concerns the confidence of the country and the president that has belonged up until now to the lawyers. to the investigators and the lawyers and the president's lawyer. toda today it belongs to the citizens. this sounded like an effort ton >> one of the big questions kate shaw is whether or not robert mueller intended the evidence he instructed on obstruction to go to the congress without a decision by the attorney general. >> right. it's not clear what special counsel mueller intended barr to do. he didn't say i'm passing the ball to you. you make a determination. it seems like the evidence is allowed to speak for itself. there were ten possible acts by the president that the attorney general referenced that are considered as constituting obstruction of justice. no decision gets made. attorney general barr steps in and says as a legal matter these acts don't constitute obstruction of justice.

we saw this needing to be understood within the lens of he's frustrating, he's angry, there's no collusion. it felt like a personal lawyer making a defense of a client. >> that gets to the question of intent on obstruction of justice. >> there was an important question asked of him whether the office of legal counsel memo which in 2000 found that a sitting president shouldn't be indicted. the question is was that one of the reasons that robert mueller didn't make a decision on obstruction of justice. he wouldn't answer whether he said that in the memo itself which to me indicates there was some mention of it in the memo. he did then say, but, when i spoke to him about it, he said it wasn't but for. meaning he confirmed that he wasn't ready to indict, but for the office of legal counsel's

guidance. there's a difference there. if robert mueller mentioned that as one of the factors, if one of the factors in not making a decision is a sitting president can't be indicted anyway, that's really important. >> that's one of the questions congress will have to consider after they read the report. i have want to go back to pierre. he's gone to read the report which we should be seeing soon. cecilia vega, already president trump has responded to william barr's press conference. likely to fuel the concern democrats have. >> exactly. there's no question president trump was watching this. he tends to be watching tv at this hour in the morning. he's got a tweet out saying no collusion, no obstruction, game over. it's a "game of thrones" reference. we can't emphasize enough the extraordinary nature of what we witnessed this morning. it's not just going to be from

democrats. i wouldn't be surprised if we hear concerns from republicans about what we just witnessed. this was the attorney general seeming to defend how the president was feeling going into this, talking about his frustration and anger. this wasn't bill barr just laying out the procedures for this report. this was him telling the world through his prism what this report will entail. this is him putting a spin on the report before we see it. >> this is unprecedented. >> it is unprecedentsedunpreced. there's a big difference between what's lawful and what's wrong. the conversation a lot of people will have is one that i think barr wanted to meet with this closing argument he was making. he's trying to spin a little bit here and put in context what the

american people are about to see for themselves. it's admirable he's going to release as much as he can. >> jon karl, you said there were several conversations between barr's team and the president's team. >> there have. we learned from barr the president's personal counsel was given a chance to read the entire report over the past couple days. george, there's a fair amount of spinning going on on all sides of this. we're just in the opening rounds here. when the report comes out as we heard from barr, there will be ten episodes -- ten episodes -- that were described by robert mueller and the special counsel that raise concerns, possible obstruction of justice concerns. while we have barr's take on this now, we've heard it fully, these ten episodes will be something that the white house is going to -- the white house

will have to explain. we have the president declaring victory. we have some opening spin. make no mistake. it's a lengthy report that's going to be published largely unredacted. it will go chapter and verse into the president's actions and the opinion of the special counsel on whether or not the president obstructed justice. >> barr said largely unredacted. one of the exceptions is the grand jury material. i want to bring in mary bruce for more on that. we already know that the chairman of the house judiciary committee jerrold nadler said he's prepared to subpoena william barr and the justice department. >> they have the subpoena card ready to lay on the table possibly as soon as tomorrow. look, democratic sources that i've been talking with over the last couple minutes say this is

the first they heard of any briefing or unredacted portion of the report that will be provided to congress. the attorney general said it will have exceptions with the grand jury. they believe there is precedent to see the grand jury material. he's willing to go to court to get it. democrats have made clear not only that they're going to want every detail, but they want to see mueller's words on it. they have want to compare mueller's words to barr's summary. from what they just heard from bill barr, democrats say it doesn't change a thing for them. >> not yet. dan abrams? >> what are the legal theories where they disagree? you heard bill barr that there were certain legal theories

where they disagreed when it comes to obstruction of justice? what are those? >> one could be is there an underlying crime. >> right. he's trying to make us believe they were generally in agreement on a bunch of things. it does seem there were disagreements. if they were in disagreement why would robert mueller be okay with a decision being made? >> i want to go back to another question terry and i'll bring in kate on this as well. you saw barr use the words unprecedented situation. i think back to previous special counsels. we heard from the special counsels. we heard from ken starr. we didn't hear from the attorney general. >> different law. that law lapsed. the independent counsel law allowed the independent counsel to send a report to congress.

they rewrote the guidelines so it went to the attorney general. it was because ken starr's was such a lurid distraction. now the special counsel delivers it to the attorney true. >> that's right. but there's still a reason you get a special counsel and go outside the department of justice to find someone. it's so they can do an independent review. yes the person reports to the attorney general. the attorney general isn't supposed to get involved. if they get involved in the process they have to report that to congress. to say of course barr would come up with a conclusion here, that's not necessarily the case. the reason you have a special counsel is so that the attorney general who works for the president doesn't have to make these decisions. >> one of the other things, kate shaw, is that william barr had

strong feelings about the investigation before he became attorney general. >> right. he interviewed for the job with a letter that said the president the can't be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. it's convenient that's the way it's played out. the difference between the independent counsel statute under which ken starr was appointed, the independent counsel statute required ken starr to make a referral to congress if he found information that might be impeachable offense. mueller doesn't have that kind of language. this report we'll see today isn't an impeachment referral in a formal sense, but whether in some sense mueller intended to pass off to congress the task of assessing what had happened, deciding whether that's consistent with the president's oath of office. that may be where the action shifts to after today. >> the action has started to

shift already. mary bruce, we're hearing from the chairman of the house judiciary committee saying they want to hear from robert mueller. >> yes. they're saying robert mueller has to appear on the hill. chairman nadler said it's clear congress and the american people must hear from special counsel robert mueller in person to better understand his findings. prior to today democrats said that calling mueller up was a possibility. seemed they were going to hold off until they saw the redacted report and until they heard from bill barr. the way the attorney general pushed this roll out has forced democrat leaders to take this step. chuck schumer and nancy pelosi said bill barr was acting in a way that was in defensivable.

they said in order for the american public to restore faith in the investigation that mueller has to come and testify before congress. >> mary, i want to bring in matthew dowd. it seems like the public's views on this entire investigation on the president, on whether or not there was any improper cooperation with russia had been pretty hardened. >> they were and that three and a half page letter barr put out didn't move the public at all. my guess is in the aftermath of this -- i was struck by watching this and listening to bill barr how much he put his own credibility on the line it seemed in order to spin for the president and to give the president two hours of better press. he put his own credibility on the line. as you watched him do that, excusing the president on his

emotional or mood state, he felt more like the hand of the king than he did the attorney general of the united states. when we see the report fully read how big the gap between what bill barr said and what the report actually says. >> it would be a gamble for the attorney general to give a press conference like this if there were significant gaps. >> that's one of the reasons the president's reporters are so confident. he's 68 years, he's got a reputation. would he throw it away for this? he looks at the law and the power of the president very differently in a way that's favorable to president trump. he wrote that letter saying that the president has the authorities and the law can't apply to him essentially. that is not universally accepted. whether bill barr would

sacrifice his character i'm not -- hose ne's not a trumpy. >> that would be whether or not robert mueller backs that up. >> that's correct. can we talk about how crazy it is that we've been here for an hour and we've still not seen the report? we have to wait another hour to get it. why? i don't understand what could possibly be the reason we need to wait after the press conference. >> a report mind you that barr said he showed the white house and trump's personal team of lawyers before the american public got to see it. >> right. it's not the end of the world. okay so we have to wait another hour. there's no way to justify it except for the idea of a couple hours of the president being able to respond and good media.

