the news continues. want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo primetime." chris? >> okay. thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo. "cuomo primetime." we have new information about this president's efforts to end investigations that are hanging over his head. new obstruction allegations tonight on what could be a more perilous front for the president than russia. and you just heard from andrew mccabe, former acting head of the fbi. he says he still thinks potus may be a russian asset. can he be believed about that? the president says no. he wants to counter his case so his best defender is here to test and be tested. one-on-one with kellyanne conway

and we're going to litigate the allegations in our own court. was president trump trying to get his own guy into oversee his hush money investigation and why would he go to such great lengths to interfere with justice when he says he has nothing at all to hide? that's the argument. let's get after it. tonight "the new york times" reports of a possible attempt by president trump to interfere with the cohen investigations by putting pressure on matthew whitaker to get one of his allies in charge of those probes. now these allegations seem to support what the former acting head of the fbi andrew mccabe says triggered him to start an investigation into obstruction by this president and whether or not he was being unduly influenced. he just said this to anderson. >> do you still believe the president could be a russian asset? >> i think it's possible. i think that's why we started

our investigation and i'm really anxious to see where director mueller concludes that. >> the president calls it all nonsense. his chief defender is here to make the case. welcome back to primetime. >> thank you. >> the idea of the possibility according to andrew mccabe that this president is compromised and maybe even an asset of russia. your response? >> it's hardly worth dignifying with a response. he's a known liar and leaker and he said gee, i guess it's possible but i can't say that it's a fact. why are we talking about it? and why are we giving credibility to somebody that the professional responsibility and the inspector general and an obama appointee at that concluded lied under oath. acted without candor, compromised the honesty and integrity that we know the 35,000 or so rank and file fbi men and women that go to work every day, chris, and do their jobs very well, that they

possess and he does not. so we just throw these words out there and then say yes or no. it is completely ridiculous and he knows it. something that caught my ear -- >> well he wouldn't have started an investigation. >> now he may have -- and no, he may have. because just like his former boss jim comey, they come out and write books and all of a sudden they have to announce something to the whole world, grab your hats, you're not going to believe this one. clutch your pearls. first of all, if you really feel that way, why do you wait until two years, in fact, in this case, about two years to tell everyone and why does it coincide with a book tour? in fact, the two most explosive things he tried to wedge in there before the book was even released late last week aren't even in the book. the 25th amendment nonsense that wasn't real and this stuff about the deputy attorney general, it's not even in his book and yet it's part of the book tour. do you know olivia knox that is the head of the white house

correspondence association today actually tweeted well, two controversial to put in the book but nifty to have as part of your book tour. >> you can't just have these people throwing out words about the president of the united states. >> it comes down to credibility. you already attacked his credibility. >> no, he has been fired. >> i understand what happened to him. >> i didn't attack his credibility. he has proven to have lied under oath. >> he lacked candor but do you believe this president has more credibility than andrew mccabe. >> yes. of course. it's not even close. >> why? >> let me tell you something else, andrew mccabe tried to overthrow a democratically elected president and they got caught. >> he tried to overthrow, why did he not discuss it with the press. what he got caught lying about

was leaking stories about hillary clinton investigation. he never talked about this president. why would you think he wanted to hurt him when he could have leaked about him and he didn't -- >> well, first of all, the better question is why is he talking about the president now? like his boss comey, they have three, four, five interactions. this man just told your colleague, in my 25 year at the fbi and he left because he lied under oath. and the obama appointee, the professional responsibility individual that was appointed by president obama. let's be fair here. let's tell the audience everything at play. that person concluded that -- >> tell me when i get it wrong. >> but that person concluded that andrew mccabe lied. that he had not acted with candor. >> about leaking stories about the clinton foundation investigation. that part matters. >> and you're asking me about his credibility. >> let's say he lied. let's say he lied. this president has lied in ways we have never seen. >> he's still lying. >> i'm just saying how can you

say he's got better credibility. >> if andrew mccabe -- that's a ridiculous thing and here's why. i'm not going to deal what about with the president of the united states and the disgraced number 2 at the fbi that left the fbi's credibility in tethers. >> the president wanted him out. >> that's not why he left. he left because he lied again. he lied all day long in the media and somebody is going to lie under oath like andrew mccabe has been proven to do three or four times is certainly going to lie not under oath and it's a hero's welcome he's getting by those in the media. i have been in the white house since day one of the white house, nobody is talking about andrew mccabe -- >> the president was. the president was talking about him. talking about his wife. saying he was a plant. >> no, he wasn't. he doesn't care about his wife. >> the fbi and the doj are against him. >> you mean his wife that got $500,000 from a democratic pact

