tv CNN Tonight With Don Lemon CNN April 30, 2019 7:00pm-8:01pm PDT
job. now the question is, will republican senators tomorrow do their job, or will the favoritism continue? this doesn't have to be about criminality, it has to be about what is right, what is wrong and what is reasonable. and a big day for that to be held forth. we'll all be watching tomorrow. let's get right to "cnn tonight" with don lemon. >> those are all good closing arguments, and as you know, we have a busy evening this evening. the first words that came to my mind, chris, were, of all the unmitigating gall. someone who works for the american people is working on behalf of this president. talk about no collusion in russia, there appears to be collusion between the president of the united states and the attorney general. >> listen, remember the famous quote, when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. we've seen this a.g. protect
presidents he worked for twice before. >> bush -- >> why the democrats decided to believe he was going to be somehow different in this role after all he had shown, that's on them. but now he's showing who he is. what it will mean -- and again, this doesn't mean he's a felon, it doesn't mean he's a bad guy, it means he's protecting his president. that's not his job. and for mr. mueller, by all accounts, to write a letter like this, don, this is not something he does lightly, it's not something he believed because he had a nuanced disagreement, that it was a style point, or just wanted to trade notes. as phil munn said, this was a baseball bat to the head. >> if you don't take umbrage with the president of the united states misleading you, the attorney general of the united states misleading you, lying,
both of them, then what are you going to take issue with? what are you going to have a problem with? when you're supposed to be the party of the rule of law. when you have a president and the attorney general who are not fighting for the rule of law but who are carrying the water for indecent and inappropriate and possibly even unlawful behavior? what is going to upset you? what are you going to take issue with? is there anything? >> do you know when you get your answer? tomorrow. that's why we all got to head to the hot zone because republican senators are more on the spot than the a.g. tomorrow. we know he's going to be able to handle the questions, the guy is a pro. >> we'll see. >> but will the republicans ask him about spying all day? will they shortcut around this and just wait for mueller to come and have to deal with it then? if they do, they are going to m embolden democrat efforts, and i do not think that's something they need to be doing right now. >> then they will just embarrass themselves or declown themselves, as we say.
chris, you did a great job on the breaking news. i'll see you soon. this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. here's the breaking news tonight. we're learning that robert mueller did not stay silent after all about the attorney general william barr's testimony to the senate tomorrow. he did not stay silent after all, so we're going to see what happens tomorrow morning. you've got to wonder whether the timing of this news is a coincidence. tonight a source tells cnn that mueller wrote a previously unknown letter to the attorney general. that was on march 27. that was three days after the a.g. released his own four-page letter laying out what he said were the principal conclusions of the mueller reports. but listen. what mueller said about that was pretty scathing for the notoriously tight-lipped special counsel to do. guests that we have coming up on this show told us they are absolutely stunned that robert mueller took that step. we're going to hear from them. that will be in just a little
bit. but first let me read to you from the letter mueller sent. this was from the "washington post" reporting, okay? it says, quote, the summary letter that the department sent to congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of march 24 did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of this office's work and conclusions. there is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. this threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the department appointed the special couns counsel to assure full public confidence in the outcome of our investigations. let's face it. if barr's letter did not capture the context, the nature and the substance of robert mueller's work, then what is left? mueller went on to make a very specific request, that the attorney general release the introductions and the summaries his team had written.