>> what you saw terry moran the attorney general hang it on is that this is a different law. >> it is clear the law provides the attorney general with discretion in these matters. the president as president, not as donald trump, any president gets to assert executive privilege. they looked and there was nothing they wanted to excerpt executive privilege on. the president's lawyers, that's a courtesy, but once again traditionally done. he's proceeding within a way that's helpful to trump, but within his discretion. >> the report is going to be released to congress around 1:00 a.m., to the public shortly thereafter. we'll come back after we had a chance to look at the report. our coverage is going to continue on our live channel. we'll be back in a minute.

>> announcer: this has been a special report from abc news. amy? all right, robin. the hero chaplain who saved the crown of thorns is speaking out. our foreign correspondent, james longman is there with the latest. good morning, james. >> reporter: good morning, amy. well, they are now planning to move easter celebrations to two other major churches here, but on this easter week, the religious community is breathing a desperate sigh of relief at how many religious relics were saved. as a city and nation and begin to rebuild their history, stories of heroism rise from the ashes. french officials now say notre dame was just 15 to 30 minutes away from total collapse if not for the bravery of firefighters who beat the flames away from the famous bell towers. inside as the roof fell around them, the brave crusaders who rushed in to save some of

christianity's most important relics, including the crown of thorns, believed to have been worn by jesus. this morning, the hero chaplain who helped save the artifact is speaking out. the goal of this action was to preserve this extraordinary relic, this world heritage. as the iconic spire came crash down to the cathedral floor, reverends jean-marc and his team came out holding the crown. they unlocked its container and got it to safety. once we got permission, we rushed to the cathedral, and during this time, we arrived and saw that the other team was already there. they had already broken the protection and found an attendant who had the code and he managed to take the crown of thorns out. now ahead of easter sunday, the sound of solidarity. at 6:50 yesterday evening, across france, church bells rang for their beloved cathedral as she sits still unable to return their call.

most experts think it will take at least ten years to rebuild this place, and it has of course, devastated paris, but easter celebrations with their themes of renewal and rebirth will have a special significance this year for sure. guys? >> well put. well put, james. thank you. okay. amy's very happy about this. this new "jeopardy!" record overnight. reigning champ. what's his name? james -- >> james holzhauer. >> he set a new single game milestone with amy and her family watching, winning a whopping $131,127, breaking the record he set just last week, and we're also hearing a new message from alex trebek, the beloved long-time "jeopardy!" host, updating fans on his battle with stage 4 pancreatic cancer, sharing his thanks as he wraps up the 35th season of "jeopardy!" he's vowing he'll be back. >> i'm feeling good. i'm continuing with my therapy, and we -- by we, the staff, is already working on our next season, the 36th year of

"jeopardy!" so i look forward to seeing you once again in september with all kinds of good stuff. >> good stuff. >> he looks good. >> he looks great. >> he looks great. >> as you said, he's handling everything with such grace and the way he continues to put out these messages of things. >> it's good to see. you're right. we're following a lot of other stories this morning including this exclusive coming up. a chilling 911 call from the 17-year-old who escaped torture inside her own home. she called the police to save her 12 siblings. and the mother who is suing a water park after her son died from a brain-eating amoeba. but first, let's go back to ginger. >> we have flooding in minnesota and flooding to come for the weekend. easter weekend will get saturated. you see st. peter, minnesota. that was a highway was shut down because of a mud slide, and you had it in other parts of minnesota, and will on the east coast this weekend. let's get to the summer-like cities brought to you by sherwin williams. the east coast this weekend. let's get to the summer-like cities brought to you by sherwin williams.

we have a lot more coming up. scientists we have a lot more coming up. cle-gro performance organics. it's miracle-gro's next big thing.

♪ ♪ organic plant food and soil that finally work. ♪ ♪ and work... and work. ♪ ♪ gentleman r twice the bounty, guaranteed. miracle-gro performance organics. organics finally grow up. and up, and up. introducing non-stop spring styles for the family! hurry into old navy stores for 50% off your entire purchase! with dresses from twelve bucks for women, and ten bucks for girls! only at old navy. the oats feed your body fiber. some oats, fiber helps keep things moving through your system. which is great. because when you're good to your system, it'll be good to you.

(christine) things were stolen fmy son, at only 17 years old, really had to be head of the household. instead of being a kid. because his only parent, me - i became a dependent. my tip is, every time i wanted to smoke a cigarette

i would think of my children. (announcer) you can quit. for free help, call 1-800-quit now. ♪ thyou know what i do instead?eny your cravings. i snack on blue diamond almonds. wasabi & soy sauce?! mmm! don't deny your cravings. eat 'em! all the flavors you crave, in a superfood. blue diamond almonds. crave victoriously. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. spand so do the savings at kohl's.... with an extra 20% off! save on spring dresses...

kids' easter attire - 40% off! and home decor. plus - take an extra $10 off your $50 or more home sale purchase!... plus - get kohl's cash! thursday through saturday - at kohl's. good morning. i'm jessica castro from abc 7 mornings. another bay area company is officially public this morning. pins opened up at $19 a share, making its total worth $12.7 billion. today is the 113th anniversary of the 1906 earthquake. a ceremony was held on market street? san francisco. it was a meeting spot for families after the quake. and a good reminder to get your earthquake kits ready soon. here we go to the toll plaza. we had a problem with an earlier

accident right past the tolls. that has been cleared, but take a look at the backup. it is bad right through the maze and continuing to the richmond san rafael bridge, backing up almost to marina bay parkway now. a solid 30-minute drive just to get to the ♪ ♪ star wars galaxy's edge opening may 31st at the disneyland resort

this is as cold as it gets today. 46 in santa rosa, half moon bay at 55 and the offshore breeze is starting to blow so everything good for the planner. at the end of the sharks game, 54 degrees. my accuweather 7-day forecast, it's going to be nice for easter. coming up on "gma," that california couple who pleaded

guilty to torturing and imprisoned their own children set to be set free this week. the never-before-heard 91

when you make a pb&j with smucker's and jif, that's the difference between ordinary everyday and exquisitely delicious in an everyday sort of way. because with a name like smucker's, it has to be good. whatever your dog serestbrings home to you,.

it shouldn't be fleas and ticks. seresto gives your dog 8 continuous months of flea and tick protection in an easy-to-use, non-greasy collar. 8-month. seresto, seresto, seresto. ♪ cherry bomb ♪ right right right ♪ i'm the biggest hit ♪ i'm the biggest hit welcome back to "gma." that is k-pop sensation nct 127 with their smash hit "cherry bomb," and they are here live making their u.s. morning show debut. they have a big announcement for everyone, and there are a lot of people out there waiting to get a glimpse. they have been here all night. the superfans right outside our studios here in times square. look at you jamming, robin. i like it. you got the head bob. >> hopefully we may have a little surprise for them.

