robert: the attorney general doesn't back down a neither does congress. i'm robert costa. welcome to "washington week." the attorney general under fir over his handling of the mueller report. >> it was my decision how and when to make it public, not bob mueller's. robert: democrats want the special council t testify. republicans say enough is enough. >> it's over. if there's any dispute of a conversation then he'll come. but i'm not going to retryhe case. robert: house democrats are furious. >> the aeorney general of united states is not telling the truth to the congress of the united states. that's a crime. robert: the subpoenas fly in the battle between the white house andgr cs, next.

announcer: this is "washington week." funding is provided by -- >> kevin. >> kevin. >>. kev >> advice for life. life well planned. learn more at raymondjames.com. >> babbel, real life conversations in a new language such as spanish, french, italian and more. their 10 to 15-minute lessons are online. more information on babbel.com. additional funding is provided by the qu and patricia you win. -- yuen and by contributions

from viewers like you. thank you. once again, from washington, moderaosr, robert. robert: this week, robert mueller answered key question, did he the special council have concerns with th attorney general's summary of his report? the an, he -- the answer, he did. he cleared president tru o breaking the ball in a four-page memo. days later mueller wrote to barr, he said his summary has causeded public -- caused confusion. barr defended himself in senate testimony this week noting that he later released aac rd version of the report.e >> w prepared the letter for that purpose to state the bottom line conclusions. we were not trying to summarize the 410-page report.

robert: joining me tonight dan balz chief correspondent for "the washington post." laura jarrett correspondent for cnn, carrie johnson, national justice correspondent for n. p.r. and ed o'keefe, political correspondent for cbs news. laura, as someone on the d.o.j. at day in, day out, when you look at this letter from robert mueller, what's its legal significance? laura: so i don't think it's actual possible to overstate how extraordinary of a moment this is to have the special council making a written report of his concerns it's not just the language he uses which is scathing, i think in my view, especially from someone like robert mueller who everyone thinks is so by the book. we haven't heard a peep out of him for over the two-year investigation he's gone through. his one time to speak is to go to pap against his old friend bill barr, 30 years ago.

he knows really well. stead he decided to make a written record. robert: why does it matter for him to go to paper as you said? lawyer ar: i think it shows how alarmed he was. remember, he had given the justice department redactedes cof his summaries. he thought if you put the summaries out the americal people wave a better sense of what contains in this report of what he thought bill barr's misleading letter. you'll get a better sense what the context is here. obviously, that didn't happen. robert: dan, you've observed robert mueller for years. he's an ititutionalist. he's known for his integrity. how much power do his words carry? dan: this is an extraordinary thing that happened. there are very few people who

come weph aation of a robert mueller. he is as everybody says. he isheltimate professional public servant who has had ali st reputation in everything he has done, and for him t through this two-year process, to prepare the report and then find himself upset about what the attorney general has and as laura said to put it in writing is an amazing act on his part. its -- it is an act of defiance by somebody who we neverhi of as somebody who would defy the authoritieswh fo he's working. robert: an act of defiance. but inside of the department of justice, you have an attorney general who states that robert mueller was not questioning his conduct but was raising concerns about mediaon confu what's the view inside of d.o.j. about how this all played out? carrie: to hear bill barr tell edia'sis was largely the fault, not his own part.

in part it was bob mueller's team part. they're upset with mueller for not making aar call one way or another about prosecuting mp president t for obstruction of justice. they're upset that some of the legal reasoning in barr's report was confusing. and healled this letter a little bit snitty and said one of his angry prosecutors wro it there was an element where he threw under the bus his old friend bob mueller. robert: senator lindsey graham inviting him to testify about any misrepresentation of a call he had with the attorney general. the senate judiciary committee, what should we expect and why did senator graham do this? ed: wheth he comes to congress

is certainly for debate. i keep thinking it will be t drama of the comey hearing when he cam to explain himself, plus, the drama and the tension of the kavanaugh confirmation last year. and the general mystery over, that's what he sounds like because we actually haven't heard from this guy at all. robert: you mentioned it's up for debate -- ed: well, because this graham letter is you can talk about this one specific thing. are you going to try to limit the scope of his testimony? the hore judicy committee wants him to get to talk about everything. and there are reports that that's in the works. i think it's just a matter of when exactly he will be there.ou but is like we're getting closer to this. this gra im letterpart reads as if they know he's coming to the house side at least. they now want toe involved in how controlled his visit to the capitol and make it clear that republicans have something elset they would liko hear from him