remember, everyone asked about that? why not release the summaries that were already written? mueller did that, his team did that. wouldn't that be what they wanted people to understand about their investigation? mueller reportedly even suggested some redactions, going on to say in his letter that the process of making redactions, quote, need not delay the release of the enclosed materials. release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation. and we all know that those introductions and summaries weren't released until the report itself was in spite of rumblings of dissatisfaction from mueller's team. so the four-page barr letter, the letter that claimed to summarize mueller's principal findings, the letter that said mueller had not found that team
trump conspired with russia, the letter that said mueller had not reached a conclusion as to whether the president attempted to obstruct justice, mueller says it did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of this office's work and conclusions. here's what a source is telling cnn. it is telling us that barr called mueller after he got the special counsel's letter, saying something to the effect of, we've been friends for a long time. let's talk about this. the call described as polite, but they clearly disagreed. so more than three weeks after mueller wrote his letter to barr complaining that the a.g.'s summary did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of his work, more than three weeks later, barr stood up in front of the world to again offer his own version of the special counsel's report. here it is. >> there is a lot of public interest in the absence of the special counsel and members of
his team. was he invited to join you on the podium? why is he not here? this is his report you're obviously talking about today. >> it's a report he did for me as the attorney general. he is required under the regulation to provide me with a confidential report. i'm here to discuss my response to that report and my decision, entirely discretionary to make it public since these reports are not supposed to be made public. that's what i'm here to discuss. >> is it an impropriety for you to come out with it before the public gets a chance to read it? >> given what we learned tonight, i think we have a pretty good idea why mueller wasn't there, standing side by side with barr and the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. as the attorney general of the united states steamrolled right over mueller's objections. and that wasn't the first time. i want you to listen to what barr said.
this is when senator chris van holland on april 10, a full two weeks after he learned about mueller's complaints. >> did bob mueller support your conclusion? >> i don't know whether bob mueller supported my conclusion. >> this is april 9. listen. >> reports have emerged recently, general, that members of the special counsel's team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your march 24th letter, that it does not adequately or accurately, necessarily, portray the report's findings. do you know what they're referencing with that? >> no, i don't. >> yes, he did. he knew exactly why mueller's team was frustrated. he knew. he knew exactly what bob mueller thought about his conclusion.
there is a letter. mueller's letter says it all, loud and clear. there is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. this threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the department appointed the special counsel, to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. and he sat there and said he didn't know if robert mueller agreed with his letter, his four-page letter. when asked a number of times. and now we are just hours away from the attorney general william barr appearing before the senate judiciary committee. will he answer questions fully, truthfully, transparently? we're all going to be watching to find out. but the credibility of the attorney general has been
damaged. perhaps irreparably. and the person we really need to hear from as soon as possible is bob mueller. straight away to cnn's pamela brown for insight on this. pamela, thank you so much for joining us. a pretty stunning development here. have you heard any response from the white house or his lawyers? >> reporter: well, the white house is staying silent so far. as far as i know, no tweets from president trump. i just got after the phone with rudy giuliani, the president's personal outside attorney, and here's what he told me. he said mueller should have made a decision, talking about on the obstruction investigation, and shouldn't be complaining or whining now that he didn't get described correctly. basically saying there that mueller shouldn't have written this letter to the attorney general expressing his displeasure because he never made this decision on obstruction and left it up to the attorney general, according to rudy giuliani, and that is likely the kind of sentiment
you're going to hear from the white house moving forward. but certainly this news is something that is not welcome here at the white house because it is very much looking forward to putting the mueller report and everything surrounding it behind them. and that, unfortunately, to white house officials iver beff speaking with hasn't happened, and now we're nearly two days away from the special counsel being questioned about this. the special counsel robert mueller wrote him a letter telling him that he mischaracterized the findings of principal conclusions of the mueller report and the fact that we're just now finding out about it in the news media the night before bill barr testifies to congress, don. >> yeah, and some weeks after mueller wrote that letter. i think you said rudy giuliani said he should not be whining
