begins in front of the house intelligence committee in just 13 hours from now. "a.c. 360" begins right now. will go before a house of pair committees and talk about a 448 page document which is one way of putting it and it might be the way former russia special counsel rob beer mueller would prefer to have it. it is not safe to say how people see it here in washington nor how people all over the country will likely see it tomorrow. house democrats will be questioning him tomorrow spent the day prepping for it. the president's republican defender circulated talking points which cnn obtained. the president has been tweeting and talking about it no surprise and this is whether he thinks it ought to be or not a key moment in his presidency and a critical one for the country. everyone if robert mueller stays within the confines of his report as he says he will, it is

still tremendously important or at least it could be. because not everyone of course has read it. in fact, most people have not and because so many including the president especially the president have been mischaracterizing what the report actually says. i'm quoting now from volume 1, page 1, the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. that is how the report begins. i want to read you how it ends, volume 2, page 182. if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we could so state. based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we're unable to reach that judgment. accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. this is what robert mueller intended to be his final word and it is not kind to president trump. yet, as we said, the president

his defenders and attorney general have been mischaracterizing the report. here is the president earlier today. >> so i said this morning, i said, i wrote it out and said let's see because i'm watching. goes on for years and years and years. no collusion, no obstruction. that's not good enough. let's go more. $40 million interview 500 people. they got nothing. i could find something, i could take anybody in this audience, give me $40 million, give me unlimited fbi. unlimited interviews. unlimited interviewed 500 people. listen to this, 2,500 subpoenas that. they did everything. their collusion, no collusion. they have no collusion. then i have an article, too, where i have the right to do whatever i want as president, but i don't even talk about

that. because they did a report and there was no obstruction. >> all right. so keeping them honest, the mueller report did not conclude there was no obstruction of justice. the president's attorney general did. the report spoke at length how a matter of policy a sitting president could not be indicted in addition it laid out many instances of potential obstruction including this quote from page 7 of volume 2. many of the president's acts directed at witnesses including discouragement of cooperation with the government and suggestions of possible future pardons took place in public view. that circumstance is unusual but no principle of law excludes public acts from the reach of the obstruction laws. by the way, one of the republican talking points that cnn dana bash obtained today that we'll go into later says and i quote, the president never interfered with anyone or any part of the investigation and was committed to transparency throughout the entire process. i mean, that is a talking point. it's clearly not true according

to the mueller report, one of the most egregious examples, how the president tried to get don mcgahn to call the acting attorney general and said he had to get rid of mueller. mcgahn refused and when the story leaked, the president tried to get mcgahn to lie about it publicly deny the president asked him to make that call, which he wouldn't do and to create a false record to prove that the president never tried to get him to get rid of mueller. as for another talking point that the report did not establish that campaign coordinator conspired with the russian government in its election interference, that is true, what is not true is the talking point claiming the report confirmed there was no collusion, which it didn't dedicated the entire first volume to documenting how the russian government tried to get donald trump elected and now the trump campaign invited that help in ways no campaign has and that president trump recently suggested he would be okay to try again in an interview with george stephanopoulos the next time a foreign government offers up dirt on a political opponent.

the talking points don't mention that and although they do slam the obama administration's response to russian interference they don't mention this president's long history of denying that interference even happened. >> my people came to me dan coats came to me and some others and said they think it's russia. i have president putin, he just said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. >> so just to repeat robert muell mueller's first words, the russian government interfered in sweeping and systematic fashion. those were his last words on the subject. stay tuned until tomorrow. the president weighed in on one aspect of tomorrow's testimony. kaitlan collins joins us with more on that. there was a last-minute request to have a top deputy basically appear alongside him. first of all, what more can you tell us why does he want that

and what has been worked out? >> yeah, anderson, this is director mueller's chief of staff when he was the fbi director and followed him into the special counsel's office and they say according to mueller spokesman, they talked about him accompanying mueller to the hearing weeks ago but there was last-minute request to have him sworn in as he testifies which a source says so he's there so he can help give him advice when he's answering questions, not answer any questions for him but of course, that last-minute request really raised a lot of eyebrows among republicans trying to change the format before this hearing. we should note doug collins did just tell my colleague that jerry nadler told him he will not have a speaking role at tomorrow's hearing in front of the house judiciary committee. he'll just be there to act as counsel to the special counsel. >> and as we mentioned, the president responded just before air what did he have to say? >> yeah, the president does not seem happy about this. he's tweeting a few moments ago

