mueller report. democrats are demanding more information while republicans insist it'sime to move on. plus, this week gavin newsom mark his 100th day of california. and a pioneering psychologist reveals how subtle biases can have a big effect on how we view and treat others. hello, and welcome to kqed newsroom. we begin with ongoing fallout frhe mueller report. investigators laid out numerous incidents wtere the presid believes the fbi, justice department, and top aides should follow his orders even when they may compromise a criminal investigation. house democrats have now issued a subpoena to jcompel thetice department to release to zbra

ngress the full unredacted report and underlying evidence by may 1st. it sets up a legal fight with attorney general wilam barr, who yesterdayheld a press conference before releasing a redacted version of the report. he reiterated his opinion thato there was collusion or obstruction of justice by president trump. but the report clearly states mueller's team could not reach a judgment on obstruction and, therefore, does not, quote, onerate him. here now to discuss this is congresswoman jackie speier of san mateosh county. joins us from palm springs, california. the so have you back on program. >> great to be with you. >> what do you think are the mogs concerning findi in the mueller report? >> the mueller report was really a roadmap for congress because of the department of justice ot guidance about indicting a sitting president. mueller's hands were literally tied. so he created a roadmap and was very clear in indicate to go

congress, you have got t this ball and run with it. there are serious i want to underscore serious, claims that are being made in that mueller report around obstruction of justice and the area that is less focused on is that first volume about the intervention by the russians a the counterintelligence efforts than wer being pursued by the c muellerp by having these cases referred out. so there is 14 cases, two of which we know of, 12 of which we do not. what is clear in his report, particularly in volume one, i the russians used every resource they had. they used every platform. they used social media. they used oppories to meet with trump associates. and while you cldn't find a criminality, there was a

willingness work with russia in terms ofth coordinating campaign and the message both by the russians and by the donald trump >>campaign. oes that amount to collusion in your mind? is also the other iss obstruction of justice. did you see examples in that report as well that you think amount to obstruction of justice? >> well, first of al collusion is not a legal term. >> right. >> s there a conspiracy to coordinate? i think there was conspircy to coordinate, but then you have to establish was there a criminal intent. no, the intent was just to win the election at all costs andng uhatever resource they could. so he went as far as he cou by indicting the internet research agency o of russia and a number of the principlals there >> you said your reading of the report is a roadmap. is it a roadmap to impeachments

proceedi do you think there should be impeachment hearin? >> i think that the judiciary committee needs to have special unsel mueller come in and question him in a very thoughtful manner that wil i think, lead them to more paths to pursue. and if that conversation is, as i think it will be, i think starng an impeachment process would be in order. you know, our democracy is stake here. the president has spent twoye s undermining our law enforcement agencies. he has criticized mueller. he has criticized the fbi. he has placed all kinds of roadocks in the way of us doing our work. and then he hires bi barr, who has become his spokesperson. not the attorney genera the highest law enforcement officer

of the united states on behalf of the american people, but president trump's mouthpiece. >> congrndswoman -- >>ll of that is -- >> congressman eric swalwell has called for attorney general barr to resign. do you think he should resign? ney generalthat atto barr should be impeached. >> you do? >> do. i actually think -- >> on what grounds? >> because has so misinformed the american people. he did so intentionally. he made the decision that obstruction of justice did not take place. he basically said t the president was fully innocent, andat tis not what the special counsel mueller said. there is a reason why mr. mueller was not at that press conference yesterday. and i think it has a lot do with the fact that he does not see his work product the same way that attorny general barr does.

>> you sit on the house intelligen committee and the house judiciary committee have called for special counsel robert mueller to testify before you. what do you hope to hear from mr. mueller that you don't already know at thnt p through this very long report? >> so there is 40pages in the report. there is thousands of pages background documentation that i think heou help us in sifting through that. i think he does have a perspective. i think he hwill share that perspective us with. i believe that his ha s were tied because of the department of jtice's guidance. i would also say that is not law. that is guidance. and it probably is incumbent on congress now to look at this. nobody is above l the. mueller said that himself. hebody, not the president of united states. so the fact that there is this guidance by the department of justice and you can't indict a

sitting president is, i think, suspect.al and i would say that's why impeachment becomes so important. >> impeachment of the president? >> correct. >> okay. and i have to ask you this because you didn't directly answer whether you think imouachment hearings happen. you said give it a little more time, hear from mr. mueller first. if you don't hold an impeachment hearing, with this report showing a culture of lying a culture of deception, what message does this send to futur? presiden does it suggest they, too, can engage in all sorts of questionable behavior as long as they feel there is no political will in congress to ieach them? >> so the question is, or these high crim and misdemeanors? do the crimes rise to that level? i think that has to be explored by the judiciarymmittee. that's why i would like them to start that proceeding. tut to aly go through the articles and then have it vot on by the house is a much bigger

