that lived in the white house. i think it is mind boggling that it still exists and is in such great condition. that room i really love. i also really like the state dining room. not because of necessarily how it is now, although it is lovely, but that corner of the room is where jefferson's private study was and where he had his cabinet meetings. i think my next book will be looking at adams and jefferson's cabinets. that space really holds a special spot in my heart because it does not exist really anymore like it did look at the time. trying to imagine what it was is a special thing. susan both of you have only : known working with a trump administration. it's hard to compare with past presidents. you said each administration brings their own different sense of history. what about the level of interest that the trump's have and the history of the mansion? how have they express that in working with you and others? matthew the first lady has : worked with us in terms of the egg roll coming up. that is something th

house, chief white house correspondent hallie jackson. let me start with you. that's the question to ask. what is the administration trying to do? there was an iran deal, the president campaigned against it. his national security adviser hasn't been in favor of that deal. now president trump talks of threatening to them but talking to them, getting negotiation, getting nuclear weapons out of their hands. what's the end goal? >> reporter: this is classic donald trump, notably on the foreign policy front. the negotiating tactic with kim jong-un, fire and fury interspersed with being in love. it is similar with the iranian regime. the president in that fox news interview taped it last week, prior to the tweets talking about warning of the end of iran and that of course sparking the foreign minister's fiery response. it is mixed messaging and back and forth. this is a president as his advisers will say likes to keep adversaries off balance. this appears to be if you want to call it strategy, a strategy to do just that. there's also the person

the white house has said "no." clearly, the committee could hold don mcgahn in contempt, but the white house and the department of justice has said that you can't compel mcgahn to testify about his conversations with the president. look, there are lots of people who believe you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube after he testified before bob mueller for 30 hours. but mcgahn's not going to show up tomorrow. jerry nadler knows it. and maybe they're just going to have another show hearing. >> is there any chance mcgahn defies the white house and does show up. he's a private citizen? >> not tomorrow. i don't know the answer, though i would lean "no," wolf. because whether or not mcgahn thinks this is the right move, the white house doing what they're doing, provides him cover to not have to go under oath and do -- and testify. i would note, i think that is an unfortunate thing for the public, for this reason. yes, he did testify for 30 hours. we know that. one of the things he testified to is that donald trump o

house counsel. >> maybe not this white house counsel. >> you talk about walking in to work at the white house every day and you did that during some of the most challenging times in the history of the united states, after 9/11 and the war on terror , talk to us about being part of a white house during this unprecedented legal time. you were really treading in uncharted legal water, having to make unique, novel decisions on behalf of the white house and on behalf of justice so talk to us a little bit about assessing those issues and relying on the people that were around you. >> the job of the white house counsel is not to make the final determination and with respect to top legal issues, live surveillance like those were not legal decisions by those involved in white house counsel. what i would do as a general matter is when a policy issue goes up like the ones i just described, i would get lawyers and affected agencies to come to the west wing and we would debate them. for a long time. obviously would have someone from justice, oftentimes the head of the criminal division. someone from

other white house officials. there's been this building of tension between the administration and house democrats over a litany of issues. >> it's very clear what we're seeing is bill barr and the department of justice, they don't want to be pushed around here. i don't think -- what we have seen from bill barr is he's not afraid to answer questions and say what's on his mind. he gave some very interesting answers. he knew what he was doing today. i think laura knows this best, the department of justice are saying enough is enough. we're not going to let you push us around. that's ultimately, i think, what this is all about. >> you heard nadler say the trump administration cannot dictate to the house of representatives how to conduct a congressional hearing. >> they can't. what's going to happen? people are defying subpoenas. who are going to hold all these people responsible for not responding to subpoenas? for not appearing to congress? what's the recourse here? >> heit is criminal, is it civi? this will drag ou

the white house asserts that mr. mcgahn does not have to appear today because he's entitled to, quote, absolute immunity, unquote, from our subpoenas. we know this argument is wrong, of course. because the executive branch has tried this approach before. in 2007, president george bush attempted to invoke a similarly broad and unjustified assertion of executive privilege and asked his former counsel, harriet miers, who ignore a subpoena issued by this committee. ms. miers also did not appear at her scheduled hearing. judge john bates, who was appointed by president bush, slapped down that argument fairly quickly. quote, the executive cannot identify a single judicial opinion that recognizes absolute immunity for senior presidential advisers in this or any other context. that simple yet critical fact bears repeating. he asserted absolute immunity claim here is entirely unsupported by the case law. close quote, from the judicial decision. in other words, when this committee issues a subpoena, even to a senior presidenti