saying he just got back to hear of a last-minute change allowing what he calls a never trumper attorney to help robert mueller with his testimony before congress. he calls it a disgrace anderson to the system and says it's never heard of before and should not be allowed. this tweet really gives you a look inside what the president is thinking ahead of tomorrow's hearing. >> what have your sources been saying about how the president is feeling about mueller's testimony tomorrow? because yesterday i think it was he said well, you know, maybe i'll watch a little bit. the idea he maybe won't watch and this won't consume him tomorrow is laughable on its face given the history of his television viewing. >> yeah, it already seems to be consuming him now because not only is he tweeting about this last-minute change we've seen of this request from robert mueller but the reporting is showing the president is having a series of phone calls with aids and allies talking about what it is robert mueller will be saying tomorrow and these people are walking away from the conversations saying the president seems more irritated than anxious about this because this is the guy leading this investigation to him for the last two years and

now he's going to be front and center and front of the television cameras tomorrow and that something that is just not sitting well with the president who not only doesn't want any unflattering headlines to come out of this hearing tomorrow and essentially back on robert mueller. and tomorrow just not the kinds democrats. >> now to the question tomorrow vice chair of the house ju judiciary intelligence committee. thanks for being with us. i don't quite understand the -- i mean, the president's upset about this, it seems he's looking for a reason to again say this is a rigged witch hunt. what's the big deal about robert muell mueller, people have attorneys all the time, people they consult with during their

testimony. >> it disrupts what the white house has been trying to do with respect to the mueller report. they redacted and tried to keep witnesses from appearing and testifying and suppressed the evidence. any additional help in telling the story, i think that goes against what they are trying to do. >> why do you think mueller waited until the last minute to do this? does that raise any concerns for you? >> i don't think so. there is on going conversations whether or not he would bring one or more aids with him. as we've mentioned, it's an extensive report, a lot of witnesses were interviewed. a lot of documentation was gone through. so he probably just wants to make sure he's as complete and thorough as possible. >> congressman, adam schiff indicated the same request has been made of the intelligence committee. has that request been granted and would the rules be around his deputy appearing to be the same as they are for the other committee? >> yeah, that's still being worked out and i take it to mean that robert mueller because he's going to be talking about a report, that is a few hundred pages, probably wants somebody

there to help him get into the new questions that are detailed. you want somebody there that knows the report back and forth also that can help you. >> congresswoman, i understand the democrats on the judiciary committee held essentially a mock hearing today which is, you know, something a lot of people do before debates and any big thing like this. is there anything you can say about what you learned in it in taking part? i understand you even had somebody, you know, playing the roles of republicans, jim jordan who obviously will probably be very vocal tomorrow. >> i think the focus was really on making sure that we were as efficient as possible. we only have mr. mueller there for a limit aided amount of tim >> two hours for your committee or three. >> three. >> how much time does each member have? >> the committee works under the five-minute rule. that's about what it is. >> let me just ask you, are you members of congress, you know, sometimes they get criticized for making lengthy statements

and kind of, you know, enjoying their time in the spotlight. >> grand standing? >> grand standing, yes. >> that's the term you're looking for, yes. >> will there be a lot of that tomorrow? that eats up a lot of time. >> i don't think so. i think everybody is aware how serious this hearing will be and they will comport themselves accordingly. >> congressman castro, i want to play what chairman shchiff had o say. >> people are dug in on this president, not trump and russia but if that appalling display of racism over the last two weeks wasn't enough to move people, is there anything that bob mueller can say that will? >> congressman castro, do you think he's right? do you think there is anything mueller could say that could actually move people's opinion about the president one way or another? >> i hope so because bob mueller will be talking about things

that are fundamental to our democracy and potential obstruction of justice by the president of the united states. issues of conspireing with members of a foreign government to interfere with our elections and then finally, perhaps issues of money laundering and leverage that a foreign government may have over the president or people that are in his circle. so hopefully, the american people with as much as possible will listen with open ears. >> congressman, though, i mean, you say hopefully and i certainly understand your position on this, but i mean, all the information it seems that mueller is going to give tomorrow are going to be asked about, he's going to stick to what is in the report and i know a lot of people have not read the report, most people have not in the country but essentially, people, you know, if they had any interest have a general sense of what is in the report and it doesn't seem like mueller is, you know, given, we've looked at hundreds of hours of prior testimony he's given over the years, he has certainly not, you know, an emotional witness.