now? this was on march 27. this was weeks ago, so it's not now. i want to dig in a little bit more just to be plain about the white house's response. after barr came out, pamela, with that letter, the president also claimed full exoneration. any word from the white house tonight? are they saying anything? >> no. the white house isn't saying anything, but you can expect the white house to continue to double down on the idea that the president in their view citing approximate barr's four-page memo and the overall conclusions saying, look, the case is cloegsd. we should move on now. the president didn't commit any crime. i think that is what you can expect to hear from the white house. they're going to claim that they're unmoved by the news of robert mueller writing this letter. essentially, you know, you're hearing from rudy giuliani saying, look, he's being a sore loser here. he didn't like that he couldn't reach a conclusion, he didn't have a case here, but now he's
whining about it. of course, this is serious and this is a big deal that the special counsel, who is a long-time colleague and friend of bill barr, wrote this letter in the starkest terms laying out that bill barr's four-page memo to congress was misleading, in his view, on the scope, the substance, the context of the more than 400 pages of the mueller report. that is serious, and the reporting is that justice department officials were actually taking a bath by this letter to robert mueller, and there was even a follow-up phone call between bill barr and robert mueller. of course, as you noted in your lead-in to me, don, bill barr testified before congress after he had received this letter, after talking to robert mueller about his concerns, and he did not convey this, and he did not convey it just before the press conference right before the mueller report was released, either. >> the lie can often be in the omission. thank you very much, pamela. much more in breaking news
to come, robert mueller's letter to bill barr stating that he was misleading with his conclusions. so did he mislead the public? guys, i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? so people love iphone xr, right? well, it does have an incredible camera. and it comes in all those amazing colors. uh huh. what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? iphone xr on us? yeah, iphone xr on us! what's not to love about that? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. we're finally back out in our yard, but so are they. the triple threat of dandelions, lurking crabgrass and weak, thin grass!
shaving has been difficult for me. i have very sensitive skin, and i get ingrowing hairs. so it's a daunting task. oh i love it. it's a great razor. it has that 'fence' in the middle. it gives a nice smooth shave. just stopping that irritation... that burn that i get is really life changing. we're back now with our breaking news, a source telling cnn that special counsel robert mueller sent a letter to the attorney general, william barr, a letter that expressed his concerns that barr's four-page memo to congress characterizing mueller's findings, that it didn't fully capture the intent
of mueller's report. let's bring in john dean, cara masters, max boot. his book is "the road not taken." max, the picture of the findings didn't capture, quote, the context, nature and substance of the investigation. that is according to the "washington post." i'm going to say that again. the context, nature and substance. what else is there? >> well, it's shocking to hear from robert mueller, because if mueller is anything, he is a chain of command guy. he has been that way ever since he was a marine officer in vietnam. he is not a grandstander, he does not act in the way that comey did, for example, taking it upon himself to hold a press conference and upstage the attorney general. mueller believes in doing what his superiors say. so when he is challenging his superiors in this fashion, that is an indication that bill barr has done something seriously
wrong. i mean, we are talking here -- i think this is adding to concerns that what bill barr has done is grounds for impeaching him, it's grounds for his resignation. i think he has lost the confidence of a substantial portion of the nation because we have no confidence that he is, in fact, acting as our attorney general. he seems to be acting as donald trump's attorney. i thought there was a key point in mueller's letter where he says this threatens to undermine the full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. i think that's exactly right. that confidence has been undermined. robert mueller has been undermined. mueller needs to testify right away to tell -- share with the nation his findings and to interpret the report, which is incredibly damning. and bill barr has some serious explaining to do beginning tomorrow morning before the senate judiciary committee. >> kerry -- carrie cardero, for
everyone who was confident that the attorney general was a straight shooter, what are they saying now? >> i think as far as the attorney general goes, once he gave his press conference on the 18th when he released his report, he really did a loft dama -- lot of damage to himself at that point, because it was clear when the report came out and reall re -- we all read it that it was different from his four-page summary he had released days before. but this goes to a whole new level that just three days after the attorney general sent his summary letter, the special counsel and his team were immediately so disturbed by the way that the attorney general characterized their lengthy investigation and their report that they documented it. and i think that's the key point. they documented it in the letter which, of course, would end up public and would end up in congress' hands. and so i'm glad that they did that.
