wifi to keep everyone connected. video monitoring. that's huge. did you guys know we did all this stuff? no. i'm not even done yet. wow. business tv. cloud apps and support. comcast business goes beyond at&t. start with internet and voice for just $59.90 a month. it's everything a small business owner needs. comcast business. beyond fast. like i said, that'll do it for me on "up." i will be back at 2:00 p.m. eastern on msnbc live. next up "am joy." she's like, no. come on, joy, take a plate. the president has engaged in a persistent pattern and obstruction of justice. the allegations are grave. the investigation is legitimate. and ascertaining the truth, the

whole truth, and nothing but the unqualified, unevasive truth is absolutely critical. >> he encouraged people to lie for him. he lied. i think he obstructed justice. i think there's a compelling case that he has, in fact, engaged in conduct that would be better for him to leave office than stay in office. >> good morning. welcome to "am joy." those are some republicans who voted to impeach and/or convict then president bill clinton on obstruction of justice accusations related to his affair with then white house intern monica lewinsky, specifically on charges that clinton encouraged his white house secretary and lewinsky to lie to investigators about the affair. yet now more than 20 years later as the mueller report offers a clear case that donald trump's presidential campaign welcomed efforts by russia to interfere with the election and that as president trump encouraged multiple members of his team to lie to investigators or to not

cooperate even dangling potential pardons, where are those law and order republicans? i mean, they are still in congress, many in the senate. where a successful house impeachment would land. where's their outrage now? meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle, senator elizabeth warren has set herself apart by the crowded primary feel making a forceful cry to impeach trump saying it should play a starring role in the 2020 election. >> i don't see how anyone can read that report front to back and not draw three conclusions, that a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 elections in order to help donald trump, that donald trump welcomed that help and then as president that he obstructed efforts to try to investigate

that arrangement. when i got to the end of it, i said, it's my responsibility to speak out. >> joining me now is dean ogodawala, benjamin whit tis of law fair.com. jennifer reuben of the washington post and korean jean pierre of move on doubt org. i'm slow on the uptake. we're accustomed to talking to democrats on their posture. we know nancy pelosi is having a conversation to discuss the strategy, there are a lot of people pushing for impeachment. many know i take no pleasure in discussions of impeachment. i didn't campaign on it. i'm prompted. we all prefer working on priorities pushing medicare for all, tackling student loans and a green new deal. julian castro, really quickly, on msnbc on friday. >> i think it would be perfectly reasonable for congress to open

up impeachment proceedings. we can walk and chew gum at the same time. >> so it's just at this point in terms of the presidential contenders, it's just julian castro and elizabeth warren, however, republicans should not be exempted from this conversation. no? there are about 14 -- there are exactly 14 of them who are currently in the senate who voted to convict bill clinton on obstruction of justice and witness tampering. >> are you telling me republicans are being hit poe critical here? get out of here. i think the conversation has to start with democrats right now. i want the democratic leaders to watch "game of thrones" tonight and channel your inner sirc sirci lanas. robert mueller has laid it out very, very clearly. i think there are three distinct reasons why democrats have an obligation at impeachment hearings. article one mandates them as a check on the executive branch. number two, in 2018 the democrats -- the american people

gave the democrats a check to be a checklist. as elizabeth warren said if you do not impeach donald trump, you're saying you can deal with our adversaries and you can obstruct justice, tell witnesses not to testify and threaten witnesses like you did with michael cohen and it's okay. that's not okay if you're a democrat or a republican. that's wrong. democrats have to step it up. they have to start impeachment hearings. impeachment is not removal. it's the equivalent of an indictment. there's evidence of that. then donald trump has his day for a trial in the senate. that's where protections are for trump as a president. mueller laid it out. here's the evidence there for obstruction, witness tampering, witness intimidation and abuse of power. >> you know, corinne jeanpierre, the democrats are not the atlantis, they're the starks.