>> yeah, no, i think that's true. look, there will be a crowd of people who have already made up their mind and it really doesn't matter what you say. they aren't going to change their mind. i believe there is a crowd of americans that are willing to listen and are willing to listen to bob mueller and even though he may not be the most dynamic guy in terms of how he answers questions, we're going to be talking about subjects that are very important to our democracy and to our country and i think that people will perk up because of that. >> congresswoman, what is your measure of success for the hearing tomorrow? >> well, i think it's going to be if we get the attention of some of those folks who haven't really focused yet, i mean, do think bob mueller is going to come in there and burn down the house? no. i think it's his gravity and seriousness and patriotism that will impress the american people. >> and if all he does essentially is read from the report or recite, you know,

detailed way through questioning what is specific examples of the president trying to get don mcgahn to create a false record, just an extraordinary thing on its face. >> amazing. >> it is incredible. is that enough? >> i think it will be. we've seen for example when congressman amosh came out and talked about that report for the first time, some people in his district said wow, i had no idea that was in the report because this fake news has been out there that there was no obstruction, no collusion. that's not what the report says and i think when people listen, they will come away with a different impression. >> congressman castro, is that your measure of success, as well? >> i think so. most of all making sure that the truth gets out to the american people on what is a very important subject to our democracy. you're right, there are a lot of people that probably 99% of americans did not pick up that mueller report and read any significant portion of it. so for millions and millions of viewers, this will be the first time where they are really

hearing the substance and some of the details about what was in that report. >> i want to thank congressman castro for being with us and congresswom congresswoman, as well. busy day tomorrow. a lot of head from the judiciary committee and intelligence committee tomorrow. hearings in both places. in light of president's tweet tonight, a question is robert mueller's former boss and long-time friend attorneybarr l. we'll have details on that and perspective from the legal and political team ahead and a former mueller colleague at the fbi and person he is and what he expects to see from him tomorrow under oath. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles

plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer. bookers are booking getaway deals starting from 15% off. so their tacos are 15% tastier, they're scootin' 15% smoother, and their kids love 'em 15% more. with getaway deals of at least 15% off, you can be a booker at booking.com.

with getaway deals of at least 15% off, ♪ ♪ ♪ i've always been amazed and still going for my best, even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem.

so if there's a better treatment than warfarin... i want that too. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? reeling in a nice one. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden sign of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you. whoa. travis in it made it. it's amazing.

oh is that travis's app? it's pretty cool, isn't it? there's two of them. they're multiplying. no, guys, its me. see, i'm real. i'm real! he thinks he's real. geico. over 75 years of savings and service. before the break we talked about the fight over former deputy and tomorrow's proceedings, not the only controversy. you'll recall the justice department sent mueller a letter outlining what he could and couldn't discuss. we talked about on the program with some of the panel noting it seemed odd in tone considering the special counsel had publicly

committed to doing more or less what the letter laid out. the judiciary committee leader found it more than odd saying quote it's incredibly arrogant of the department to instruct him what to say. he added quote it's a part of the on going coverup by administration to keep information away from the american people. later today, attorney general barr weighed in. >> they asked us for guidance in writing to explain or tell them our position. we responded in writing the donald tru department sent the die again. >> what do you think of mueller saying it the arrogant to send this letter? >> he was misinformed as to the facts. >> joining us now legal and political team and host and former top advisor david axelrod and gloria burger and assistant

attorney general elliott williams and cnn political analyst kirsten powers and chief of staff and cnn political commentator, we were reporting mueller requested this and department of justice pointed that out so why is congressman nadler saying this is unwarranted? >> not me. yeah, i think barr is making the point that mueller requested it and the reason and wants someone sitting next to him is because he wants to be on solid ground and i think he's being cocooned into a degree because he wants to turn to his right hand person and say okay, correct me if i'm wrong on this little detail and he wanted the guidance in writing from the justice department in case he gets he can and not cannot say. it's more about mueller in this particular case than the justice system. >> i don't understand why it's such a last-minute thing.