official, white house officials over here at the white house, and the president said this is not being done for me. this is being done for the presidency and so the president is essentially saying what his team is saying this is about protecting the interests of the presidency. but, wolf, i thought it was also interesting, you know, the way he answered my question about whether or not his administration is stonewalling the congress. at the very end i tried to ask a follow-up as to whether or not he's will and whether his team is willing to battle it out in the courts and didn't answer that question and turned to the next question at that point. one thing we should also point out he was asked about this judge's ruling earlier this afternoon that said that his longtime accountants had to turn over financial records to members of congress. wolf, the president there said that he blamed all of this, this ruling on an obama appointed judge and so, you know, that is one of his go tos when he's confronted with a ruling that goes against him and his interests and his agenda he typically blames

and we still have a white house that basically denies that this took place, and we have a white house that is so afraid of donald trump's wrath that when the former secretary of homeland security said let's get a cabinet meeting together, to actually plan for 2020, the white house chief of staff said let's not have that meeting because it might offend the president. this is outrageous, and it is candidly beyond the pale, and why our committee, bipartisan, and why this congress needs to make sure it doesn't happen again. we need to make a law in place that if you receive assistance from a foreign power during an election, you have an obligation to report that. that we make sure that we have our election systems safe and secure with a paper audit trail and that the large companies who have 90%, three companies have 90% of our voter files, there's some way to have security checks on the files. and that we have some rules of the road around facebook, youtube, twitter, in terms of how they are not going to be manipulated on a going forward basis. every american, i don't care what political

let's go to peter alexander at the white house. what reason is the trump administration giving for the president directing don mcgahn to defy a congressional subpoena and not testify today? >> the white house counsel details this in a letter to the house judiciary chairman writing that the justice department has advised him that mcgahn is immune from white house testimony. the legal opinions go back four decades it says regarding a president's close advisers and makes clear in this letter the president has directed mcgahn not to appear. president trump was pressed on his decision on the south lawn before departing town last night. >> why are you asking don mcgahn to defy a congressional subpoena? >> well, as i understand it, they're going that for the office of the presidency for future presidents. i think it's an important precedent, and the attorneys say that they are not doing that for me, they're doing that for the office of the president. so we're talking about the future. >> meantime, the democrats have scored their first cou

whether trump and the white house will try to stop him from doing so. here's what the president had to say about that today. >> will you allow robert mueller to testify? >> well, i'm going to leave that up to our very great attorney general, and he'll make a decision on that. bob mueller's no friend of mine. i had conflicts with him. we had somebody that is in love with james comey. he liked james comey. they were good friends. >> this is a potential reversal from one he wrote mueller should not testify. earlier this evening james comey who was fired exactly two years ago today had this to say about mueller and about trump's remarks. >> i respect him. i don't think we have that kind of relationship. >> you think mueller should testify? >> of course. and explain his thinking. the president says this report is a complete exoneration of him. why wouldn't the special counsel be permitted to testify? >> tonight trump is also coming to the defense of his son, donald trump junior who is now facing a subpoena from the senate intelligence committee which is carr

however, the white house and lower level u.s. navy officials did exchange emails about keeping the ship's name out of sight, lest it provoke the president's anger. navy leadership nixed that idea. this morning at the white house, the president exhibited more of his trademark anger and resentment regarding the late senator and this story. >> i would not have done that. i was very angry with john mccain because he killed health care. i was not a big fan of john mccain in any way, shape or form. i think john mccain had a lot to getting president bush, a lot to do with it to go into the middle east, which was a catastrophe. to me, john mccain, i wasn't a fan. but i would never do a thing like that. now, somebody did it because they thought i didn't like him, okay? and they were well meaning, i will say. i didn't know anything about it. i would never have done that. >> the buck stops with him, not. a reporter then asked the president do you owe the sailors of the mccain an apology, the president replied no, not at all. hours later, se