we got to give a shoutout. that woman right there, monica, she is our music producer, our top senior producer. she's the one who books all of these great acts for us, musical acts. monica, we love you. >> yay, monica! >> yay. yay, monica. all right. that is ahead, but first we have the top headlines we're following right now. you're looking live at washington where they're bracing for the public release of the mueller report. attorney general bill barr is expected to send his edited version to congress later this morning. nearly 100 million americans are on alert for severe weather. the violent storms that hit the heartland overnight are now moving east. and we have some good news this morning. the gofundme campaign to help rebuild those historically black churches that were destroyed by arson, it has now sir paurpasse goal, raising more than $1.8 million. they saw a spike in donations after the fire at notre dame cathedral. >> that's amazing. >> it is. we move to our abc news

exclusive. the couple who pled guilty to the california couple who pled guilty to imprisoning and torturing their children is heading back to court for sentencing tomorrow, and now we're hearing the 911 call from their daughter for the first time. chief national correspondent is in l.a. with the latest. good morning, matt. >> reporter: good morning, george. that 911 call comes from 1 of the 13 turpin children who had been imprisoned by their parents their whole lives. it lasts over 20 minutes because 17-year-old jordan turpin had never before been out of the house alone, and didn't know how to tell dispatchers her address. jordan seems so naive, the story so horrific that at first those dispatchers seemed to doubt it was even true. >> 911, state your emergency. >> no. yes, i'm still here. >> what's your name? >> jordan turpin. >> reporter: that child's voice, high-pitched and uncertain is not a child, but 17-year-old jordan turpin authorities say scrambled out of her bedroom window to freedom, saving her 13 brothers and sisters from captivity at the hands of their parents. >> i have never been out.

i don't go out much. so i don't know anything about the streets or anything. >> reporter: at 6:00 a.m. that morning, she grabbed a brother's deactivated cell phone and called the only number it would dial. the 911 dispatcher peeling back the layers of horror. >> okay. i live in a family of 15 people, and my parents are abusive. they abuse us, and my two little sisters right now are chained up. there's 13 kids, and then a mother and father. >> and how many of your siblings are tied up? >> two of my sisters, one of my brothers. >> how are they tied up? with rope or with what? >> with chains. they are chained up to their bed. >> reporter: jordan's call would free the rest of her siblings and land her parents in jail. it's our first time hearing from any of david and louise turpin's children about the horrors the parents were convicted of, including counts of torture and false imprisonment. they pleaded guilty in february

and will be sentenced tomorrow to 25 to life in prison. we first met their precocious daughter jordan turpin on youtube. she had somehow been able to post a few of her videos online, singing. the turpin children all looked and sounded young because prosecutors say their parents systematically starved them. food was just one of the deprivations. >> do you think anybody in the house will need to go to the hospital? >> i'm not sure. sometimes -- we live in filth, and sometimes i wake up and i can't breathe because how dirty the house is. >> when was the last time you had a bath? >> i don't know. almost a year ago, but sometimes i feel so dirty, i wash my face and i wash my hair. >> reporter: and then another shocking revelation. >> is anybody at the house taking any kind of medication? >> i don't know what medication is. >> reporter: to neighbors, the

turpin children were rarely seen and only at night. >> i would come home anywhere from 12:30 to 3:00 in the morning. the kids were marching between those two rooms up there. >> how long would they march back and forth in single file? >> hours. >> reporter: the children ranged in age from 2 to 29. >> are you homeschooled? >> no. we don't do school. our mother tells people we're homeschooled. our mother tells people we're private schooled and she has a fake private school set up, but we don't really do school. i haven't finished first grade and i'm 17. >> reporter: jordan later adding -- >> i don't know much about my mother. she doesn't like us. she doesn't spend time with us ever. >> reporter: and finally, 20 minutes into that call -- >> hi. >> is that the deputy? >> yes. >> go talk to him, okay? >> reporter: minor infractions at home were punished by being chained to their beds for weeks at a time. so her escape was a monumentally

courageous act that prosecutors say ended decades of abuse of her siblings. her parents will be sentenced tomorrow and i'm told it's possible we could hear victim impact statements from some of those children, guys. >> wow. i mean, jaw-dropping. >> bless that 911 operator. >> so calm and walked her through it. >> incredible. >> she was incredible. >> it's so crazy you would think it wasn't real, it was a prank call because it was so unthinkable. >> so heart breaking. >> matt, thank you very much for that. now to that terrifying near miss. an out of control car nearly hitting a mother and her two children barreling over the curb. that mother is speaking out about that very close call. abc's adrienne bankert has more from los angeles. good morning, adrienne. >> reporter: yes, amy. good morning to you. this mom says that when she saw the car coming at them so fast, she knew there was nothing she could do to stop it, and just like you when she saw that video, just the shock of what could have happened, it was, like, wow. she's just so thankful.

>> i can't believe that we are alive, and i'm so -- and i'm so lucky. >> reporter: juliana perez is speaking out about this brush with disaster. the mother and her two children barely escaping the path of this out of control car at a napa restaurant. she can't stop crying as she relives the moment that nearly killed her family. >> nowhere to go, and i just opened the door. >> reporter: within seconds, the vehicle, patio tables and debris flying where the family had just been. >> very fast. like -- >> reporter: the restaurant employees watched in horror. >> when i went to that door, i was, like, expecting the worst, you know? and it's a blessing to see her right next to me. >> reporter: perez grateful for the rain pouring down that day, to avoid getting wet. she urged her 3 and 5-year-olds to cover their heads and move quickly as they left the restaurant. >> i never expected to see her alive again, but i'm very happy

she's alive and her kids are fine. >> reporter: amazing. thank goodness for that rain. to think those two small children running with their hands over their heads trying to keep from getting wet, and that's what helped them to escape that car hitting them. guys? >> stunning. adrienne, thank you very much. >> oh my goodness. coming up, we have the mother suing a water park saying her son died from a brain-eating amoeba. or to carry on a legacy? its show of strength... or its sign of intelligence? in crossing harsh terrain... or breaking new ground? this is the mercedes-benz suv family. if you've never seen yourself in a mercedes, you've never seen these offers. lease the gla 250 for just $379 a month at the mercedes-benz spring event. hurry in before april 30th. the savings add up!... with 25% off select nike and converse!

save on women's nike shoes... men's nike polos... kids' nike tees - just $14.99... and - converse shoes for the family. plus - get kohl's cash! right now... at kohl's. when heartburn hits, fight back fast with tums smoothies. it neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪tum tum tum tum smoothies. also available tums sugar-free. when it comes to type 2 diabetes,

are you thinking about your heart? well, i'm managing my a1c, so i should be all set. right. actually, you're still at risk for a fatal heart attack or stroke. even if i'm taking heart medicine, like statins or blood thinners? yep! that's why i asked my doctor what else i could do... she told me about jardiance. that's right. jardiance significantly reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event for adults who have type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. that's why the american diabetes association recommends the active ingredient in jardiance. and it lowers a1c? yeah- with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening, bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea

or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, what do you think? now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. ask your doctor about jardiance today.

