captioning sponsored by honewsur productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening, i'm judy woodruff. on the newsho tonight... did you actually totally exonerate the president? >> no. >> epnow, in fact, yourt expressly states that it does not exonerate the president. >> it does. >> woodruff: robert mueller testifies. the former special counsel appears before congress answering questions about russian interrence in the 2016 election and whether president trump obstructed justice. then, we devote mosof the show to examining mueller's testimony. what it mea for the president and what it reveals about the scope of russian terference. all that, plus the day's other headlines on tonight's pbs newshour.

>> major funding for e pbs newshour has been provided by: a lthanguage progra teaches real-life conversations in a new language, like spanish, french, german, italian, and more. babbel's 10-15 minute lessons are available as an app, or online. more information on babbel.com. ♪ ♪ >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their sostutions to the world's mo pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> the lemelson foundation. committed to thproving lives ough invention, in the u.s. and developing countries. on the web at lemelson.org. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more

t, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you >> woodruff: the man in charge of the years-long inquiry into president trump took the stand today, in back to back all culminad in a full day of testimony today by former special council robert mueller. and as william brangham as william brangham reports, the partisan war over the mueller probe was on full display. >> brangham: it was a historic day on capitol hill, two years in the making. former special counsel robert mueller testified before two house committees about his

report on russia interference in theel 201tion, and president trump's repeated attempts to end it.se houudiciary committee chairman jerry nadler of new yorark d off trying to rebut president trump's assertions abo >> so the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice is that correct? >> that correct. >> and what about total aloneration- did you actually tot exonerate the president? >> no. >> now in fact, your reports expressly states that it does not exonerate the president. >> it does. >> brangham: democrats zeed in on a key point-- why mueller did not obstructed justice or not. >> director mueller, you found evidence that as you lay out in your report that the president wanted to fire you because you were investigating him for obstruction of justice, isn't that correct? >> that's what is says in the report, yes i stand by the >> you f president engaged in efforts and i quote, "to encourage witnesses

not to cooperate with the investigation" is that right? >> it's correct. >> an unsuccessful attempt to obstruct justice is still a crime, correct? >> that is correct. >> brangham: but mueller said he was limited because of a longstanding department of justice memo written by the office legal counsel. dictates a sitting president cannot be indicted. >>ecause the o.l.c. opinion, office of legal counsel, ind ticatt we cannot indict a sitting president, so one of the tools a prosecutowould use ist there. >> brangham: mueller also agreed that some witnesses misled investigators, which impacted his conclusions. >> according to your report, pagni volume one, witnesses lied to your office and to s, those lies materially impaired the investigation of russia inteerence, according to your report. and that lies by trump campaign officials and administration officials impeded your investigation. >> i would generally agree with that. >> brangham: multiple former

associates of mr. trump's campaign and members of his admintration were charged for lying to mueller's team and to congress. the judiciary committeead almost four hours to question mueller. but one topic that was rely touched? impeachment. no democrats brought it up. and mueller declined to say his report was a blueprint for removing the present from office. >> russia meddled in the 2016 election. the president did not conspire with the russians and nothing we hear today will change those facts. am: for their part, the republicans didn't spend much time addressing whether the president tried to slow or derail mueller's probe. instead, they returned to tir longstanding criticisms of the investigation, including that it was more political than legal. >> it's starting to look like having desperately tried and failed to make a legal case against the president, you made a political case instead. u put it in a paper sack, lit it on fire, dropped it on our porch, rang the doorbell and inn. >> i don't you will review

a rept that is as thorough, as fair, as consistent as the report that we have in front of us. >> you hired people that did not like the presid: t. >> branghcusations of political partisanship among his legal team roused some of the strongest defenses from mr. mueller, especially when >> andrew weisman's ae of your toorneys? >> yes. >> andrew weisman attended hillary clinton's election night party, did you know that before came onto the team? >> i don't know when i found that out. i'm not even talking about the 49,000 they donated to otherra dem, just the donations to the opponent who's the target of your investigation. >> can i speak tore a second to thepr hirintices? >> sure. we strove to hire those indiduals that could do the job. >> okay. i have been in this business forlmost 25 years, and in those 25 years, i have not had casion once to ask somebody about their political affiliation. it is not done. what i care about the

capability of the individual to do the job and do the jiob ckly and seriously and with integrity. >> brangham: others, like florida republican matt gaetz criticized mueller for his unwillingness to investigate the role played by the notorious steele dossier, a series of unproven allegations about donald trump's dealings in russia, compiled by former british spy christopher steele. >> quhere's mtion: did russians really tell that to chrispher steele, or did he make that up and was he lying to the f.b.i? >> let me backup a second if i could and say as i said earlier with regard to steele, that's beyond my purvie >> no it is exactly your purview mr. muell and here's why: only one of two things is possible, , either steele made thi whole thing up and there were never any russians telling him of this vast crinal conspiracy at you didn't find, or, russians lied to steele. >> mueller went before the houco intelligencittee for another round this afternoon.