they can negotiate with him and they get their heads lopd off. there's one aria and apparently that would be senator elizabeth warren. they don't really fight really tough. so here's the question. do the democrats wind up having the intestinal fortitude to do what republicans would likely do when you're hearing things like this? this is emmanuel cleaver, here he is talking about the prospect of impeachment this week. >> we already are a badly divided nation. the impeachment effort is going to only divide us further. let's go to the american public and tell them you have an opportunity to re-elect a cleptocrat or a democrat. i think the majority of the american public will elect a democrat. >> it's not an either/or. it's both here. we have to do what we need to do, which is really congress needs to do their job, which is

do their constitutional duty. we cannot be a nation that says the president is above the law. we cannot do that. he clearly obstructed justice multiple times. it is laid out in the mueller report and they need to follow the facts. they need to start impeachment proceedings and see where the facts takes them. it's pretty simple. there is historical precedence for it. this is not the first time and dean was right, democrats were given the house in part because they wanted -- they -- the people wanted them to hold this president accountable. yes, it was about the issues. yes, it was about health care and the economy and what they were going to bring forward, but it was also because of this run away train of donald trump and his administration. they cannot allow this to happen. what happens, what precedent would they be setting if they don't hold this president accountable? i mean, in this report, joy, we learned that donald trump welcomed and benefitted from russian interference and then he tried to cover it up, lied, lied

to the press, lied to the american people, lied to congress. like we have to move forward with this. they cannot just be sitting back. they need to be leaders. this is what the people want them to do, and they can do both. there are dozens of committees. they can talk about the issues, bring forth legislation like they have been doing since january 3rd when pelosi was given the gavel and also investigate. it's not that hard. >> i want to throw that question to you. two presidents have been impeached, andrew jackson and bill clinton. if in the instance of donald trump one can per the mueller report subborn this and then once in office repeatedly encourage members of your team to not cooperate with the investigation, dangle pardons in

front of them, commit what robert mueller found were at least ten separate instances of either witness tampering or obstruction of justice, if a president can do that, then impeachment will do what donald trump can't be impeached. if it can be done for sexual affair but not what donald trump was shown to have done by robert mueller. >> i wrote a piece probably 18 months ago now calling for an impeachment inquiry, largely on that basis, that the nature of the allegations against trump even then in my view were such that congress ignored them at some risk to its own institutional seriousness. and i think after the mueller report and the factual findings in it, that is certainly accentuated. and i think, you know, i -- i find myself in almost complete agreement with elizabeth warren

as to the right answer to this question. now there are, of course, lots of political reasons why you may forecast that it's a bad idea politically for democrats. that's of course always true when you have something that is the right thing to do that may have negative political consequences. that's kind of not my job to figure out how to balance those. i do think if you were -- if you're just asking the question shoulded congress -- should they institutionally undermine this. the answer to that is latent in the question. of course it is. this is egregious, egregious conduct at just about every level and there are very few

defenses of it. it just describes a systematic pattern of abuse of power and if congress tolerates that, then it deserves the disrepute that it will put itself in. >> jennifer reuben, were lies to congress. his secretary. what can the american people give to a congress. it's important as suborning. >> well, i have to think step one is to get the entire report.

one of the most telling intriguing aspects. it's in contact with wikileaks. that whole section. the entire report. it's unprecedented. the roadmap didn't happen with bill clinton. step one is they must get the entire report. if that requires them to go to the supreme court to get a subpoena, that's what they should do. step two is it's essential for mueller to come and testify and for two reasons. one is the report doesn't answer every question. it's also possible he may not want to answer every question, but he can, i think, inform the american people and there is a

teaching exercise. there is a didactic exercise here in bringing the american people along so that they appreciate the gravity of this. and i think you get that with mueller testifying at length in front of congress. step three after you've gotten the entire report, you've heard from mueller, you have to have hearings. hearings can be certainly cover this ground, but they can also cover other things. they can also cover the campaign finance violations which mueller spun off to others. there are 12 or 14 other investigations that are going on. so i think you go through this process and as you go through the process ideally the american people come to a conclusion. they come to a consensus. you're never going to have everybody but you may get 65, 70% of the american people who as they are educated through this process say, you know what, he's really got to go. >> ben, i want to go back to you on this because i wonder what is