here is what the white house would like to do. like to flip it and make it 57% employment and skills, 33% family, 10% humanitarian and other grounds and don't forget they want to end the visa lottery. border security. the president will talk about that. building the new wall. modernizing ports of entry. updating the legal immigration process. if you know anyone trying to immigrate to this country it is long and expensive. expedite the adjudication process and quickly remove those who do not have legitimate asylum claims. it has been cast into sharp focus thanks to the millions coming here claiming asylum by by passing and jumping the line white house officials say ahead of those fighting to come here the legal way. but any solution to this problem will have to begin in the halls of capitol hill. >> white house's plan is not designed to -- this is designed to become law. the white house plan is trying to unite the republican party around border security and merit-based immigration. i'm trying to get relief to our border patrol agen

another no from the trump white house. the president blocks his former counsel from testifying, and more and more democrats say the price of this defiance should be an impeachment inquiry. plus, some perspective employees ask for a parking spot. others may be a chance to telecommute. just wait until you hear the demands of a kansas politician who wanted to be the president's new immigration czar. and the president on the road doubling down as his own producer. he loves the rally stage

why he is refusing to answer whether he's talking to the white house about how the white house wants those ongoing prosecutions to be handled. justice department, just so you know, is supposed to be totally independent of political interference in terms of who it prosecutes and who it doesn't and how it conducts prosecutions. but barr today refused to say whether or not he was consulting with the white house about the conduct of the prosecutions that have sprung from mueller's report. barr also today announced, i'm not kidding, that if a president wants to contend that he has been falsely accused of wrongdoing, well, that's all he needs. that's all he needs if he wants to fire a prosecutor investigating that. and i know you think that i'm being hyperbolic. i know you're thinking right now that barr couldn't possibly have said that a president can fire a prosecutor if he believes that prosecutor is investigating something that is a false accusation. i know you think that i'm being hyperbolic here, but honestly, that is exactly what he said. >> if it was based on false allegations, the

it says the white house learned in august that mr. mcgahn had told mr. mueller's investigators that he believed the president had not obstructed justice according to one of the people. after "new york times" article revealed that mr. mcgahn had spoken to investigators for at least 30 hours, mr. burke tried to reassure the white house that his client told mr. mueller that he never believed mr. trump had committed an obstruction offense. pall paul butler, let me ask you about that. there's some sourcing here. so who knows? if what is being suggested here is true, that is to say mcgahn's lawyer, mcgahn told the white house that he had told mueller i didn't think what you did was obstruction, does that change at all questions about propriety of the white house doing this? >> well, i think that in terms of whether the president committed obstruction, don mcgahn has never been a federal prosecutor, he's never practiced criminal law. on that issue i'm going to go with the judgment of the over 800 former federal prosecutors including barbara and i, who signed th

an administration official revealing that the white house asked former white house counsel don mcgahn to say publicly that president trump did not obstruct justice and mcgahn refused. a source familiar with the president said he was upset with mcgahn's reversal. the story was first reported in "the wall street journal." the white house made the request to mcgahn at least twice in the last month. mcgahn was a key witness for robert mueller. he was mentioned in the report more than 500 times. according to the mueller report, president trump sought to have mcgahn fire mueller. mcgahn refused to do that as well but the president denied that ever happened. joining us is the reporter who first broke the story, rebecca ballhouse. rebecca, what are you learning about this outreach from the white house to don mcgahn. >> what we understand is within a day of the release of the mueller report, emmet flood, a top white house lawyer, the white house special counsel, received a request from the president that he ask don mcgahn to publicly declare in a statement that he didn't believe his interactio

>> it's a little card that allows you to get into the white house through security to go to white house press brief wrrings go to meetings with senior administration officials in the white house. it's a valuable thing to have. and once you have it, you really should do everything possible to make sure that it's renewed. however, when i got my hard pass renewed under the trump administration that was in 2017, and i got it because one of the nbc cameraman at the white house said once you have it, don't lose it so go and get it, so i got it. but i never went to the white house. so when i got an e-mail from the white house on march 19th saying our records show that you haven't been -- in the last 180 days you've been to the white house 50% less of the time, therefore your pass is expired, i didn't think anything of it. i thought, well, they got me. i haven't been since january -- actually april of 2017. so, fine, okay you can have it. but it wasn't until i read dana's column this week where i realized oh, holy smokes it wasn't just that this was a systematic thing, and that's why i retweete