>> it's not clear. there seems to be some debate but suggestion. people ought to chill out about it. nobody cares about aaron. >> i'm sure he has friends and family. >> that's true. [ laughter ] >> wish him nothing but the best. >> doesn't sound that way. >> he's not important. >> he's important to mueller. >> he's important to the family but the -- this is about mueller and mueller will say what mueller will say and some letter that some burro cat wrote him is not going to determine what he says. mueller is going to determine it. >> it does give the president another example that this is a, you know, crooked witch hunt. >> the problem is it gives them a talking point, right? they want to say is that they aren't playing by the rules and mueller isn't playing fairly and

so on. they should have spent months negotiating and did spend a bunch of tile negotiame negotia. it looks odd to put someone next to him even if, as gloria said, it's not unreasonable because it's showing up at the last minute, it sort of feels odd and you gave the president a talking point and i don't think that's what democrats or robert mueller need right now. >> david? >> i wonder how much of it is mueller himself recognizing that he is walking a very narrow ledge here. he wants to stick to the text of his report and doesn't want to go beyond it. he understands the mission of the republican there is is to try to paint this as a partisan exercise and he's going to be under siege from that side as well and so perhaps he just wanted this guy there to make sure that he didn't slip off the ledge. >> i think he did. >> randi kaye did a piece -- >> even though he's insignificant. [ laughter ] >> you did a piece yesterday

looking at, you know, many, many hours of mueller testimony over many, many years and he is very precise in his testimony and he doesn't give an answer unless he is 100% sure of all the facts so it makes sense he would want someone right there. >> that's right. you've seen when he's been up on capitol hill before even though he's reluctant to go this time he's been up there dozens and dozens of times. if he doesn't know an answer, he'll say he doesn't know the answer. this is right. this is a reference that he's going to have there with this aid who knows him well and obviously knows the case well, as well. i do think also, this does give the republicans an opening. these are republican whose are really going to be wanting to perform for the audience of one, donald trump and put some of those republican talking points and donald trump talking points in this hearing and kind of derail it in someway. this certainly gives them louie, jim jordan is there and devin nunes on the intel committee.

to the extent you're going to see fireworks it will be coming from the republican side and probably those members. >> it's interesting. both sides have been doing mock hearings, which i'm not sure how common that is for every hearing but certainly -- >> not at all. >> something of this size or magnitude, i guess, it may be. i could still go off the rails. >> what a prediction. [ laughter ] >> yeah, i mean, obviously the republicans will try to be disruptive of this, but i think that -- and for the democrats, this is very important. so i think they want to be prepared and there has been a lot of talk about how mueller will stick to what's in the report but i think there are opportunities hererect yes and . you can ask was this meant to be an impeachment referral, yes or no. if another person has done the things in this report, the type of obstruction of justice that seems to be laid out, anybody other than the president would you have charged him with a crime, yes or no?

there are opportunities to ask him to address things not answered in that report. >> mike, do you think you could come up with answers that say as we said. that doesn't look like what he's doing, i can't say it. look, this entire thing is theater. all the fundraising emails are written and ready to go out tomorrow from the superstar on that committee that will get five minutes. jackie speiers had a fantasy robert mueller would read the report. i keep waiting to hear sunny and cher. this is the same story over and over again. the country will go whatever and democrat haves blown their chance. >> but the most -- >> -- to have an agenda. >> most of the country hasn't read the mueller report. >> they won't read it tomorrow, either. >> they may have it read to them and may see it coming from a credible witness, robert mueller and so there may be some

questions as kirsten points out he can answer for example, did you -- was the president a corporative witness here? or is that how the president characterized the report accurate? >> right. how barr -- >> i don't know why he wouldn't be able to answer the questions. >> i love democrats want to do this and think they will get something out of it. they are taking a round peg and asking robert mueller to slam it in the square hole the public doesn't care about anymore. they moved on from this and the democratic party, there is a lot of things they can talk about. presidential candidates want to talk about something else. house democrats won't let them do it and they will try to make a huge circus tomorrow and make a name for themselves and it's hard for the party and i'm happy. >> we want to talk about this more. we'll take a short break and will have more on the testimony ahead on the house intelligence committee which will devote to the obstruction of justice mueller report. we'll be right back.

