>> welcome to inside politics. i'm dana bash. john king is off. robert mueller's investigation started as an effort to determine if team trump colluded with russians in 2016. did the president's actions in 2017 turn the focus to possible obstruction of justice. plus the fbi is investigating the clinton foundation to see if donors were promised special access to hillary clinton while she was at the state department. president trump isn't the only republican lashing out at the attorney general. >> let me put it this way. the american people and now are getting a taste of what people in washington have known over this last year. that is jeff sessions betrays the people who have had faith in

him. >> new questions about a building case in the russia investigation it seems for potential obstruction of justice. president trump gave firm instructions in march to the white house top lawyer and stopped the attorney general jeff sessions from recusing himself in the justice department's investigation into whether mr. trump's associate had helped. the russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election. walter is the former head of the office of government ethics and resigned from the trump administration in july of last year and he tells cnn in hindsight a few weird conversations suddenly make sense. >> i felt the doj officials seemed uncharacteristically rattled when i was talking to them and i couldn't figure out why. i thought maybe jeff sessions has a hot temper that i don't know about. it turns out don mcbegan who was

known have a hot temmer was leaning on them to recuse and thats in the piece of the puzzle as to why they seemed rattled. >> here to share their story is michael zeld on, a former special assistant to robert mueller and lauren fox and olivier knox from yahoo news. happy friday. let's dive right into the theme of this "new york times" story which i should say has some more meat on the bones, but it's a notion that we and others have been reporting that potentially, let's zero in on it, it's not necessarily the crime, but the cover up that could get the president in trouble. >> it's a matter of context. in the most benign sense the president of the united states is asking the white house

counsel to speak to jeff sessions to see whether or not there is any legal way by which sessions doesn't are to recuse himself. that's perfectly appropriate. not normal, but the white house talks to the doj about ongoing matters, but not obstruction of justice. >> it's not obstruction of justice? >> to go ask. >> does my attorney general really have to recuse himself? that's legit? >> should or could and you are saying it says must. can we talk about this. i don't think there is anything wrong about that. if he says look, i don't care what they said, you tell that attorney general he cannot recuse himself from this thing. i need him to protect me like bobby kennedy protected his brother. that's much more obstructionist. you have to understand the context and the intent of the conversation and we can't get that from the "new york times" report.

>> it is no secret that president trump was livid that jeff sessions recused himself and cannot let it go mostly because of the events that unfolded as a result of him recusing himself and the deputy appointed robert mueller. >> at the time it's clear that jeff sessions really went around the white house on this which ampified the president's anger about it. one of the interesting bits was about the lead up to comby and according to the "new york times" there was a mention of russia in the original letter the president would have sunday about the firing of james comey. the white house denies that. to deny it is really important for them to prevent the narrative from sinking in. the comey firing and the anger

towards sessions was about the president wanting to be protect and feeling that his own justice department and fbi was coming after him. the white house is trying really hard to push back, but virtually all the reporting we have seen leads to the same point. trump was angry and kind of wanted it to be over and wanted his people to stop it. >> the people with legal sensibilities, i remember realtime telling the president he doesn't have to recuse himself and feeding the notion that sessions is making a mistake. >> one is the firing was the worst decision the president has made. the other is that one of the most important sentences in all american politics is that one loan in the mueller appointment. and any other matters that arise from that investigation. that's how we get from what did

they do to the trump campaign work with them where we get into did they obstruct the investigation? that's how we get the series of things that bob mueller is investigating. >> i want to get to it, but one other nugget in the "new york times" story is about reince priebus taking handwritten notes and handing over those notes to robert mueller. i am told that what that reference appears to be is notes about a conversation that priebus had with the president about conversations that the president had with james comey where the president said that comey told him he was not under investigation multiple times. the president reporting this and said what do we do with this? the president did what is appropriate. let's give it to the white house counsel and let don know about