but the fact that they felt they had to put it in writing shows you that the communication between them and the attorney general had no trust left. if it wasn't something that could just be discussed, if it was so serious that they felt their work was so mischaracterized that he had to document it and put it in writing, i'm sure it's something that was so serious for the special counsel to do, and it is really astounding that weeks have gone by and the attorney general never revealed that this letter existed. >> john, i got a quick question for you, then a longer one. did the attorney general mislead the public is the first one. >> absolutely. no question about it. >> and was it -- actually, three questions. did he do that, the letter and then the press conference, to shape the public's opinion? >> clearly. as i said at the time, he is framing the issue and framing it
for the president's benefit. >> okay. so his letter only had 101 words from the actual report. then he had his presser before we even saw that report, right? and when we finally got the report, it was far more damning than barr led us to believe. do you think this is a slow motion cover-up of the investigation? >> i don't know how slow it is, but it certainly is an effort to cover up and shape public thought about this document that we still don't know all of the contents. part of it is redacted. i think the fact that the senate, several members of the senate today, sent a letter to the inspector general of the department of justice telling the inspector general that the attorney general had to recuse himself virtually from the pending 12 cases that were referred to the department of
justice by the special counsel speaks volumes. and i think we're going to hear more about that tomorrow. this is not an impartial attorney general. this is one with an agenda. and i think that will be flushed out in more detail as well, and it's a sad day, don. >> why do you say that? >> well, i mean, this is the top law enforcement officer. we've had this problem in the past during watergate. we had an attorney general who went to jail, and when his successor lied to become attorney general, he would be charged with a misdemeanor. we were over that legacy post-watergate. we're right back into nixonian thinking. >> max, let me ask you about this letter that mueller wrote to barr, because he asked barr to release those executive summaries. remember when we questioned, why didn't he just release the executive summaries? why is he giving his version of
what he thinks the report is about? mueller reportedly even suggested initial redactions for doing all of this. that did not happen. does that say anything to you? >> well, of course. what it says is that attorney general barr was not concerned with presenting mueller's findings in an impartial fashion. what he was concerned about was spinning them for the benefit of the president of the united states, and what they essentially did was they bought a few weeks of time in the narrative to basically try to shape public opinion in a way that would make impeachment much less likely, trying to convince people that mueller had not found enough evidence to charge the president with obstruction, whereas we found out when we actually read the report that there was copious evidence to charge the president with obstruction on at least six counts. and the only reason mueller didn't do it was because the president cannot be indicted. and r. was deliberately
deceptive in his rendition of the mueller report, and that's why i say i can have no confidence, and i don't think anyone with any justice, can have any confidence in attorney general barr as head of the department. mueller is blowing the whistle on the fact that barr is actually obstructing justice to prevent the full findings of mueller's obstruction of justice case from coming to life. >> we're learning that barr and the doj officials were frustrated with the special counsel. it says, they expressed irritation that mr. mueller fell short of his assignment by declining to make a decision about whether mr. trump broke the law. that left mr. barr to clear mr. trump without the special counsel's backing. is the frustration from barr warranted, or is this doj spinning? >> no, it spins. once we were able to read the report, we were able to see that
the special counsel didn't make a finding of obstruction based on legal doctrines, the doctrine of fairness and because they thought they were tied to the department of justice legal opinion. but it is so clear once you actually read the report that they laid out a complete pattern of obstructive behavior and then the proper venue to consider that is congress. i really think with respect to these attorney general hearings coming up, they might as well just cancel them and wait to hear from bob mueller. because i'm so sick of the lying, don. we're going to have the attorney general come up, he's going to obfiscate, he's perhaps going to mislead or he's going to lie. they might as well just have bob mueller come up and finally tell the american people the truth about what the report says and what his investigation found. >> you know, carrie, you're usually very measured and i can understand your frustration. i think the american people can understand your frustration as well. we are tired of being lied to, and we're tired of the political partisanship of people making
every excuse for this administration when they are clearly breaking the rule of law. thank you so much. i appreciate it. carrie mentioned the hearing. there's one in the senate, one that's supposed to be in the congress next week. ted luke is supposed to question the attorney general later this week. tonight he is calling on barr to resign. he tells me why, next. shades. new infallible full wear concealer car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it.