lick fast like a cookie dough ninja. apply that same speed to the ford hurry up and save sales event. for the first time ever get 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards. it all adds up. don't you love math? so get here asap because tasty deals and summer go fast. get in or lose out on 20% estimated savings on select ford models, plus earn complimentary maintenance through fordpass rewards.

and my side super soft? with the sleep number 360 smart bed you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. so, can it help us fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. will it help me keep up with him? yup. so, i'll wake up ready for anything? oh, we've got your back. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise. prove. and now, save up to $800 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends saturday. you eat right... mostly. you make time... when you can. but sometimes life gets in the way, and that stubborn fat just won't go away. coolsculpting takes you further. a non-surgical treatment that targets, freezes, and eliminates treated fat cells, for good. discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. some common side-effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling.

don't imagine results, see them. coolsculpting, take yourself further. at visionworks, we guaranteand look great.eat "guarantee". we say that too. you gotta use "these" because we don't mean it. if you don't love your glasses, we'll make it right. guaranteed. visionworks. see the difference. wiswitch wireless carriersn bring in your own phone, and save hundreds of dollars. it's pretty much the easiest way to save since sliced bread. sure is. because savings is as savings does. and sometimes you've just got to stop and smell the savings. i'm sorry, i think you mean roses. oh right. you need to stop and smell the roses of savings. bring in your own phone, switch to xfinity mobile and save hundreds of dollars a year.

now that's simple, easy, awesome. get $100 back when you bring in an eligible phone. click, call, or visit a store today. welcome back. bump the break i made a mistake and we would be talking about the house intelligence committee and obstruction. it's the house judiciary committee and obstruction and focussing on russian interference in the election. a key aspect of the allegations

of obstruction is the president's firing of james comey, his dismissing led deputy attorney general rod rosenstein to appoint mueller as head of the russian probe and i spoke this year on the second anniversary of his firing. you were at an fbi burro in los angeles and you actually saw it on cnn that you had been fired. i'm wondering two years later with all that's happened, how do you look back on that moment? >> i didn't expect to be fired. never entered my mind. i knew the president didn't like me but i thought that's okay because that will keep the separation. so it still feels a little numbing frankly and like it happened yesterday and a lifetime ago. >> no deal there will be a great deal for the committee to go over with robert mueller back with our political and legal teams. before the break, mike raised a totally valid argument and that this is actually bad for democrats that they are not talking about creating jobs, they are not talking about climate change or whatever it is

they want to talk about or the presidential candidates want to talk about. they are focused on mueller and the argument is the country heard this and it's made up their mind at the very least. >> they can do both. i think they can do this. they can do their job of oversight, which is actually their job. it not just about what the american people are interested or not interested in. it's about whether or not, you know, this actually like i said was this an impeachment referral? these are reasonable questions that need to be asked and i think doing oversight is not a problem and i think that they can continue to talk about the other issues being talked about in the 2020 race and they can do this. >> every congressperson i talked to that will be asking questions tomorrow, i think i've talked to three of them, they said it's not going to be congress people making a long statement so they can get on their local news or whatever it may be, do you buy that? >> well -- >> can they resist that? >> probably not. it's remarkable they have done

these prep sessions. i worked up there awhile. ist it's rare they prepare more than the morning of the hearing. >> that's frightening. >> there is a lot -- they are pulled in a lot of different directions. it's rare to see hours and hours of members of congress doing prep sessions for hearings, so i would hope they could be disciplined because i think both sides have a story to tell if the republicans truly believe this is a collusion and witch hunt non-sense and that the democrats truly believe as the report says, that there were allegations of crimes. >> can i just say, jeff, i -- i think that everyone is focused and i understand why on what the president did and what his campaign did but the mueller report was pretty extraordinary in the detail in which it laid out what the russians did, and, you know, the notion that congress shouldn't be exploring