we are back now with a mother who is suing a texas water park saying her son died from a rare brain-eating amoeba. will reeve is here, and he's going to have that story for us. good morning, will. >> reporter: good morning, robin. a young man from new jersey took a trip to a texas wave park to surf, but a rare, invisible killer allegedly lurked in the waves. this water park is a surfer's dream, but in september what was meant to be a fun day hitting the waves turned into a nightmare for fabrizio stabile and his family. the 29-year-old's mother says her son contracted a deadly brain-eating amoeba at bsr surf park. stabile's mother has now filed a wrongful death suit against the park seeking over $1 million in damages. >> fornately this is very rare. the problem is about 97% of people will die from this infection from this disease. >> reporter: how rare? from 2008 to 2017, only 34

similar infections were reported in the u.s. in 2013, "gma" spoke with a 12-year-old who survived the brain-eating killer after visiting a water park in arkansas. >> i was so sick. mom wouldn't leave the hospital. >> this amoeba loves to live in warm, freshwater bodies of water and what happens is it somehow enters the body, enters the brain through the nose and that can happen if someone goes diving or jumps in the body of water. >> reporter: according to the suit, teams from the cdc and the texas department of health tested the water quality at bsr within a week of stabile's death. they found conditions that could allow the growth of an amoeba. >> we were told that, you know, the amoeba was not, you know, in the surf facility where fab was surfing at. we were doing everything we were supposed to do, you know, by law. >> reporter: just a month later the park posting this video on their facebook page saying they

were installing a new system. >> as you can see, we have drained the entire surf park. getting it ready for the new filtration system. >> reporter: fabrizio stabile's family hopes their lawsuit will prevent deaths like their son's in the future. bsr surf resort recently reopened after closing for six months voluntarily after fabrizio stabile's death. experts say wearing a nose clip or holding your nose when jumping into the kind of water you would find at a water park is a smart idea, robin. >> all right, will. thank you. jen ashton will join us now. this is a tough story. it really is. >> robin, it brings you back almost to high school biology class, right? when we learned about amoebas. they are single-cell organisms. i can't emphasize this enough. this is incredibly rare in the united states and actually can live in warmer temperature water, freshwater, and as we heard in the piece, you don't

swallow it. parents like myself included say you don't want to swallow potentially dirty water. that's not how this organism gets in. it goes in through the nose and causes a pretty severe, you know, brain infection. >> where besides a water park could you -- >> right. and that's the thing. we're hearing now about the association with a water park, but to be clear, this is freshwater lakes, rivers, geothermal hot springs, some poorly chlorinated water. it does not live in the ocean, and again in the very few cases that have been seen in the united states, most are occurring in southern tier states. half of the documented infections in the u.s. occur in texas and florida. there have been some reports in the north, but again, incredibly uncommon. >> what symptoms should you be looking out for? >> same symptoms of meningitis, and they generally appear one to nine days after swimming, with the average of five days. first stage, you have severe frontal headache, fever, nausea,

vomiting, g.i. issues, and the second stage goes to that full blown meningitis. stiff neck, seizures, altered mental status, hallucinations, coma. you've heard me say it before, robin, in medicine, like in life, we have a saying. an increased risk of a rare event is still a rare event and while tragic, it's uncommon. >> we'll have you back on our next half hour. >> 8:00. now over to amy. >> all right, robin. coming up next, we have our "play of the day," guaranteed to put a smile on your face. o put a smile on your pace.

(speaking in foreign language) i'm sorry i don't understand... ♪ help! i need somebody ♪ help! not just anybody ♪ help! you know i need someone the savings add up!... with 25% off select nike and converse! save on women's nike shoes... men's nike polos... kids' nike tees - just $14.99... and - converse shoes for the family. plus - get kohl's cash! right now... at kohl's. finally, an eggo thick and fluffy waffle all to myself, whoa. karen, karen you've got to try this. breakfast in bed? major. husband. points. would you l'eggo your eggo? the oats feed your body fiber. some oats, fiber helps keep things moving through your system. which is great. because when you're good to your system, it'll be good to you.

thto help janet change whher front tire... monsoon is the same type of person who can help you find exactly the right car from our inventory of over 50,000, because helping people is what carmax people are all about. woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): 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 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action. wintroducing non-stop springm styles for the family! hurry into old navy stores for 50% off your entire purchase! with dresses from twelve bucks for women, and ten bucks for girls! only at old navy.

♪ baby love, my baby love all right. we are back now with our "play of the day." >> we're dancing. >> that's pretty cool. we're outside from the desk. we have got the ultimate basketball baby announcement. just when you thought you had to wait until next nba season to see duke superstar zion williamson rule the court again, check this out. he gave a major assist to nolan and his wife, danielle, who are having a baby. the associate director of blue devil network asked for their help. you see there, they are having a boy. that's how they did their gender reveal. with blue confetti. i love it. the blue confetti goes everywhere. congratulations to the happy couple. they're having a boy. >> we got some happy folks outside. we'll tell you why when we come up. when we come up? when we come back. also a parenting alert when we come back. the new study about young children, screen time and adhd. come on back. n time

and adhd, when we come back. (mom vo) it's easy to shrink into your own little world. especially these days. (dad) i think it's here. (mom vo) especially at this age. (big sister) where are we going? (mom vo) it's a big, beautiful world out there. (little sister) woah... (big sister) wow. see that? (mom vo) sometimes you just need a little help seeing it. (vo) presenting the all-new three-row subaru ascent. love is now bigger than ever. spand so do the savings ats kohl's.... with an extra 20% off! save on spring dresses... kids' easter attire - 40% off! and home decor. plus - take an extra $10 off your $50 or more home sale purchase!... plus - get kohl's cash! thursday through saturday - at kohl's. it's steroid-free. do not use if you are allergic to eucrisa or its ingredients. allergic reactions may occur at or near the application site. the most common side effect is application site pain. ask your doctor about eucrisa.

we've transformed this home to show the keurig k-café brewer makes any house a coffee house. just pop that in for a coffee or brew a shot and froth milk for a latte or cappuccino. easy peasy. now she's a barista! it's so frothy. a little piece of heaven. thank you. but how's the coffee?

we're finally going on the trip i've been promising. because with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. ♪ so even when she outgrows her costume, we'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure together. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only when you book with expedia.

welcome back to "good morning america." check this out. i don't know that i have seen this before. it looks like a whirl or a tornado of foam. that is on some waterfalls in sioux falls park. interesting as it comes down there and gets caught in the wind. this segment has been sponsored by expedia.com. your local news and weather, ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ "good morning america" is sponsored by king's hawaiian foods. irresistible since 1950.

let's get up and get going. hi there. good morning. i'm jessica castro from abc 7 mornings. mike nicco has a pretty awesome forecast. >> good morning, jessica, hi, everybody. we had a little fog this morning but that offshore breeze is bringing good conditions. watch out for the sunshine, you can burn in 15 minutes today. low 80s around the bay and mid-80s inland. a quick look at the weekend forecast, quite a change in temperatures. sue? a couple alerts for your commute this hour. southbound 880 and 101, you're looking at the 101 overcross and you could see very slow crossing on that overcross. we also have another

over in pits ♪ i've slain your dreaded dragon. for saving the kingdom what doth thou desire? my lord? hey good knight. where are you going? ♪ ♪ climbing up on solsbury hill ♪ grab your things, salutations. coffee that is a cup above is always worth the quest. nespresso. tis all i desire. did thou bring enough for the whole kingdom? george: nespresso, what else?

you need to place yourself whilein the moment.ears, ♪ our products make the wins more victorious... and the rewards even sweeter. you need confidence in the appliances you select to build the home and life you love. our products and services bring moments like these

to every family. shop top-brand appliances including kenmore at sears. ♪

news special, the mueller report. here now george stephanopoulos. >> good morning we're coming back on the air. it's 11:00 in the east the time that william barr said the mueller report would be sent to congress. it will be released to public shortly thereafter. we're share the results with you, share robert mueller's reports with you. we heard from the attorney general this morning where he laid out his conclusions on what robert mueller has found. he says robert mueller found no evidence that there was an

illegal conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia and barr's conclusion where he said there were disagreements over the law with robert mueller. that the president did not obstruct justice. i want to bring in jon karl. we know, jon, that the president's team had briefings on the report over the last couple days. >> we have learn thaad the president's legal team was briefed twice this week, given the chance to read the entire report. we also heard there was no attempt by the president's legal team or by the white house to redact if i of the material based on executive privilege. that is significant, george because through the course of the investigation robert mueller interviewed many of the president's closest advisers including his prior white house counsel don mcgowan.

