tv The Beat With Ari Melber MSNBC April 19, 2019 3:00pm-4:00pm PDT
"meet the press daily." president trump's personal attorney, rudolph giuliani, will join chuck. plus, jerry nadler on your local nbc station. "the beat" starts right now. >> good evening. thank you very much. welcome to you at home to a special edition on "the beat." the first full day since the redacted mueller report came out. what's next in the battle? a top democrat joins me on why they are subpoenaing the entire report today. that's big news. also, a headline that would scare any white house. 14 new investigations that mueller handed off. many of them unknown. we'll get into them. and later, you know we cover all the evidence on "the beat." we begin with the truly damning evidence of obstruction against trump in this report. at the end of this hour, we will turn to a witness who faced off against the mueller probe and came out in the clear. carter page, one of the trump
advisers, first caught up in the probe will join me live. we begin with the news rocking washington even as the trump administration tries to distract you from it. tonight it is official. house democrats formally demanding bill barr hand over the full unredacted mueller report by may 1st. judiciary chairman jerry nadler issuing this subpoena today. the move telegraphed during the past three weeks of sparring between bill barr, given his aggressive and we can now report, often proven to be misleading handling of the conclusion of the mueller probe. let me tell you this. as we get into this news. telegraphing you might do something and negotiating about it with the white house or the doj is different than action. tonight is action. the first time the trump doy is now staring down the pressure of a subpoena from mueller's report. and that's not all. democrats demanding that bob mueller himself testify by may 23rd.
they are seizing on barr's ters statement yesterday in the first may know press conference as attorney, that he didn't obt to mueller addressing congress. pelosi taking the lead on now the biggest fight of the trump era. tonight he says mueller's report busts president trump for serious instances of wrongdoing. what comes next? i can tell you this because it is a very live story. doj has responded late here tonight on the east coast saying the subpoena is, quote, pre mature and unnecessary. that is a sign of the battle ahead. that's the doj not saying we'll work with you on this. we want to give you more. they're saying it is unnecessary. get ready for a big subpoena fight. it is especially important because remember donald trump went i know what the house vote saying it's fine, we're getting the full mueller report. tonight the doj is showing that was bull, not true. or the doj is breaking with what was the republican position. a kind of a claimed bravery in
the face of the mueller report. they've seen some of it. apparently they don't want everyone to see all of it. this trump administration strategy as you know by now has been to undercut the mueller road map by falsely suggesting it is all up to barr to decide what happens with these findings. tonight, what we're seeing is chairman nadler saying, no, congress itself will consider the quote full scope, according to nadler, of what is released here including what he calls donald trump's misconduct. i'll tell you something else. america has been doing this. maybe we've been doing it together. i've been reading this thing. it takes more than a day for the 400-page findings of the 22-month investigation to be clearly and fairly and accurately processed. i mean regardless of what you think is in here or what you want to be in here. it takes more than a day or two for this to set in. you can't debate what people haven't even digested. this may sound like a challenge for the media era we live in. maybe a challenge for the trump
era. what we're seeing, what i'm reporting to you is that chairman nadler is leading a wing of the democratic party that is suggesting there are choices between do nothing over here and a rush to the i-word over here. the dems invoking mueller's own words in the report which shows even if one did agree with bill barr's conclusion, he is the attorney general, you can look at what emand decide where you agree or not, there is something that everyone can now see. that mr. barr, perhaps in his cyn cynicism, doesn't care what you see. he was letting the conclusion sit throughout the last three weeks. here it is, quote. the conclusion that congress may 90 obstruction laws to the president's corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law. mueller wrote that up for a reason and he wrote it up in a way that it would be released, not easily redacted.