so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana. our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy. and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. onmillionth order.r. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order? ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved.
four-page letter didn't fully capture the intent of mueller's report. let's discuss now. congressman ted liu of california. we have a lot to talk about so if you could gi ve me some quic answers here. first, you heard carrie cardero, saying, i'm frustrated. the congress should just get rid of him and bring mueller in. what do you say about that? >> i wouldn't give bob mueller the opportunity to perjure himself. we also want to hear from bob mueller. but from what i know, william barr needs to resign. he's supposed to be america's attorney, not trump's stoog,sto.
and because he misused his position, he's got to go. >> people say democrats appear to have no spine. when are you going to start taking some action? when are you going to jail people? what are you going to do with people that defy subpoenas and when are you going to follow the constitution? when? >> we do need some of these people to actually violate the subpoena, so bill barr has until tomorrow to provide the unredacted mueller report. if he does not do that, i'm going to push for a contempt proceeding against bill barr, and then i'm going to push for that contempt proceeding to also happen on the house floor. once that happens, it triggers a number of things. we can litigate the subpoena in court. we can also use our inherent powers on congress to impose fines to bill barr. in the past, they actually had a house jail, but i don't think we'll go there yet. >> barr denied knowing. you know that, he denied knowing about mueller's objections twice
when he testified before congress. let's remind people. here it is. >> did bob mueller support your conclusion? >> i don't know whether bob mueller supported my conclusion. >> reports have emerged recently, general, that members of the special counsel's team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your march 24th letter, that it does not adequately or accurately, necessarily, portray the report's findings. do you know what they're referencing with that? >> no, i don't. >> hmm. you heard him. okay? we know the attorney general chooses every single word carefully. do you think he lied to congress? >> i do. but let's just take a step back and see how extraordinary it is, what bill barr did. not only did he write a four-page summary that misled the american people, he was then told by robert mueller that he misread the american people, then he lies in front of congress, then he does a press
conference misleading the american people again. it is incredible the actions he took. he absolutely needs to go, and then he can apply to be white house press secretary where he can lie all he wants. >> what do you intend to do, then? if he lied to congress, what is the next step? >> so the house judiciary committee, we want him to show up this thursday. he is balking at being questioned by house counsel. he'll either perjure himself or look like a fool against the american people. we hope he provides an unredacted mueller report tomorrow. if he doesn't, i'm going to push for contempt proceedings, and i think the senate and congress will support that. with what we're learning about robert mueller's objections to the summary of his principal conclusions, what about mueller's findings about
obstruction? will congress go ahead with trying for impeachment? more straight ahead. if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. don't stoop to their level. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. it extends with a protective shield and targets weeds more precisely. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root while guarding the good. roundup sure shot wand. got weeds in your grass too? try roundup for lawns. kills weeds, not the lawn. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years.