this and let him deal with this. >> what is significant about that is that you have another person who is taking contemporaneous notes on their conversations with the president. you have comby and his contemporaneous notes and reporting that said mccain was briefed and had those meetings. >> his deputy at the fbi. >> correct. after the oval office meeting that so shook him up. now you have priebus with handwritten notes that are contemporaneo contemporaneous. you have a lot of corroboration with what comey has said. that makes the president much more vulnerable were he to be put under oath and say something otherwise. >> we have to remember that this comey conversation when the president was asking him, am i under investigation, that was part of the frustration that the president had with comey. when comey went before congressional leaders and trying to talk about what he knew and

didn't know, that is what when president trump was stewing over what was happening. he was getting frustrate and it continues to build the narrative that he wants the investigation over yesterday and that the further this goes on the more concerned and the more in trouble it seems to make him because he just can't let it go. he wants that loyalty so much and he wants it to stop being a distraction. >> i agree with that, but the problem this creates is he wants personal exoneration. he wants to be himself cleared of this. in some sense what happens to those in the orbit and he doesn't know who paul manafort is anymore. he prepared to let those guys, but he wants his name cleared. the longer it is before that happens, if it does happen, the more likely we are going to see continued obstructionists or behavior that is contrary to his best legal interest.

his own worst enemy because of his psychological need for exoneration. >> this came out with the backdrop of this explosive book. one of the many things in this book that steve bannon apparently did was talk about impeachment. here is according to the book. bannono tone veered from desperation to resignation. if he fires mueller, it just brings the impeachment quicker. why not? what am i going to do? save him? he's donald trump. >> the reality is that you talk to people close to trump who are trump allies. many of them are most fearful about the impeachment. it's not just whispered around. people are talking about it and they are fearful about it. some people are encouraging him to 96 mueller for that very reason. they feel like this is all part

of a circle enclosing the president and entrapping him in something that will undermine his entire presidency. steve bannon maybe if that is accurate is not alone. it's not being whispered around anymore in washington. people are talking about it. >> impeachment is possible with republicans in control, but unlikely. >> people don't realize it's a political decision and not a legal one. there is a constitutional standard, but it's a political question. >> i want to turn to something that broke a short time ago and that is word that the justice department is now actively investigating the clinton foundation. the requesty is whether donors were promised favors or special access to hillary clinton when she was secretary of state. this is according to a u.s. official. the justice correspondent

jessica schneider is watching this. what are investigators actually looking for? >> we learned this investigation is being led by the fbi field office in little rock, arkansas. these agents are investigating the clinton family foundation for corruption. they told cnn authorities are digging into whether the donors may have been improperly promised policy favors or special access to hillary clinton while she was secretary of state in exchange for donations to the charity's kofer. and whether or not tax laws were followed. the new development is on the heels of cnn reporting way back in november of 2016 before the election, they are reporting that fbi agents opened an inquiry about impropriety in the dealings with donors. this current visit at least in part a continuation of that and

did start before the election. at this point now, it's still unclear what new evidence if there is any may have ignited this latest federal investigation since that initial inquiry had stalled earlier. the clinton camp is pushing back hard against this. a spokesman for hillary clinton told cnn let's call this what it is. a sham. we also heard from a spokesman and he said this. he said time after time the clinton foundation has been subjected to politically motivated allegations and time after time the allegations have been proven false. he continued on to say there are real issues in our society and leading to a tension they work hard to solve every day. we are going to stay focused on on what really matters. this is the latest inquire tow bill and hillary clinton's foundation that comes at a sensitive time. we have seen the president urge

the justice department in his tweets to investigate his biggest political rival, hillary clinton who he beat in the election. the doj larnlly stayed silent on the president's request, but the field office in arkansas opened this probe into possible corruption of the clinton foundation. >> back around the table, there could be new evidence that the fbi is looking into beyond what was in the political zit geist and the uranium one deal. it fell flat, the whole notion that there was quid pro quo because of the way the process works. having said that, i will talk about the strategy here. the fact we are being told about it and it is being reported that the president can watch on cable tv that the justice department and the fbi -- this idea