in a moment i'll talk about all of this with the deputy to chairman nadler, the vice chair, congresswoman mary gay scanlan. i'm excited about that. mother jones has been covering this from the start, and the columnist from the "washington post." what do you see is significant about the way democrats are taking mueller's findings and mueller's admittedly intricate discussion of the interbranch powers and who deals with this. >> i hate to agree with you, ari, but you're right. this report, over 400 pages long, does take more than a day to absorb fully. i've written a couple stories off it already. i'm still going through it line by line through footnotes, looking for things i might have missed or that need further amplification. i think if you're running congress, if you're the chair of
the judiciary committee, or the intelligence committee, or the oversight committee. you need to go through this really carefully and see what here can we look at further, needs further investigation. what can we amplify for the public. there is a lot here, if you actually had people coming before committees to testify, it would mean a lot more. hearing don mcgahn talk about how he had to put off what he considered to be improper, illegal instructions from the president would be really instructive for the public at large. so i think taking a moment to figure out, okay. between doing nothing and rushing to impeachment, what is the right course here is exactly what democrats should be doing and there are leads here to investigate and aspects of the story, and constitutional principles which you're so good at elucidating, that need to be brought before the american public. and mueller has done a good job in that regard, of laying out
those issues. >> i want to play something for my colleague, joe scarborough, a former republican congressman. he like many in washington began by noting that mr. barr did have a respected reputation in the main stream legal establishment. and yet, and yet, we do need to assess him by what he's doing now and not by the reputation he may have built in the past. because now is the news, now is according to some, according to don mcgahn, forget the democrats, now is, what do you do about the constitutional crisis of a president of the united states who insists and repeats leave orders, i pause because i want to be precise. i'm quoting don mcgahn. he did think they were so illegal that he would resign rather than carry them out. when we think about barr, here's scarborough on barr. >> he is not an attorney general
in the common sense of the word. he is a political act. when this presidency is over, john mitchell will not be sitting alone as the worst attorney general in modern american political history. he will be side by side by william barr. >> e.j., tough but fair or too far? >> no, i think that's been true from the start. i wrote at the time when he was before the committee in january that there were all kinds of red flags there. that establishment washington just can't possibly see how an establishment arian would become a trump enabler. he gave signal after signal that he was ready to do whatever trump want him to do. he wrote to that memo that many have called an application to be trump's attorney general. but in the spirit of the holiday, and happy passover and happy easter to everybody, i want to agree with you on something, too. and i thought you made a really important point on the way forward when you said, it is not
just do nothing or go straight to impeachment. i think it is a mistake to take impeachment off the table because that would say this is not serious. but there is absolutely no need to rush for impeachment now. because the judiciary committee, the government reform committee, can do all the hearings that you need to do that would be in preparation for impeachment without having people think that you're rushing off prematurely. i think the argument that needs to be had is with that 10 to 15% of americans who are not hard core anti-trump, or hard core pro trump. as david that, they need to see some of these witnesses. they need to hear just what a horror show the mueller report describeshe trump presidency as, and i think these hearings will have a great educational value for the american people. >> when you say that, part of my
job is to try to fairly cover the law and present the evidence, let people make up their own mind. the other part is being real about what is in here. as i was going through more of this today, like any document, you read it more than once. as you get deeper into it, understanding the holistic findings. not unlike a novel, i know that you're big in literature. but -- >> both david wrote. >> more important than a novel, because it's true, the other thing that comes through in here, is the issues of what the first year the trump presidency looked like according to the people who were in it. this is not according to critics and not according to observers who are out of it. the people in here, priebus, bannon, rob porter, christy after private meetings with the white house, every single
interview, the footnotes thankfully are not redacted, is a portrait of a presidency hanging by a thread because of the lunacy and the attempted illegal orders of the commander in chief. this is something people should care about even if the legal questions are more arcane. so for that, i want to ask you both to stay but bring in as promised, the congresswoman from pennsylvania, the vice chair of the house judiciary committee which just enspoubpoenaed. >> thought it gave me a break from my reading. >> right. everyone is doing the reading. >> i want to get your views on the big issues but i will begin the breaking news from the justice department. which is not engaging chairman nadler and your subpoena as a kind of debate how to do it. rather saying, blank it tonight
and immediately it is unnecessary. your response. >> my understanding, i haven't seen their response. i read a tweet about it which seems to be how we get so much of our need these days. and i saw that they said it was pre mature which we disagree with. >> let me say, we can put up on the screen, we'll pull it up because we had it in our newsroom. pre mature was how they put it at the doj. >> it is obviously very necessary. we're looking at two different things. we're looking at the department of justice and mr. barr as now apparently a defender of the president, rather than acting as the attorney general has decided to do. i mean, the mueller report lays out very clearly that there are serious issues here. particularly around the issue of obstruction of justice. he gives us a road map in what congress has to do. and we need the full report and the underlying evidence in order to be able to follow that road map. >> let me ask you, when you look
at the obstruction section of the report, at the risk of oversimplifying it. for people who are not following every little moment. could you describe, i'm talking about at the criminal level. not other opinions. the conspiracy section looks broadly good. at the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, there is no finding of a conspiracy. the obstruction section lists several incidents that look very bad for the president. they appear to find evidence of obstruction. are you ready tonight, and i'm not rushing you. it may take more time. are you ready to say, do you view, speaking for yourself and not the whole committee, that section as s a finding that donald trump did commit obstruction? how would you put it? >> well, i think what you have to do when you look at that section is look at how mueller frames it. i've gained, i always had respect for the man. i didn't know him personally.