barr doesn't believe the president was guilty of obstruction of justice -- >> the report has been posted publicly. we're going to go to the report itself. we're going to take our time and make sure you all understand exactly what robert wrote. i want to begin with quotes from the obstruction of skrjustice sections. several feature of the conduct distinguished it from typical obstruction of justice cases. he said the investigation concerns the president. some of his actions involve acts which raises constitutional issues. he also points out that the president as the head of the executive branch has means to influence. then the third point is that the

evidence did not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime relating to russian election interference. the obstruction status doesn't require proof of the crime, the absence requires consideration of other possible motives to his conduct. bottom line conclusion, this is a direct quote from robert mueller, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. based on the facts we are unable to reach that judgment. this report does not conclude the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate. dan abrams, your reading. >> there's a lot of on the one hand on the other hand. there's reasons why there could be obstructions and other reasons why it wouldn't be

obstruction. then you go further on -- we haven't read the entire thing. these are the general conclusions here. he concludes with that statement that you just read. i think there's one other -- there's another key phrase there with regard to obstruction of justice. it's basically talking about -- it says with respect to whether the president can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under article two of the constitution we concluded that congress has authority to prohibit a president's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice. the constitution doesn't i am mu niez a president. it sounds like what they're saying is that congress hasn't done that yet. there's almost like a sentence missing that we still need to figure out. that's a critical phrase. >> terry? >> the question is did the president obstruct justice. that's a hard question to

answer. what did he do? is firing comey something he's empowered to do? it raises difficult legal issues. they're sorting through both. the first thing i get from looking at the words of robert mueller is that they looked at the question, not did this incident firing comey amount to obstruction of justice, did this incident, tangling a pardon, a tapestry of conduct that they say let's look at whether that tapestry is obstruction. >> robert mueller's exact words are tell k. he says there were two phases that they looked at. the first phase they write covered the period from the president's first interaction with james comey through the president's firing of comey. soon after the firing of comey and the appointment of the special counsel the president became aware his own conduct was

being investigated in an obstruction of justice inquiry. at that time the president engaged in a second phase of conduct involving public attacks of the investigation, efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation. the judgments of the motives of the president would be judged by the totality of the evidence. >> we're obviously going to need to see more detail. one thing that strikes me that this report seems to stand for the principal that the president isn't above the law. the obstruction of justice statute could apply to the president. the president's conduct needs to be evaluated, not just through the lens of the constitutional power he has, but to also protect him from being an ordinary defendant. he's also given these powers and we have to look at the way he exercises that power.

it seems like mueller's team has come out with the strorsaying t president can be scrutinized. >> the june 2016 trump tower meeting, the report said trump had substantial involvement in the communication strategy over the russian probe. it doesn't establish that it prevented mueller or congress from getting those emails or don jr. >> critical to obstruction. i want to bring in chris christie as well. chris, your reading of the obstruction section? >> a lot of stuff that has been discussed to day and the attorney general talked about it is corrupt intent. what they're coming down to

saying here -- i just started to read the report. you know, he was talking about what the president's motivations were, what was going on in terms of his knowledge of whether he was a target or not. all that stuff is being laid out to discuss the issue of corrupt intent when you're trying to prove an obstruction case. it's a necessary element to an obstruction of justice case. that's what we'll see laid out in the report. >> the examination of an obstruction case in a court of law and possible determination by the congress whether the pattern there is a high crime and misdemeanor. terry, i want to pick up on the sentences that dan read. we concluded that congress has the authority to prohibit a president's corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity.

the constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize a president. could that be read that congress should or could take a look at this? >> yes. there's one argument going. the president has vast sweeping authority over the execution of laws. so you can't really charge him unless congress specifically says that you can't fire the fbi director or dangle a pardon. calling the offer of a pardon or the implied offer of a pardon -- which we haven't seen yet. we'll learn a lot. calling that obstruction, bill barr would say, no, the president is the only executive authority and you can't do that. mueller's team said wait a minute. we can look at whether the president is subverting justice, even using the powers of the presidency --

>> and congress can look at that. >> while not a road map to impeachment, it's an offer to congress to take a look at this tapestry of things that we heard about and things that we're about to learn about. private conversations that mueller prosecutors, the mueller team felt that's fishy. >> as we said we started to get the report. it's been released to the public. we're starting to read through it. two big binders make up the report. one of the possible collusion between the trump campaign and russia. one on obstruction of justice by the president. i want to bring in pierre tho s thomas. show a little more of what we have there and then let's turn to what we know about mueller and what he fund on the contacts between the trump campaign and russians. what have you been able to do over the last several minutes? >> this is volume two which deals with obstruction of justice.

one of the primary issues is the event. it says, quote, the evidence we obtained about the president's action and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if making traditional prosecutorial judgments. they had difficulty establishing his intent. they did note in the report, however, george, that the president took a number of, quote, unseen activities to influence or control the investigation. that was mueller's primary concern. there was a lot of activity by the president that was meant to influence and control the investigation, much of it was done in plain sight and he had difficulty establishing intent. the other thing in looking at the volume one which deals with the obstruction of justice i was struck by a number of things. it lists the names we've heard before. carter page, george

papadopoulos, paul manafort. it makes clear that jeff sessions was under active investigation and they considered whether to charge him with perjury. they spent considerable time looking at the trump tower meeting in june of 2016. they wanted to establish whether that involved a violation of the law. some facts that influenced their decision, number one, after the meeting there was no follow up. the russians attempted to reach back out to the transition team involving the trump campaign, but the trump campaign did not respond. there are some details in terms of why specifically that the mueller team decided they could not bring any charges in relation to the trump tower meeting. george, as you recall, that was probably the most overt action taken by members of the trump campaign to get negative information about hillary clinton from the russians.

here's what the special counsel said about that. quote, campaign officials or individuals connected to the campaign willfully violating the law would be difficult to prove that they had the intent to violate the law. quote, it says da-- bear with m george. on the facts the government would be unlikely to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the june 9th meeting participants daparticipan participants -- they willfully broke the law. >> that was where don jr. was told they had emails related to hillary clinton. they said that jared kushner and paul manafort had contacts as well. pierre, you spent a little more

time with this than we have. we heard from william barr that this was lightly redacted. we know the report is 448 pages. could you tell how extensive the redactions were and which of the material, material affecting ongoing investigations -- do you have a sense generally of the redactions we're seeing? >> many i saw were related to grand jury. there's not a lot of redactions. there's page after page after page where you're reading the material. it's page after page after page. on the obstruction of justice part, volume two it's not redacted. >> kate shaw, almost all the

information found -- all the information that the special counsel developed on obstruction of justice was through interviews, not through the grand jury. >> right. it seems like evidence came from public statements which wouldn't involve any investigative techniques at all. i'm struck by the minimum redactions. there's very little on the personal privacy of third parties that we heard bill barr talk about. i think the department of justice has made the correct and cautious call not to overuse that basis for redaction. there's a good deal on ongoing matters. we're trying to figure out what. >> including the discussion of wikileaks. roger stone was reputed to be in contact with wikileaks and he's facing trial. >> that's ongoing. full pages of fully redacted texts on that section. i don't think we knew if we were

going to have 100 pages of text or several hundred and it looks like the redactions have not been excessive. >> again, we're just beginning to read through this report. we're going to take our time and get it right. there's one clear disagreement between william barr and robert mueller it's the sentence where robert mueller wrote if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice we would state. we are unable to reach that judgment. while this report doesn't conclude the president committed a crime, it also didn't exonerate him. william barr said he didn't commit obstruction of justice. robert mueller said we couldn't reach that judgment. >> that's right, george. robert mueller outlines reasons why there are significant concerns about the president's actions that would suggest