that the clinton foundation had a lot of shady things and he refused to express confidence and say jeff sessions was going to stay on as a attorney general that is a public rebuke. this does have -- i would love to know more than a u.s. official. that would help us know is this the doj letting off steam a little bit and letting the boss know they are doing what they keep insisting publicly and privately that they do. i would love to know more. >> i think it's also important to put it in the context that it's not just that say are saying i think hillary is a crook. why isn't my justice department

doing this? this is public and clear and this is a campaign promise. this is a president who is focused very intensely right now on his own political fortunes which are directly related to his ability to fulfill the promises he made on the campaign trail. lock her up was a campaign promise. for him to throw away that idea i think became untenable. you saw his allies who are saying what happened to the idea of investigating the clinton foundation? we don't know where it's going, but it is critical to the president. >> this is the calculations that are i think the 50 thing we need to talk about. what about the legal implications some. >> the allegation is donor makes donation to foundation. foundation communicates with hillary clinton as secretary of state. hillary clinton in turn does

something snsk respepecific and crime that is not being to be proved. >> how are you so sure? >> i'm not, except to say the surprise that the clintons were that cavalier about things which they have knowledge and second, we have seen in recent attempts to prosecute people. these are not prosecutable cases. you can't prove quit pro quo in this context. there is not really going to be anything at the end of this thing. i think from the law standpoint, that is most troublesome for me and it appears the white house is directing the justice department to investigate a specific individual or organization and that is problematic. >> the president is doing it on twitter. >> he can say all he wants, but

if they are acting on those t t twitter rants, that's problematic. there are clear boundaries between what the white house and justice department should do and we are meeting them if this is a true story. >> i love having you on to talk about the legal issues. everybody else stand by. we want to give a quick programming note. pamela brown is going to break down how this investigation began. all of the players tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern only on cnn. up next, the author of an explosive new book wants to say thank you. not for white house access, but president trump's insults. >> where do i send the box of chocolates. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals.

and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide.

president trump is lashing out against the author of a damning new book about his presidency. dismissing phony and full of lies. that's what he said about it. overnight the president said he authorized zero access to author michael wolff and he hit back. >> i work like every journalist

works. i have recordings and i have notes. i am certainly and absolutely in every way comfortable with everything i have reported. >> as for how wolff got access to the president and his inner circle -- >> i absolutely spoke to the president. whether he realized it was an interview or not, i don't know. it certainly was not off the record. >> did you flatter your way in? >> i said whatever was necessary to get the story. >> okay. matt visor of the boston globe joins our conversation now. i am sitting with four really good reporters. certainly you worked to get a story and worked to get information, but you don't say whatever is necessary. that's not normal. >> that's not normal. >> fair. >> i want to do that for the record and move on. speaking of not normal, i just want to put this up from steven

hayes who is a writer for the weekly standard and the long time conservative voice. here's what he says. so the president wants a book banned. he wants an opponent in jail and for good measure, maybe the former fbi director too. his thinks his former top adviser is insane. this isn't normal. it's not just trumping trump. the preferred dodge of elected republicans, it's an election of the president's troubled mind and the irrational judgment. the weekly standard has not been rah-rah donald trump at all. this is from a thoughtful guy who is clearly concerned for his party and for the country. speaks to say what you want about the sourcing on this book and about the way that michael wolff describes things. he is talking about atmospherics that all of us have heard frankly off the record in

different ways. >> nothing in here doesn't ring true. a lot of this seems to back up with more detail the reporting that a lot of us have been involved with about the white house chaos. another thing that trump seems to do. they are not necessarily arguing on some of the specifics, but trump is saying i wouldn't know this guy. i didn't authorize this. which is often his case when he doesn't like something. to downplay the knowledge of that person. when it's very clear that michael wolff was in the white house and we have seen him in the white house and he was escorted in and he did have the access. you can quibble with the details if you want. >> making the reaction to the book seems to bolster the theme of the book in general. that the president is someone who is sort of erratic and quick to anger and is reactionary.