when she was running for a failed race for state office. nobody cares about that. >> the president did. >> the president addressed that in a tweet today. here's what is important. the number one and the number two at the fbi and other people in the highest of the fbi thought so little of the democratic elected president, thought so little that they needed a, quote, insurance policy. >> you're taking that from one text between lovers. >> that's enough for me. >> of course it is. out of convenience. >> well, wait a second, you want us to think that they're lovers but were they really, chris? where did they work? they worked at the fbi. they were top, top level. this all started with the dnc, clinton campaign funded dossier. i expect the clinton campaign to want to stop donald trump from being president. that's their job. i'm disappointed but i'm not surprised that most of the

mainstream media tried to stop donald trump from being president but we should all be outraged, you included, that people at the highest level of the fbi tried to put their thumb on the scale to prevent this man from being president. >> they wound up leaking about the clinton campaign and not the trump campaign. comey came out and evicerated hillary clinton. they did a lousy job of hurting this president. >> they were all lawyered up. >> note to self, all fbi members that want to effect the next campaign, don't attack the other american's campaign if you want to hurt somebody in a campaign. >> well, here's what is so weird, here's what is so odd. you have the disgraced number 2 who was fired because of the obama appointee -- >> because the president didn't want him. >> no, no. you know it was an obama appointee that wrote the report. none of us forced this man to

lie under oath. he is a serial liar. >> it just matters what he lied about. what he lied about matters. >> really? what he lied about matters? what he lied about matters. so you're okay that the number two, in fact, the acting director of the fbi -- >> of course i'm not. that's why i keep asking you about this president's lies every time you come on. >> that's just crazy. >> that's why i'm worried about the president. when leaders lie, it matters. >> no, let's talk about this guy selling a book. let's talk about this guy selling a book. he tried to subvert the will of a people. a democratically elected president. donald trump gets elected there must be a reason for that other than you had hillary blaming comey and mccabe saying it's russia. get off it. >> he got rid of comey.

>> folks, donald trump is the president. it's been going on a couple of years now and get used to it. it's going to last another six. next. >> i like your word next. the idea of what has been going on here. you saw the times reporting today, kellyanne. do you believe that the president wanted burman in charge of the southern district investigations? >> the president says he denied it today on camera, the press pool was in there. >> i know. i'm asking you if you believe it. >> no, i don't believe it because he was already recused and the president knew that. >> i know. >> well why would he want -- >> are you sure the president knew it? >> to oversee an investigation. >> knew what?

that he was recused? >> yeah. >> of course he would know it. if i knew it, he knew it. if you knew it, certainly a lot of people knew it. >> i'm saying it was very knowable. the doj -- >> here's a question i have for you -- >> we're both lawyers and it looked like a lawyer response. >> it wasn't clever. it was very forthright. >> he never said they never spoke about it. >> the acting attorney general testified at length under oath he was shown great disrespect by any number of members there -- >> and he was disrespectful. >> he wasn't disrespectful. >> he spoke in a way we have never seen anyone in that position -- >> that's not true. you should go back and roll the tape of the questions he was asked. >> i watched it. >> he answered that question and today the doj said in a statement that the then acting attorney general matthew whitaker stands by his sworn testimony. the president independent of that was asked a question by colleagues and yours in the press today and said, no, that's more fake news. >> he said that about things before that wound up being 100% true and the doj said no promises and no commitments were made but they never said that the president didn't ask whitaker about getting burman back in charge of the investigations and that would be very consistent with a well established pattern of behavior.