the material difference in the real world and impeachment hearings? >> there are a couple of differences. first of all, the investigative hearings are generally efforts to develop facts, and i am all for that and i think congress has an independent duty to inform itself and to investigate matters, but an impeachment inquiry is a process of judgment and it's a process in which you take facts that presumably have been developed elsewhere, in this case by the mueller report, and you assess them against the standard of the impeachment clauses of the constitution and you make a decision as a house of representatives, do we want to proceed with an impeachment hearing? it's an evaluation and a judgment. very similar in -- although it's political in character, it's

similar to the process that a prosecutor goes through in deciding whether to indict somebody. that's not the investigation, right? the fbi does the investigation, brings in all the information but then you have a process of evaluating that information, holding it up against the criminal law. here the relevant standard is not the criminal law, it's the standard of the impeachment clauses, treason, bribery, other high climbs and misdemeanors, other high crimes and miss demeansors being the most person nt one. we have to decide is this described in volume one and volume two of this report something that we want to decide is acceptable or do we want to decide that it constitutes some form of high crime or miss k misdemean misdemeanor. >> i want to ask you one more quick question. in your view just looking at

both that standard of high crimes and misdemeanors, what's in the mueller report and the standard of every other previous president, all 44 previous presidents and their conduct, do democrats need more than what's in this report, in your view, to proceed to impeachment? >> i have no doubt, no doubt whatsoever that the material laid out in the mueller report would adequately and amply and on its own support an impeachment. >> benjamin wittis, thank you very much for your time this morning. have a wonderful weekend. dean, jennifer, corrine, stay with us. we'll continue this discussion after the break. s discussion after the break. peninsula trail? you won't find that on a map. i'll take you there. take this left. if you listen real hard you can hear the whales.

oop. you hear that? (vo) our subaru outback lets us see the world. sometimes in ways we never imagined. mike and jen doyle? yeah. time for medicare, huh. i have no idea how we're going to get through this. follow me. choosing a plan can be super-complicated. but it doesn't have to be. unitedhealthcare can guide you through the confusion, with helpful people, tools and plans. including the only plans with the aarp name. well that wasn't so bad at all. that's how we like it. aarp medicare plans, from unitedhealthcare. aarp medicare plans, you get the freedom of what a 7-day return policy.

this isn't some dealership test drive around the block. it's better. this is seven days to put your carvana car to the test and see if it fits your life. load it up with a week's worth of groceries. take the kiddos out for ice cream. check that it has enough wiggle room in your garage. you get the time to make sure you love it. and on the 6th day, we'll reach out and make sure everything's amazing. if so... excellent. if not, swap it out for another or return it for a refund. it's that simple. because at carvana, your car happiness is what makes us happy. bleech! aww! awww! ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft for the win win. a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network

along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast.

it's certainly the case that you can see lots of evidence that this president deserves to be impeached, but since i'm not in congress, i'm focused on replacing him the old-fashioned way. >> do you think there should be a conversation? >> no. >> why not? >> i think right now we should continue this investigation. >> i believe that there is room for that conversation but right now what i want is i want mueller to come before congress to testify. >> i think we can solve this once and for all in november of 2020. >> the release of the redacted mueller report has reignited conversations about the potential impeachment of donald trump. democratic leaders in the house have largely cited against pursuing the option for now and other than candidates elizabeth

warren and julian castro, the rest of the democratic field is still playing it safe. dean, you wanted to make a point about what mueller seemed to have wanted done here. >> quickly, by the way, a recent poll shows 70% of democrats want an impeachment of donald trump. if you run into the democratic nomination, don't discount the will and interest of 70% of our base. the very last line of the mueller report, the very last line said the protection of the criminal justice system including the president accords with the fundamental principle of government that no person in this country is so high that he is above the law. this was robert mueller's last line in a huge report before the paragraph summary. no person in this country is above the law. robert mueller is begging congress, begging congress to do the right thing. and they must -- that is their responsibility under article 1 of the constitution. yes, it's equal branches of government, but guess what, only one branch can remove someone and that is congress. >> right. >> the framers understood article one was the most

important branch. article one met. if the democrat does not want to do their job under article one, i beg you to resign. let another democrat get in there who will do the job the american people want which is holding the president accountable for a litany of crimes in the robert mueller report. >> just what's in the report, jennifer, at minimum what robert mueller was able to show is this is a president that encouraged people to obstruct the investigation. that he himself on multiple occasions obstructed it and per mueller the only reason that he's not being charged with witness tampering and obstruction of justice like any other american would, like you and i would, that he is president. staying president is his only protection from prosecution. back in 1999 the republicans montpelier believed that bill clinton had so obstructed to justice by not admitting to his affair included chuck grassley, pat roberts, mike crepo, roy blunt, richard burr, jerry more