as we sort through this very intricate document, as you mentioned, he's really done a brilliant job of laying out the issue here. if you look at the first page of volume ii, the obstruction volume, he says what he's doing and why. he says first of all i went into this knowing there's a department of justice rule knowing that you can't charge a sitting president. so i went into that knowing that. that's congress's job. if a president were to obstruct justice that the criminal justice system can't deal with it, then it is congress' job to deal with it. then he said, if i had found evidence that this president had not obstructed justice, i would say so. unfortunately, i cannot and there is no exoneration in my report. no exoneration. the fourth thing he does is say, i'm going to lay out everything we found so that we can preserve the evidence.
whether that's for congress or for some sort of post presidency indictment, he lays out exactly the evidence, including ten separate incidents which look like obstruction of justice. >> what do you mean by that? you read mueller as holding out the legal possibility of indicting the president for the obstruction evidence after he leaves office? >> he certainly seems to suggest that's an option. >> david? >> yeah. i was very impressed with that part of the report. he does walk it through some very complicated constitutional issues. ultimately, i think this is the right position. he says there has to be a way for the government, for one branch of the government, to make sure that the pursuit of justice cannot be corrupted, even by the president of the united states. and if the justice department can't go after him directly, that job is left to congress.
like the congresswoman here. he is very clear on that. he makes bar's letter, in which he took it upon himself to exonerate trump on this, seem rather silly. mueller is saying per justice department, i can't indict. but barr is saying per me, i can exonerate. if you look at the whole report, you see just this miasma of deceit. and mueller portrays it in a very, just the facts manner. putting it all together there, i think it is pretty stunning. the portrait of the presidency. the president, and the campaign he ran. >> if i can just say quickly, i think -- >> i'm going to give you time. i want to throw one at you. a lot of last night's initial understanding of the report required fact mr. barr.
he had been so blatantly false in letters, in formal statements to congress. and then in a press conference, he insisted holding yesterday before people saw the report, that became part of it. i wonder what you think, in addition to whatever else you'll share with us, about what people see on their screen right now. if you read the headline on the screen. this is the news. the headline is mueller's bottom line was that trump, according to his own age, was pursuing more than one saturday night massacre. which is what ended nixon. the only reason he didn't pull it off was because there were people around him who defied him. >> i think one of the reasons it is so important for mueller to testify is that line in the report when he said no person is above the law. he's saying, i did not say that
he was innocent. i was bound by the rules but i think he needs to be held accountable. and i think he needs an opportunity to expand on that and talk about how radically barr distorted what the report was. i was really struck when that letter came out that the report, the part he quoted, said that they could not establish collusion. and barr rendered it as you couldn't demonstrate it. it was a very different word. just those two sentences showed how much barr was rewriting this for the president's purposes. and you saw that an hour before the report came out. >> congresswoman, because you're a sitting member of congress, because we're out of time, i'll end with my bad holiday joke for david cornyn instead of for you with your blessing. david, we have so much to talk
about. i didn't even get to ask you why this night is different from all other nights. >> well, this is the first night of the day after we've had a report demonstrating that the president -- just can't not lie about so many different things. it is historic. i don't want to went a joke on this but the good thing is, i think it has reset the debate, despite what barr tried to do. and the congressman and other americans will try to continue absorbing this. and following where it should go. >> and we will reach the promise land at the end of all of this. >> e.j. is the catholic optimist here. >> e.j., in the spirit of the question, he rose to it more than you. i would say that for some of us, this is a holiday where you say, look. let my full reporting.