so democrats are reacting to the breaking news tonight that special counsel robert mueller expressed concerns that the attorney general's four-page memo to congress outlining mueller's findings didn't fully capture the intent of mueller's report. house speaker nancy pelosi tweeting this. attorney general barr misled the public and owes the american people answers. it's time for the doj to release the full report and underlying docs and finally let mueller testify. americans deserve the facts. barr must stop standing in the way. the attorney general heads for the hill tomorrow with what could be two days of testimony about the mueller report. let's bring in nia-malika
henderson, frank beuhl. could it mean that congress should take up impeachment? >> it's anybody's guess at this point what the democrats are prepared to do. they've been telegraphing all along, essentially saying the leadership is slow-walking this process. they want investigations, they want to call people up before congress, they want to issue subpoenas if those folks don't come before congress and refuses those subpoenas. but this, i think, raises the stakes quite a bit on what they've been trying to do and forces their hand a little bit more and certainly puts more of a spotlight on tomorrow's hearings with bill barr and it certainly puts more of a spotlight on whether or not he's going to cooperate with the house committee as well. he's been making certain demands about what he wants to see from those members, particularly no
questioning from staff counsel. that's been one of the demands he has made and nadler said, you don't get to dictate what these hearings are like. the other thing i think it does is this whole idea of whether mueller is going to testify, this is something that democrats have wanted, this is something that oftentimes republicans have said, oh, well, they don't really need to hear from mueller because he spent two years on this report and it came out as 444 pages -- >> they've got to do it now. >> exactly. that almost puts the spotlight on republicans. how can they continue to sort of stonewall and essentially say, oh, there's nothing to see here, there's nothing to hear from mueller after this report from "the times" and the "washington post." >> frank, we talked about this. you know nancy pelosi is trying to tamp down talk of impeachment. there are other democrats trying to tamp down talk of impeachment as well. does this make it harder for them to do that? >> 100%, yeah. democrats are enraged already. they're more enraged in the wake of this. they should be. and those who feel strongly that
the only way to give a full airing to everyone, an airing that's not corrected from spin barr is wanted at this point. i don't know if nancy pelosi will end up there, but the chances just increased substantially because of these latest developments, which are extraordinary. i'm just astounded, don, because when you go back to when barr is releasing that four-page summary, which turns out to be so incredibly inaccurate, how does he not know that as the weeks and months go by, and as the report ultimately comes out which it was sure to in a redacted form, how does he not know that at some point the game is going to be up and the fact he's been acting as a total partisan and not as an attorney general with the country's interests at heart, how does he think that's not going to come out? that's the part of this i will never understand. >> as i explained with chris, frank, it's not the first time there's been some questions about how he handled certain
things with certain presidents, that he had more allegiance to those presidents than the american people. it's not the first time. should people even be surprised by it? >> no, the history is there. he's not an honest broker. and when you go back to when he was testifying before his confirmation and you look at things he said then and you compare them to what we know now, he was clearly presenting an entirely false front, an entirely false face. so to go back to your question about impeachment, i think democrats feel a great disservice has been done to the country here by barr, which it has, because he set the narrative for how we're going to talk about this report for many, many weeks. i think they feel that the president wrongfully dodged a bullet and that barr was the one who yanked him out of the way, so they're asking the questions. what do we do so that the historical record is more ak ra -- accurate, so the american people don't remain puzzled by this. i don't think a majority of them
will ask for impeachment, i don't think nancy pelosi is there yet, but the chances have increased. >> mueller's letter about the report have raised so many questions about what barr has said publicly, especially his insinuations that mueller and the special counsel's team were on board with these conclusions. he was asking pelosi, i don't know, i don't know, but he led people to believe they were on board. does barr have any credibility left with the congress and with the american people? >> you know, certainly he hasn't ever really had any credibility with democrats, right? the idea, i think, and the suspicion that many democrats had early on was he was essentially a hired gun. he had written this memo about his thoughts about the russia investigation and the special counsel before he even got nominated for the attorney general. a lot of people thought he was basically going to come in and protect this president. and then you saw, of course, this four-page letter which, again, mueller sort of disputes the framing of it, so i think his credibility, and you even heard this from some