land, rob portman, lindsey graham. they were among those that said the conduct of the president of the united states in having a sexual affair and lying about it were so bad that the constitutional remedy must be applied. they didn't want more hearings. they didn't want more investigation. they wanted him gone because of a sexual affair. >> yes. >> how can the congress of the united states, and i include republicans in this, ever impeach another president in history if they don't apply that standard now? >> this is the difficulty, and i think you're exactly right. to not act is also acting. to not go forward is to say, we've now so lowered the bar for the commander in chief for the chief of the executive branch of government that we essentially have accepted what is completely unacceptable and i think for those democrats who are running, i think it is important for them not to say that i am not in congress, it's somebody else's job, but to call for mueller, to

call for the proper hearings followed by impeachment hearings and then see where the evidence takes them and where the american people take them. and i would say this. i think they have -- they're underestimating the american people. they are assuming that the american people will just kind of roll their eyes, nothing new here and i don't think that's the case. i think seeing this report in one place, compiling all of this evidence of lying, of obstruction, plus welcoming with open arms trying to get the elusive 30,000 emails which really didn't exist, ordering people to do things that if they had carried them out certainly would have been crimes, all of this collectively, i think the american people are able to digest this, they're able to take this in and i think that public opinion will coalesce in the right place. and we've seen again and again, sometimes politicians are

followers rather than leaders. but i think they should talk to their constituents. i think they should absolutely have mueller come forward as kamala harris said, but at that point i think they've got to begin to do their job. >> yeah. >> i think it would be a mistake for them to say, well, the american people will be mad at us or the american people won't like it or we'll be divided. you know what, we're always going to be divided because he's created a cult-like atmosphere. 25, 30% of the american people, whatever it is, are completely brain dead. so we're never going to have complete consensus. that's not our problem collectively, that's a problem for the president and for that select group who has kind of left earth one and now is operating in different space. >> yeah. >> the rest of us, 70% of the american people cannot be held hostage to 25, 30% of the cultists who will never listen to anything. >> and corrine, for democrats,

they keep making the political calculations including that it wouldn't succeed in the senate. note that no impeachment has ever succeeded in the senate. andrew johnson and bill clinton has survived it. are democrats right or wrong in your view in worrying about the 2020 electoral consequences of potentially impeaching donald trump? >> here's the way i see it, joy. it should not be about politics. it should be about the rule of law. it should be about protecting our democracy. it should be about doing their job, their constitution al duty, period. trump obstructed justice and it worked. the mueller report lays out a staggering abuse of power. i mean, just unbelievable. you read the 448 pages once and you're like, wow. you read the 448 pages again and you're like, oh, damn, this is really, really bad. we cannot be stuck in the politics of this. we cannot. we have to move forward and hold

this president accountable. and it's just -- this is not the precedent that we should be setting is that the president of the united states is not above -- is above the law and that's not who we should be as a nation. >> yeah. >> what will happen the next time? what will happen? and here's the thing. democrats, if they do this right, you know, that term that everybody uses, they can walk and chew gum and get this done. they could talk about the issues. they could talk about the things that american public wants to hear, about what the party, the base of the party wants to hear and do their constitutional duty. it is not a hard thing to do. and so i -- it just baffles my mind that they are not being leaders on this. they need to act. i think the mueller report at the end of the day when you look at it in its totality, mueller was saying, congress needs to act. congress needs to take the next step. and like we've been saying, there are historical precedents for this, right? one of the articles of impeachment was obstruction of

justice. >> yeah. >> bill clinton was impeached because of obstruction of justice. this is nothing new here. we're just asking them to do their job. >> yeah. nixon was an unindicted co con spiritor in a crime and donald trump happens to be an unindicted co-con spiritors. we have two lawyers here. quick yes or no question here. would any ordinary citizen get away with the kind of obstruction that donald trump has practiced and not be indicted? >> you're in a holding cell right now if you're anybody else waiting for the hearing before a judge to have bail set for you. let's be honest. >> there are a lot of ordinary citizens in america sitting in jail right now. >> being charged with a crime. >> that is exactly right. dean, thank you very much. jennifer reuben, corinne will be back in our next hour. coming up, donald trump's minions are out spinning, spinning, spinning the mueller report. we'll have the latest on that next. next

getting dressed can be rough on sensitive skin. downy free & gentle has no perfumes, no dyes and softens clothes for sensitive skin. the only one trusted by the national psoriasis foundation. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country.