possible obstruction of justice. he's emphatic he could not clear the president of this. he did not exonerate the president on the question of obstruction of justice. in fact he found chapter and verse cases that raise serious concerns about whether or not the president obama strustructe justice. >> mary bruce, congress does have this report. i'm sorry she's at the president's right now. terry moran? >> as we go through it we're confronted with new information. there's a lot of stuff the public has not heard. private meetings, comments by the president. that goes to william barr's notion that the president cooperated. he could have excerpted executive privilege. they turned over a million

documents. we'll learn a lot. some of it isn't pretty. >> we talked about don mcgowan. >> the former white house counsel. >> this is page 113. the president orders mcgowan to deny the president tried to fire the special counsel. then they give the background on what happened. in late january of 2018 the media reported the president ordered mcgowan to have the special counsel fired. mcgowan refused saying he would quit instead. the president through his personal counsel and two aides sought to have mcgowan deny that he had been directed to remove the special counsel. >> each time he was approached mcgowan responded he would not refute the press accounts because they were accurate in reporting on the president's efforts. the president personally met with mcgowan with only the chief of staff present and tried to

get mcgowan to say the president never ordered him to fire the special counsel. mcgowan refused and insisted his memory of the president's directive was accurate. that's pretty damning stuff in terms of -- >> what's the date on that? >> that's late january 2018. >> in shorthand the president ordered his lawyer to fire the man investigating him and then ordered his lawyer to say he didn't give that order. now if you're a prosecutor, that's something to look at for sure. >> something to look at if you're a citizen. >> that's where we are. we're in the area where every single american has the right to look at this. >> cecelia, this was after some of the comments from the president. the president consistently when asked in the past about firing robert mueller said i'm not thinking about it at all. >> yes, but it was also sort of hard to gauge. he seemed to waffle back and

forth. there were days he was furious with him and there were days when he seemed to say that he was a reputable character. as we got closer to the release of the report last month, the president's attacks on mueller became increasingly personal and frankly increasingly nasty. there was a long time where he never even named robert mueller in his twitter account and then went full bore at him. >> after william barr's summary the president said that robert mueller was an honorable man and continued the attacks. >> page 107 from the summer of 2017 through 2018 the president attempted to have jeff sessions refuse his recusal and order an investigation of hillary clinton. again, that's not something that comes as a surprise. it's something that was reported

and the question was what do we know? how much do we know about it? we now have the special counsel drawing that conclusion as well. >> that was fake news according to the president of the united states. it's now in the special counsel's report. >> those are two different things we'll be looking at. there was a fair amount that was in the public record. what does robert mueller ratify about what was already in the public record and what new facts did he uncover? on the obstruction of justice question so much will be the interpretation of law. >> right. obstruction of justice was important to the impeachment that never went forward with president nixon and president clinton. you know, here we seem to have a special counsel concluding there's a lot of evidence that seems to amount to something

that looks like obstruction of justice. does the conversation on the hill change in that so far speaker pelosi has been emphatic that impeachment isn't on the table. a lot will turn on the public's reaction to this. there's implication in terms of constitutionality. >> much will depend on what facts seep through to the public. jon karl, we've been talking about don mcgonwacgowan, the sp house counsel. he's a central player in this report. >> absolutely. we see that the president directed mcgowan to tell sessions not to recuse himself and undo the recusal once he had.

there's a point where don mcgowan was directed by the president to do something that he thought would be obstruction of justice and refused. this was in the volume on obstruction of justice. on june 17, 2017 the president called mcgowan at home and directed him to call acting attorney general and say that the special counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. mcgowan did not carry out the direction, however, deciding he would rather resign than triggering a saturday night massacre. then it goes on to describe the president's actions to try to elicit a prominent outside adviser to get involved. corey liewandowski had a one on one meeting on june 19, 2017 in the oval office. the president dictated a message

for lewandowski to deliver to jeff sessions. the message said that sessions should publicly announce the investigation was very unfair from the president and the president had done nothing wrong. sessions planned to meet with the special counsel and let him move forward with the election meddling. lewandowski was to deliver this message to sessions. he met with him -- met again with the president the next day. the message had not been delivered. according to this -- this must come from lewandowski's discussions, lewandowski didn't want to deliver the president's message personally. so he asked another white house official to do so. you have cases where don mcgowan, corey lewandowski are being directed to take steps to

interfere with the investigation and are refusing to follow the president's order. >> the president did remove james comey. he did want to remove robert mueller and he was complaining about jeff sessions. >> this is something new. another act that might result in obstruction of justice. the president in march of 2017 met with dan coats -- this is on page 55. the president asked intelligence leaders to make public statements he had no connection to russia. koets said the president never asked him to speak to comey at all. two named officials who are dan coats' top aides say that when he came back to his office he said the president had said is there a way that the intelligence community to get the investigation over with, end it or words to that effect? this is the president reaching

out, according to the president of michael democracy and edward -- the president reaching out saying can you interfere with the fbi? that's what nixon was impeached on in part which is he was on tape saying tell the cia to tell the fbi to stop investigating watergate because it will get into national security issues. here at least on page 55 is the suggestion that -- not from coats himself, but from his two aides who said when he came back after meeting with the president saying the president wanted me to get involved in the fbi thing. >> let's take a step back on the obstruction. we now have the executive summary. it lays out pretty clearly the ten areas they looked at for obstruction that included the campaign's response about russian support for trump. that deals with the president's response to wikileaks and the

hacking. it points out that even in 2016 the trump organization had been pursuing a licensing deal for a skyscraper in moscow. the president continued to deny any contacts. >> we knew about that going in. i'm reading through some of the president's answers presumably written with in coordination with if not by his legal team, that robert mueller posed to him. they're talking, even in great detail, when the president said hey wikileaks if you're listening which became a monumental phrase that we've gone back to over and over. he's saying that was made in jest. i was joking and anybody who was watching me would have known. as we pour through this we'll

learn more and more about the inner workings and things like the trump tower meeting and the moscow deal. >> one of the other things explained in the report is why robert mueller chose not to push that issue of interviewing the president and accepting the written responses. >> that's right. the question was is he going to be relying on a sort of technical department of justice guidelines issue which is the target of the investigation. that's not what i'm seeing here. what i'm seeing is the amount of time it would take and the delay. >> he thought he could get what he needed from the written answers? >> exactly and witnesses and other people. in the end he didn't feel it was necessary and worth in effect the amount of fighting that would have had to ensue and time it would have taken to get the president to answer the questions. i'm seeing something additional here about the president's answers or lack thereof on

certain questions about michael cohen. >> right. >> it says on september 17, 2018 this office submitted written questions to the president that included questions about the trump tower moscow project and attached cohen's written statement to congress. among other issues the questions asked the president to describe the timing and substance of discussions he had with cohen about the project, whether they discussed a potential trip to russia and whether the president suggested that the discussions about the trump tower project should cease. on november 20, 2018 the president submitted written response that is did not answer those questions about trump tower moscow directly and didn't provide any information about the timing of the candidate's discussion with cohen about the project and whether he participated in discussions about the project being abandoned and no longer pursued.