for former white house counsel don mcghan not to testify. the white house announcing in the last hour that mcgahn has been directed to defy a congressional subpoena and skip a house judiciary hearing tomorrow. the move will set up a lengthy court battle and potential contempt proceeding for mcgahn. it's another aggressive step by the trump administration in their efforts to stone wall lawmakers. that's where we start with our former reporters and friends, joyce vance joins us, mike schmidt is back, john heileman is back from "parts unknown" -- >> so far-off the grid it wasn't clear i'd ever get back. i somehow did. >> and david jolly, who i have to say, i saw an echo of what you've been saying in congressman amash's tweets. and karine jean-pierre is here. all, of course, lucky for us msnbc contributors. mike schmidt let's start with you. your story popped up an hour ago. you reported that mcgahn was going to get this legal opinion from olc at doj, the opinion in the white house saying our guy isn't showing up. is he really their guy and is h

, wolf. >> jim acosta over here at the white house for us. let's bring in kara scannel and senior justice correspondent, evan perez. evan, if flynn did, in fact, tell mueller that there were individuals associated with the trump administration or with congress, trying to get him to change his testimony in order, presumably, to make it more favorable toward the president, why wouldn't mueller have brought specific charges of obstruction against individuals? >> you know, that's a big question. i think members of congress are going to be drilling down on exactly that, that question, wolf. i think we get a few hints in the mueller report. we can see that, according to the mueller report, they couldn't reach to this issue, simply because there's an attorney general/client privilege issue. there's a reference to this in the report, that there is a trump personal attorney who had reached out and left this voice mail, this voice mail in which a sort of oblique reference to, we want to keep you on the team, get a heads up on what you're saying. but i

white house source saying things will inevitably cool down. there's a lot of that that can get done without a lot of interaction between the white house and congress. as of 2 p.m., this is pretty serious. >> dana: he is the decider indeed. john roberts, thank you. for reaction from the democratic leadership, mike emanuel is on capitol hill. schumer and pelosi left the white house, went straight microphone. >> reporter: no doubt about it, dana. good afternoon. speaker nancy pelosi continues talking about that infrastructure meeting which abankruptly conned. people ask her if she's surprised and she said nobody should ever be surprised about what happens here. >> there's so many needs. we thought we had some level of agreement. but you never know with this president of the united states. so that's what happened this morning. it was very, very, very strange. >> reporter: chuck shumer accused president trump of coming up with a preplanned excuse when he couldn't figure out how to pay for # $2 trillion worth of infrastructure. >> we were interested

is not backing down. >> the white house and the department of justice is enabling the white house to try to evade accountability to the people. to say in effect the president is a tyrant and dictator with no limit. we'll use any legal power we have with respect to mr. muller and mr. mcgahn, to anybody to do our job of holding administration accountable. >> democrats have issued subpoenas to nearly ten current and former trump officials among them the secretary of the treasury steve mnuchin is still refusing to release six years of the president's tax returns to the house ways and means committee and has until friday to reply. today mnuchin was asked about that deadline. >> how do you plan to respond to chairman neal's claims? >> we haven't had an official response yet. we will compile with the timing of it, i think you can pretty much guess how we're going to but i haven't made a decision. the democrats are trying weaponize the irs. it's a very, very dangerous issue. >> mnuchin had not spoken to the president or white house about how to handle the demand for records and we're learnin

this is the style of this white house. this is the style of the white house to want to fight, to want to have a foil, in particular, a democratic foil and the foils here, of course, are nancy pelosi, jerry nadler, the folks who are over these committees and over the house democrats. i think this will continue from this white house, because it isn't clear where this goes. it's not clear how long this fight lasts. it's not clear how you resolve it. what is the real power of the democrats to actually compel people? are they willing to go as far as susan is talking about here? or as barr joked about, this idea of handcuffs and putting people in jail. i guess there's a little congressional jail some place on the hill. but for now, this is a white house that likes to have this defiant posture. and also, i think, the zroerts, too. the republican voters. the idea that this is a place that they're under siege. >> bianna, the white house argues that the democrats are certainly trying to do a do-over on the mueller report. they say t

