks in recent weeks. this one hits home there injuring seven. >> reporter: you can see the damage it did to his home. seven people were injured in this rocket attack. this is the farthest a rocket has been into israel since the end of the 2014 war. prime minister benjamin netanyahu is in washington. he will cut that short. he will still meet trump and then immediately head back here. he is prime minister and defense
minister. he has promised a forceful response and a swift response and i suspect we will begin to see that later tonight. so far everything since the rocket landing has been relatively quiet but there is little response. so far israel has closed two border crossings and limited the fishing zone as well as closed areas to military zones outside of gaza perhaps in anticipation of the response and perhaps more rockets coming out as this escalates and if it escalates. >> when you look at the damage of the house it is amazing that people survived. is hamas claiming credit for the rocket strike? >> reporter: hamas is denying responsibility. hamas issuing a denial which opens the question of if not
behr presents: tough as walls. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. ♪ that's some great paint. behr ultra, a top-rated interior and exterior paint. paint, prime, protect - all in one. now that's some great paint! find it exclusively at the home depot. life isn't a straight line. things happen. and sometimes you can find yourself heading in a new direction. but at fidelity, we help you prepare for the unexpected with retirement planning and advice for what you need today and tomorrow. because when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear,
there's nothing to stop you from moving forward. a partner who makes sure every step is clear, you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. ♪ one plus one equals too little too late ♪ ♪ a sock-a-bam-boom ♪ who's in the room? ♪ love is dangerous ♪ but driving safe means you pay less ♪ ♪ switch and save ♪ yes, ma'am excuse me, miss. ♪ does this heart belong to you? ♪ ♪ would you like it anyway? [ scatting ]
it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. top of the hour now this monday morning. poppy has the week off. president trump is starting his first work week in 22 months without the cloud of a special counsel investigation hanging over his head, but while he and his aides and legal team are planning total vindication on collusion and obstruction of justice, democrats are not convinced.
job one for the house judiciary committee is to grill attorney general bill barr over his summary of the still confidential full report. democrats are questioning the conclusion reached not by mueller but by barr that the evidence developed is not sufficient to prove the president guilty of obstruction. muell mueller himself wrote that the president should not be seen as exonerated on this charge. that is key. at the least the president's critics want to see the mueller report for themselves and barr is promising to release as much is allowed. we are following all the questions and repercussions starting with our senior justice correspondent evan perez. a clear no on collusion with russia. a sort of in between answer on obstruction of justice. >> the fact that mueller punted on