the president answered, quote, i had few conversations with mr. cohen on the subject. as i recall they were brief and not memorable. i was not enthused about the pro poe sal. i don't recall being aware at the time of any communication between mr. cohen and any russian government official. >> those words "i do not recall" are words lawyers have you use. >> special counsel is saying he's not answering our questions. that's not my characterization. that's from the special counsel. >> that pushes the question why he didn't push harder to interview him. maybe the open question that might be presented if they are -- they would have to maybe

litigate it if the president didn't want to sit for the interview. they didn't want to go to the supreme court about the president testifying against his wishes. if they got testimony, there's the possibility of perjury which brings up other questions. >> which is what got bill clinton in trouble as well. pierre thomas? >> george, i couldn't hear you. >> you're weighing in on the president's answers. go ahead. >> that's right. the president was asked specifically on what he knew about the trump tower encounter with don jr., paul manafort and jared kushner. we're now seeing his responses for the first time. he says, quote, i have no recollection of learning at the time that donald trump junior, paul manafort and jared kushner were participating in a meeting

concerning potentially negative information about hillary clinton, nor do i recall in june of 2016 that the meeting had taken place, that the emails existed or that donald trump junior had other communications. he's saying he did not know about it. he also said i have no independent recollection of what portion of these four days in june of 2016 i spent at trump tower. he's saying he has a foggy memory with regard to that. george, there's interesting color that we found here about how the president first reacted when he was told that there was a special counsel investigation. his quote was oh, my god, this is terrible. this is the end of miff py presidency. >> that also included something

we can't say on tv. >> i excluded that. >> jon karl, we have known from what the president has said in public, from the president's tweets how angry he was about that. we're seeing more from inside the oval office based on the cooperation from the president's aides. >> what is significant about this is we learn thaad the president was in the oval office talked about potential candidates to replace james comey as the fbi director. he was meeting with jeff sessions, sessions chief of staff and don mcgowan, the president's counsel. sessions got the phone call from rosenstein saying he got the permission to appoint the special counsel. when the president comes back he has the reaction "this is the end of my presidency." he says "this is the worst thing

that ever happened to me." he then tears into the attorney general jeff sessions saying "how could you let this happen, jeff"? he contrasts him to eric holder and robert kennedy telling him "you were supposed to protect me." very interesting insight into the president's state of mind in those first minutes after learning there was a special counsel. >> here are a couple critical paragraphs. this is page 157. it helps the president a little bit and understands why barr made the comment he did. in the investigation the evidence does not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime relating to russian interference. the evidence points to a range of other personal possible motives. these include concerns that continued investigation would call into question the he jet

legitimacy of his election, whether meetings could be seen as criminal activity by him or his family. on the other side -- this is one of the most interesting paragraphs in here. the president's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful. it's mostly because the persons declined to carry out orders. comey didn't stop the investigation after flynn. mcgowan didn't tell the acting attorney general the special counsel must be removed, but was prepared to resign. lewandowski and deerborn didn't deliver the message to session that he should confine the election investigation to future

meddling only. can't with that pattern, the evidence we obtained does not support obstruction of justice against the president's aides and associates beyond those already filed. what we're hearing the special counsel saying he was trying really, really hard, but the people around him weren't letting it happen. >> then what does congress do with information like that where they can say had the president's orders been carried out that might have been a crime. does it demonstrate abusive power? >> there is this key line from the mueller report. with respect to whether the president can be found to have obstructed justice we can find that congress has the authority to prohibit the president's use of his authority to protect the integrity of the administration

of justice. they can do that by passing a law or they can do it after the fact by saying this pattern, while it may not have risen to a criminal charge, is clearly an effort by the person sworn to uphold the laws of the land to try to get people to help him subvert them. if they decide that, we're off to the races. >> chris christie, one of the remarkable things here is what we're learning from the president's aides. >> that's right. the early decision by the president and his legal team to not claim any privilege and to allow everybody who the special counsel wanted to speak to, absent the president, to speak 0 to the special counsel, that these people were very candid, very direct about their interactions with the president and there was no attempt by

these folks as far as i can tell to sugar coat this stuff in any way. >> pick up on what dan abrams was reading, they were candid and that portrait of the president's aides not carrying out his wishes, pretty remarkable. >> it is although i'll tell you this, george, having been a chief executive in a state, you -- that's part of what you count on your aides and the people around you to give advice. there are times you get emotional about things and your aides are going to say you don't do this or you can't do that. i'm not saying that involves criminal conduct as we see here, but i think what chief executives count on their aides to do is to be an informing effect, a moderating effect. i ha one of the things that's good to

see in the report is the fact that all these people stood up to things they thought would be questionable conduct. it says a lot for guys like don mcgowan in particular who stood up to particular pressure that came to him and he didn't give in. >> jon karl you're picking up more from inside the white house in the report. >> i am. this is a section of the report on the question of possible obstruction of justice. recall that rod roz even stein was the person responsible for overseeing the investigation because of sessions' recusal. we have a suggestion that there was a consideration to firing rosenstein. the number three official at the department of justice is rachel brand. in early july 2017 the president asked staff secretary rob porter what he thought of rachel brand.

porter recalled the president asked him if brand was good, tough and quote, only team. the president also asked if brand would like to be attorney general one day. the president asked porter to sound her out about taking responsibility for the special investigation. the president told porter to keep in touch with your friend. later the president asked porter whether or not he had spoke to brand. porter did not reach out to her because he was uncomfortable with the task. in asking him to reach out to brand, porter understood the president to want to find someone to end the russia investigation or fire the special counsel although the president never said so explicitly. porter did not contact brand because he was sensitive to the implications of that action and

didn't want to be involved in events voe events associated with ending the special counsel investigation. once again, the president asking a subordinate to do something they feel would be either unethical or illegal. rob porter was the staff secretary. he was a friend of rachel brand at the department of justice and he refused to go and deliver that message to rachel brand. of course in the end, rosenstein is never fired. rachel brand is never put in charge of the investigation. presumably not until now knew about this chain of events. >> go ahead, jon. >> one other thing in this section which keeps coming up is, again, rod rosenstein is in charge of the special investigation because the attorney general recused

himself. as we know the president was furious about that decision. here's the testimony of hope hicks, president's close adviser who freely met with the special counsel. hicks said the president viewed sessions' recusal from the russia investigation as an act of disloyalty. in addition to criticizing sessions' recusal the president raised other concerns about sessions and his job performance. >> one of the things established by robert mueller is that on several occasions the president directed staff, encouraged staff to remove every single person in charge of the investigation at various times, whether it was the attorney general, whether it was the special counsel, whether it was james comey. i ha i want to take a step back. the report was made public 45 minutes ago. 448 pages.

it's divided into two main sections. looking at whether they could establish obstruction or collusion and obstruction of justice. the special counsel didn't draw any conclusions though he states he couldn't -- the president directed white house counsel don mcgowan to fire the special counsel. there's a pattern that robert mueller established. the president discussed pardons with the counsel and after cohen began cooperating with the government, the president

criticized him, called him a rat and suggested his family committed crimes. we saw this with paul manafort and roger stone. he praised them and when he thought they were going the other direction he criticized them. >> this goes back to, i think, his conflict as to whether he could cite obstruction of justice for this president. i'm still pouring through -- i want to bring up the response for the president. i'm not able to get the page here. i'm just struck by the number of times that he and his team say that they do not recall in his written answers. they do not recall everything from talking about wikileaks, they do not recall talking about things that we mentioned about michael cohen, about the moscow trump tower deal.

this section in particular about roger stone. i'm on page 13. >> in the appendix. >> yes. i spoke by telephone with roger stone from time to time. i have no recollection of the specifics of any conversations i had with mr. stone between june 1, 2016 and november 8, 2016. that stretch of time you can't remember one specific thing. you kind of scratch your head. i don't recall discussing wikileaks with him nor do i recall mr. stone discussing wikileaks. >> a lot of that is redacted because some is facing the continuing investigation of roger stone. >> there's a portrait emerging of donald trump during these mon months. this is a man in a fight and he's fighting like a beast. at the same time he's won an election he probably didn't expect to win and trying to do the hardest job in the world.