step. i think you have to preliminarily do the review, have the discussions with the scial counsel, and then look at the crimes that -- and crimes, you know, are different n a congressional setting. so we then need to look i at in those terms. >> some democrats have suggested that there needs to l be news so that we can have future presidents play by the rules. what kinds of laws would those look like to prevent some of this kind of conduct from happening in the future? >> well, first and foremost, we have to require every presidential candidate to provide ten years of previous tax returns. the problem with donald trump is he has so many involvements aroundwo thd that can in fact influence his decision-making on behalf of te can people based on whether he has loans from saudi arabia or russian banks or whether he

has business dealings in those countries. we need ant presi who is thinking, first and foremost, about the american people and not his personal pocketbook. >> i actually have introduced t legislatit requires 20 years of tax returns for any presidential candidate to participate in the electoral process. >> all right. congresswoman jackie speier joining us from palm springs, cppifornia. we areciate your time. >> thank you. aside from the extraordinart events the national level, this week also highlighted a nchmark in california politics. governor newsom's first 100 days in office which promises has he followed through on so far and heat can we expect in the coming months. r hoover institution fellow lonnie chen, colle law professor david levine and washington cooperate for the "san francisco chronicle." she joins us via skype from the

nation's capitol. welcome to you all. what has the scen been like in washington, d.c. the past couple of days after the mueller report was released? >> one of the things you have to realize about the timing of this release is that it came during the first week of lawmakers easter and passover recess. so the odd thing about it is that the halls of capitol hill were largely empty when this report was delivered. some aren't even in the country. this is a popular time t take international trips. nancy pelosi was overseas in ireland doing sort of a tour through prts of europe. we had to get a lot of reaction in emails, in-box sort of statements. overall, i think that washington was really preparing for a report with a lot more redactions. you sow a lot prebuttle focusing on barr misconstruing th report in their eyes and preparing for this dogged fight to get the full report and underlying materials, and they haven't really changed the

script all this much. you see a few democrats going after the president and actually presidenal candidate elizabeth warren has said they should start impeachment proceedings. by and lrge, the democratic leadership is still focusing a ba getting the report. they are still saying that even though these redactions, which were i think a lot lighter than peep people expected, they still want theull thing. >> david, from your vantage point as a law professor, is there anything in the repo that robert mueller could have justifiably concluded amounted to a crime but perhaps chose not to? >> i think that's what he did with the obstruction material. there is so many instances that look like obstruction or attempted obstruction, and that what mr. mueller does is he says that, well, because of the complications of being able to indict the president and if they were to, that you wouldn't have an indictment, so the president couldn't fight back. d ey decided to shy away from that. ally the obstruction things, it really is the situation that because mcgahn

and the other aides refused to do things or ignored directives that it is that mr. trump didn't commit obstruction ofc jus the aides saved him. >> and basically president trump has declared a total victory as a result of the mueller report. is it a total victory for him? this lays out a really troubling case of culture of lying, a lot of deception. what do you make ff it. >> a things are clear. congress and the democrats in congress will not stop. they are going t continue to investigate elements that come out of the mueller rept and thin that they have been thinking about for some time with respect to the president's personal financi dealings. now, more broadly for the president, i do think he can read it as a victory for two reashis. one is n in the report took this out of the realm of the political and put it into the realm of the legal. in other words, all of his expore is political exposure which i think he feels more equipped to handle.ow it a him to continue to come back to themes that he

knows is popular with his base no cloougs, no obstruction. he can talk about the things in an adversarial way that allow him to continue to pitch his base and why they o to stiought stick are him in the 2020 cycle. i think it is still a victory he can claim. >> you mentioned about senatorb eli warren calling for impeachment proceedings. there is a growing call by her and otheemocrats for this to happen. could this divide the democratic party as we head into the 2020 presidential election? >> i think it already is. ni think the bews for the president and coming out of this report is ion't think there was anything in it that substantively change add lot of minds. in fact, a lot of what was in the report we sort of already knew because of the dogged investigative work of the press. in a weird way the drip, drip, drip of news saved him from the impact that this report would have had i we were all reading some of these details fresh for the first time. but you are seeing some

democrats now more comfortabli forward with using the "i" word inio a alexandria ocasio-cortez who is a fire brand now in the progressive left, she is leading articles of impeachment. elizabeth warren was the first out of the gate of theen presal candidates saying she believes impeachment proceedings should be initiated. the california philanthropist and billionaire who started an oregshing forri impeachment. it already is creating tension and democrats are really going to have some soul searching going forward over how they think is the best way this very much away ware we are in the mid of a presidential cycle already. >> david, let's say, can he be f dicted on somehe things that were laid out in this report after he leaves office? and what is the statute of limitations on those things? >> sure. the answer is es, he could, and in fact i think part of what mr.