he does that again and again and again. >> all right. well established pattern of behavior. that's so ridiculous. hey, chris, here's the deal. mccabe just wasn't under oath on your network and he lies when he is under oath so he sure lies that he's not under oath. >> i don't know that credibility is your best case against mccabe. >> yeah it is and i'll tell you why because whether it's jussie smollett or andrew mccabe. the media loves to put credibility on to people -- >> i couldn't think of two less analagous situations than this. >> what i said to you was whether it doesn't matter that you put credibility on people that otherwise don't necessarily deserve it without proper push back and this guy said he was fired because they wanted to get rid of him. may 2017 he opened up an investigation on the president. one week later bob mueller takes over the investigation. 8 months later, march of 18 the president doesn't care about

andrew mccabe. >> he sure tweets about him a lot if he doesn't care about it. >> and then in january 2019, it's revealed that mccabe opened up an investigation. again, may 2017 he opens up the investigation. january 2019 the new york times reports he had opened up investigation. march of 2018 he loses his job because independently it is concluded by an obama, president obama's appointee. >> that he lied about leaking stories about hillary clinton. so you don't care what he lied about. >> i think it's a little convenient that you want to call him a liar when the only person he ever tried to hurt is hillary clinton and --

>> no, no. >> it didn't have anything to do with the statement. kellyanne, come on -- >> i have a question for you. >> he did it -- go ahead. >> i have a burning question that i haven't really heard people discuss in awhile, if ever. why did neither jim comey nor andrew mccabe make their way to trump tower during the transition after donald trump was elected president? i don't understand. he was elected november 8th, november 9th, and it takes three months for jim comey to get to -- two months, january to get to the white house. >> he wrote about it in his book. saying how much reservation he had in terms of approaching the president directly. he wanted to follow the normal channels. >> that's the question. >> is that what it was?

a lot of people came to see donald trump including people you have on your network routinely. some that were paid by your network but they were begging for jobs. >> not you directly but they came to you in the campaign and they said watch out for the russians, in july they told you this. they're trying to get in, be careful. and your people had all kinds of reckless contacts and reaching out for coordination even after -- >> no, not me. >> i never said you. >> they're going to have to suffer the consequences. >> what did you say? >> so i'm consistent. i'm consistent here. people who lie to congress, lie to investigators about all of that, they'll have to suffer the consequences. some are about to. i was a campaign manager and i thought so much of donald trump. i knew he could do it on his own. i was on your network and others every single day. those clips will live forever. we can pull a clip. >> good for you.

>> five or six times a day. i'm making the point. i'm making the point and -- no, he got it done. he got it done. but it's amazing he got it done given that all the kings horses, all the kings men, all the money, all the mainstream member and now the fbi wanted his opponent. >> nobody got the attention from the media that he did for better and worse. >> but the media only gets one vote per person and you don't live in swing states. it was his connective tissue with the people. >> he was on tv a lot. >> i'm not blaming the media. i want to thank the media. no i want to thank the media for 2016. i'd like to thank the democrats for 2019 and 2020 because they are off to an awful start. >> there's a long way to go before then but i have to questions. >> trying to out socialism each other. anti-semitism, socialism. >> if it's not the probe, it has to be congress and it has to be somebody.

it's not about criminality. if they had nothing to hide including the president of the united states, why did they lie so much about russia-related matters -- >> who is they? who is they? >> the president and people around him. don't say the president and people around him. >> let's look at the list of people that have been convicted and lied under oath. >> any named donald j. trump? >> no. smart man. >> no. >> he won't go under oath. >> he's answered questions. >> written answers that his lawyers wrote. he won't go under oath. smart man. >> do you know why? because there's no collusion and you know it. >> there's plenty of collusion. >> and i think your colleagues said something very curious. >> you meet with a russian guy and give him polling data and talk to him about policy. >> you're talking about somebody that was just convicted. >> it's his friends in the campaign that may have done the most collusion as behavior, crimes, not for me to say. >> do you find any collusion and is anything here touching the president and the campaign?

>> yeah. he lied. he lied about the meeting at trump tower and what he knew about it. he may be lying about what he knew about stone and manafort. >> he may be lying. i love it. he may be lying. he may be -- do you know what we know for sure, i'll going to tell you something we know for sure. here's something not hypothetical, he is the president. he may not not be the president. he is the president. deal with it. you're going to have to be as miserable as you are for six more years. >> i'm not miserable. >> others. i can't look at you. i'm looking at a blank camera. >> he should appreciate his position and not lie need leslie and if he has nothing to fear with the probe, why does he keep messing with it? >> what probe? this thing that's been going on for two years, tens of millions of dollars. >> chris, does it mean anything to you that your network and you have invested gazillon of dollars and air time in this dead man space, this spooky