about. robert: it was a high stakes showdown when th attorne general came to capitol hill to talk to the u.s. senate. democrats accused barr of lying during two priornc appea to congress when he said he was not aware that mueller's team had frustration. carrie, did the att answer those questions in a sufficient way in the eyes of the democrats about whether he lied or n carrie: absolutely not. speaker nancy pelosi accusedathe rney general of lying, which she said was a crime. now, to heaill barr tell it, he was answering a question that wasorded very specifically. he answered it very specifically. but dem irats, especiall the senate, said that he was gaging in painful hair splitting and legalistic parsing and not telling the truth, the whole truth. robert: how vulnerable is thiser attorney g? is it more of a political fight or inside the d.o.j. are they concerned h could face perjury

charges? laura: they're not worried. not to hair split, but the question from representative chris was about special members of the council's team. he didn't say did robert mueller call you on x day around express concerns? if he hadn answered a quest like that, i think he would be on different ground here. that's not to that the attorney general should be misleading the american public. i mean, this is not -- i think the standard necessarily that one would want, lack of candor an issue even if perjury is not on the table. robert: that's such a good point because there was this legal dance throughout the attorney general's testimony, and there were a number of heated exchanges including this one between barr a kamala harris who began her career as a

prosecutor. >> has the president or anyone at the white house ever ask or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone, yes or no, please, sir? >> the president or anybody else? >> seems you'demember mething like that and be able to tell us. >> yeah, but i'm trying to grapple with the word "suggest." there had been suggestions of matters out there that they've not asked me to open an investigation. >> perhaps they suggested? i don't know. i wouldn't say suggest -- >> hinted? >> i don't know. >> inferred? you don't know? ok. robert: dan, careful and savvy or too cagey? well, it depends on which side of the aisle you sit. from the democratic point of view way too cagey. it goes back to the question of questionsponded to t when he was asked when he testified in the house about well, whether he knew anything

about the concerns of the ueller tea it was -- it was an effort at bestle to d the question if not to dodge the question. i think republicans saw that moment as a member of the senate badgering the attorney general. and they take a much different view of it. but there's no doubt it was a question that he was uncomfortable with as you could see in that clip. >> i think she sent at least two fundising e-mails within 12 hours of that exchange trying to pump it up amongst her supporters and s how much money she could raise. >> she'sue answering theion like that because the president calls on the justice department to opennvestigations all the time. so i think part of what he's wrestling with, well, does a tweet count? what we want to know is what has the president said behind doors as far as opening up investigations. the president has been saying

the justice department should look into spying f weeks and months now. it turns out the justice department is looking into that. bu was itriggered by the president or was it bill barr's interest it? that's part of the issue. >> we might hear asut t soon. robert: let's pause here on the spying point. because the toge de--or ay general defended his use of the word "spying." this episode during presidential campaign in 2016, you had an f.b.i. person meet withe geop develop louse -- george popodopolous. it raises questions during the 2016 presidential campaign. this is in part with the inspector general who has a report that's coming. what do we expect to learn about this so-lled spying or is it just normal surveillance from the inspector general in m the

comiths? >> yeah, remember inspector general michael horowitz was asked to look into the carter page question. and remember that obama officials signed off on that process. ist the inspector general appears to broadener view. it contains some inaccurate details. there were questions whether he was fed disinformation by the russians himself. and he appears to be looking at strategies or ttics the f.b.i. deployed against the campaign advisor and other people in 2016. republicans welcome this effort. bill barr, the attorney general, says she's very concerned about it. he's launching his own which may expand beyond what the inspector general is doing. he gave some real credence to these concerns and president