mueller did is that he explicitly says they were preserving everyday and they do stay one audience would bec gress. another audience once mr. trump leaves office it may be that other prosecutors will take it up. ons obstruction of ce it's a five-year statute of limitations. >> he is re-elected,ouould he ru the clock? >> on the events in 2017, yes. if we are talking abouthim not getting out of office until 2025, yes, you could run the clock on those. if hees dnot win re-election, he would be vulnerable on obstruction of justice charges. >> okay. and attorney general barr was not busyonly with the mueller report this week. he issued an order on asylum on uesday. his order that he put out basically prevents certain asylum seekers from being released on bond while their cases are pending. t how does process currently work and what does this decision mean? >> well, what it mtans is t

for people who have entered illegally, meaning not at the standard ports of entry, that they wouldoube held wi bond. that's what mr. barr is directing. the orderid that won't take effect for 90 days, in part so the officials can get ready, but also that's going to provide the opportunity for legal challenges. the ea thathey can be held without bond, without any opportunity for bond, isretty surprising. the timing on these hearings is running at least 700 days now, and if we are going to start gathering up more and more and more people seeking osasylum, times are only going to stretch out further and further. >> a with this asylum order again it doesn't take affect for 90 days, but will this policy change anything in terms of how many peoplere trying toross the border? >> i don't know that it will. i think fundamentally what it highlights is the inability of congress to act. this is a responsibility of the congress to act to reform the immigration system. even on the asylum system or the asum process specifically,

reforms to the asylum process, t number of immigration judges to process these cases. this is something that congress should be haning, quite frankly, but what we're seeing now over the last several years is action that happed on immigration has been via executive action, whether it was the craigslist of the daca program by resident obama, child separation issues, which president trump addressed early in his term ahe now question of asylum. really it's beyond the scope of what the executive should be dealing with. >> let's turn to state politics. this week marks governor gavin newsom's first 100 days in office. he put out an announcement, reigning in prescription drug costs, a moratorium on the death penalty. how would you assehis performance so far? >> one of the interesting things is how much he has managed to make himself a national figure already. yoknow, the really forward-leaning move to put the moratorium on the dea penalty especially because you have kamala harris running for president. anything he does like that

immediately inserts itself into the presidential debate and then the more national conversation among democrats. you know, we have seen this from gavin newsom in ors hi he was very forward leaning on gay marriages, for example, and you seen his ability to sort of inject things into the national democratic conversation. and so, you know, he also played into the national conversation in a way he probably might want n't to take back with the high-speed rail announcement that was fumbled and happened at the exact same time the green new b deal wng discussed in washington and makes a push for high-speed rail. republicans seized on it as an example of why that wouldn't work. we so seen it play both ways. it's fascinating how he has been able to make that national impact. >> high-speed rail and he also warned cities and counties they could lose their road repair funding unless they met state oals for housing. then he backtracked on that, too, and said, hey, we'll set it aside for four years.

is he too quick to jump on some of these ideas? >> beingac anve governor is a change from what we have seen the last several years. if you talkosacramento insiders the first observation about him is how different the case and paidens of his administration is from jerry brown. think it's an activ attempt to contrast. there is no penalty for him so far for overstepping or noor penaltybeing ac. >> translator:. why not? where not pursue the priority policies. >> could it backfire? could to make it seem harder to tell what his main friars are when he is going so rapid fire? >> it could be. the death penalty, the focus on homelessness, health care, giving medi-cal to undocumented immigrants, those are things tt i think will put him in good stead whether he succeeds or not. >> and i think these are very

popular in california. sometimes he is ahead of the curve. less so if you think about his base here in california. >> david levine, lonnie chen with the hoover institution and tal koppen in washington with the "san francisco chronicle." thank you all. >> thanks. now to an examination of implicit bias. jennifer eberhart is a social psychologist at stanford university and the014 recipient of the mcarthur genius grant. her wor her works the way unconscio bias can have profound effects in society. in her book she says we can all get better at spotting situations that trigger stereotypes and shares her experiences how to fight them. joining me is professor jennifer eberhart. nice to have youk ere. >> thou for having me. >> you say in your book that racial conditioning starts un even as young as 3 months old.