>> welcome to the last gasp of the russia collusion conspiracy theory. >> reporter: in t of the russia investigation >> brangham: in the early days of ruthia investigation, republicans on this same committee released their own report on russian interferenc in the 2016 election. but their report came to a very different conclusion than mueller. it determined russia did not interfere in the election to help mr. trump's campaign. but democrats today again pushed back against that idea, and the assprertion by the esident and other that the investigation was a waste. >> and when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt that was also false was it not? >> i like to think so yes. >> your investigation wasot a witch hunt. >> it was not a witch hunt. >> when the president said the russi interference was a hoax that was false wasn't it? >> true. >> when he said publicly it was false? >> he did say publicly that it was false. >> yes. >> brangham: another question, oneth that's been ominds of many since the report was issued, why wasn't the presedent intervinder oath? new york democrat sean patrick maloney:

>> powhy didn't you sa the president >> we negotiated with him for a little over a year. the expectation was if we did subpoena the president that he would fight the subpoena and we'd be in the midst of the investigationor a substantial riod of time. >> brangham: representative will hurd, republican of texas, turned the hearing back to what the special counsel has always cited as one of the most serious issues raised by his investigation: the past and future threat of meddling in our electns: >> our committee issued a report and insight saying that russian active measures are growing with frequency and intensity and would you agreeith that? >>yes, in fact one of the other areas that we have to look at are many more companies. not companies, many more ntries are developing ability toreplicate what the russians have done. >> in your investigation did you think this was a single attempt by lvthe russians to get in in our election or did you find evidence to suggest they'll try to do this again? >> oh, it wasn't a single attempt, they're doing it as we sit here.

>> thbrangham: fopbs newshour i'm william brangham. >> woodruff: president trump spent most of today at the white house and was tweeting reaction during the mueller hearings. whte this afternoon, he spoke to reporters on the house lawn. >> ryso we had a ood day today, the republican party, our country, there was no defense of whallt robert m was trying to defend in all fairness to robert mueller. whether his performance was a bad one or a good one, i think everybody understands that, i think everybodynderstand what's going on. there was no defense for this ridiculous hoax, this witch hunt that's been going on for a long time, pretty much front he time i came down the escalator with our first lady, its disgrace what happened but i think today proved a lot to everybody. >> woodruff: our yamiche alcindor who has been tracking

e response from the white house. so, yamiche, you did hear all what the president had to say. what are you taking away from the white hou? >> the president, his personal words an white house aid all agree that the president feels like he's in a better position today than he was yesterday. he sees this hearing as really doubling down and being proof of what he's been saying which is all a witch hunt and a waste of time. he said the decrats were ina worse position today because they came away with nothing. mocrats, of course, take issue with that. they think getting robe r mueller on tord saying he didn't common rate the president and he also could be charged when he leaves office was a win for them, buntt the presi overall was pretty confident that he thinks this is going to help him in the 2020 election. i also put the question to the president directly. bert mueller said generally the questions and the answerrous gave him were untrue. t president got very, very upset and said that the question

was untruthful. ei pressed him some more, he said campaign aides and white house aides hadn't lied to the president, hadn't lied to robert mueller, but rosht robert, of course, said the exact oppose. o this was in a lot of ways a total repudiation of what the president was saying, but he's out there continuing to say mostlyalsely that he was common rated and in full defhane of whe was saying. >> woodruff: you were addressing one of the questions i was going tosk you, what robert mueller said in answer to different questions ofnt diffe members of congress, was he did find the president's answers not always credible, not generally truthful was another question he answered. so you're saying the white house is simplyng pus back on all of this? >> the white house and the president personally, to me, are pushing back on the idea that robert mueller said that the president's answers, written answers were generally untruthful and that campaign aides and white house aides

lying impeded the mueller investigation. the president is, i think, very upset with the idea that robert mueller on the cord before millions of people essentially were saying that the people around him and himself were lying. the president really feels as hathough hto now defend his character. he called republicans today incredib f warrio him and said that his party really was coming to his defense, as everyone was really trying to attack him. but when you look at what robert mueller said, he really did push back on so manms that president trump has been making over the last two years. the presidt said this was a witch hunt carried byou2 democrats, the president said ceis was a hoax and there was no russian interfer all of that robert mueller was wrong and that was notrue. >> woodruff: yamiche alcindor following it all from the white house, thank you, yamiche. so this evening, house >> woodruff: this evening house speaker nancy pelosi reacted to the hearings, speaking to reporters at the capitol. she said theouse is still not prepared to pursue an