the idea that trump would certainly turn on his chief strategist and pretend to barely know him is a theme that michael wolff talks at length about and goes to straight lengths to blow up into a bigger narrative about this president. >> we should play the way the white house is handling this. sarah huckabee sanders was very aggressive at her briefing and so is her deep tputy. >> he repeatedly begged to speak with the president and was denied access. he makes it seem like he was sitting outside the oval office every day. that's not the case. >> this is full of inaccuracies and this author is quite frankly a crack pot fake news fantasy fiction writer and it has been proven time and time again.

by his own admission. >> he has the language of trump down pat. >> he was in the communications shop. totally known quantity michael wolf. they have known donald trump for decades and produced books like this before. somehow trump's inner circle decided it was a great idea. he had access and an appointment badge that got him into the office area. one quick thing. this is not consistent with what we heard off the record. this is two years of reporting on the trump campaign and the white house. one of the things that he benefits from is he has it all in one place. i have questions about the anecdotes and i don't think donald trump know who is john boehner was. he has it all in one place. we had everything from they don't know thou turn on the lights and they don't have staffers to that amazing mar a

lago thing where they use cell phone flashlights to see documents. this is not an argument against him, but it makes me service when reporters say we did this off the record. there is ample reporting over the last two years about this kind of chaos. >> there is one anecdote to understanding the caution that you put out there. i haven't seen them get much attention, but it speaks to the way that the president approaches the people that work for him. even though he appoints to the highest courts. here's what he apparently according to the book said about judge gorsuch. on february 8th during the confirmation process, gorsuch took public exception. trump decided to pull his nomination and during conversations with actor

discussed how he should have given the nod to rudy, meaning rudy giuliani. he was the only loyal guy. this is believable. >> about the anger with gorsuch reported a couple of weeks ago. the idea that giuliani ended up being the only loyal guy is typical trump. he always goes back to old allies and friends. >> we have to remember when it came to gorsuch, the republicans in congress spent a long period of time trying to hold that seat for someone they felt was qualified for the job. giuliani wouldn't have fit that bill for many republicans. i think that that just reveals more tension between the president and the capitol hill leadership. >> the question about whether he could have been confirmed. >> everybody stand by. up next, why a key house democrat said one of the president's top lawyers should resign or be fired.

>> the top democrat on the house

judiciary committee is calling for don mcgann to step down or be fired after he asked jeff sessions not to recuse himself from the russia investigation. he was instructed by the president to talk to sessions, but the former white house ethics chief said the buck stops with mcgann. >> my view of don is that he's a cancer who has done much to undermine anti-corruption mechanisms. he can try to hide behind the i was only following orders, but that didn't work and it's not going to work here. as an attorney the president is not his client. the office of the president is his clintd and he is ultimately answerable to the american people. >> any time you refer to cancer and nazis in the same interview referring to somebody, that is harsh as it gets. to be fair, we had michael

zelden disagreeing with what you just heard depending on the context which we don't know. there is a scenario where it's totally okay for mcgann to go to jeff sessions and say you really want to refuse yourself? >> the fact that he did it is why he is where he is. the loyalty trump had with don mcgann dates back several years where he played a vital role in getting trump on the ballot in certain states and fending off challenges at the convention. he's one of those few people that had the rotating cast of characters. mcgann is one of those because it could be dubious of carrying through president trump's orders. >> the question is what if anything was the mechanism by which trump wanted mcgann to