trump was tweetin ver favorably about the "new york times" which you do not see every dayfter this story cam out. robert: that is about tweets, you have the president using the word "coup" a government overthrow with regard to this pending seport onveillance. >> well, i think we have to keep in mind we've got two situations. we've got this constitutional clash between thed a nstruation and the congress over what information is going to be made available. and whatoi is to happen beyond the investigation that bob mueller undertook. theecond is the political battle. and the president has been frankly quite effectiven the political battle first in raising questions about the validity of the entire mueller operation, and now, pushing mor and more in the direction of we need to get to the bottom of how this whole thing happened because in his mind, it was illegal, you know, every word he's used. but that's part of what he's doing to feed that side of thec

poli debate that's undergoing. robert: that was the russia side of what happened durg barr's testimony. but what was also so notable is what hapned on the obstruction side on the mueller report. many democrats said that barr was essentially acting as president trump's lawyer especially when ite to obstruction. >> there's a distinction between saying this, go fire mueller, and saying have him removed based on conflict. they have different rests. robert: ed, when you think about the case he's making forec ive power on obstruction, it comes back to that 19-page memo he wrote before he even became attorney general. ed: it does. and it continues to feed democratic suspicions that the reason he got this job in the first place is becau someone showed the president that memo bd the president realize, oh, this guy wou much better for me than jeff sessions. the fact that we now have almost dueling impeachment debates, do

we impea attorney general or the president or both creates a bit of a pickle for democrats because you look at polling, "the washington post," abc poll once again firmed up the belief the majority of americans say that impeachment isn't worth it. and the numbers among democrats say it absolutely is. the house speaker nancy said it's not necessarily off the table. but she doesn't see it as aop and immediate priority. see how these things go. if they want to redirect all their ire to the attorney general and blow awe the president, well --he blow off president, well, some will be ok with that. some will say you're taking you eye off the prize which is defeating the president. robert: pt of that matters about executive power is executive privilege. the white house i looking this week to prevent don mcgann from coming before congress to talk about these episodes that were detailed in the mueller report. do we expect elexecutive pri

to be asserted and for the attorney general to back it up? >> i think so. i tnk we've seen this letter now that has been unearthed curiously this week from the top lawy in the white house, a day after the report is released excoriating mueller from being too political looks like part truth commission, part law cool exam. but he's also making the point that just because we allowed mcgann theme f white house council to come testify for 30 then heoesn't mean tha gets to testify in congress. tihink that's a really hard argument to make solely because we now have the report. it would be onehing if he had provided the testimony only behind closedyo doors. could argue that was still within the executive branch. the fact that president trumpwe al all of that all to come out in the open through the mueller report, i think that's been waged. that will be hard to make an argument over any of that

material in >> yeah, but they're going to fight it out anyway. that seems to betr theegy that this administration is pursuing out of the white house and continuing through the justice depar robert: you're saying it ends up in federal court. >> it may well. i've covered that involving the administration and the bush administrationle all -- administration. and owl of those took years and years to resolve. >> the president said said it's done. he said, i allowed mcgann to testify. i let everybody testify. they've spoken. we don't need anymore. we're done. >> isn't thislso designed to keep don mcgann and robert mueller and all the oers off camera because the moment they step before cameras in congress it becomes a big tv moment that will be used against the president? >> like michael coe went. -- michael cohen robert: democrats have to face

that this weekend. the one we're watching is nancy si because she's walking a political tight re from h party's base to impeach and with her own political instincts. when you think about speaker pelosi, how does sheavigate this? >> well, as deftly as she can in nga cg environment. i mean, until mueller report came out, s seemed to have the high ground with her -- you know, with her conference which was toay let's not go there unless there's bipartisan support. and then theueller report came out and it ramped out the pressure inarious places for at least looking toward the possibily of impeachment. she is maneuvering, you know, day by day, week by week on this, trying her best to stay within the rem of public opinion. but it's not an easyon situa now. and the more there is a clash over documents an everything else, the more it is going to

create ire among democrats in the house and president on the outside presidential candidates them. robert: ed, what about holding the attorney general in contempt? that's a step before impeachment, but if he doesn't supply with the subpoena ispt conthe next move? >> it is, and in some ways it's an easier move because it doesn't go after the president necessarily. contempt of congress by the attorney general is nothing new. eric holder had that with fast and furious. we've been down that path. and eric holder lived to fight another day. i think you referenced this, t da pressure, the increasing pressure from presidential candidates that will begin to occupy soap boxes over the summer will be a bit much for pelosi. you're clearly trying to do something else. that's the potential to reallm divide ts this continues. i think, you know, absent numbers that show declining pport for this among democrats, which after this week, i don't think will be there. it's goingo be even trickier