and white house involvement? >> the big issue is puerto rico funding. republicans and donald trump feel they have provided enough money for puerto rico and the u.s. territory has poorly spent the money. they don't want to provide more. they have given leeway in that -- in theations negotiations on the senate side. the reason the house held this vote today on disaster aid, they had one in january but since and there were floods tornadoes and other disasters that they wanted to add funding for. the complaints. as we mentioned 34 republicans voting against it, it is a significant showing given trump tweeted not to vote for it. >> what about the senate's version? are they trying to come up with their own? not familiar because i cover the house but they are working on the puerto rico issue as i understand it. >> it included border security. is that a sticking point? >> there are republicans that would like -- the white house does want -- they had sent a supplemental for border security spending, $4.3 billion to help w

the white house thinking is this isn't normal. why would we put a cabinet official when an elected member of congress can do it. >> there is a bit of irony for the first time in two-plus years the white house wants things in washington to be normal. >> the attorney general's testimony and the special counsel's report. we'll break down where these two friends contradict each other. one stitch. one load. one breakthrough at a time. everything that matters, made better. you know them by their work. they know us by ours. everything, built for those who are on to bigger things. well, here's to first dates! you look amazing. and you look amazingly comfortable. when your v-neck looks more like a u-neck... that's when you know, it's half-washed. try downy fabric conditioner. unlike detergent alone, downy helps prevent stretching by conditioning and smoothing fibers, so clothes look newer, longer. downy and it's done. like.. pnc easy lock, so you can easily lock your credit card when its maximum limit differs from its vertical limit. and c

the white house announcing former white house counsel don mcgahn will ignore a subpoena to testify tomorrow before the house judiciary. we break down that fight tonight. >>> early in the day the president spent a good deal of time sounding off on everything from threats to iran and hillary clinton to the genesis of russian probe. we debate should president trump and republicans zooming in hard right now on the strength of the u.s. economy? where are the republican because this is the 2020 fight. it will be a referendum on the economy and president trump himself. right now you're witnessing the biggest 180-degree turn around of all, it is this. a year-and-a-half before the 2016 election all the republican candidate were talking about big tax cuts. this a year-and-a-half, before 2020 all the leading democrats are talking about getting rid of trump's victory and tax cut and enacting the biggest tax hike ever joe biden issuing a campaign, stop fighting, start fixing. biden's words don't match his actions. two terms of economic failure with president obama, high unemployment, florida flat-lining

how long will it last to be cleared of white house influence? >> the opinions in case law are on our side. take a look at the meyers case. where the court said not once but twice, there is no such thing of a claim of a blanket immunity. that's a claim an administration with make, but not case law. that won't hold up. >>> you confident the district court in d.c. would handle it? who am deliver what you consider just? >> i hope the courts see that every institution of our government framed over the course of hundreds of years through sweat, blood, and giving of their lives will say this is too important of a time to allow this amoral president to tear down whether it's judiciary or rule of law, coequal branches of government. i hold out hope that the judiciary is sworn to uphold the law against an out of control administration. >> he seems to be, this president, operating like -- and i would do the same. if we were on death row, we would do everything to delay it. he's going to challenge every subpoena and every citation for contempt. every reques

cnn abby phillip is live at the white house. and so abby, we know sources tell cnn the president was in their word erupted -- that he erupted after hearing speaker pelosi speaking out this morning. let's take some steps back. how did this whole news conference evolve complete with the podium signs and printed handouts? how did it come together. >> reporter: that was the big question. because one report -- when reporters were haste illy called into the rose garden they were greeted by that sign which was a greatest hits of all the president has been saying about the mueller investigation. but sources say this morning after the president heard what nancy pelosi had to say about him, he was livid. he was angry about those comments and you heard him bring it up repeatedly in that press conference. so aides went ahead and started putting together this poster. they had a printout that was also featuring a number of facts about the mueller investigation and the president likes to cite. but that -- that pamphlet they were handing out to

. >> a 12-page refusal let there says the white house won't turnover documents to house judiciary so the committee chair likens the president to a king and accuses the white house as if trump were a tyrant or dictator and our elements of our own government trying to get us into a war with iran? they claim incoming threats from iran but members of congress have at least one british general don't seem to know what they are talking about and the alabama governor signs a bill effectively banning abortion and violates the law of the land and reproductive rights are now in something of a ground war across our country as "the 11th hour" gets underway on a wednesday night. >>> well, good evening. day 846 of this trump administration. the state of alabama has now passed what is infect a ban on abortion in that state. the most restrictive apportion law in the land. the governor who signed it today admitted quickly it unenforceable because it goes against the law of our land, but this bill is designed to challenge that very president. tonight, we'll look at what this means for the women of alab