impeachment inquiry against the president. >> my position has always been, whatever decision we made in that regarwould have to be done with our strongest possible hand and we still have some outstanding matters in the courts. it's about the congress, the constitution and the courts. and we're fighting the president in the courts. >> woodruff: our lisa desjardins was in the hearing room today and been following the response on capitol hill. lisa, in general, what are democrats saying, first of all? >> well, democrats sathey feel that their members prepare and that that preparation really married, that they were able to focus mr. mueller in a way that they think helps. they alslike the mantra of no one is above the law, of course, talkinprabout the the ident at that point. it's interesting that there's a divide among democrats whenou speak to them privately over how

mr. mueller did.ny ays this was a huge report, 448 pages long, she shouldn't be expected to know every detail, but others admit the democrats involved in the investigation that they felt. eller was not quite as sharp that as they expected himo i. the reactithe caucus is interesting as well, they just had aemocratics-only meeting and i'm told it wasn't especially lively. the were a lot of thanks to thmmittee chairman but not overall iasm. the caucuses are still momentsing what this means. >> woodruff: lisa, we just heard speaker pelosi said they're not ready to move ahead wi impeachment. that suggests they don't think what mr. mueller had to say today moved the ball down the field very much. >> i get that suggestion. hink they are mulling it over right now. arenow a couple of things going to happen, talking to sources in both committee. diciary committee next i going to move to push for subpoenas on don mcghan. his name came up a lot today

because he is a witness thatot mueller the president instructed him to firemr mueller. they're going to court over that. the house intelligence committee is planing to call mr. witnesses including rick gates in september. he's the former deputy campaign chairman to nald trump. finally they will focus more on financial investigations in llte inence committee, not just the mueller report. but this is a big question of impeachment yes or no. i'm told behind doors that speaker pelosi told democrats now that they're infavor of impeachment that she will respect that. she's sending them me for august recess which begins friday and is saying talk tbeo your m and district, we'll see what happens when you come back. she does not want to begin an impreevment inquiry but august will be important. >> woodruff: you mentioned don mcghan the special formal legal

counsel to president trump, but what you're saying suggests democrats are not dropping this, they are moving ahead, but they are picking and choosing how they're gog to do that >> that's right. they see this as one huge step in a large series of parts investigation. this is something they absolutely wanted to do. at the same time, judy, republicans feel very good about what happened today. they don't feel like they able to really take down mr. muelle some of them wanted to do. they don't feel successful at that, but they do think the greater burden was on democrats and they have a point, the eded to move public opinion in their direction if they're going to force impeachment, which speaker pelosi has said,y and to republicans think that what happened, whether it confirms the parts of the report that democrats think are important or not, they don't think publicans that it movedthe dial, that there were no omectrifying electrifying thets that might have galvanized public opinion or thought. we'll see what happens,ut republicans feel this was a win

for them andhat democrats did not get what they wanted. >> woodruff: lisa desjardins at the capitol, thank you, lisa. >> you're welcome. >> woodruff: at the table with me here in our studio for the hearings and remaining with me now: john carlin. he ran the justice department's national security division from 2013 to 2016. before t of staff to then f.b.i. director robert mueller. and, mary mccord was acting head of the national security division in 2016 and '17. she is mentioned in mueller's rert, as part of the team that went to the white house to voice warnings about former national serity adviser michael flynn. they both have worked at justice moin both atic and republican administrations. hello to both of you. we have been together all day long, but let's try to sum it

all up. john carlin, what, for you, is the main takeawa? we heard robert mueller saying, daat several points it's not normal for a prosecutor to be testifying before congress. >> that's right, and you saw different agendas. i think you saw the democrats caying to use this moment to make the amepeople more aware of certain parts of the report and use it as feeder in that regard. you saw the republicans by and largest special in the earlg mornying to attack the credibility of mr. mueller and his team. and you saw mr. mueller and his agenda, which was to stick with othe departmejustice guidance in this unusual situation for a prosecutor and stick to the fourorners of the report. number two, to defend his team and come across credibly and not give either side a sound byte, which i think he did as well. and numb three, you saw him try to raise the alarm bell about russian interference and those rare moments where he was moved off script and beyond the

four corners of the report were all around sounding that alarm bell aussian interference, expressing displeasure and does belief that thpresident along with others were welcoming foreign interferee and pushing back on attacks on his team. >> woodruff: and defitel pushing back on attacks. we heard some of that in the sound byte we played earlier. mary mccd, he did try to stick, as john said, within the four corners of the report, but there were these interesting changes where he raised his voice in saying the president wasn't completely credible in his answers. >> i think one of the sor most memorable parts to have the day came toward the very end when representative demings asked him a sers of questio about the president's written responses to questions, and he was very pointed when asked, first of all, did the president always respond, his answer was there were many questions he simply didn't answer, he said true to that. she asked, there were in answers

that contradicted other evidence that you accumulated during your investigation, and he said yes to that and then pointedly, she asked, isn't it fair to say that the president's written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete because he often didn't answer, but that when he did answer, many of his answers were not always truthful. and to that, mr. mueller took a second of breath and said, i ulsay generally. so agreeing really for the first time publicly that the esident's own written responses not only contradicted the facts developed throughe extensive investigation as shown in these 448 pages, but that they weren't always truthful his opinion. >> and, john, does that conform, do you think, tob what rt mueller wanted to do when he came before the members of congress today? >> i think the -- not being used by either side and not creating a sound byte was definitely gold today in trying to put people's

attention back on the report that, as he said, was one of the most thorough and consistent reports in history.t and in thay, if you read the report, getting people to focus on the rsian interference, i think mary makes a good point, i'm not sure intentional, that that exchange isuite memorable because it's not as clear in the report what he said today in the hearinabout the president's credibility. >> woodruff: mary, something else you and i were discussing on the air bere we went on tonight had to do with what robert mueller's mission was ane whetheid or did not find president trump guilty of a >> or charged with a crime. i think one of the unfortunate misimpressions or misdirections from all of the discussion about the mueller report about the focus on whether a crime occurred, and trthat's because as a result of the special counsel regulations he was required to submit a confidential report to the attorney general, which we call

in prosecution the prosecution memo which has to recommend utprosn or declination. and he answered at one part in the testimony to focus on whether crimere committed, but his actual appointment only had sort of an afterhought that he could pursue criminal charges if appropriate. the acal mandate wato see if there were links or cooed nation between members of the trump campaign and the russian government and certainly part one shows all kinds of links, d i think these didn't get to the point of a chargeable woffense, bat the americans should be very concerned about is, again, and i think representative schiff went through this very nicely in his very first set of question, you know, russia made outrage to the campaign, thepa cn welcomed that outreach. trump, jr. said we delight in it. trump called on the russians to hack into the e-mails. he praised wikileaks for what wikileaks was doing.

the campgn plas their press strategy around the hacking and disclosure of e-mails and, apart from helping trump win, people in his orbit, his campaign, had a financial motive including himself, manafort, trump, and when investigated, they lied abmit it. so that not equal conspiracy under the law for a prosecution, but it's a who lot of links, it's a whole lot of unethical and un-american and undemocratic behavior. >> woodruff: and thank you for correcting me. i was referring to not finding him guilty but charging him one way or the other, which wasth the purview of what he was doing. john carlin, there were al parts of his testimony that gave us an understanding of how frustrating it was for him, that he never was able to sit down p wisident trump, that that just didn't happen, despite more athear of trying to get the white house to agree to this. >> yeah, he really did walk

through that in a detail i a series of exchanges, and in that exchange explain tt in some ways that made the investigation more difficult to not be able to sit down and ask the president questions, and that's what i think led to the exchange as well, where the written answers for the questions that were answered where he said very remarkably, i think, when referring to the written answers under oath from the prident of the united states, he said that they were not consistent with the evidence that they found in the report. >> it s a direct answer to questions about, you know, did you get the answers, you know, how much more did you want to know from the president that you weren't able to get, in essence, is what the members were trying to get. so mary mccord, john clin, thank you both. >> thank you. >> woodruff: let us get reaction

mafrom lrs from both parties. start with representati mike johnson, a republican from louisiana. he is a member of the judiciary before his election to congress ar 2016, he was a constitutional attorney for 20 he questioned robert mueller earlier today and he joins us now from capitol hill. so, congressman johnson, your main takeaway from these former special counsel's testimony. >> the main takeaway was there were not many surprises. many of us expected mr. mueller would stick to the four corners of his document. he said as much in the weeks preceding today's events. he did exactly that. i don't think he offered anything new.so i thin of our democrat friends expected much more of today and i don't thk they got what they were after. >> woodruff: you said earlier today, i was looking at a quote from a interview you gave, you said there would be great frustration that you couldn't answer aany questionsut --

this is what you said to robert t answer that he could any questions about the origins of what you called "this charade." why were you focused on the origin? >> well, there are a l of people in this country that are deeply concerned about that because it goes to the integrity of the investigation itself. the origin of it is what everyone has heard now, the dirty dossier the christopher steele dossier, it had a political origin. it was a document created as a hack job and has no real credibility. that was the foundation for what started the whole russian collusion investigation. he mentioned it in his report in a number of b place he was unwilling to talk about it today, and i think that's a source of frustraton for a lot of people. >> woodruff: how credible did you find robert eller? >> look, mr. mueller is an individual, someone who deserves our admiration and respect. served his country admirably in the military in so many but its and position think today was a difficult day for him, i think it showed in his face, on hisncount . i think the weight of this has been pretty heavy on him.

i think he's very relieved today, but i think his performance is something that ngeveryone will be tal about in critiquing for -- and critiquing for some time a i'm not sure, again, it's what chairman nadler and our democrat friends wanted to come out of it today. >> woodruff: well, did it concern you when he said on several occasion that he didn't find president's answers -- particularly toward the end of the day when h said didn't find the president's answers, that he had been given written questions because he couldn't get an many n-personw intervi, he didn't find all those answers credible and in general he found some to have the president's answers to be not truthful. >> well, look, everyone is able to read the report now, we've all seen the day-long hearing and people are going to draw their own conclusion. as an individual, he as the same right and d prosecuto it every day. he had the ability to subpoena the president and there was an exchange today where i think he chose not to do that, but if the writn responses were n what

he was expecting, he could have gone further. he didn't and now we have to live with the results of the report. >> woodruff: didn't he say very clearly that that was because he pwas underssure to not let the investigation go on any longer than necessary? >> well, lo, it went on for 22 months. he spent $30 million and an inordinate amount of time and resources, taxpayer dollars that are precious resources. he had an unlimitnd exhausted amount of time and he needed to follow the facts where they led. he came up with a reearty 450 pages long and we've gone in it in gross tail. i'm not sure there's much more to do or talk about and we hope we can move o the work to have the american people. the diciary committee hone of thead bt agendas in congress because we have been mired in all this. we hope we can turn e page and move on to something else. >> woodruff: do you think the president should have met with mr. mueller in person and answer questions in person? >> i think any president in his

position probably would haved avoiat. it's a trap, often, in situations like that, certainlyu whene talking about a chief executive, and i know why his lawyers o advise him not o it, but, you know, we'll all have oni own os about that decision ultimately and what it means for the report. >> woodruff: athis point we are hearing from lisa desjardins that covers the capil for us that democrats plan to subpoena don mcghan, theñi president's former white house counsel, other people close to or who worked for the president, are those -- from your perspective, are the going to be productive steps? >> no, i think that we are losing the patience of the people. i think at least half the country and maybe a growing number is ready for us to move on because we're miring, as i said, the important time of this commtee into all this endless hearing. i think the democrats want to lectiohis into the e cycle because i think it's part of their strategy but i don't think it's going to work and will frustrate more and more

people. >>et me play devils advocate, doing you think it's important to get to the bottom of somef the important questions even if it means bringing people before the congress to answer direct questions? >> well, ialf the specounsel with a huge team of investigator, lawyers, agents and 500 witness depositions and everything that they did for arly two years and $30 million could not get to the bottom of it, i'm not sure what a handful of the member of congress are going to do in a limited hearing. i think we've gotten enough of this and i think, at the end of the day, that will be the conclusion. at>> woodruff: represente mike johnson of louisiana, we thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: we stay on capitol hill and turn to a lawmaker who sits on both the judiciary and cintelligenmittees. she is only one of three members of congress today to question cerobert mueller t her exchange in the second ing was one of the most commented-on of the day. representative val demings is a crat from florida and sh joins me now.

congresswoman demings, thank you very much for talking with us. your principal takeaway from today'stime? >> i think special counsel mueller's testimony confirmed that russia interfered with our d election, they interfe a sweeping and systematic way, according to the report, that th mpresident tiple occasions attempted to interfere with the investigation into russia's interference, that he obstructed or attempted to obstruct justice, that special counsel mueller could not exonerate or clear the president, clear him from wrongdoing, and that, in the president's written responses, as you've already stated, that he refused to do a-d sn or in-person interview, which was tremely disappointing, special counsel tried for over a year to try to get him to do that. but in his written responses that the president was not completely truful in those

responses. >> woodruff: i'm sure you know you haven't heard that president trump's comments on all of this today was that it was a disaster foroc dts, that special counsel -- the former special counsel had really nothing new to add, that it was a weak performance and essentially democrats have hurti case by bringing him before the congress. >> well, you know, it't doe surprise me, of course, t trump would say that, and what's also very amazing, for the president to not even commenon the part about russia systematically interfering with our election, you would think as opposed to attacking democraticc member oress or attacking special counsel mueller that het would at locus on that. so it doesn't surprise me especially after today what the prsident is saying or i not saying. also, if i may comment, too, itp alns me when other members of the committee, or my colleagues on the othethside of aisle and the president try to make this a partisan issue, i

do believe the person people do care about what happened in the 2016 election. evi bethe american people do want to hold the president accountable, if he was engaged in wrongdoing, and this is not a partisan issue. this should be a bipartisan issue. and i tell you what, we're not going to stop until we do just that a >> woodruff what does that mean? >> that means we will continue our investigations. i know you asked the question earlier about attorney mcghan who played a majo role in the investigation. according to attorney mcghanecho l counsel confirmed today is a very credible, was a very credible witness, the president tried on multiple times to get attorney mcghan toall assistant attorney general rosenstein to fire muelle as a matter of fact, the. presidents said something to the effect muell has to go on multiple times. then to me, like a mobster then asked the queion, has it been done yet, has it been done yet.

d, so, i believe that attorney mcghan's testimony about this atmpted obstruction on th part of the president is extremely important to the additional work ahead of us. >> woodruff: what do you see this leading to, congresswoman demings? do you see it leading to impeachment proceedings, something short of that? how do you see the building blocks coming together? we heard speaker pelosi saying today again that theho e, she is not ready for the house to take that next step. >> yeah, and, you know, i've said bhore, leadep, as we have the ability to see the entire field, they have to be able to see the bi picture, and based on that. i said four months ago after reading the special counsel's report thatie i b that there was enough in the report to begin annt impeachmenquiry at that time. so we're going to continue ourat investns, we're going to hopefully provide information for the american people and

other members of congress, so we can do really what the forefathers expected us to do and that is to really hold the president accountable. and i also heard my colleague before me talk about the american people being tired of i don't believe so. i do not believe that. i mean, that's his opinion. he's entitled to that. but the provision was put in our constitution that, when additional accountability needed tobe exercised, that responsibility is given to congress to do tha and we intend to do that. >> do you believe the case for impeachment was advanced today by robert muelleta >> i cly do because, now, remember, i believe that four months ago as a former police chief, a formepolice detective, when i saw the report, the element of crimes on multiple occasions, e mber of people who lied, the abuse of

power, i believe we had enough then, bu certainly, listening to attorney mueller today confirmed some very speciaca points in th and also, again, talk about the president not being completely truthful in his written response. i certainly believe that the ba was advanced down the field today. >> woodruff congresswoman val demings of florida, we thank you very much. >> thank you. oo>>uff: we turn now to garrett graff. he has written extensively about robert mueller for over a decade. he's the author of "the threat matrix: inside robert mueller's f.b.i." and david rivkin served at the justice department and the white house counsel's office in th

reagan and george h.w. bush administrations. hello to both of you, and i i should pointda outd rivkin, that it emerged in today's hearing that it was president reagan who initially nominated robert mueller for his first job as a prosecutor and president george h.w. bush, bush 41, who nominated him for another position at the f.b.i. david rivkin, what is your main takeaway from today, though? >> my main takeaway that it was a good day, i think, for all sides. i think -- >> woodruff: all sides? all sides. i think the special counsel did a good job, he stuck to the report. i happen to think that the main take wte were the same -- takeaways were the same as you can get from the report. i think the effort to suggest that he has indicated something that is damaging the president is part of the spin. i frankly don't think the republicans have done much damage to mr. mueller's

credibility, and i have a lot of regard for him. i think it a nonevent. it was the intellectual equivalent of y2k. >> woodruff: a nonevent? substantively, a nonevent. >> woodruff: garrett graff, you have been following robert mueller. how did you read his performance or advance order changed understanding of what happened? >> i agree largely with david with the exception of that by sticking so closely to the report, mueller madclear that, actually, the report had incredibly damning information abouthe president's behavior in volume one onct obstn and then candidate trump on the trump campaign's willingness to accept russian help in the second part. but i do think, along with david, that i'm not really sure this substantially mod the

needle for either side today, in wentbecause mueller really out of his way time and time again to avoidg say anything or giving any of the sort of incrime na tore sound bytes i think the democrats were waiting for. >> woodruff: and yet as e have been discussing, david rivkin, we did hear robert mueller answer a series of questions about how truthful, how credible he found the president's answers. at this point, does that change our undersnding of what happened? all of this? >> with all respect to special counsel mueller, he expresse concern in a sense that he did not think that the answers he got fromrehedent mirrored the information he got. let me say the job of the prosecutor, special counsel, a few things that somebody's lied to him, a osecutable crime. mr. mueller actually indicted a ernuf people for that, properly so. if he felt that, he would have

written a confidential report to the attorney general, if he think the president, despite the temporary immunity the president enjoys, would have written a report that he thinks the president could be charged witht ffense. he did not. so we have to put this in a proper context by the way, the notion that he did not exonerate the president is correct, but exonerating the president is not a task of any criminal investigation. we are all presumed innocent. the task of the prosecutor is t come up with a recommendation to indict. so i did not find it trouble, troubling is an effort to spin something which this is not. >> woodruff: it is the case, garrett graff, that robert mueller made it clear when he was asked that no, i have not exonerated the president. the republicans challenged him sang it's not your role to exonerate the president, but he made it clear the president is stilsubject to prosecution potentially after he leaves office. >> yes, and that mueller, his

investigation gathered the facts, domes, e-mails -- comets, e-mail-- documents, e-mails, witness testimony to make sure that that evidence would be preservefor the future for either congress or a future prosecution of the president after he leaves office. t> this is absolutely correct, that the presides not above the law. the president is also not beneath the la, okay. i don't know of any cminal investigation whose job it is to exonerate tmebody. so fact he's not exonerated -- this is a very important due process, let's get beyond part'sanship, a due process issue. nobody in america is supposed to be exonerated by the government. a person is presumed to be innocent including this president. >> something i want you both to hear, and this is an excerpt from the hearing in which a ermef congress was asking the former spial counsel, had to do with wikileaks. i want you to listen to this and

will ask you about it. >> director pompeo assessedle wis in one point as a hostile intelligence service. giving your law enforcement experience and your knowlge of what wikileaks did here and what they do generally, would you assess that to be accurate or something similar? how would you assess whaes wikileaks >> absolutely, and they're partly under indictment. >> but would it be fair to describe them as you would agree hat' director pompeo, t what he was when he made that remark, that it's a htile intelligence service, correct? >> yes. if we could put up slide 6. i lo wikileaks. donald trump, october 10, 2016, this wikileaks stuff sun believable. it tell us the inner heart. you've got to read it. odonald truober 12, 2016, this wikileaks is like a

treasure trove. pboy, i love reading those016, wikileaks. donald trump november 4, 2016. any of thoseuotes disturb you, mr. director? >> i'm not sure i would say -- >> repter: how do you react? well, it's probably -- probleis an understatement in terms of the waits displayed, in terms of giving some, i don't know, hope o some boost to what is and should be illegal activity. >> woodruff: so clearly, garrett graff, an attempt here to get t former special counsel to look at the president's praising what wikileaks was doing, which was also information that had been stolen from hillary >>nk this is as close as clinton. we got today to a raw, personal opinion from robert mueller.

in most allother instances, pretty monosyllabic, 100 times he told people toh go back to te report. this is a moment where his own personal feelings aboutow troubled he was about the president's behavior in the 2016 mpaign. >> woodruff: david rivkin, troubled but not enough to go beyond that and say esthe ent -- >> not only not enough, it does not incriminate at all. let me say for therecord that i'm disgusted by in things wikileaks has done. let me alsoay for the record that if you look at some of the other previous statements about democrats abouta wikilks previous leaks long before trump got into office, there's a lot praise. but to me there's something fundamentally wrong as a matter iof process to do sometng as a critique of a president's personity, a president's policy statements and rapid context of indictment, as a lawyer, i don't know of any legal argument why praising somebody doing bad or illegl things can amount to even an element of offense. >> if i can respondo that,

though, i do think that there's a fair question in this about whether we should -- you know, there's a question of what's legal, and that's part of this, but then what is -- >> a criminal -- ueller's's not what answer was here, and i do think that there's a fair question of whether the president and el ted leader should be helto a higher moral and ethical standards in their behavior in terms of the behavior that we want to condone in our democratic society. >> i don't mind the criticism of the president. i very much mind as a lawyer and american citizen when this criticism comes in the context of a multi-ear criminal and law enforcement investigation of a president. the context is wrong. the process is wrong. >> woodruff: where do you see this going from here, graff? i mean, we've now that had this long-awaited testimony, the former special counsel has spoken. what do you see? >> i think it'a very difficult question, judy, in part because, you know, next week, we're

ading into the august recess, you know, sort of whatever up today congress built is going to dissipate, members are going back to their district, they're going to hear from their constituents in down meetings and -- town meetings and then the current plarn houseimes is to convene a new series of hearings in the fall involving some of the witnessing like don mcghan, but i think we're really going to see the august recess hehelp shapeer people really believe congressman johnson congresswoman demings and sort of whether the american people have a stomach for this. >> have an appetite for this,an this is something that we will all be -- >> i agree, but my only point is, you want to criticize the president, what he says about chairman kim or chairman g., try to put it in the context of d eaking the law is abhorrent ong and sets up poisonous

politics even more. >> woodruff: david rivkin, garrett graff,e thank you both. >> woodruff: it was a chaotic day in puerto rico. the island's governor, ricardo rossello, had been expected to resign all day amid a political scandal that has enraged puerto ricans. amna nawaz has the latest. >> nawaz: arelis hernandez is a staff writer for the washington post, where she has reported extensivom puerto rico in the aftermath of hurricane maria. she is following the political turmoil that has engulfed the island and the administration of governor ricardo rossello in the past two weeks and joins me on the phone from san juan. arelis, thanks for being with us. let's start with the latest the wie know of. a spokesman for the governor came out a short while asmght

did he have any news on whether governor rosselloó will resign? >> this evening, we d't know how or when and that he didn't take any questions, but at some point, it, you know, rossello will be observe television or talk live with the people of puerto rico presumably because he's going to resign or appoint a secretary of state to relieve him. >> give us a sense of what it's like on the ground now. obviously, we have following the protts historic in their nature and scope, tens of thousands of people taking to the streets, they're still out there today, many of them gathered outside of the governor's mansion. to say that the last day has been chaotic tis an undersand statement, though. give us a sense of hawhat's ened over the course of today. >> a giant understatement. in fact, i'm in fronts of the

governor's mansion now and you can hear the protesters down the street. they sound like the crowd has gotten much bigger but basically this stas around last night at local media started rumors that the governor's resignation was imminent. so people have been in the frenzy waior the announcement, whether a video recording or through a press statement of some kind. i talked to bunches of people today who were, like, puerto rico is not sleeping now. we went through this anxious place trying to understand what's next. and, so, we heard -- 10:00 a.m., heard noon that this recorded fawell message would be transmitted but nothing came over. then we heard that the president of the healthepresentatives here in puerto rico, carlos men do's nuúñez called a meeting of the new progressive party which is the statehood party rossello belongs to and as a result of that particular meeting, people

were inspecting what was going on, heave a press conference this afternoon at the capitol building basically saying that the impeachment inquiry that he sort of had commissioned a weekr so ago had come back with a conclusion or recommendation there were indeed grounds for impeachment within cee evidrom these leaked chat messages. so since then, in that message, mendez also mentioned that he was ready to begin impeachment proceedings against rickardo rossello but tha essentially he's giving the governor a chance to resign first t sohe country wouldn't have to go through the process. but sounds like he has the two-thirds majority that he would need to start a formal impeachment press. >> reporter: arelis hernandez reporting on the ground. we'l see what governor rio

has to say in the statement later on. >> woodruff: in the news, the u.s. justice department declined to pursue criminal contempt charges rainst attorney general b and commerce secretary wilbur ross. democrats in the house of representatives had voted to cite them for contempt, for refusingrn documents on adding a citizenship question to the census. the justice department says that act did noconstitute a crime. a federal judge in washington, d.c. refused today to block new restrictions on those seeking legal asylum at the southern border, while a court challenge plays out. the ruling permits the trump administration to require that migrants seek asylum in countries they pass through, before reaching the u.s. it is aimed at stopping the surge of migrants from central america. in britain, boris johnson took over as the united kingdom's prime minister today. he succeeds theresa may, who appeared before parliament a final time as prime minister and

conservative party leader. later, she spoke outside her official residence. >> i'm about to leave downing street butroud to continue as member of parliament for maidenhead. i will continue all i can to serve the national interest and to play my part ing k. a great country with great future for everyone. >> woodruff: as may depart e, crowds wavopean union flags, marking her failed attempts to reach a brexit deal with the bloc. then, johnson, a brexit advocate, arrived at 10 downing, saying his leadership will put things right. >> after three years of unfounded self-doubt, it is time to change the record, to recover our natural and historic role as an enterprising, oward-looking and truly global britain. no one in the last few centuries

has succeeded in betting against the pluck and nerve and ambition of this country. >> woodruff: the new prime minister has vowed to deliver brexit by halloween, with or without an e.u. deal. there's word that north korea has carried out a new weapons test. south korea's military says the north fired at least two projectiles early thursday about 270 miles across the sea of japan. it's the first such incident since north korean leader kim jong un met with president trump at the boundary between the two korest month. resident trump veet owed congressional resolution that would have barred some arms hles to saudi arabia. it passed bothse and senate but not with a veto-proofjo ty. in may the white house announced that it would invoke emergency authority to pushhrgh $8 billion worth of sales.

in this country, facebook facebook will pa$5 billion, in a sweeping settlement with the federal trade commission, involving privacy violations. arday's announcement is the f.t.c.'sst penalty ever for a tech company. facebook did not admit any wrongdoing, but it will face a slew of new requirements. those inclcreased transparency and oversight by an independent privacy committee. and, on wall street, the dow jones industrial average lost 79 points to close at 27,270. the nasdaq rose 70 points, to a new record close, and the s&p 500 added 14, also finishing at a record close. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> text night and day.

>> catch it on replay. >> burning some fat. >> sharing the latest viral cat! >> you can do the things you like to do with a wireless plan designed for you. with talk, text and data. consumn cellular. consumercellular.tv >> babeal. a languageing app that uses speech recognition technology and teaches rl-life conversations. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. >> this programade captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> buon giorno. i'm lidia bastianich, and teaching you abouttalian food has always been my passion. the kitchen a beautiful place to be creative, so it's endless! you should give it all the love you've got! so join me, and learn how to celebrate itatyle. it's going to get better and better. tui a tavola a mangiare! and better. tui a tavola a mangiare! venite! >> at cento fine foods, we're dedicated to preserving the culinary herite of authentic italian foods by offering over 100 specialty italian products for the american kitchen. cento -- trust your family with our family. >> calabria, crystal blue seas, rocky coasts and s beaches, national parks, ancient ins, and historical sights. traditions still survive in