compel sessions? we don't have any knowledge of that and as far as the times went, that indicated there was a conversation and i don't think there is anything wrong about a conversation happening. since sessions responded to mcgann by saying i talked to my attorney and they think i should recuse myself. he went and did just that. >> mcgann walked away. >> he said i understand. >> i think there is something personal there. i want to remind people that mcgann because he is the white house counsel, but even under normal circumstances -- forget about normal circumstances. let's go back to what sally yates said about her conversations with the white house counsel. remember she was the who went over with her hair on fire saying i'm worried about michael flynn that he might be compromised by the russians. >> remember the questions that

mr. mcgann asked me when i went over the second day is why does it matter to doj if one official lies to another white house official? we explained to him, he was a whole lot more than that. we went back over the same concerns that we raised the prior day and that the concern about the under lying conduct that he lied to the vice president and the american public had been misled. >> she described somebody who was not willing to at least initially grasp the severity of the problem under his roof. >> for goes back to what trump was saying about the underlying purpose of this. whether don mcgann is acting as a personal lawyer. there is a distinction there. you can't forget why did donald trump not want jeff sessions to recuse himself. it was to add a layer of

political protection to the president. it goes to that same flynn question. we had white house officials lie to each other with repercussions and about how things unfolded. it's the underlying conduct that was problematic and what was the purpose the not taking action on what sally yates told the white house. >> the attorney general in particular is facing backlash on his role in russia, but a new policy he announced on marijuana and it's coming from inside his own party. stay with us.

steyer: the president's national security adviser -- guilty. his campaign chairman -- under indictment. his son-in-law -- secret talks with russians. the director of the fbi -- fired. special counsel robert mueller's criminal investigation has already shown why the president should be impeached. you can send a message to your representatives at needtoimpeach.com and demand they finally take a stand. this president is not above the law.

your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

>> some other things on our radar, the job market is on a red hot streak. new government figures released show 148,000 jobs were added in december, adding to a total of two million jobs for the year 2017. december marks 87 straight months of positive job growth in the u.s. the unemployment rate helped steady the 17-year low. wages grew from last time at 2.5%. cnn confirms that they had a

conversation last night with mid-romney. they had a complicated history and speculation is swirling about a senate run. they said the phone call was about retiring warren hatch and they wished romney the best of luck. >> mitt romney let us down. he should have won that election. he failed. he choked. it's no different than a golfer that misses a put on the 18th roll. >> donald trump is a phony, a fraud. his promises are as useless as a degree from trump university. >> also not so civil these days, the president's relationship with his attorney general. according to a "new york times" report, trump was furious that jeff sessions recused himself from the russia election meddling investigation, but the

"new york times" is saying he tried to stop it from happening. when sessions did step aside in march of last year, the president reportedly blew up saying sessions was not protecting him. mr. trump asked where is my roy cohn. that had been senator joseph mccarthy's top aide in the 1950s. he died in 1986. some republicans are also unhappy with the attorney general for different reasons. ohio congressman jim jordan wants segs to just go. >> i just want to you do your job. we expected a different process and treatment and a different justice department when you took over, but unfortunately we are getting a slow walk on document production. that's what we want to see

happen. >> and jeff sessions is really facing a gop pile on. republicans are awningry with him about his rule affecting states where marijuana is now legal. this message to the attorney general. dear jeff sessions, business and patience. and now this is pretty intense stuff. olivia, you spoke with senator cory gardner in colorado where marijuana is completely legal. he was incredibly angry on the senate floor. this is not that tends to get worked up. >> we were told that state's rights would be protect and not just by the attorney general. then the nominee. we were told that by then

candidate donald trump. i will be putting a hold every nominations from the department of justice until attorney general jeff sessions lives up to the commitment he made to be. >> i'm assuming he said that to you and probably more. >> that and more. he was in a phone booth. that's why i remembered it. he held up his vote on jeff sessions until jeff sessions gave assurance that is the trump administration would not go after it. he tuesday could not be a priority. in a mid 2016 interview, it should be up to the states. there are assurances coming from the trump team that they wouldn't do what he did. that is essentially walk back the rules that lighten the

prosecution load. saying we are buying and selling. >> in states like colorado, both democrats and republicans were not that psyched about it being legalized, but now they see that the money is coming in in a big way and it's a big part of the economy. colorado is an extreme example, but 30 sit states legalized pot recreationally or at least for medicinal reasons. >> trying to retain the house and the senate, this scrambles the politics. most care about this. colorado and nevada and california and florida, all states that are purple and the house members need to protect the district.