the white house press secretary declared to reporters, quote, there was no real news here. which is true, except for the part that mueller stating publicly that if his team thought the president didn't commit a crime, he would have said so. sanders had an answer, though, saying if bob mueller determined there was a crime, he would have had a moral obligation to report it, he didn't. that's not really true. mueller explained because of the guidelines he was working under, no president could be unindicted. it would be unfair to the president or any defendant to be charged, but not able to have their day in court. mueller did report what could be considered efforts of possible obstruction that could be determined defenses by congress, but sanders had none of that. >> i think it's real simple. i say what we have said is that they were looking at whether or not there was collusion. that would be the crime that would have been committed, collusion or obstruction, and all of those things have been determined to have not taken place, collusion, conspiracy, obstruction. and again, w

who has the answers about what is happening in the white house? t is happening in the white house? my experience with usaa has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ is that for me? mhm aaaah! nooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand. [son loudly clears throat] [mom and dad laugh] bounty, the quicker picker upper. now with new prints featuring characters from disney/pixar's toy story 4 in theaters june 21. a wealth of information. a wealth of perspective. ♪ a wealth of opportunities. that's the clarity yo

president trump walked out of a white house meeting with democrats. he said because nancy pelosi accused him of a cover-up of the russia investigation. >> we believe that the president of the united states is engaged in a cover-up. >> instead of walking in happily into a meeting, i walk in to look at people that have just said that i was doing a cover-up. i don't do cover-ups. this whole thing was a takedown attempt at the president of the united states. >> the president went on to say that he cannot work with democrats unless they stop investigating him. let's discuss that with joe lockhart, former clinton press secretary and abby phillips, cnn white house correspondent and john avlon, cnn political analyst. was the president going into the meeting to hatch an infrastructure plan with democrats? the democrats accused it of being a pre-planned walkout. did he really want to hammer out a deal? >> probably not. it had been over 24 hours in which the white house had been signalling that the infrastructure meeting wasn't going to go as everyone planned. t

how is the white house feeling? >> it's a messaging war to see who came out on top or at least expressed it to the american public in the best possible terms for your side. sarah sanders doing the bidding for the president, basically accusing the democrats of a complete lie, suggesting they can do two things at once, saying the only thing they can do right now in is investigate. i pressed her for a little clarity on what will happen now and here is what she said. >> does this mean the president is open to a shutdown because democrats continue to investigate? >> we want to continue to move forward and get things done. i think the president and our team will look at administrative actions we can take to fix some of these problems. >> is the president putting his own job ahead of the best interest of the american people by saying no legislation if you keep investigating. >> that's insane. the president is putting the american people first. it's the democrats that don't want to do anything. >> that was sarah sanders a f

we've seen a number of white house officials on the white house lawn today touting them including larry kudlow and sarah sanders. the sustained economic growth which, let's note, began under barack obama, but has certainly not slowed down under this president and it's frustrating to his advisers that he can't stay focused on this, when this is his best argument. democrats recognize this too, inherently it's tough to beat any incumbent when the economy is this good. >> indeed. and michael steele, the last time we had jobs numbers, an unemployment rate this low, americans were landing on the moon for the first time. that's something that kevin hassett pointed out from the white house today. and he's absolutely right. now, they're going to say -- the president's already going to say that this is all him, and as jonathan just pointed out, he inherited a rising economy from barack obama after all of the hard work that was done after the 2008 crash that obama inherited that mess. but that said, they certainly can argue that the corporate tax cut helped on the upside in terms of not that it tr

the white house is not going to budge. this white house is very hard on information. getting information. even though they say they're transparent. there are so many contradictions with the mueller report, with the redactions, everything involving this investigation. and the best thing this white house could do would be to allow this to go out. but now by holding back and saying we're not going to budge as far as the supreme court and it's going to be delay and delay and delay. but the bottom line is it's not giving the american people confidence and at the same time it's seeing the highest approval numbers yet. the american people want to know what it is in this mueller report. >> it's going to be interesting to see when the approval numbers come out. you're right. still low but for this president it is a high maerk. i want to bring you in. and we'll discuss this in depth in the show more yeb wa. we've discuss canned much of this and you managed to get ahold of one set of tax returns. they show the president lost more money than literally any other individual taxpaye