let's see the whole thing. >> oy! >> congresswoman, we're leaving you out of this because you are of your seriousness of your position. >> i appreciate that. >> i appreciate you being on the show and everyone making time a busy news night and a busy week night. we have so much more on "the beat" tonight. this mueller mystery. a dozen cases under seal. we'll get into all of that. later in the show, the obstruction road map. i'll show you now that i've had more time. point by point what mueller is doing in giving what some call overwhelming evidence against donald trump for the crime of obstructing justice. we will speak to the journalist who sent donald trump down some of these paths and later my interview with the former trump aide, carter page. there are eight pages devoted to him in the mueller report. he is clearly a part of this
what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ sarah's last tuition payment, sent off. feeling good? oh yeah. now i'm ready to focus on my project. ♪ ♪ this is why we plan. ♪ ♪ you never cease to amaze me, maya. see how investing with a j.p. morgan advisor can help you. visit your local chase branch.
or any particular group of people because we literally don't know who many of these people are. but consider that "the new york times" was the source of much of it. 69% are relate to ongoing matters. criminal investigations. and these are mysteries. we dome know and mueller does not say in here what these matters are about. take appendix d. it lists the cases he has handed off. the redactions at the right side of the screen. these are active cases. two unknown cases mueller was ordered to investigate which he has now transfrd back to the doj. these cases that we know about of course include roger stone penning trial. you have of course what happened with paul manafort. but then there are the cases where mueller uncovered other types of criminal activity or evidence of criminal activity that just aren't in the probe. of course, the most famous
example was michael cohen. everybody knows they handed that back to new york. so think about it for what you see here. 12 unknown other cases referred to other jurisdictions. so that's like potentially, 12 michael cohens in maybe overhappening jurisdictions or maybe 12 different places, depending on the evidence. if there is no interference in the months ahead. to dig into just this piece. i bring in the former prosecutor. glen, what does it mean there are 12 unknown handoffs? is that more than you expected? >> it is a lot. it signals a couple things to me. it signals that bob mueller took his jurisdictional man tate very seriously. i think it would help if we went back to his orange appointment letter in may of 2017 and look
at the three things that he was actually empowered to investigate. we talk a lot about the first two but less about the third. the first one, and i have it in front of me. any links between trump campaign and russia. the second is anything that is from investigating the links. the third we haven't talked about all that much. the third says any other matters within a particular section of the cfr. the code of federal regulations. section 600.4 a. the number is not important. when we look at that, that talks about how bob mueller is empowered to try cases. to actually prosecute people in court. so he can further his investigation of points one and two. and it actually cites things like obstructing justice. lying, committing perjury. and it is not an exclusive or an exhaustive list. that third paragraph says he can
bring prosecutions that will help him get to the bottom of coordination between the trump campaign and russia. >> so with that in mind, isn't it important to understand that what we do have in the mueller report are patterns of lying and deception that clearly impeded the probe at times. some of it done by an individual that cannot be indicted. the president. and some allegedly done by all these other people. some of them redacted. and i think about that because those are some of the hanging matters. mr. craig, who happens to be a democrat, was ultimately pursued on similar lines to flynn and manafort. being, no, you did not go out and do the worst crime in the world but yes, you slowed and impeded the investigation by not being straight with the feds and mueller will not tolerate it. he doesn't care what party you are, how senior you are in the white house. i put that in the context of
elijah couple who's referred to this mueller finding that so many people were trying to hide what they were doing. or using encryption or destroying evidence. take long. >> there has been some disruption of evidence. that's another thing that we want to look into. again, you know as the presidential records act. i want to know, who was destroying evidence. that's another thing that stop mueller from being able to complete his job. and a lot of this stuff may have been directed by the president. >> who could that apply to? >> oh, destruction of evidence? we saw so much of trump's associates, or hangers on, trying to prevent the president from doing further bad things, that could one of them have done what congressman cummings was saying? i don't know. it's possible. and i'm glad that glen brought up what he did. that i think mueller did
frustratingly to me view his mandate very narrowly. what we've seen is that he is already referred out cases, basically involving financial crimes. all the money stuff, he's thrown out the other people. so when i came across appendix d, i heard the wwe, oh, my god, that's sdny's music coming. on i think most of the financial crimes that mueller did not feel he was empowered to investigate got pushed out. that's what is in the 12 redactions. >> yes. so i think he makes a great point. and the other thing i'll say is we have two cases referred, two unknown cases, and 12 investigations referred out to other offices. in my book, as a former prosecutor, that is 14 potential cooping witnesses. that's why i don't think this is over by a long shot. with respect to everyone of
those 14 referrals, you can bet the prosecutors who are now digging into those cases, are going to try to debrief, interview and bring on board every one of those 14 people. and i'll bet every one of them, you can then sort of finger out into other potential misconduct by other folks. that's how we build cases. so i think there's a lot of investigating that will spin out of these 14 referrals. >> briefly. >> there is another huge gap here. the inauguration committee. i think that was outside of mueller's scope and i think it could be in these indictments. you know that i care about this. i need some prosecutor to go find me a subpoena for don jr. and ivanka and eric and this might be where we find that. >> i know you feel that way. i'll hold you accountable. you were one of the guests we've had that will talk about whether the mueller probe was getting closer. as i've reported cynic yesterday, it is very clear not only were they not indicted, we
knew that, the reason don jr. was not brought in was he was not seen on the conspiracy. that doesn't clear him of any one of a million things but it is important to note that. we always benefit from the legal insights of both of you. first, something i've been asked about over and over. we'll get into it. why does the mueller report lay out facts rather than charges on obstruction. we're back in 30.