this and exploring it in depth and that the fbi shouldn't somehow have opened an investigation when they got wind of the fact that the russians were, what turned out to be running a full scale operation against our election, this seems like something whether people are interested or not, it does seem like something congress should be investigating and does seem like something the american people should be concerned about. >> i think the question is the timing, really. because there are a lot of people saying why couldn't they have gotten mueller sooner? i'm one of them and i am one of them and i think there was a long negotiation of a time limit now that is sort of imposed by bob mueller while i'll give you three hours there and two hours there and pie question my quest he's up there, he can't just get up and leave if they are not done. >> i guess they technically could issue a subpoena for him. you raise on excellent point about this two bites at the apple question, can congress and

should congress still be looking into it? republican haves been saying you don't get the president tweeted yesterday, you don't get two different bites at the apple. notice it's a different apple. congress has an investigative mandate and oversight and this is squarely both on the intelligence side and obstruction of justice side. squarely within what congress ought to be doing. they can walk and chew gum at the same time. >> they testified that the russians are still active and we have the president of the unite states dismissing it as a hoax and as a witch hunt and you know this is deeply concerning. it should be. >> so mike, do you think the republicans on the committee do they try to interrupt the flow and get specific moments, five key moments and explain what

happened and tell don mcgahn and fake records, do republicans try to interrupt the flow of that or have launch broadsides on the fbi and peter strzok and the lovers and is that where they go? >> i think there is a little bit of theater that comes into the hearings. we saw with the first kavr va gn -- kavanaugh hearing where booker and harris were show boating. there will be a lot of show boating and interrupting. that happens in these hearings. the republicans, the key thing is the inception of the entire investigation. what was the information robert mueller got? how did he handle peter strzok before he fired him and did he use that everyday as part of what he did that you mentioned the page, excuse me, the steel dossier 12 times. you know, what's the process you went through in verifying that? they will try to take apart how this got started in the first place. i think that some of them will get sidetracked in saying, you

know, this was a partisan thing. i think they would be better to focus on that because there is questions there to be answered. >> wouldn't it be a better idea to embrace part of the mueller report? wouldn't you say you had an unlimited budget, you issued thousands of document requests. >> doug collins, the ranking member said publicly first that mueller should testify. the ranking member on the committee called for mueller to testify to do -- >> so what -- >> the point is director mueller, you had an unlimited budget and had out of every fbi agent you wanted and after two years you found absolutely no evidence that the president colluded in a conspiratorial way with the russian government. >> that's a very good question. >> but you said one other question, i guarantee. >> to which he responds, i did find evidence. collusion isn't a crime as -- >> i said criminal conspiraccon >> they would use the word collusion and correct them -- >> he also used and said we

didn't find sufficient evidence which is different than saying we didn't -- you said you didn't find any evidence. >> let's see. he's going to have to decide how much he wants to push back. but i mean, i just think there is a lot there for republicans to -- without going on to nutty conspiracy theories about -- >> kirsten, one of the questions you said democrats should ask is the statements the president has been making, you know, is he not telling the truth? is he wrong? >> it's an accurate representation -- >> there is a way for mueller to answer that without mueller confronting the president calling him a liar. he can say well, if you read the report, you know, he can have a long drawn out -- >> if you ask him like if you read the way the president hears quotes how the president represented this, you know, and is this correct, yes or no? >> which is probably a good reason why they practiced because of how they ask the questions and are critical. thank all of you. still to m ccome, we'll talk wi someone that worked with

mueller. he shares what he expects to see tomorrow. let's get down to business. the business of family time... ...and downtime. ...and you time. ...and forgetting what time it is...altogether. modernized comfort inns and suites have been refreshed because when your business is making time, our business is you. get the lowest price guaranteed on all choice hotels

when you book direct at choicehotels.com. ♪ ♪ ♪

priceline will partner with even more vegas hotels to turn their unsold rooms into amazing deals. delegates, how do you vote? (cheering) ♪ yes, y-y-y-yes, yes... that is freaky. (applause)

mueller got strong words appraised during testimony on capitol hill. he said mueller was quote the professional and straight shooter. he also said he had no reason to doubt the integrity of mueller's report. joining me now is someone else that worked alongside robert mueller, james baker the former

general counsel of the fbi that served while mueller was director. aaron zebley, you worked with him at the fbi and special counsel's office. the president is calling him a never trumper. he's been a long-time aid of robert mueller. going back many, many years does it make sense to you and/or can you explain why you think mueller would want him by his side. >> aaron is great. he's a great person. he's an excellent lawyer. he's super nice, low ego, team player, good judgment. i mean, i just can't stop saying enough good things about him. look, if i was in director mueller's shoes, i would be wanting someone like him with me because you don't know the level of detail he will go. you can't remember everything in the 448-page report plus the other stuff he has. i'm sure he is there to help. i don't see this as a big deal. i don't know what the president and others are complaining about. it makes sense to me.