for the speaker going forward. robert: what about republicans? >> they don't sm to have any attempt to make any moves from this mueller robert. as damning as some of the facts were on the obstruction issue, the fact that mueer didn' actually reach a decision on that, i think was sort of a gift to them, and the fact that if you certainly didn't say thatwa ther an act of conspiracy between the trump campaign and the rusan government, again, all they could potentially askf for outhe mueller report. and so what, i think, you have now is democrats clamoringn things like the attorney general not showing up, these document production fights.ou so see all of those extraneous things. meanwhile lind i sail grams saying he doesn't even want to hear from mueller.'s robert: thhe meet reaction from republicans. they think thege attorneral is in the right. they like that they're f with congress. does it set a precedent for the future for the next time there's

a democratic president about the power of congress vs. the power or -- ef thecutive? >> if they let bill barr get away with dictati terms o their hearing in their hearing room, they have given up the store. they maintain that they're a branch of government and they cannot give ground to this executive branch and thiser attorney g who's view of executive power is so sweeping. it could be that some of the arguments that administration makes come back in the future and bite republicans in the posterior. i've seen it happen in the national securityce s since 9/11. e needs to be careful as to who holds the gavel and who holds the white house. robert: posterior, very cbs. [laughter] when you're in the crowd, democratic vot s, some republicans, are they talking about all of this?

>> no. they are not. i mn, they are certainly aware of it. some of them are following it. but what they are focused on is trying to get a sense of who these 21 candidatesho are are seeking the democratic nomination. ther're very ited in evaluating them apart from the issue of what they think about president trump. they are determined to try to nd a candidate who can win that presidential race in 2020 ins and outs of what's going on -- i mean, i was there the day that the attorney general was testifying. i didn't hear anybody talk about nobody raised it. and theormer vice president didn't bring it up. robert: ed, you've been on the campaign trail asell covering things for cbs. when you talk to democrats, and they know the april jobst rep exceeded expectations, you may have heard the same thing from votershat dan's been hearing from voters, yet, the presidential field for democrats continues to call for

impeachment at some level of president trump general.ttorney >> yeah, and i think on the economy, you've got the argument that well, thingski are l good on paper, not everyone is enjoying it at the same level, same intensity. and so that populist argument could prove to be quite true -- or quite popularemorrats. i was with biden when he had his first event in pittsburgh. we talked to people on the crowd. and that was the day that the president tweetedhat members of labor unions were more likely to supndrt him not joe biden because a major firefighters union supported him. and members of the union said, no we don't like him. we're sick of him. we want to move back to normalcy and decency. that's something i've heard at a few events this year in iowa and in other states. this sense of everything going on in washingtonves me nuts. i'm tired of it. like physicall mentally tired of it. if there's a way forts democ

to focus on that it might resonate quite widely. robert: quick read on biden? >> he's a work in ogress. he had some good moments and some not too good moments. robert: you he to read all of dan's column. thanks everybody for joining us. we will talk about the latest shooting at aog syn. you can watch it at 8:30 p.m. every friday night and all week long on youtube. i'm robert costa. have a great weekend. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.visit ncicap.org] announcer: corporate funding is provided by --

>> babbel, a language program that teaches conversations in a new language such as spanish, french, german, italian and 0 re. theirto 15-minute lessons are available as an app orne on more information on babbel.com. financial servis firm raymond james. additional funding is provided by -- >> ku and patricia yeun through theeun foundation committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation forublic broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

♪ ♪ ♪ cromartie: good night. hello, young lady. enjo weekend, my love. what's up, brother? man: how you doing? oh, wait. cromartie: got it? man: thank you. you, too. cromartie: enjoy. lumberjack. good to see you, brother. hello, sir. step right up. this job as a station agent, it's something i feel like i was born to do. bart's, bay area rapid transit, that's the subway system