you can look at this evidence of telling people get this investigation away from me in two ways. the country will. on the one hand he's trying to subvert a legitimate investigation into an attack on our country by russia and whether or not he participate and he's trying to subvert that. the other way you can look at it is he's got the biggest job in the world to do. he sees it as a political fight for his life and maybe his freedom. he can't believe the people that work for him won't help him stop it so he can get on with what he was elected to do, the business of the company. that's the portrait that's emerging. a man fighting with fury asking everybody around him will no one rid me of this investigation? the question is motive. >> but does the motive there matter, whether he's protecting -- in both questions

he's protecting himself. >> well, he has the right to discharge the duties. >> that's a different thing. >> he took an oath to do it. his lawyer said the president can't obstruct himself. we have one president. the question is is he tying to say, guys go look at some real crime sos i can get on with this business i was elected to do. or is he saying i can't let this investigation get closer to me because they'll catch me? >> it seems clear on the issue of obstruction of justice it was not inaccurate for william barr to say what he said in his letter about mueller not being able to reach a conclusion. that has been borne out by the report.

you know, the question that i had going into this was how much is mueller going to rely on, for example, office of legal counsel, guidance on not indicting a sitting president. it seems it was more simply based on his analysis of the law and the facts and how difficult obstruction can be, a, when you're the president, b, when you don't have an underlying crime, c, saying i'm not saying that public acts can't be obstruction. all of this together does not make for an easy obstruction case. >> case, right. >> i think that's an important step back as to what these hundreds of pages of documents are saying act that issue. >> presumably if and when robert mueller is called to congress he'll be asked the direct question, what did he intend?

we'll hear that answer from him. >> jon karl, you've come up with something else. >> two points. by my count so far i count five people close to the president who refused to follow the president's directives on issues that would have raised obstruction of justice concerns. the list is pretty incredible here, george. obviously jeff sessions refusing repeatedly to undo his recusal and mueller points out the reason why he wanted that was so sessions could constrict the investigation. don mcgahn his white house counsel repeatedly refusing to fire the special counsel. corey lewandowski, one of his most intensely loyal outside advisers, refusing to pass a message from the president to the attorney general because he was concerned about the appropriateness of that message.

rob porter who interacted with the president as much as anybody in the white house before he was eventually fired, the white house staff secretary. refusing to pass a message to rachel brand. rick deerborn refusing to carry a message to jeff sessions. the people that are with the president, that are the most loyal to the president refusing to carry out his directives because he thought they would be illegal. really an extraordinary tapestry here looking at this. they may have protected the president from himself. if they had gone through with any of these, you know the implication is that there would be an obstruction of justice case. george, one other thing is the question of the president's memory in those written questions. t

mueller makes it clear here he wanted to interview the president in person. he writes the written responses we informed counsel demonstrate the inadequacy of the written format. we've had no opportunity to ask follow-up questions that would ensure complete answers and refresh your client's recollection or clarify the extent or lack of recollection. mueller writes we requested an in-person interview limited to certain topics advising the president's counsel this is the president's opportunity to provide us with information for us to evaluate. mueller says when help didn't get a yes answer, they considered whether or not to issue a subpoena for the testimony. the reason -- prominent reason that mueller did not go forward with a subpoena is that it would have dragged out the investigation. it's very clear that the

president -- mueller wanted to talk to the president. the president said publicly he was willing to talk to mueller under oath. he steadfastly refused repeated efforts to be interviewed. >> i want to bring in a former director of homeland security and i want to pick up on the point jon was making,he pattern of the president ordering actions from his subordinates to stifle the investigation and those individuals refusing. you worked inside the white house and worked closely with president trump. does it ring true to you? >> it rings true to me that this president is pretty on his sleeve with his emotions. when he's angry we knew it. when he was happy we knew it. when he wanted something done, he expressed it to us. he was also willing to receive

that advice that governor christie spoke of. wasn't always welcomed when we pushed back and told him something wasn't legal or proper, but he did it. he took advice back. what we're seeing here today the president was really well-advised by a lot of people that deeply frustrated him and he may not have been well advised by people during his campaign. george i have another observation. i'm struck that director comey got us into this mess. the russians got us into this mess. director comey made a prosecutorial decision when it wasn't his role to do so. now we have a special prosecutor who has given the authority to prosecute crimes in his mandate from the deputy attorney general who chooses and it's clear he

doesn't say way. he said we've chosen not to make a prosecutorial decision. the question is why? there are theories why director comey made that decision. why would this special prosecutor choose to take a pass? es one of the big differences is of course james comey was not looking at the president of the united states here. he was looking at hillary clinton. here the president of the united states is the -- kate shaw, you found something. >> in volume two we see what the special counsel made of this proposition. they say we're part of the department of justice. we accept their view a sitting president can't be indicting. that said there's nothing of a

sitting president being investigating. we're not going to apply the approach that the president committed crimes. they decided they can't conclude he committed a crime. yet they do this investigation and don't rule out the responsibility that he did. >> can you read that again? >> it's confusing. page two of volume two which is the obstruction of justice portion. we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the justice manual standards. we determined not to apply an approach that could result in a judgment that the president committed crimes. we essentially decided what we couldn't conclude. >> he doesn't say why they made the determination. >> he goes on and says -- here's a couple things. one, there are concerns about reaching that judgment when no

charges can be brought. if they say he committed a crime and they can't charge him for it, he can't defend himself like he did in court. that's the judgment that this experienced team of prosecutors made. he can't be indicted. he can be investigated. there's these constraints on the investigation. there's one conclusion. they don't believe they have the legal authority to reach. tell me if you disagree with how i'm reading it. >> he's saying they're applying four factors in terms of evaluating the possibility of obstruction of justice and the fact that one and a half of them relate to the office of legal counsel's view on a sitting president not being indicted. it's clear that was a factor in the way that they looked at the evidence here. it does say second of the four -- we first described the

consideration that guided our obstruction of justice investigation and then provide an overview of this volume. then, number two, is while the olc opinion concludes -- the opinion recognizes that the president does not have immunity after he leaves office. if individuals other than the president committed an obstruction offense that may be considered. we conducted a thorough factual investigation in order to preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available. they're saying that yes, the olc says a sitting president can't be indicted, but that doesn't mean that we can pursue this

investigation. >> this is a punt. you got hired to make these decisions. you're a prosecutor. it looks like there was a disagreement on the team. there were gung ho prosecutors that thought they could move forward. the solution was found in watergate. watergate was the investigation of a president for obstruction of justice. the grand jury named nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator. that was secret, but it leaked months later. there's a reference here. we ha

we didn't want to go that route, but it leaked. >> didn't this interpretation come out during watergate? >> yes and then it was reinforced in the clinton investigations. a sitting president can't be indicted because you would disrupt the functions of the government. you could name him as an unindicted co-conspirator. you could seal it, wait for the president to leave office and then prosecute. >> this is a separate question, kate shaw, it makes me think of the southern district of new york where michael cohen was found guilty of campaign finance charg charges. president trump was individual one. if those prosecutors reach the same, then they're not going to do anything.

>> the southern district of new york has this autonomy. if anyone breaks from that, it might be that office. so far we know it's not possible criminal exposure of the president. i think this framing matters. so, kwyou know, the president h an advantage going into the investigation. there was one outcome off the table which is that he committed crimes. the other outcome is something that the special counsel isn't willing to say. when you look at the framework this feels a lot loss favorable to the president than the original framing in the original barr letter. >> one question will be what does the congress do with it? it is noon in the east. about an hour ago the robert mueller report was