bob mueller doesn't say that donald trump committed a crime and he explains why he can't. but there is as legal experts are making clearer and clearer cynic we've had time to digest this, a damning road map. doj rules, you can't charge a sitting president. bill barr, obviously, talked a lot about that. what mueller provides is factual conclusions about obstruction. that's something he tried to get ahead of yesterday.
>> the deputy attorney general and i concluded that the evidence developed by the special counsel is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction of justice offense. he made it clear that he had not made the determination there was a crime. >> that's not quite right though. in fact the report lists 11 incidents, ten as president trump as president, and goes through whether they constitution obstruction. when mueller conclusions the comey firing section, he says this may not neat standard of obstruction of justice. it does not resolve whether those concerns were personal, political or both. others went mueller detailing
the case against trump. concluding that the demand to prosecute hillary clinton, which would be unconstitutional as a political request was for the illicit purpose of shielding the president from the ongoing russia investigation. we should be clear. the mueller report shows donald trump tried to commit this time of obstruction. that's very clear. because corrupt inextent combined with overt actions for any citizen, for anyone who doesn't happen to be president is obstruction of justice. like flynn hide to the fbi. did he pull off the cover-up? did he fool the fbi? was he successed? obviously not. he admitted to it. that's an obstruction related kroim. what we see is donald trump paying the in some of these goals. that doesn't mean he didn't fail to obstruct justice. good evening to you. >> hey, ari.
>> when you see these calls related to donald trump being president, what is your understanding with what mueller is doing and does he provide enough information to make conclusion about each of them? >> so mueller lays out the legal standard that he uses to determine obstruction of justice. he lays out facts and he holds them out to the legal standard. and as you've pointed out accurately and very importantly, he bends over backwards to give president the benefit of the doubt. in criminal justice assessments, the tie goes to the runner. you don't charge a defendant unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he's guilty. that said in a number of cases, mueller's bottom line assessment appears to be substantial evidence of obstruction of justice. >> so let's use the hypothetical to follow mueller's care because of the unique issues around a sitting president. if a nonpresident was faced with
the evidence you just described. say substantial evidence on five. could they be charged? >> i think they would be charged. and of course one important difference is that mueller doesn't even engage in that calculus out of fear that it would be improper. >> fascinating. so with that framework, stay with me. i want to bring in david ignatius from the "washington post" and a long time washington expert. he has a column about michael flynn's secret contacts with russia that sparked some of the very first moves, the probe as well as obstruction crimes. good day to you, sir, as well. >> good to be with you. >> david, what do you think about the interpretive side of this? we just talked about the law. then there is how washington understands this. ken starr took role of prosecutor and was obviously seen, i don't think anyone
really disagrees with this, as putting his thumb on the scale with what he saw was wrong with bhi bill clinton. >> if people read the report, the fact that mueller has been so meticulous and fair and balanced in how he weighs the evidence should convince them in the instances that you're describing. in the 11 instances, mueller comes down saying there was obstruction here. this is a case you can take forward. and by people, not convinced of his bad intentions but republicans in congress and around the country. if they read that language, i think they're going to find it very powerful. somehow that meeting has to come from the country, i think, more