republicans, that it's taken a bit of a hit, how he's able to restore that if he can. we'll see. i think he may try to do that tomorrow with these hearings. it's going to be a tough crowd certainly from democrats. some of those folks are running for president who aren't on the judiciary committee, then you'll have to see what happens to the republicans there, too, who also -- have circled the wagons around this president, but i think it becomes more and more difficult when you have smn like barr whose credibility is being questioned in a very credible way. his credibility, i think that he himself has done some things that he didn't necessarily have to do to make people call his credibility in question. >> i'll give you the final word here, but it's just interesting to me when all the findings, report and his supporters or his spokespeople, when they said, oh, fake news, this is right,
this is wrong. so the reporting comes out to show what was correct. rob is not being a straight shooter. he's acting like the president's lawyer and not the lawyer for the american people, and all of a sudden this comes out. it's a pattern. >> you bet it's a pattern. they say whatever they want to say to look blameless, and the truth keeps coming out, and you're absolutely right. i'm so glad you brought that up, don. you go back and look at all the reporting along the way. this is what dad was looking at and the american public was saying "fake news, fake news, fake news." we need you to understand, that's quite different than the truth, and if you're still accepting it as truth, you have really lost your way. >> thank you. where did robert mueller feel like he had to write a
we're finally back out in our yard, but so are they. the triple threat of dandelions, lurking crabgrass and weak, thin grass! scotts turf builder triple action. this single-step breakthrough changes everything. it kills weeds, prevents crabgrass for up to 4 months, and feeds so grass can thrive, all guaranteed. only from scotts.
our backyard is back. this is a scotts yard. back now with breaking news. special counsel wrote a letter that he objected to attorney general barr's characterization. you work for mueller. you know how he thinks. why would the is special counsel feel the need write down his objection in a letter to the ag?
>> the importance is fairly straight forward from the mueller investigation in bob mueller's perspective in all off this and i think it shows three things president. one that he has committed this investigation tee a record that is established. and that he's one of the few people without a political agenda in d.c. and so he's wanting to make sure that independence is seen throughout this report. the fact the ag's come out, obviously ewith this full-page memo that did not accurately characterize the report, i think he's pushing back on that. and i think it goes to the fact that he's ad hering to the rule of law and precedence but that has limits. if the ag mischaracterizing, if
you will and having a different out oakum than perhaps bob mueller intended. but that lim et, sounds like that was crossed. and third and finally i think it shows both the thoroughness of the investigation, which obviously ways not captured in any way in the ag's summary, but also -- and this may sound strange to viewers. but the brevity of the investigation not trying to be all things to all people all times and all places as it relates to all things. six plus year ozes of the starr independent counsel investigation. it's relatively brief. >> i notice people were saying it's taking too long. it wasn't that long when you consider these types of investigations.
barr has said many times about what he decided were mueller's conclusions. if mueller felt like the original letter from barr that didn't capture the nature of the letter, why not speak out? >> i think that's just to who bob mueller is in terms of allowing the work to speak for itself. as opposed to having a press conference disagreeing with the ag or trying to lay out a summary of the report, that's just the way he works. during my six years as his deputy director, he often would try to avoid doing pres conferenceses and things because he wanted the work to speak for itself and the men and women of the fbi to get the recognition for their hardwork and professionalism and integrity.
he tried to steer attention away from himself. that's a consistent pattern in terms of doing the report and doing it confid engsally to decide what should be redacted and how it should be summarized. the fact this mem o disagreeing with the sum and substance, if you will, i think that goes to the core off who bob mueller is as a consummate professional of doing things quietly behind the scenes and making sure there's a paper trail to say i don't agree with your conclusion. it's up to you. that's your discretionary function to do so but that's not what we found. >> do you think he's going to ultimately testify before congress? mueller? >> i think so. and he may have to be subpoenaed.
but i think he will -- now whether he would answer every question is a different issue. it's in the public interest, which is why i think he said yes to taking the assignment in the first place. >> thank you so much, sir. we have much more on our breaking news tonight. robert mueller objecting to how william barr spun the report. and will there be consequences? dad, we need to talk about something important. you don't need to go anywhere dad, this is your home. the best home to be in is your own. home instead offers personalized in-home services for your loved ones. home instead senior care. to us, it's personal.