music. >> no music on my show. >> and now you have chairman burr saying they found no collusion. the chairman of the senate intelligence committee has said no collusion. >> right. >> and your colleague, dana bash. >> as a crime, criminal collusion which is different than collusion of behavior. >> well, what if the mueller report doesn't say this and he said right away, well we'll have our own investigation. he is showing that they just want to investigate and not legislate. they just want to continue. >> nobody should be in favor of that. you need answers. it doesn't matter. it could be plenty wrong but not a crime and everybody should be open to that reality. >> in the meantime this president will continue to preside over a boom economy because it's amazing that he got elected given the fact that many in the mainstream media, the upper of the fbi and everybody else didn't think he can do it and were in his way. >> i don't agree with that statement at all. >> that's talking about how the dossier started --

>> when the mueller report comes out we'll see how much of the investigation was based on that. we'll leave it there for that. >> where's the collusion? >> the collusion is manafort taking those meetings. the solution is trump jr. and manafort and jared taking that meeting. the collusion is roger stone -- >> that's not true. don't call that collusion. don't call that collusion. >> that's all collusive behavior. >> the individuals that you talked about -- what is the word -- you make it sound like a fancy adjective. we both paid way too much for our law degrees. >> they were messing with the wrong people in ways that they should have known better. and they were told not to do it and they did it anyway. is it a felony? i don't know. probably not. but that doesn't mean it's not wrong and it doesn't mean that they were open for business with the wrong people. >> the only person we have discussed tonight on your show who we know lied multiple times under oath is named andrew mccabe.

>> that's not true. we got a bunch of liars around you guys and it includes the president. >> no, it's not and you should stop saying that because of all the things you say, you and andrew mccabe said today, may be true, may be true. the one thing we know is true, donald trump is the president. >> i got to go. when we learn more. >> not me. i have no exposure. >> when that probe comes out, i'll give you guys as much time as you want to discuss it's findings. i believe it's critical to the american people. the offer will always stand. >> great. let's see if there's a report to even discuss. >> that's up to you guys and -- >> that's up to you guys. >> the american people want their elected officials to focus on issues and my boss is. >> they want that report, kellyanne. >> let's see if the democratly controlled congress starts to. you have them say we're going to continue to investigation. >> the mueller probe, forget about the politicians for a second, the mueller probe

without a report -- >> you have the woman from minnesota, the socialist -- >> forget about the democrats. focus on the fact. that report should be made public and i hope you agree. >> that's up to mr. mueller. >> no it's not. >> we have produced over 1 million -- >> he gives it to the a.g. and the a.g. is going to decide what to do with it and that's your boy. so hopefully it will come out. >> we'll see. >> okay. thank you. >> be well. >> you got it. >> there's the defense. can't believe mccabe and all the other things are too soft to ever stand up. is that enough? let's take it to court. we have two brilliant minds about what this could mean going forward. next. steven could only imaginem 24hr to trenjoying a spicy taco.burn, now, his world explodes with flavor. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts

for all-day all-night protection. can you imagine 24-hours without heartburn?

i felt i couldn't be at my best wifor my family. c, in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back,

because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. we have a fight on our hands and you better get used to it. that's what this mueller probe is going to be. it's going to be a big debate. it's not going to be a massive prosecution. that's my take. we'll see if i'm right or wrong. but you just heard the president's senior adviser in the wake of a new york times report that says he might have tried to interfere with the investigation of his personal attorney, an allegation that he flatly denied today. listen to what he said. >> did you ask matthew whitaker to change the leadership of the investigation to michael cohen. >> no, not at all. >> is he telling the truth? >> when it comes to obstructing justice prosecutors look at something called corrupt intent. there's certain simple things that must be established. with that, cuomo's court is in session. you heard me talking with

kellyanne, he's like, well you heard the president say no. she has lied to us about material matters of fact in the russia probe before. he's not underoath. but in terms of credibility, him saying no, i didn't do that, you pair that with what the doj put out saying not that he never asked them, not that he never talked about it, not that he didn't want it but according to the doj there were no promises and commitments made to do anything with the southern district management of the case. what does that mean to you? >> that when you fully vet and have lawyers comb over what you're saying, the underlying conduct is probably nefarious. you can't put much stock into a blanket denial when you heard him repeatedly say things that have been untrue. he'll later find out when it comes to a court of law, michael