than from the congress right now. people have to say, hey, wait a minute. i have read this report and i'm troubled by what i saw. >> david, does it matter that he ultimately found the comey firing less concerning because of donald trump's, the nicest way you could say it, unique approach? as opposed to things where it was a glaring evidence of obstruction like his attempt to fire mueller, and his attempt to have sessions take back over and prosecute hillary, because you can't even in the reading of it, you can't find an innocent way to explain that you want your attorney general to jail your political opponent. something more familiar with the foreign policy wing of your reporting that our viewers are also familiar with. something we know about from other countries. >> so like you, i was a little surprised that he didn't find in the comey case evidence of obstruction, firing the man
leading the investigation. again, the very fact that he bent over so far backwards in the case of comey, makes the other cases all the more convincing. the attempted firing of mueller himself. the scenes involving his white house counsel, don mcgahn. calling mcgahn and saying, i want to hear from him. when you've fired him. when you've done this. you fear for don mcgahn. his attempts to interfere with the investigation were in many cases, not successful because his subordinates simply refused to carry out his orders. i find that one of the most damning statements of all. >> i'm running over in time. i'll thank david and joyce. we'll fit in a quick break. up ahead, carter page joins me. makes it beautiful.
state of the art technology makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2019 nx 300 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. with retirement planning and advice for what you need today and tomorrow. because when you're with fidelity, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward.
woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...a clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis. woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): 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 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action.
former trump foreign policy adviser and a key figure in the beginning of the russia probe, carter page, joins me. carter, we have interviewed you before and i told you when it was all over, we would have you back. i'm glad you're back tonight. >> great to be with you. thanks. >> when you look at this report in a sentence or two, what is your bottom line? >> the bottom line, the last 24 hours, or 36 hours since it came out, i've been working on my second circuit reply brief which is focused on another insubstantial, you were talking with joyce about obstruction of justice. that's what i've been focused on. i gave it a quick skim so i haven't studied it too much. so from my quick look and what i've heard summarized, it sounds pretty, you know, as we said, a
nothing burger from the beginning. so yeah. >> well, not a nothing burger on everything. but your burger is fine. you are not well done. you're not medium well. you're in the clear. and we acknowledge that. there are some interesting parts in here. maybe we'll talk about them and get your honest, fresh reaction. >> it will be very fresh. >> the best way. you've got nothing to hide. you've made it in the clear. let me read to you an interesting part of what mueller found with documentary evidence. december 2016 email intended for manafort has an alleged russian asset who mueller indicted, kilimnik, said carter page is in moscow today sending messages he is authorized to talk to russia on behalf of donald trump on a range of issues of mutual interest including ukraine. did you know that kilimnik knew you were there and telling manafort? >> that's preposterous to me.
>> that's news to you. >> yeah. i have to look up that page. that's interesting. >> did you ever deal with kilimnik directly? >> i don't think i've ever met him. that name does not sound familiar, other than being in the news all the time. i don't think we've ever crossed paths. >> tim me indication from mueller is that while you may have been minding your own business, so to speak, this intelligence linked asset had knowledge of your whereabouts and was telling manafort. does that concern you given that he and manafort were both indicted by the probe. not concern but you but about them? well, given the accuracy of that statement, that sounds somewhat concerning, i guess, on that level. the fact that there were some news reports that i happen to be over there and he may look at those things. not too big of a surprise on that front. >> another thing that jumped out again, because it's weird. not because it's a crime.