>> we looked at a lot of mueller's past testimony. he's deliberate. if there is a fact he doesn't know, he says i'll get back to you. >> like in this context, getting back -- >> right, getting back isn't the same. >> this is when he was fbi director. >> normally when a person like that is testifying, they can say we'll take that as a question for the record and highmy agenc will get back to you because you have a staff of people answering those questions. to short circuit that, i'm expecting director mueller wants aaron there. >> there is a lot of expectations on all sides of this, however you look at it. what are you expecting tomorrow? >> people need to lower their expectations in terms of what they get out of director mueller from democrats. >> if the democrats are expecting this to be a tied changing thing, it's not. >> that's not going to happen, i don't think. the main thing to me is just have director mueller put sections of the report in front of him and read them. the report itself, the

obstruction part is so damming and it's so concerning and it should be so unacceptable to americans. >> it is incredible when last night reading how the president again tried to get the, you know, tried to get rosenstein to fire -- tried to get mcgahn to call rosenstein to fire mueller and tried to get mcgahn to deny it when the story leaked. >> and create a false record. >> and create a false record that the president of the united states is trying to get his legal counsel to create a false record is extraordinary. >> yeah, i mean, i reread the whole volume two over the weekend again and it's just so shocking and it's so -- it should be unacre semibkunaccept america for any organization to be run that way. if these people are running a major corporation, it would be shocking. >> the -- >> and also, the number of people who don't listen to the president who take, don't do what he wants -- >> corey lewandowski. >> yeah, it's amazing. he wants to portray this image

of being in charge and yet people ignore him fairly frequently and lie to each other and the public and lie constantly internally. >> obviously, republicans have a different strategy going into this. do you see them -- i mean, if they go after the fbi, if they are looking into the origins of the investigation, is that something mueller can talk about? i assume he can. >> i don't know. he wasn't there when the whole thing started. that was many, many months -- what? july of 2016. he got there in may of 2017. so in terms of the origin of the investigation, he learned a lot about what we did back in those times but he wasn't there. i expect republicans will try to attack the origin of the investigation and angry democrats and so on. >> page and lovers as president trump calls them. >> which is extremely offensive and beneath the dignity of his office i have to say. >> right.

>> his constant, his constant way of referring to american citizens in that way is deeply offensive. >> yeah, but i mean, we've seen there is no dignity in this. so in office these days which is a sad thing. well, we'll be watching tomorrow. >> okay. >> we'll talk to you more. >> i'll be here. >> thank you. ahead tonight, something dem kratds and -- democrats agreed on, the 9/11 first responders. we'll have details just ahead. tn is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer. plus no payments for up to 90 days. crabfest is back at red lobster

with 9 craveable crab creations. from the new ultimate crabfest trio with three kinds of wild-caught crab to the return of crab lover's dream! grab your crab crew, hurry in or order it to go! book two, separate qualifying stays at choicehotels.com... ...and earn a $50 gift card. because when your business is rewarding yourself... ...our business is you. book direct at choicehotels.com at t-mobile, for $40/line for four lines, it's all included for the whole family, starting with unlimited data. use as much as you want, when you want. and if you like netflix, it's included on us. plus no surprises on your bill. taxes and fees are included. and now for a limited time, with each new line, get one of our latest smartphones included. that's right, only $40/line for four lines and smartphones are included for the whole family.

but it's not really something yoyou want to buy.. it's not sexy... oh delicious. or delicious... or fun. ♪ but since you need both car and home insurance, why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%. which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like ah well i don't know what you'd wanna buy cause i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless.