it puts a policy at the forefront. it's kind of dangerous. you are pushing back aggressively. >> gardner holds the senate majority and he told me, pun intended, that this lights up new challenges. >> real quick, what are you hearing from your sources? what about you hear yesterday? >> it seems like the republicans are frustrated because they view this as an electoral problem. they viewed this as an issue to retaining both young voters and maintaining business interest. they are the party of pro business. if they are starting to crack down some that make millions for their state. >> that's a problem with donors and votes. we have to get a quick break in. and president trump is heading out of town for the weekend and he's not going to a property that bears his name.

instead he is going with a few friends in high places to a place where decisions are historically made and policy is written and historic words are spoken. >> there is no question he's what we call a prime suspect. if he thinks he can hide and run from the united states and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken. you always pay

your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it?

news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

>> president trump heads to camp david this afternoon for a weekend retreat with congressional gop leaders. they are going to discuss everything from tackling infrastructure and the problems in this country trying to get legislation done to reforming welfare. the question is will the president be able to land a bipartisan immigration deal? can he get democrats on board without alienating the base? the president sounded hopeful. >> hopefully everything is going to work out very well. i can tell you the republicans want to see it work out very well. if we have support from the democrats, i think daca is going to be terrific. we have a great spirit going in the republican party. i think it can be bipartisan. i hope it's going to be bipartisan. we can take care of a lot of

problems. take care of a lot of problems. it would be really nice to do it in a bipartisan way. okay? >> it has to happen in a bipartisan way. there is no other option. it ain't happening if it's not bipartisan. something that two republican senators put out yesterday after something they did not attend. over the course of the last several weeks, we have negotiated in good faith with senate democrats on a daca agreement. unfortunately our discussions on border security and enforcement with democrats are much further apart and that is the key to getting to a deal on daca. we cannot prish whaccomplish wh country needs. more work remains tead. they did not come back and meet

with the democrats. what does this tell you about the possibility of a bipartisan deal. conservatives will have to be okay with voting no? >> with border security i would argue there were complications with that and came out of the meeting with pelosi. they related to the dream act. they went crazy. it's not tried and true. i will just say again to that point, these are two republican leaders the president has not had a great thing with. they did not want it to be president and don't want to take

the fall with the base for something they consider amnesty. having that conversation the notion of hanging out. it will be fascinating to watch. thank you very much. secretary of state rex tillerson talks and gives his take on a tax against the president's mental fitness. wolf blitzer will brick you back after a quick break. with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

hello, i'm wolf blitzer. thank you for joining us. this could be the most compelling evidence yet that robert mueller is investigating president trump for obstruction of justice. first reported by the "new york times," c, this n confirmed the president told don mcgann the top lawyer in the white house to persuade the attorney general of the united states jeff sessions not to recuse himself from the justice department's russia investigation and instead protect the president. the special prosecutor reported about these efforts and what he will do with that knowledge and could it be a key part of any

obstruction of justice prosecution. there is the allegation that sessions planned a smear campaign against james comey with some of the efforts taking place supposedly just days before comey's firing. according to the "new york times," an aide asked about whether the staffer had any derock tori information about the fbi director. sessions wanted one negative story a day according to the paper. the justice department deny this is happened. dets talk more about these revelations and both the russia investigation and the trump administration. here with us are pamela brown, analyst laura coates and gloria borger. we knew the president was upset with the attorney general when we refused himself, but this goes a step further. >> it do