former white house counsel don

in the white house driveway. kellyanne conway actually broke the law in the white house driveway, on video in front of a group of reporters who didn't seem to notice that she broke the law, and that might be because there is so much other seemingly bigger potential law breaking going on in and around this president of the united states. first tonight we go to the breaking news about the break between special counsel robert mueller and his boss, attorney general william barr. and we begin with new video tonight of the attorney general not telling the truth about special counsel robert mueller. >> did bob mueller support your conclusion? >> i don't know whether bob mueller supported my conclusion. >> the video is, of course, not new, but our knowledge, our understanding of that video is completely new. our knowledge that the attorney general was not telling the truth. that is what's new tonight. we also know tonight that the attorney general did not tell the truth about the special counsel in the house of represent

house officials and republicans close to the white house. trump feared a repeat but bigger of the february testimony of his former lawyer and testimony michael cohen which dominated news coverage and each overshadowed a into you can clear summit with north korean leader kim jong-un. trump feared americans would be captivated by seeing and hearing mueller. yesterday we got a taste of that. of course, so what has been -- we saw the public tweets, the reaction from sarah sanders outside the white house yesterday saying case closed, robert mueller has finished his job, it's time to move on, but what are they really feeling inside the white house? >> the white house was given a heads up the night before that mueller would be given a statement but they weren't apprised of what the contents would be. the president as he often starts his mornings stayed in the white house residence yesterday and watched on television just like americans around the nation to see what mueller would say. mueller to finally break his silence after two years, his first p

hans nichols at the white house. i understand you have new information for us. >> i was just speaking with the senior administration official, chris. the white house was given a heads up about this last night. what is unclear whether they know the subject and/or content. from talking to officials this morning, it doesn't appear the white house has settled on a strategy on whether or not they're going to respond to what mr. mueller has to say at 11:00. that's the indication. it's not proof, but an indication that the white house doesn't know what the subject and/or content is going to be from mr. mueller. it almost seems as though they're watching this with as much interest as we are. now, all this information takes place and gets conveyed at different levels. we have to be very careful about what we know and what we don't know. we know the white house was given a heads up on this. this is going through normal channels. if they didn't try or weren't able to stop robert mueller from making this statement. and we know w

now you have the president or at least the white house saying we are not going to allow the white house, former white house counsel to involve himself in, you know, another testimony. isn't this yet another form of attempted obstruction? >> it certainly seems like it is. think about the idea, this is accumulation of instances to put your thumb on the scale and influence an investigation. you have the cumulative aspect of it and request that sounds like what happened when james comey was asked by the president to say publicly, i'm not under investigation. please, crack the narrative to make sure everyone knows i'm exonerated and going beyond that to say, i would like you, the white house counsel, whose job it is not to be my personal attorney to be the office of presidency and longevity of credibility to have it refused and continue is part and parcel of the theme of the president of the united states acting as if there is no law. >> if executive privilege was already removed so that don mcgahn could be questioned by the mueller team, how could the white house exert executive privilege n

you need to reissue your subpoena to the white house. the doj in this letter is making this argument about an accommodation process. they want to sort of get into the details of who can see it and who can't see it rather than giving any sort of hard and fast definitive answer. so their end, it's all about running out the clock here. >> so, josh, what is likely to happen right now with this pending vote? apparently the judiciary committee still planning to go forward with it. if they do, what would that mean? >> well, it means that barr, attorney general barr could be held in contempt. potentially don mcgahn, although i think that may slip to the back burn area little bit as barr takes center stage. we've also seen the fight over barr become a proxy for the bauder discussion that some democrats don't want to see to have about impeachment. it's a much simpler vote to go after the attorney general. the accommodation process is a prelude to potential court battles over all of these issues. when they go into court, i think the executive branc