tomorrow's mueller's hearings are of course the topic here in washington tonight. chris cuomo joins us. i sense you're going to be exploring this as well. do you think this matters? do you think, you know, mike shields was on earlier and made the point that he thinks this is great for republicans, bad for democrats. >> the one thing that's bad for everybody is when we hear a partisan say, this is really bad for the other side, so i'm kind

of happy. that has to end. decency has to be inject eed ba into this. i think it's a win fuor us. only 3% of people read the report. and it was a lot. it's dense. but they're going to hear things tomorrow that are different if not said differently than they've heard in the past. so that's good. even if it's said, just the way mueller speaks, it's not histrionics, dramatic, but it's credible. >> and i'm happy he's got a second chair tomorrow. this is a lot of information to remember. it's good for him to have somebody. this should have happened sooner. i say that tomorrow is about the democrats. they either -- because i don't know how this affects the president adversely. his base isn't going to move, no matter what is said. and i don't know what actions they're taking, except the obvious. the democrats have to decide, after tomorrow, soon, is it time to walk the walk or do we have to find something else for our election to be about? because they can't keep saying

that he's obstructed justice, he's abused his power, and not start an impeachment inquiry. so tomorrow is make or break for them. >> what are you going to be focusing on? anything in particular? >> best-case scenario, worst-case scenario in terms of how we monitor tomorrow. >> all right. chris, we'll be looking for it. thanks very much. that's just in about six minutes from now. coming up, an update on a story that we have followed closely, obviously. the reauthorization of the 9/11 victims' compensation fund. as you know, comedian jon stewart and about a dozen first responders were on the hill today as the senate voted. we'll have the latest on that, when we return. can my side be firm? and my side super soft? with the sleep number 360 smart bed you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. so, can it help us fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. will it help me keep up with him? yup. so, i'll wake up ready for anything? oh, we've got your back. so, you can really promise better sleep?

not promise. prove. and now, save up to $800 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends saturday. ♪ here i go again on my own ♪ goin' down the only road i've ever known ♪ ♪ like a drifter i was-- ♪ born to walk alone! ...barb! you left me hangin' on the high harmony there. if you ride, you get it. geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more.

i've always been i'm still going for my best... even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin, i'll go for that. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both.

what's next? sharing my roots. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you. (v...especially when your easily distracted teenager has the car. the worst... at subaru, we're taking on distracted driving [ping] with sensors that alert you when your eyes are off the road. the all-new subaru forester.

the safest forester ever. after months of debate, testimony, and public shaming, the bill to permanently provide money for victims of 9/11 has passed congress and heads to the president, who's expected to sign it. now, sources at the white house tell cnn they are planning a signing event with first responders after the senate passed the victim compensation fund today on a vote of 97-2. republicans mike lee and rand paul were the only senators to oppose the bill. certainly a lot of emotion, understandably, from two people who helped push this bill into law, comedian jon stewart and first responder john field. they and about a dozen first responders, who championed this bill, were on capitol hill to watch what was a momentous day for them. last month, i spoke with first two responders working to get this bill passed. over the years, they and others have made a lot of trip to congress, held meetings with officials, all to get the

continued support for those who have fallen hill or are living with illnesses that they got from the work they did at ground zero. >> we're firemen, we're police officers, we're construction workers, we're correction officers. and this isn't our job to come down here and fight. you know, we did our job. on 9/11, on one of the darkest days of our country, we went down there and fought like so many did to build this country back up. >> today, jon stewart told reporters, quote, we can never repay all that the 9/11 community haze done for our country, though we can stop penalizing them. the news continues. i want to hand it over to chris for "cuomo prime time". it starts now. chris? >> thank you, anderson. i am chris cuomo and welcome to prime-time from washington, d.c. the waiting is over. robert mueller will tell you what he found and why. politicians on the right and left will try to find advantage. will his answers have people yelling for impeachment or just yawning? one of the leading progressives

who's going to question the former special counsel is here. and second only to your interest in hearing from mueller what matters most about your government and democracy, the democrats really do shave the most on the line. what are the best and worst-case scenarios for them tomorrow. and what will decide the outcome of this entire situation? >> and can this president keep his taxes quiet as an exercise of his first amendment rights? congresswoman and law professor katie porter is here to test that notion. what do you say? we're on the eve of a big day. let's get after it. all right. we're just hours away from an historic hearing here in washington, d.c. the stakes are so high, they were actually practicing for this. both sides, mock hearings, using stand-ins for mueller and gopers like jim jordan from ohio. democrats worry that maybe he'll interrupt the hearing, trying to hijack