how does that happen? >> yeah. so researchersave found that infants as young as 3 months of agedy are alr showing a preference for faces of their own racial group. so it happens partly because of how our brains are wired, t partly because of the faces that we are exposed to normally. he extent that we live in segregated spaces, we are exposed faces of our own racial group. and so our brain gets practiced up on that and then that fects us. >> so with this inherent racial intensifies d it over time. what drives it to become stronger? >> so i don't know intensifies over time is the -- i think that, you know, as -- when you are young and you're a child, ow you don't s maybe as much bias as, you know, as an adult would. and part of that is just kind of trying to figure out sort of what the stereotypes are about

the various groups. sometimes when you are youn yn't know what the social categories are, what the groups are. and so as youan learn tha as you sort of learn more about how these various groups are positioned in the world, then you can experience, you know, d express more bias. >> we heard about how stereotypes can afft people are different races in criminal justice, for example, but also even in education, right. you cite a study by social scientists that i found vy interesting in your book. you say that study described a phenomenon called whitening t resume where even college students who are looking for jobs are rponding to implicit bias in interesting ways. what are they doing? >> yeah. well, they were sort of trying toownplay their racial group membership in order to, you know, be mre sort of marketab on the job parmarket. so that would mean maybe whitening their names.

and so, yoknow, black applicants, for example, instead of pudding, you know, jamal, you know, adrew jackson would maybe jackson, andrew something like that. same with asian applicants were whitening their re their names and also through, you know, the kinds of activities that they said they liked to engage in. atey were more inclined to put down activities awere more exciting like snowboarding. so it be more relatable so people would think they could fit in. >> we know that implicit bias affects a broad section of society fr education, employment, the criminal justice system. despite the fact that manut business exes and teachers and police officers don't view themselves as biash. do we begin to address that? >> yeah, i think one sort of big issue is just how we define what bias is. i think that people have the

sense of bias people who are burning crosses and people who are filled with hate and so forth, but when we talk aboutns unous bias or implicit bias we are talking at beliefs i beliefs and these feelings that people have about social groups that can influence them, you know, even without their awareness. so you don't needs intention. you don'tat need motn to, you know, do bad or evil things itst something that's there that thesassociations are built up over time. >> how do you teach people to recognize that and stop them from resulting in prejudicial behavior to people from other ethnic or racial groups? >> one wa to help people to recognize itel is tothem to understand that we are not always acting on our biases. so there are certain conditions or there are certain situations that make bias more likely than others. so learning what those conditions are, i think, is

pretty critical. >> can you give an example? >> so the one exple is ju we're more likely to act on bias when we make cities reallyy. quic li when we're forced to think fast we are morly to rely on the sort of automatic associations that we have built up over time. and so that's going to potentially affect our decision-making. >> so maybe step back? >> step back, slow down, yeah. and to take your time. sort of think. things throug >> you worked a lot with police partments, includingthe oakland police department, and have they adopted some of the theseocedures and has it worked for them in measurable ways? >> yes. so since i have been there we've work with the department to to add a question, a simple they on to the form that complete when they make routine traffic stops, and that- question >> what is the question? >> the question is, was this stop intelligence led, yes or no? is this a check box, yes or no.

they mean was the stop -- could you actually tie e specific dividual to, you know, some, you know, prticular crime. and just stopping -- slowing down again and slowing down and thinking about officers to think about whether the tstop is a high priority stp and all of tht. >> not based on something prejudicial? exactly. that led to a hge drop, by 40%, in the number stops made from one year to the next. >> what about this concept of colorblindness? not seeing color, not thinking about race, is that a solution? >> right. i think many people believeat it is. but the research should give us pause on at, right, because the research shows that whil you teach cren to be colorblind or we try to be colorblind, we not only not see color, but wee cannot discrimination. so if we are trying to be colorblind because we are interested i you know,

furthering racial equality and that kind of thing, then it' producing the opposite where we are, you know, more inclined to sort of ignore inequality rather than combat it. so it's not the collusion solut thinkyt is. >> vinteresting. so much more we could discuss. thank you for your time jennifer eberhart. the new book is "biased". tt does it for us. as always find more of our coverage at kqed.org/newsroom.i thank you for ng us.

robert: the mueller report shines a bright lht on the president's conduct. i'm robert costa. president trump claims victory and continues to attack the mueller report calling it crazy, but democrats say, hold on. >> the special couple made clear he did not exonerate the president and the congress has to hold the presidente. accoun >> the attorney germ and special counsel are called to testify as a new political battle begins. we cover it all, next. announcer: this is "washington week." funding is provided by --