cohen at the back of air force one, a blanket denial and there's not going to be any promises made. the american people don't want to hear about semantics. i find it very unpersuasive in a court of law or court of public appearance. >> the challenge is that any one of these, you look at one, well he got rid of comey yeah but he couldn't do that. and then he said he was about russia, okay but that's just one. look what he did with flynn. telling people to say that oh, he came to me and i made him re-sign and then oh, oh, that will make the probe go away. oh, yeah, but that's just one

thing. well, what if he did ask to have his guy oversee the southern district investigations? at what point is the pattern daming. >> so his guy was the nominee of the president that was confirmed by the senate and is the career prosecutor and disrespectful to his entire year in law. >> it's a reason. >> and donar to the trump campaign, right? >> well, the reasons why he recused are up to him but let's break this down for one second. >> he has recused. so even if the president made that request and that request was made to whitaker and we have no evidence whatsoever that whitaker did anything with it, even if it came to him and he did recuse himself. he did the right thing here.

if he felt there was need for a recusal because he a convict, the individual lawyer in charge of that office takes an oath of office and he's a public servant. >> nobody is saying anything about him. >> you're attacking him. >> i'm not attacking him -- jimmy -- >> one of the biggest law enforcement offices in the country -- >> what i'm saying is the allegation from the reporting of the new york times, laura i'll bring you in on this is that they have multiple sources that tell them the president went to whitaker and said i want my guy in there. can we get him in there and the context was i don't want another mueller probe. >> so we have maybes. >> yeah, it's called reporting and journalism and we have a president that lied time and

time again about this stuff. laura, what's your take? >> well, first of all, calling him his guy, because of all the u.s. attorneys that are in this country, the president of the united states interviewed a select view, i think only one. this particular person when he replaced him after firing him as u.s. attorney in sdny. so he actually did put somebody in place that he knew and interviewed him. >> that makes him not a professional? >> nobody is saying he's not a professional. >> i'm going to finish my point. the point i'm making is the notion that there is somebody that is actually the president's particular choice unlike any other u.s. attorney. he did recuse himself. that's important but at the time the president made several comments illuding to the attorney-client privilege being dead and the raid on michael cohen's home and hotel room and

office he was under the impression that his person was involved in it in some way and that disturbed him a great deal. why? because he tried to have his hand on the scale and say i have somebody that i have selected -- >> what i'd like to do is finish my sentence and i'd love for you to speak after that. what the president did was try by installing his person to try to put his thumb on the scale to say wait a second, a probe that involves me, my fixer and hush money payments involving women that i allegedly had an affair with that sounds more of an issue it's actually an accurate lineage going on. >> wrap it up for us. >> but in this context. just answer the question in this context. >> don't say that we're attacking berhman and saying he's not a professional. >> you are. he was picked by trump and that would be why trump wanted him overseeing these things. i'm saying if trump asked for him, that is why.

what is your take? >> the president of the united states nominates the u.s. attorneys across the country. that doesn't make him his boy. he has an obligation to this country and he's fulfilling that obligation. he also has ethical obligations as a lawyer which he fulfilled and he has ethical responsibilities as the u.s. attorney which he fulfilled. even if the president of the united states had made that ask. even if he had made that request to whitaker, i wouldn't have made a hill of beans difference. >> it depends. what the president wanted to happen and what did happen are two very different things and let's be thankful for that. the president denies it. >> i know the president denies it. the idea that i'm not going to believe anonymous sources but i'm going to believe the president of the united states

is doing a huge degree of violence to my idea of common sense and what we have learned to be the new normal. the idea that the president says it didn't happen so it didn't is not enough for me. i have to leave it there. >> but you're going to put a guy on a pedestal. >> i'm not doing anything to him. >> meaning mccabe who was found by professionals to have -- >> if he had come here, i would have put it to him like everybody else just like i always do. >> simply put, jim, it matters, jim, that the president of the united states tried to influence an investigation that involved himself. that's the point. not about who is whose boy. not about andrew mccabe. whether the president of the united states tried to influence an investigation. >> trying to do it is relevant. >> but whether or not it actually happened is -- laura is making the right points and you know it. we're not attacking the man. we're attacking the idea that

the president asked for him to oversee something he was worried about and that's the concern. but you both argued your points and i appreciate you for doing that. have a good night, both. thank you. all right. so you got the legal part of it but then you have the investigative part of it. if you're the fbi, if you're the doj, if you're part of the mueller probe and you hear about this request, what does it mean, by itself? what does it mean as part of this pattern? everybody enacting something because they keep getting rid of people around the probe? we have a special guest. mueller's former deputy. what does he see and not see here? next. let's be honest:

dealing with your insurance shouldn't be more frustrating than the accident itself. that's why esurance makes it simple. just take some pics. [picture noises] go to sleep. wake up. grab a bite. maybe some racquetball. and boom - your money's on the way so you can get back on the road fast. well, not that fast. the editor had to make it fit in 30 seconds. it's pretty tricky actually trying to ... and ... tagline. when insurance is simple, it's surprisingly painless. when insurance is simple, ♪ ♪

t-mobile will do the math for you. join t-mobile and get two phones plus two unlimited plans for just one hundred bucks a month.

for each family member? so with xfinity mobile i can customize each line yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need and still save hundreds of dollars... do you guys sell other dogs? ...now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. and now get $200 back when you buy and eligible smartphone. click, call, or visit a store today.

if "the new york times" reporting is right and the president did try to get the a.g. out in line of the michael cohen probe, is that obstruction? let's get after it with the former director of the fbi and the president of anderson university. welcome to primetime, sir. >> thank you, good to be with you. >> so what's the answer to our question? >> well, the simple answer is we don't have enough information, obviously, to know whether that's obstruction because one we don't know the intent. it's obviously implied as to what the intent would be to favor a particular outcome and we don't know what the evidence would be to corroborate that and in a criminal proceeding you need proof beyond a reasonable

doubt to convict a person. can you indict with proof beyond a reasonable doubt? so right now there's not enough information that we have in the public realm. the question is does special counsel mueller have information and what does he do with that information if he believes there's clear and convincing evidence that there's obstruction of justice. >> what would be your concern about this pattern of behavior that's not just the one off? that this is one of 7 different actions that all seem to be to the same effect to end the investigation of him or make it easier for him. >> yeah, it's concerning if true. it almost reminds me of when i was working on a task force and looking at rico investigations where you tried to establish a pattern of racketeering activity. i'm not saying that's what is going on here at all but the whole idea that if there is a pattern of activity that

establishes that there's criminal culpability in multiple instances. >> it's all speculative because you don't know what special counsel mueller has. >> true. >> a measure of it is speculative. we have seen a lot of these things play out in public. we know as you know already that the mueller probe is considering the president's public statements as part of their reckoning of what it is. something to lose sight of and i want you take on this, there's this assumption that mueller is just looking for criminal behavior but right in the mandate delivered by rosenstein

the first directive is to find any evidence of coordination and contact with those with russian interference. that doesn't mean crimes. >> no but i think the intended outcomes of that as a directive from the deputy attorney general and the department of justice is that the highest is criminal culpability. after that, robert mueller as a career prosecutor and fbi director for 12 years can presumably working on this report that he would present to the new attorney general bill bar r and make recommendations as to what actions should be taken. whether any current, present, criminal indictments should be sought. of course if it involves culpability by the president. a sitting president cannot be or should not be indicted. so would the indictment be held or the information held for indictment for the day after the president is out of office? that's something that we don't

know at this point. >> you work for mueller, there's a big political price that would come with doing something like that. i know you're supposed to be able to keep it separate but a little bit would be the measure of a man and woman doing the job. do you think that bob mueller, in your experience, that he would do something like make a move on the president of the united states if he thought it was right even though he knows it would be a huge battle about whether he was right to even suggest it, whether it could even happen and he would be under tons of scrutiny. is that the type of pressure he would take into consideration? >> i don't think so. he has been given a broad mandate and i think in my experience working with him for eight or nine years before i went over to tsa, in 2010 was that he is apolitical when it comes to criminal investigations. democrat, republican, independent, it doesn't matter to him.

he's looking for the evidence to be used to establish is there proof beyond a reasonable doubt that would result in a criminal indictment and presumably a conviction prosecutors never want to indict somebody that they think would not be convicted at trial. so i think really the question becomes what is the evidence. not speculation or anything else but what is the evidence that he is relying on to make that determination in his report to the new attorney general to say what should happen as a result of this investigation. so we have seen all the other charges, some of the guilty pleas of some of the inner circle there and then all the russians around that. all the contacts with russia and everything there's a lot of smoke there. the question is, robert mueller and his team are frankly the

only ones that have the inside knowledge to know what -- so what about that. what does that mean? does it mean that there is a case against the president or others that have not been named at this point? we simply don't know that. but the concern is has the president or others tried to obstruct justice by naming friends or allies as those that would oversee investigations such as the cohen investigation you have been talking about. >> let me ask you another quick thing. i invite you back so we can learn more as we understand the lenses of investigation once the report comes out. that's my question. his mandate says you report to the attorney general, the directing ag, the acting ag, whoever is overseeing it at the time and that's your only duty to tell them. how do you think bob mueller would react to the proposition that his findings were not going to be made public? that they would be kept closed? >> i think he's fine with that

because he adheres to the rule of law and the guidelines and the parameters that he has been given. he's been given a specific task and that's exactly what he's doing. i think it's remarkable that there's been no leaks out of that investigation and obviously we haven't seen bob mueller do a press conference or anything else with all of these indictments and convictions and all of this russian activity. so i think he will comply with that mandate. i think the only way that we would see something if the attorney general decided not to release that report or at least have a redacted version of it is in the event that bob mueller found clear convincing evidence, proof beyond a reasonable doubt that there was evidence of a crime, whether it was obstruction or whatever it might be and the attorney general

declined to do anything with it. >> i think in that instance, maybe, and again, that would be a stretch but i think maybe bob mueller would say that because of the compelling public interest in having some of this out, that he would have a very strenuous engagement, argument, if it was, with the attorney general to say why he believed it should come out and i think he might then take action in some respect, not a leak because that's not him, but then to do something, and i don't know exactly what that would be. i just don't see him providing information to the new york times or washington post or somebody. maybe engagement with congress in terms of potential impeachment or something like that. that's a bridge i don't think he wants to cross. turns a report in and then looks for the outcomes that he believes are justified.

[brakes squealing] accidents can happen anytime that's why geico is here 24 hours a day everyday. geico, fifteen minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. geico, fifteen minutes could save you 15% or more about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k? have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine

or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. when you switch out you an old car part. but you do when you switch to jackson hewitt. at jackson hewitt we help lots of people like you. that's why you get $200 when you leave your old tax service for us. so switch to jackson hewitt today and get $200.

the vice president met with a cringe-worthy silence in munich. listen to this. >> i bring greetings from the 45th president of the united states of america, president donald trump. last august -- >> whoo. he probably wished he was standing among maga hats. that is one thing that is working in the republican party's favor right now. the democratic party, there's a fight over which hat to wear. let's bring in d. lemon. you were with senator klobuchar last night. you've got sanders -- >> can we talk about that, though? >> yeah, you can talk about whatever you want. >> the vice president, that was so -- >> tough crowd!

tough crowd! >> that's like when they introduce you, chris. they're like, and, chris cuomo. >> you don't get boos? you say my name, you get boos, hisses. >> the guys are even laughing at me. how are you, my friend? i missed you. >> i'm doing well. >> you did a nice job last night. >> thank you very much. >> she was god. she was candid, the questions were good. but boy, is she a different kind of democrat. they've got to make a choice. >> they do. so there is someone on twitter, and someone i know, elise jordan who tweeted something i thought was accurate. she happens to be a contributor on another network. and she said, amy klobuchar is the kind of candidate, the more you hear from her, the more you want to hear about her, the more you want to learn about her. and i think she is. there are going to be a lot of

folks fighting for that left/right progressive lane, because that's where the party is and all the young folks are now. even bernie sanders, that's where bernie sanders was in 2016 for the 2016 election. so the things that people thought were radical for bernie sanders now may be core to the democratic party. so i thought she did a good job in differentiating herself from the rest of the pack and showing why she is what the party is going to likely face. she is the electable one. i'm not saying that she is, but that's the strategy, you understand what i'm saying? >> yeah, i do. >> are they going to go with someone who is really left and may not be electable or someone who can win over the other side. >> that's always the dichotomy of primary politics versus general elections. we saw that with the republicans last time with that huge field, but the democrats got to be not just message, but messenger as well, you know? do you want bernie sanders'

politics, but you want it in a different package? something that reflects more of which way you think this country and your party is going based on the midterm turnout, or do you go straight pragmatic and say, look, we've got to beat trump. and we're not about the future right now, we're about the president. anyway -- >> but that's -- here's the question, though. the -- i thought she was very qualified, obviously, you know, she's a senator. you've interviewed her before, i've interviewed her before. she's extremely qualified. she lived in my head all of last week. i read her entire book, i knew, you know, as much as there is to learn about her. she's very electable, she's very capable. she's a very smart woman. so the person who may be the most qualified, you know, there are others, right, that will have town halls and will be part of the democratic, part of the process, who may be very capable of being president of the united states, but are they electable? do they have the personality? do they have the gumption and the gall to go up against donald trump and call him on his bs and his lies, to stand up to him, you know, trying to take you down? that's really the question they're going to have to face.

who's going to be the -- who's going to be electable? and who can stand up to him? >> cold pragmatism. all right, my man. >> hey, quickly. >> yes. >> that big bombshell "new york times" report? >> yes? >> someone from "the new york times," who do you want? maggie haberman. she wrote it, she's on. >> strong. >> see ya. maggie haberman one of four on that by line. mazzetti was another one, that kind of reporting, you're going to start seeing flurries of it like what "the times" had today. it's a signal that the probe is winding up and that the spin cycle is beginning. it's going to get confusing. my argument is this. there are really just two questions and i have them, next.

i thought i was managing my moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. but i realized something was missing... me. the thought of my symptoms returning was keeping me from being there for the people and things i love most. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira can help get, and keep, uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts so you could experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems,

serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. 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. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible.

i can worry about it, or doe. something about it. garlique helps maintain healthy cholesterol naturally, and it's odor-free, and pharmacist recommended. garlique two questions are all that really matters. one, that goes to all the people around the president and including him, and there's a second question for just the president. the first is, and we ask it here all the time, if there's nothing to hide about dealings with russia, why did so many around the president and including the president lie about russia-related matters? and now, in light of the new reporting from "the times," there's a second question for the president. if you want exoneration and you know for sure there's nothing that has been done that threatens you, why did you do so much to disrupt the probe? the idea that the president was

just asking questions, making suggestions, that makes sense if it only happened once or twice, but remember all the people he's messed with surrounding this probe and how hard he has worked to make sure as many of you as possible see the entire deal as a miscarriage of justice. trump reportedly calling on his acting ag to try to get a trump supporter put in charge of the investigation into hush money payments. there's one. the president reportedly peddling misleading information about the firing of michael flynn, telling his press secretary to say trump asked for a resignation because it sounded better. there's another. and there's trump asking jim comey to end the investigation into flynn. and there's getting rosenstein to concoct a basis for removal of comey and then revealing that he was always going to fire comey because of this probe. none of those is a supposition. the last is the most damning and he told it to you, to your face. >> i was going to fire comey.

my decision. >> we've learned something else now, as well. you cannot compare what this president says and does to what has come before. the whataboutism is an invasion and an illusion. we have never seen anything like him in the presidency. he will say whatever he feels he must to help him in the moment. and he does it well, truth be damned, decorum be damned. why are so many surprised that his lawyers reached out to manafort and flynn about pardons? he saw and sees them as problems for him. and do you really think he wouldn't pardon them, if it might make all of this go away? can you imagine where we would be if lawyers and helpers had not ignored or dissuaded this president from so much of what he reportedly wanted? and yet for all the layers, all the lies in this lasagna of lies, keep it simple. two questions will reveal much

of what we need to know. why did he and his folks lie about russia and why did he do so much to mess with a probe that he keeps saying could never hurt him. you get those answers, assuming the president's new pal in the doj will allow you to learn the answers and many other questions will be answered as well. that's all for us. thanks for watching. please get right to "cnn tonight" with don lemon. >> can you explain to me, what does lasagna of lies mean? >> when you make a lasagna, you start with one layer of pasta, you have the meat, more ricotta, cheese, more sauce, another layer of sauce, then the sauce, and then more ricotta and more cheese and more sauce. and you build it more and more and more. and that is the lasagna of lies that we are dealing with on this probe. do you understand? >> everybody -- >> i want some matza balls, but you go ahead.