. >> white house counsel don mcgahn will not appear at a white house committee today, defying a subpoena. the white house directed mcgahn not to testify. now, chairman nadler says there will be serious consequences. nadler tells cnn the first step will be holding mcgahn in contempt of congress. joining us now to discuss all of this, we have rachel bade, congressional reporter for the "washington post," who has inside scoop of what happened behind those closed congressional doors last night. we also have jennifer rogers, former federal prosecutor and cnn analyst. david gregory, political analyst. and abby phillip, white house correspondent. rachel, give us color of what transpired behind closed doors, where the democrats began in a heated debate about impeachment. >> yesterday was sort of a tipping point for a lot of house judiciary committee members, when they got news the white house was not going to allow don mcgahn to appear for testimony he was scheduled to give this morning at 10:00 a.m. another example of stonewalling from the white house. they were fed up. in their traditional mon

they now want to know what white house counsel don mcgahn witnessed inside the white house. he revealed a lot to robert mueller, but this question -- will he reveal it to the american people? not if the president has his way. and here's abc's cecilia vega. >> reporter: he was the white house lower on the inside. the man who heard it all and took notes on everything. and today, the trump administration made it clear it does not want don mcghan cooperating with congressional investigators, ordering him not to comply with a subpoena demanding his records from the mueller probe. democrats are enraged. >> every day, he's obstructing justice by saying this one shouldn't testify and that one shouldn't testify. >> reporter: mcgahn played a key role in the special counsel's investigation into whether president trump obstructed justice. cited more than any other witness in the mueller report, 157 sometimes. he told report mueller's team the president repeatedly asked him to have mueller fired. mcgahn said he refused and also refused to lie about it later. and he documented it all in e

the white house says that don mcgahn, the president's former white house counsel doesn't have the legal right to provide documents subpoenaed by congress. do you believe this is a valid legal argument? >> well, i don't think so. i think don mcgahn -- frankly wing it's the president who has waived executive privilege by allowing don mcgahn to testify pot special counsel and share things to the president's own personal attorneys. that's an issue that may end up being litigated in court. more broadly, it's pretty striking that just a few weeks ago, the president was claiming complete and total exoneration and is now taking steps to prevent don mcgahn, the white house counsel who provided so much information to the special counsel from even appearing in front of congress. i do think this is one of those instances where i'll repeat a line i said a number of times before. if the president's truly innocent, he ought to act like it and allow white house counsel mcgahn to testify to congress. >> one of the arguments they make over at the white house is that the president allowed don mcgahn to sp

the white house versus the house. and at any minute an assist from the senate because mitch mcconnell is about to be on your screen right there declaring the russia investigation is case closed. stopping a big fight over who might be held in contempt and who might not. don mcgahn is on the list. as of about 25 seconds ago, the former white house counsel hit a deadline to hand over a bunch of documents. jerry nadler is also threatening to hold the attorney general in contempt. his staff is meeting with the doj today over democratic demands to see the full unredacted mueller report. and rounding out the list of trump world folks under fire, steve mnuchin who again refused to hand over the president's tax returns. and we're also watching fbi director christopher wray talking spying now in his first testimony since the redacted report's release. and what about robert mueller himself? when might we see him in the witness chair? here is what the white house is saying. >> the president said robert mueller shouldn't testify,

. >>> the white house ratchets up the trade fight. the chinese trade delegation is expected to arrive in washington this week as president trump's tariff threat rattles markets. >>> good morning, everybody. it is tuesday, may 7th. i'm yasmin vossoughian alongside jeff bennett who is in for ayman mohyeldin. let's start with treasury secretary steve mnuchkin rejecting a request from house democrats. this is the third time he's failed to meet a congressional deadline to hand in documents raising stakes for a legal battle between congress and the administration. another legal battle. in a letter to house ways and means chairman, mnuchkin said the committee's request lacks a legislative purpose. citing guidance from the justice department, mnuchkin went on to say, out of respect for the deadlines previously set by the committee and consistent with our commitment to a prompt response i'm informing you now that the department may not lawfully fulfill the committee's request. he added the doj would publish a legal opinion on the issue soon. t

the white house rejected demand for documents. congressman jim jordan tonight about the widespread presidential harassment that is going on on capitol hill. >> is the chairman of the ways and means committee going after the president tax returns for the past several years. you have maxine waters and chairman cummings owing after 10 years of the president business records based on the testimony of michael cohen who went to prison last week and went to prison for lying to congress. then you have chairman nadler who is telling the attorney general with our subpoena and if he was comply with that subpoena, he would be breaking the law. >> straightforward. just like that. president trumped down the line. new immigration plan tomorrow. focusing on border security and moving towards merit-based immigration. his plan would quadruple the number admitted because of work-related skills/the number of immigrants admitted because of family ties and the lottery. bill de blasio decided to make a big announcement declaring his presidential bid wro