is this account and the mueller report that a very senior kremlin person asked you for trump contacts in december, 2016. deputy prime minister, quote, asked page if co-connect the prime minister with individuals involved involved with future cooperation. i guess i'm wondering, why were they thinking they needed you when donald trump was president-elect and they had presumably very high level contacts? i would need to see the full context of that. i did have a conversation with him very briefly while i was over there in december about the primarily about the school where i gave a graduation speech. he's a graduate of that school and he's been on the board for some time. we did talk about some policy-related stuff. but nothing -- >> so you're saying, there was some inaction. they were thinking of you from that connection. i want to throw up something from hope hicks. a lot of people who speak for
donald trump have been caught in lies that basically, he ordered them to tell. one of them appears to potentially be about you. march 2016 as i think so many now know, you were announced as this informal adviser to the campaign. not a big deal. then we see in the mueller report, that hope hicks, who you know deals with trump personally, tells conway and bannon in semi, inquiries about page should be announced that he was announced as informal adviser. since then he's had no role or official contact with the campaign. was that true? >> listen, ari, the craziness, if you look at what had happen over the last two months, going to that defamatory report on september 23, 2016, poor hope was getting these insane number of calls from "wall street journal," "new york times," cnn. at least those are the ones that were calling me. and based on this defamatory
dodgy dossier, which the dnc consultant was trying to pass around and finally he finds someone in late september, and it was just complete chaos. so it's -- the election interference. the massive election interference and hopefully we get to the bottom of it. >> so i get a straight answer from you. if she was not telling the truth, your view is you understand why. you think she was under pressure of a media campaign. >> no. i wouldn't say that. and i don't know the full context. i'm not familiar with that piece and i haven't seen any reports on it. but i feel, my heart is, it just feels really bad of everything that hope went through based on this election interference. >> final question to you. i'm late on time. they're telling me i have to go. one more question for you. do you think this should all rest here and the country should move forward once congress decides whether or not they want
to do anything about the results of the report? or are you looking for the barr justice department to begin new proceedings or investigations? >> i haven't over the last decade, i can't think of one time i've agreed with former ambassador mike mcfaul. on the last hour, he said that they should look into what happened around the election with the obama administration. as a former obama administration i'm in full agreement with him and again, mostly -- he said it in a comparison to the 9/11 commission. we need to find out what happened to get the full story. from what i've seen, it's not the full story from the brief clips i have read. >> i will give you time and there is a lot of the story in here. they said it was not a good use of time and we want to relook backwards again.
we will be covering all of it and thank you for taking the questions here. >> thank you, great to see you. >> when we come back, one more thing. ome back, one more thing. subscribe to movies. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ 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. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter]
(vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? ♪ ♪ i can do more to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and i take trulicity once a week to activate my body to release it, like it's supposed to. trulicity is not insulin. it starts acting in my body from the first dose and continues to work when i need it, 24/7. trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, you're allergic to trulicity, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin
increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. [horn honks] man this is what i feel like when i wear regular shoes, cramped and uncomfortable. we can arrange a little upgrade. which is why i wear skechers... wide fit shoes. they have extra room throughout. they're like a luxury ride for my feet. try skechers wide fit shoes. they're like a luxury ride for my feet. so, you're open all day, that's what 24/7 means, sugar. kind of like how you get 24/7 access to licensed agents with geico. hmm? yeah, you just go online, or give them a call anytime. you don't say. yep. now what will it take to get 24/7 access to that lemon meringue pie? pie! pie's coming!
that's what it takes, baby. geico®. great service from licensed agents, 24/7. you have 4.3 minutes this time,to yourself.rn. this calls for a taste of cheesecake. philadelphia cheesecake cups. rich, creamy cheesecake with real strawberries. find them with the refrigerated desserts. conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan, that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪
i'm happy to announce that msnbc will devout a two-hour special to what is in the report. you can join me and neal katyal and special experts at 9:00 p.m. eastern, 6:00 p.m. pacific. an expert laden special. i hope you have a great holiday weekend and hope you join us this sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern. we'll be right back. 0 p.m. eastern. we'll be right back. let's see, aleve is proven better on pain
than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills. so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain. when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org
dad, it's fine. we have allstate. and with claimrateguard they won't raise your rates just because of a claim. that's why you're my favorite... i know. are you in good hands? when your flight gets in late, it's never too early for coffee. oh no no no. your new boss seems cool, but she might not be sweatpants cool. who is that ready this early? it's only 7 am. somebody help me. close call. not quite ready to face the day? that's why we're here with free hot breakfast and a warm welcome. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. hampton by hilton.
you mighyour joints...ng for your heart... book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. at to cover the essentialsyou have in retirement, as well as all the things you want to do. because when you're ready for what comes next, the only direction is forward. every day,
visionaries are creating the future. ♪ so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. ♪ the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ because the future only happens with people who really know how to deliver it. that does it for me. we will see you sunday night. "hardball" starts now. will the democrats be the enforcers. that is the question. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington