to go. >> any of these folks want ice cream, it is on me. >> reporter: jeff left $40. you're welcome, folks. jeanne moos -- >> that's all folks. >> thanks for joining us. have a great weekend. anderson starts now. good evening and take a look. it is a tweet from president trump this morning. jobs, jobs, jobs. and today's new employment numbers certainly justify the all caps treatment. employment a 50-year low and job creation impressive almost across the board. strong enough for the president to stay on message about it for a good four hours or so which gets us to our big story tonight. not for what it says about the message discipline but more substantive matters because today the president of the united states had the opportunity to confront vladimir putin about his interference in the 2016 election and could tell

him not to do it again. he might have finally been free to signal to his russian counterpart that the question of foreign attacks on american democracy is not personal and not partisan. perhaps he could tell him that any future or current attacks will not be tolerated again and he had the chance when the two leaders spoke by phone but apparently he didn't. and keep in mind he was asked about it this afternoon. >> -- the meddling issues that came up in the mueller report with mr. putin today. >> we discussed that he sort of smiled when he said something to the effect that it started off as a mountain and it ended up being a mouse. but he knew that because he knew there was no collusion whatsoever. so pretty much that is what it was. >> it almost sounds like president trump is still more concerned about denying his own culpability than addressing vladimir putin's. anyway, it is good he got a second chance to answer the

question. >> did you tell -- did you tell him not to meddle in the next election. >> excuse me. i'm talking. i'm answering this question. you are very rude. so we had a good conversation about many different things. okay. >> did you tell him not to meddle in the next election. >> we didn't discuss that. really we didn't discuss it. >> so no talk from the commander-in-chief on today's call warning the leader of our main nuclear adversary not to do it again. plenty of talk about how unfair this all is to him. >> i was totally transparent because i knew i did nothing wrong. it turned out i did nothing wrong. no collusion with russia, think of it. $35 million they spent, they wasted over a period of two years, no collusion, no obstruction. thank you all very much. i appreciate it. >> they actually clawed back tens of million dollars from paul manafort. and the final words on subject by contrast, here are robert mueller's first words quoting from introduction of volume one of the report, the russian government interfered in the

2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. also the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through russian efforts. now despite that, the report goes on to say and i'm quoting again, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. however, it did detail numerous efforts by the russians to interfere or with president trump himself and in volume two the mueller team lays out a laundry list of potential obstruction of justice without indicting or exonerating the president, so as to the president's own behalfor the report is at the very least unflattering and inconclusive and russia hit this country with a sweeping and systematic campaign and that is the bottom line and it hasn't stopped. >> despite public statements by the kremlin to the contrary, we continue to see individuals

affiliated with the st. petersburg based internet research agency creating new social media accounts and using these accounts to draw attention to divisive issues. >> that is director of national intelligence dan coats last july, the same day, july 13th, that special counsel robert mueller charged 12 officers of the gru of interfering with the 2016 u.s. presidential election. so three days after that the president met with vladimir putin in helsinki armed with his dni assessment, the mueller indictment and far more. if you want to use it. i think you know the answer. did he not. instead with the perpetrator standing by his side he sided with the perpetrator. >> my people came to me, dan coats came to me and some others, they said they think it's russia. i have president putin, he just said it is not russia. i will say this, i don't see any

reason why it would be. >> i have great confidence in my intelligence people. but i will tell you that president putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today. >> well fast forward to today and it is impossible to gage the strength of vladimir putin's denial because this time none was needed. you only need a denial when the other guy makes an accusation and clearly the president offered none so yet again as during the campaign and in helsinki, as it has been all along, president trump simply could not bring himself to confront vladimir putin about this. perspective fr someone who watched this play out from the inside. james clapper was director of national intelligence at the time and served presidents in both parties for decades and is an author of "hard facts from a life of intelligence." he said that he and vladimir putin did not talk about the sweeping russian cyber attack in the 2016 election that mueller detailed.

the president is correct when he said mueller is correct when there was no conspiracy with the trump campaign but it doesn't make what the russians did any less real. are you surprised it doesn't come up between these two. >> no, i'm not because when you think about it, both of them are in a state of denial about the russian meddling. obviously putin will continue to deny that there was any russian meddling. so he's in his reality world. and of course president trump does not want to acknowledge it because when he does in his mind i think it casts doubt on the legitimacy of his election. so shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody that they're just not going to bring it up. >> even if the president doesn't want to talk about the 2016 interference because he thinks it is somehow a threat to his -- to the validity of his actual election, the whole idea of what will happen in the next election and frankly every election after that, the president's own intelligence community said this is an ongoing threat to american

democracy. >> yeah, and, you know, i find it somewhat ironic that people in the trump administration criticize the obama administration for not doing anything. yet here as we're approaching 2020 and there is an ideal opportunity for the -- for president trump to make clear once again that -- don't meddle in our political processes. and you're right, if we don't do that then of course this just in the russian's mind gives them license to push the envelope and to interfere in 2020. >> to that point about the obama administration, sarah sanders said this administration unlike the previous one takes election meddling seriously and we're going to do everything that we can to prevent it from happening. a. what, do you make of their characterization of the obama administration reaction and also the president doesn't seem to be holding high-level meetings or cabinet level discussions on a

routine basis or if at all about russian meddling. >> for point one is the obama -- just for the record, the obama administration did take russian meddling very seriously. and did things about it. for one, president obama did directly confront putin about it and didn't ask him, hey, are you interfering in our election, and there is -- there is an element missing here in my view. it is the void of -- that could only be filled by the unique bully pulpit that only the president occupies to galvanize the country, the voters, about what the russians are up to and what they might do. and i would just hope that we pay more attention to volume one of the mueller report which documented an exhaustive detail something that, looking back, we kind of scratch the surface of in january '17 about the russian

meddling. that's the big deal here. and who is the winner in all of this? vladimir putin. >> it is sort of interesting when you look back over the last two years of the trump administration, the president has never really made a speech to the american public about what happened and about how they're going to prevent it from ever happening again. would you think that is the kind of thing that would at least be one speech to the nation about as opposed to every public comment he's made is essentially upd cutting the idea that it might even be russia. >> well, exactly. and of course taken -- taking putin's phony assurance that there was no meddling over that -- the word of his own intelligence community and i say his own intelligence community, and not the prior one, and that leaves doubt, i think, in the minds of many americans and it encourages the russians to do more. >> no surprise the president seized upon the "new york times"

reporting discussed last night and how the fbi sent what they call an investigator, an undercover investigator to meet with george papadopoulos in london as part of the counterintelligence inquiry into trump campaign and russia and the president suggesting that it was inappropriate or nefarious. how do you see it? >> well, this is a standard investigatory technique that the fbi uses. they use it in counter-terrorism investigations. and it is been under -- the use of undercover officers, undercover agents that has led to the rolling up of -- and thwarting of terrorist plots in this country. and it is a legitimate technique. the narrative obviously is spying on the campaign. no, it was trying to understand what the russians were doing. and the fbi has very -- very strict protocol for the use of undercover agents and i -- i'm

sure that was the case here. >> director clapper, appreciate your time. thank you. >> thanks, anderson. much more ahead, including how today's economic news plays into next year's presidential election. whether more days like today could usher in a second term for president trump. joining us, two democratic strategists jim seena and james morgan. and later on attorney general barr's decision not to answer questions and the move to force barr to show up as far as the controversy this congressman sparked with a bukts of fried chicken. run with us on a john deere 1 series tractor. beacuse changing your attachments, should be as easy as... what about this? changing your plans. yeah. run with us. search "john deere 1 series" for more. yeah. run with us. featuring three new dishes that are planked-to-perfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank...

...but not for long- so hurry in! your control. like bedhead. hmmmm. ♪ rub-a-dub ducky... and then...there's national car rental. at national, i'm in total control. i can just skip the counter and choose any car in the aisle i like. so i can rent fast without getting a hair out of place. heeeeey. hey! ah, control. (vo) go national. go like a pro. what sore muscles? what with advpounding head? .. advil is... relief that's fast. strength that lasts. you'll ask... what pain? with advil.

we need a solution.ut their phones down. introducing... smartdogs. the first dogs trained to train humans. stopping drivers from: liking.

selfie-ing. and whatever this is. available to the public... never. smartdogs are not the answer. but geico has a simple tip. turn on "do not disturb while driving" mode. brought to you by geico. forget about vacuuming for weeks. the (new) roomba i7+ with clean base automatic dirt disposal empties the roomba bin for you. so dirt is off your hands. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba. plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants.

♪ call it the mueller report versus the jobs report. and as we said at the top, it was strong. lowest jobless rate since 1969. the mueller report can drag on the chances for re-election and drag him down but a jobs report could boost him to a second term. joining us is james carvel who helped elect bill clinton and jim masina who did the same for barack obama and they recently

co-authored an op-ed on this project. you said it is the economy stupid and your op-ed with jim in the "wall street journal" you write there is a great saying when your opponent is drowning, throw him an anvil. trump is under water. where is the anvil because there was strong job numbers today and the lowest level. >> the clinton economy was much stronger and al gore was able to win by a half a million votes. if you look at economy, two-thirds of the counties are in where hillary clinton carried and this is money economy that is on fire and if this continues, i obviously hope it does, more people will be employed it could help him. but thus far that hasn't helped him at all. >> jim what, do you do about swing states like michigan and wisconsin and pennsylvania and if the economy under president trump is doing well, why would

voters want to change course? >> because they look at -- >> sorry, this is for jim. >> sorry. they look at this and say is health care good? president trump striped health care from a bunch of americans. said he would replace obamacare and didn't do anything. they look at their future and say is he investing in education? they'll ask one very simple question anderson, who is on my side. and i think when there is a clear choice between our economic agenda and theirs, we'll win that choice. >> james, vice president biden at this stage at least in the race, as his entry into the race, seems to be looking at it through a lens less of economics and more of a moral lens and said that is the real vulnerability for trump and he's not fit for office and is doing morally bad things to america. how hard is it to got -- to get people to overlook what may be good financial news for them and focus on an issue like that, a moral issue? >> well, i mean, first of all, like 40% of people in the united

states don't have $400 in the bank. and while the economy is booming and it is particularly booming in urban areas and i think los angeles county is growing faster than most anywhere else in the country, a lot of people don't feel it and a lot of people feel like that the distribution in this economy is nowhere near what it should be and that so many of the gains are going to the few and the rest are left behind and that is a winning message tor democrats and as jim pointed out, the whole health care thing has people really concerned. you could tell me this economy anybody could afford prescription drugs. go tell people that. i don't think that they can. and like we say, he took a already good economy to a trillion dollars worth of stimulus, a trillion dollars deficit in a good economy and in the '90s under clinton we were running surpluses and by the time president obama left office the debt was going down as percentage of gdp faster than any time than world war ii and i think they did it in a fiscally

responsible way. >> jim, i wonder what you make of biden's kind of looking past the tabletop issues in his announcement and focusing on president trump? >> well, look, he's -- >> well, sorry, this one is for jim. sorry, james. >> it's confusing. >> we should have -- anyway, jim, go ahead. >> he's in a democratic primary and the single unifying force in the democratic primary is our hatred of donald trump. and so he's smartly saying i'm not going to pull myself down and start talking about my 25 opponents. and instead going right at donald trump. which i think is what he's got to do and he's got to contrast himself with donald trump as james was just talking about and lay out a vision for where he wants to take this country. and i think he'll be stronger if he does that. >> james, you hear a lot of democrats discussing, well do you reach for new voters who have been underrepresented and

who haven't been touched by the democratic party or motivated to come out to vote, do you stick with trying to mobilize your base or is it not a binary choice? >> it is not really a binary choice. parties want to expand. we're not running a fraternity or sorority or the urban and diverse and the cool and hip and we want everybody and jim and i understand profoundly and you talk about west virginia or michigan or wisconsin, if we don't do better in the rural parts of those states, we might suffer the same fate we suffered in 2016. plus i hate to tell people, but 50% of the senate is elected by 18% of the united states. well we're not going to do that searching around to get core urban voters at a part of our coalition. we have to expand our coalition. i'm proud of what the democratic candidates stand for and let's people people in northern wisconsin or michigan or northern florida what we're doing. i'm all for that. i think it is dumb to want to run an exclusionary party that

just focuses on people like yourself. >> jim messina, how much do democrats need to avoid getting sucked into the day-to-day drama of the white house or the latest tweet or the justice department and concentrate on tabletop issues like health care and taxes. >> this is something i'm worried about. president trump is like free beer. he said something crazy every day and you could have a lot of fun with it and you go online and raise a bunch of money and get democrats excited, but voters care about these tabletop issues you just asked me about and we've got to stay focused on these economic bread and butter issues that win presidential elections. and that is why james and i wrote this op-ed. we're going around the country trying to meet with as many campaigns as we can and just say the same thing, which is if you look at barack obama and bill clinton, we want elections -- we won elections and focused on exciting our base and talking to swing voters who will decide this election and we can and should do both things. >> appreciate you being on. thank you very much. >> thank you.

the op-ed is in the "wall street journal." check it out. still ahead, was it finger-licking good politics or a bad way to play chicken with the attorney general of the united states. there were serious issues. i'll talk to a member of the house judiciary committee who was eating chicken at the hearing, next. guys, i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? so people love iphone xr, right? well, it does have an incredible camera. and it comes in all those amazing colors. uh huh. what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? iphone xr on us? yeah, iphone xr on us! what's not to love about that? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us.

it's nice. ♪ you got this! ♪ woo! ♪ ♪ ♪

we're finally back out in our yard, but so are they. scotts turf builder triple action. it kills weeds, prevents crabgrass and feeds so grass can thrive, guaranteed. our backyard is back. this is a scotts yard.

jerry nadler is giving barr until monday to have the justice defendant to turn over the mueller report. and he said he would move to contempt proceedings if he doesn't comply, one day after

barr skipped a house judiciary committee as they voted to allow staff attorneys to question him. one democrat on the committee steve cohn called him chicken barr for not showing up and he chowed down on kfc. congressman joins us now. and the new monday deadline for nadler, how do you think the justice department and attorney general barr will respond. is there any reason to believe they'll turn over documents your committee wants? >> i have no reason to believe they'll do anything that is in keeping with the traditions of the relationship between the executive and the judicial as equal branches of government. i think they will stonewall at all costs because they -- they know that they can't give up information and data or the president will be exposed for the type of person and the actions he's undertaken. >> so chairman nadler talked about moving to contempt proceedings if the attorney general doesn't comply. what does that -- what would that actually look like? >> well i hope it would be

inherent contempt because we go out and take him and bring him in and have him personally brought to the house. if it is a -- >> you want to send out -- >> -- a contempt. >> you want to send out a sergeant-at-arms and require the attorney general to come. >> yes. otherwise it is up to the justice department. the justice department will not do anything to take a contempt citation from us and enforce it against their boss. so you have an impossible situation and it leaves us no alternative except to use the sergeant-at-arms and to bring him in. he's being utterly contempt shus to congress and he lies to congress and charlie crist asked him and he claimed he had no idea. he lied. speaker pelosi said that yesterday. she's correct. >> when you say bring him in, do you actually -- actually support the idea of putting him in -- are you talking about just having him sit for a hearing or

locking him up somehow? >> you have to have him sit for a hearing and i think you have to have him locked up unless he agree to participate and come to the hearing. either that or have him be in a room with somebody like mike -- what is his name, gates, just the two of them, that might be more difficult punishment. >> but do you believe that you're going to -- that your committee is going to order the attorney general of the united states to be arrested by the sergeant of arms and put in jail? >> i don't know what we'll do. but we can't just go to the justice department. it is meaningless. it shows we want to hold him in contempt but he won't be held in contempt because the justice department won't enforce a contempt citation against their boss. it won't happen. and trump and barr would fire whoever tried to do it. >> have you talked about this with everybody on the committee or do your colleagues support this -- >> it is strictly up to chairman nadler. but i think this is the most

contemptuous conduct toward congress we've ever had. he lied to congress and refused to attend and tried to dictate the terms of oversight and that never happened before. we have a lot of precedent for counsel questioning people in hearings, not just impeachment hearings but hearings of all kind. we had it in whitewater and many times of hearings and back in the mccarthy era when bobby kennedy questions people and micha michael chertoff questions people and then you could follow up on questions an not be cut off and filibustered and he's afraid of it and that is why he didn't come in. >> if -- if it came to you sending the sergeant of arms or committee sending the sergeant of arms to apprehend and arrest the attorney general, isn't that handing republicans an incredible thing to -- to point

to as democratic overreach? they went after you for the chicken stunt yesterday. and gave them talking points that you weren't taking this whole thing seriously. >> i don't think anybody was adverse to what i did with the chicken -- anybody who had a modicum of a sense of a humor or a modicum of intelligence or understanding liked it. those that failed in the two criteria didn't and for those people, get a life. >> congressman cohen, i appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> for more on the subpoena fight, we're joined by preet bharara. is that a world that we exist in, that the sergeant of arms will arrest the attorney general of the united states? >> i don't expect that to happen. i suppose that is a possibility. we haven't seen that in my memory. but congressional investigations and congressional back and forth

with the executive branch relies on both the law, with the constitution says but also public opinion and also on momentum for their investigations. and i think it is frustrating when we have these conversations about how the impasse will be resolved, what happens when the subpoena is ignored and ordinary criminal cases like the kind that i would oversee, you have a strong-minded judge who resolves the issue fairly quickly and when you have disputes not between an ordinary garden variety prosecutor and ordinary garden variety defendant and instead between two co-equal branch of government and the judiciary trying to mediate, it doesn't end so easily. you could hit an impasse quickly. the congressman is right with the respect to criminal intent, if there is referral to the justice department that has never been followed up by the justice department own people who could decide to or not bring a criminal contempt case against the person who is held in

contempt and this case the attorney general and that happened in respect to eric holder and nothing ever happened. >> so it would die with that request, in the justice department. >> that is what i would expect. and by the way, even if it is brought, my understanding is it is just a misdemeanor. so it doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot in that case either. what matters in these instances and why in most cases people talk about and history books are written about are cases in which there is public pressure to provide information to reach an accommodation and negotiated end to what happens and what is provided. for example, in the case where a subpoena was issued for testimony and it end up being withdrawn and then bill clinton famously testified voluntarily with certain parameters and that is how these things get revolved. >> the president said he'll decide to invoke executive privilege to stop don mcgahn from appearing. >> still don't quite understand -- i know -- i mean

he has the power to just try to invoke executive privilege but if there is not a legal -- a strong legal case for it, how long would it take moving through various courts? >> if could take a long time. look, lot of what you're finding in the struggle between the congress and the executive branch and earlier between bob mueller and the executive branch, although he's part of the executive branch, is this issue of time. one of the things that bob mueller is criticized for is not pursuing the subpoena and compelling the president to come testify before the special counsel office and he gives a reason in the report. he said it might take a very, very long time. so it is not very satisfying to people who like to have quick judicial resolutions of things but things take a long time. >> preet bharara, thank you. is will barr a legal know it all or a dedicated institutionalist who demonstrated patience during this senate hearing. coming up, the polarization surrounding the attorney general.

and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear. with peak season berries, uniqcreamy avocado. and a dressing fit for a goddess. come taste what a salad should be. and with panera catering, there's more to go around. panera. food as it should be. one-of-a-kind women weg call "mom."e with an engaging new experience... ...ancestrydna can help her uncover her history... ...to tell a story as unique as she is. order a kit for mom (or dad) at ancestry.com (michelle) i know what it's like to be in a financially struggling family.

we had a lot of leftovers...[chuckles] i couldn't have asked for better parents, but like most people they didn't have anyone to teach them the best financial habits. so we changed that. as a financial health coach, i help people every day. i try to put myself in their shoes from my own experience. i connect to them because i've been there. helping families like mine save a little money changes everything. this is personalized guidance. this is wells fargo. omar, check this out. uh, yeah, i was calling to see if you do laser hair removal. for men. notice that my hips are off the ground. [ engine revving ] and then, i'm gonna pike my hips back into downward dog. [ rhythmic tapping ]

hey, the rain stopped. -a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. -tell me about that dental procedure again! -i can still taste it in my mouth! -progressive helps keep you out there. -i can still taste it in my mouth! - hi,- hey! [beeping] [♪] - hmm! yummy! - pretzelrami is back, with our famous pastrami and a bigger soft pretzel roll. and try the new turkey bistro with warm turkey and smokehouse bacon. or the new hot club chicken dijon with black forest ham. the new hot pretzels, only at togos. how far would you go for a togo? - i own you, doug.

if nothing else, as the weekends, attorney general barr cemented himself as one of the most polarizing people in the country after testifying on wednesday the wall street journal headline, democrats are turning the attorney general into a villain for doing his

duty. an opinion column saying bavr testimony was a low point in justice department history and the defense view is william p. barr came across as a political hack. and "the new york times" op-ed james comey said about barr during the hearing, proximity to an amoral leader reveals something depressing. i think that is at least part of what we've seen with bill barr and rod rosenstein. accomplished people lacking inner strength can't resist the compromises necessary to resist the president. kerry corn arrow and david rivkin and columnist kirsten powers. clearly attorney general barr is a lightning rod and accused of lying to congress and congressional democrats are days away from potentially holding him in contempt. this is not exactly normal. >> no. and i have to say the talking point you cited from the "wall street journal" that mueller had abdicated his responsibility so

barr stepped in to do what he needed to do, mueller didn't abdicate his responsibility. that is just a republican talking point. what he did was he clearly stated in the report that because of existing doj guidelines about not indicting a sitting president, he didn't drey a conclusion, he left that clearly to congress. it is obvious. it's clearly stated there that he cannot -- he does not feel that he can bring charges against the president. so it now goes to congress and so you have democrats saying that they want to see the underlying evidence because this is -- this judgment has been sent over to them to make. which is a completely reasonable request to make. >> david, is that a reasonable request for -- request to make? >> no, it is not. let me say a couple of things. kristen was right, the mueller report would not have made any finding about the collusion on the same basis that you cannot indict a sitting president. now he clearly has a

prosecutorial judgment on collusion. did he not reach a prosecutorial judgment on obstruction. let's be clear, he's an officer of the justice and not independent counsel and you look at the constitutional realities that under lie, he provided the report to attorney general. the attorney general to get with the deputy attorney general and senior leaders of the justice department will ensure the finality of this matter which i think is what the american people and any reasonable person would want. to port portray -- to have the notion i've find a number of times i find distressing, the special counsel's job is to pass the buck to congress is absurd. >> that is not anybody's argument, though. >> it is the argument -- the argument is that somehow the special counsel is working for congress. if congress wants to pursue impeachment, i've argued clearly, congress should do its own job and exercise political accountability and pay a price for it. it is not supposed to look for

the hand-outs from a grand jury which is part of both article 3 and 2 or special counsel. >> let me ask, kerry. mueller, his purview doesn't make sense to you that he would essentially because he was operating under doj guidelines of a sitting president can't be indicted that he would serve it up and -- to congress? >> i think some of us were surprised and i think many people an -- and obviously the attorney was surprised that he found he couldn't make that judgment but what is important is the special counsel did explain in the report why he didn't make the prosecutorial judgment and in light of the explanation, which is both in a doctrine of fairness that it wouldn't be fair to recommend charges when the president couldn't then defend himself in court because he can't be tried and because of the existing justice department legal opinion the special counsel didn't make that determination. it doesn't follow that the attorney general had to or was required to then go ahead and

make the prosecutorial judgment. in fact, i think it shows there was a deep legal disagreement between the attorney general and the deputy attorney general and the special counsel and his team. so i think at this point what is important is that congress and the people have to hear from special counsel mueller. so that he could carry acterrize his own report and describe his own finding and his own reasons for everybody to hear instead of having the attorney general characterize his work. >> kirsten, i think you wanted to respond to what david was saying. >> oh, just the idea that again he's show -- mueller somehow abdicated, how you say it, not punted but send it over to congress, i don't think that is an accurate reflection. i think he laid out a clear road map basically of what had happened and left it -- it was a political question. it wasn't really a legal question because the attorney general isn't going to indict

the president. assuming that barr would ever do that, which he wouldn't, he can't. so it is a political decision. so that is why it would naturally go to congress. >> i repeat, if that were true there would be no finding about collusion because you cannot indict a sitting president for collusion any more than obstruction. >> well collusion is not a legal word -- >> well conspiracy, anderson. my point is this. it has nothing to do with presidential immunity part of teaching the sitting president is immune from indictment number one -- >> how you could a that because mueller clearly states in the beginning of the -- his report that that is the guideline he's operating on and he goes into further detail saying not only is it doj guidelines but it would be unfair given that you can't indict a sitting president it would be unfair to level charges against him. >> if you look at the mueller report, that is not the only basis upon which he did not reach a prosecutorial judgment.

>> he seemed to go into great deal early on the in the report so it had great importance -- >> but attorney general barr as he said in the hearing, the ball passed to him, having received the report, with the march lionized deputy attorney who has been the hero and the senior leadership of the department reach this issuance and they did specifically anderson, not based on presidential immunity and went for -- a pretty robust -- which, by the way, also not based upon the constitutional view which he espouses and cannot exercise justice with the constitutional power of his office. what bothers me enormously, a judgment that reads by four or five most senior officials in the department operating in good faith looking at the law and in where mueller did not reach his judgment and we're picking it apart and trying to find bad faith here. >> well the reason that -- >> go ahead. >> the reason that people are coming to a conclusion of bad

faith is in part because of the attorney general's press conference and because of his march 24th letter which picked and choosed from parts of the mueller report and characterized his findings in a way that then when everybody read the report turned out to be different. which is why at this point it is quite true, and i agree that congress is the one that has the job to do. and the most important people for them to hear from at this point are special counsel mueller and then also don mcgahn so that congress could finish the investigation. >> let me -- >> i'm sorry, we have to go. i'm way over time. it is -- we'll continue this. appreciate it. it has been weeks since the last formal briefing by white house press secretary sarah sanders. and ahead sam donaldson wears in the suspension of a tradition and the potential impact.

next on the agenda. priceline will partner with even more vegas hotels to turn their available rooms into amazing deals. ladies' weekend delegates, how do you vote? (wild cheering) just going to count that as a yes. the nightclub djs? (music plays) sample: yes... y-y-y-yes... can you just... turn that down? and magician delegates, how do you vote? ( ♪ ) that is freaky. the motion passes! more great deals from priceline. that is freaky. the motion passes! we humans are strange creatures. other species avoid pain and struggle. we actually... seek it out. other species do difficult things because they have to. we do difficult things. because we like to. we think it's... fun. introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger built for the strangest of all creatures.

if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. don't stoop to their level. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. it extends with a protective shield and targets weeds more precisely. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root while guarding the good. roundup sure shot wand. got weeds in your grass too? try roundup for lawns. kills weeds, not the lawn. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years. introducing miracle-gro's next big thing. performance organics. finally organics that work. tested and refined by plant scientists...

for twice the results, guaranteed. don't grow a snack, grow a feast. don't grow a flower, grow a million dollar view. this new organic collection of soil and plant food is what you always wanted. no compromise, just results, guaranteed. miracle-gro performance organics. check out this time-space wormhole i created. - how's it work? - let me see your togo, and i'll show you.

- earl! you have my lunch. - pretzelrami is back, with our famous pastrami and a bigger soft pretzel roll. and try the new turkey bistro with warm turkey and smokehouse bacon. or the new hot club chicken dijon with black forest ham. the new hot pretzels, only at togos. how far would you go for a togo?

it's been 53 days since they held one which shatters the previous record of 52 days which was yesterday. we're committed to shining a light on this because it's not about us but about transparency and the duty of a white house to inform the public and take questions from the free press which this white house is refusing to do. >> today the president did not miss the opportunity to attack the media. i want to play a clip for the viewers. >> they go out of their way to cover me inaccurately. i don't think that's a free press. that's a dishonest press. >> obviously one could argue with the inaccurate part but do you think the president understands the meaning of what free press is?

>> no, no. he said later in the same interview as i understand it that it's actually the opposite of a free press when he is talked about inaccurately. he has not read the first amendment. he has not read the constitution. here's a man that said if they impeach me i'll go to the supreme court and that will stop it. no, that has nothing to do with it. he's ignorant at a lot of things. >> the question he was answering today was about how he could improve communication with the press. that's how he responded. do you ever see a chance for this white house to make efforts to communicate with the press? or is that not in the dna of this white house? >> no, it's not in the dna or the strategy. demonizing the press and calling

us all fake news pervayers is part of the strategy to keep the base inside of him every moment and a base which believes in him every moment and a base that's going to vote for him every moment in 2020. you were well-known as yelling at president reagan as he was calling toward the president so reagan can say i can't hear what the questions are because of the sound of the helicopter on the whaus and they came under criticism for being heavy handed at times but it seems to pale in comparison to now. >> well, they weren't moving. you don't want to decapitate a president. the motor was on.

but interestingly enough most of them responded enough. if he never came over. this president instead of having news conferences, i can't remember the last time he had a news conference right after the midterms. but this president now conducts like an orchestra meter. conducts a little news conference and reporters don't really have a chance to follow up or delve in and he says that's meeting the press. well it's part of feeding the press. >> it's also something that sarah sanders does. occasionally you'll see clips of her on tv talking but can you explain for people why it isn't the same as a full press

briefing at the white house? >> we tangled because we were on opposite sides of the fence but the great ones came out and prepared to answer questions and if they couldn't answer they'd dodge and weave and sometimes say no comment and one of the best answers i ever heard, i thought about it was from mike mccurry that was president clinton's press secretary during the monica. we asked him a question one day and he said i don't know. i don't know. we said well go ask the president. he knows. come tell us. he said i'm not going to go ask the question. we said you're the press secretary. we can't get to the president. it's your job. why won't you ask the president? now check the transcript, he said, because i don't want to have to lie to you. well, i don't expect them to say things like that all the time but they answer the question to the best of their abilities usually and when they can't, they don't treat you as if

you're some -- well, how dare you ask a question like that. why don't you say, how come the president did so well today? why is he such a great man today? they can get that from fox today but not from the press corps. >> thank you as always. appreciate it. >> let's check in with chris and see what he's working on. >> you on colbert last night pretty awesome. >> what do you think? too much? >> no, it was great. >> would you have done it? >> i couldn't hold colbert like you held colbert. >> couldn't you? >> maybe in a more gentle sense. >> you have carried me out of several cities if memory serves. i was in a tough spot. i could have used a little coop counsel there. i've never been apart of anything like that. what are you supposed to do when the guy punks you on live television and says come on, let's go, me and you? what do you do?

what do you do? >> i think you did the right thing because you beat him. >> well, of course. what was i going to lose? >> 10 seconds, what do you have? >> what do i have tonight? >> four seconds. >> whether or not democrats can argue the economy and we have a member of the democrat house committee that's thinking about holding the ag in contempt. what are they going to do? >> i'll see you then. four minutes. we'll be right back. thanks for coming. no problem. -you're welcome. this is the durabed of the all new chevy silverado. it looks real sturdy. -the bed is huge. it has available led cargo area lighting. lights up the entire bed. it even offers a built in 120 volt outlet. wow. plug that in for me. whoa! -holy smokes! -oh wow! and the all new silverado has more trim levels than any other pickup. whoa! oh wow! -very cool. there's something for all of us. absolutely. it's time to upgrade. (laughter)

is your floor's best friend. only roomba uses 2 multi-surface rubber brushes to grab and remove pet hair. and the roomba filter captures 99% of dog and cat allergens. if it's not from irobot, it's not a roomba. i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. woman: this is your wake-up call. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. vo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis,

and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman: help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. with licensed agents available 24/7. it's not just easy. it's having-a-walrus-in-goal easy! roooaaaar! it's a walrus! ridiculous! yes! nice save, big guy! good job duncan! way to go! [chanting] it's not just easy. it's geico easy. oh, duncan. stay up. no sleepies.

it's geico easy. change has many faces. names you'll never know. the bright-eyed, the brave, the visionaries. where challenges exist, you'll find them. everything they do is for those who come next. so side by side, they pave the road ahead to create a place where everyone belongs. at citi, we empower people who are out to change the world. because tomorrow waits for no one... but it belongs to those who welcome it with open arms. citi. welcome what's next

the news continues right now. we want to hand it over to the colbert cuddler chris cuomo. >> heavy charge. welcome to primetime. this president told vladimir putin today that the mueller probe was a hoax and then joked with the media about how putin disrespected the probe. he also refused to address any future interference with the man that is still actively trying to interfere with our democracy. and he decided to accept putin's claim that he wants nothing to do with venezuela despite the secretary of state saying the opposite just days ago. how is any of that okay? we have a foreign affairs committee member that may breaom