some breaking news for you this morning. special counsel robert mueller was just spotted this morning coming out of church by our very own nbc's mike viccara. mike? >> reporter: hi, joy. bob mueller, former director of

the fbi, special prosecutor, special counsel attended church services just across lafayette park here at st. john's episcopal church. that's the church of the president. we knew that he was going to be there. he's been there in the past so we waited for him. easter services, tried to be as respectful as possible. he came out the side door of the church. i did have a couple of prepared questions to ask him. let's just roll the tape. >> sir, could i ask you a couple of questions? will you testify before congress, sir? >> i have no comment. >> are you sure about that, sir? >> no comment. >> if he were anybody but the president would mr. trump be indicted, sir? >> now that you've finished the -- >> sir, why didn't you make a recommendation to congress one way or the other, sir? >> are you going on vacation? >> did the attorney general accurately characterize your positions on conspiracy and obstruction, sir? >> i think it's accurate to

characterize director mueller today as being tight-lipped in response to my questions, joy. >> yes. >> nevertheless, you know, this is history in the making. it's an opportunity to ask him questions. obviously he's reticent. he's never been one to really hold forth in a situation like that before the press. i've had the opportunity to stake him out when he was fbi director on capitol hill. basically, the same kind of encounter. of course, the congress has asked him to testify by may 23rd. the attorney general, bill barr, his nominal boss in this situation has said he doesn't have a problem with it. i think we can probably expect that to happen unless m nevertheless, the first time we've seen bob mueller on tape in many, many months. >> first of all, great questions, mike. very good questions that you were asking him because that is exactly what i think the american people want to know. really quickly, as you've said, you've covered him before. in the past has he been the type

of person to be a little bit more forthcoming eventually about his investigations or what we saw just now, is that what we could expect even if he goes before congress, him refusing to really be very open about what he's done in this report? >> reporter: well, i think it's important to make a distinction. this is what some would characterize as an ambush interview. some passengers by weren't happy that we were doing that. in a format setting on a constitutional setting testifying before congress, obviously this is an individual, a ramrod straight ex-marine decorated for valor in combat. a straight up and down guy, a straight arrow. that's been the characterization that we've heard about bob mueller for years including over the past 22 months. when he gets before congress, what he's going to be compelled to say and more importantly what he's going to feel obligated to say as a constitutional officer, that's an open question. i do think he would probably be a little bit more forthcoming in that setting.

>> absolutely, mike vacara, nbc this morning. thank you. >> more am joy after the break. ♪ help! i need somebody ♪ help! not just anybody ♪ help! you know i need someone

when donald trump sends his surrogates to defend him on the mueller report he doesn't send his best, they're bringing spin, they're bringing lies and some i assume are good people. >> there's nothing wrong with taking information from russians. >> come from that intelligence briefing, you know how jim comey

spends the last minutes of his time, telling the president about some unverified dossier. >> meanwhile, trump is also taking pr matters into his own hands tweeting out this video yesterday saying the mueller probe cost a whopping $30 million which happens to be less than half of what it has cost taxpayers to fund trump trips to mar-a-lago since his inauguration. >> is the cost of the investigation irrelevant? >> no, we don't. we don't judge them by the cost. it would be pretty fruitful just in the forfeitures of the u.s. government.

we've produced the evidence in this report that showed i think a pretty breathtaking scope of illegal activity by the president in office in addition to people on his campaign having links with russians if not outright coordinating with the russians with supporting that goal and publicly benefitting from them. >> both sets of facts have not changed many people's opinions of donald trump over time except in the negative. the latest polling shows that since the mueller report came out donald trump's approval rating has gone down. his approval ratings over time as part of the personal industry. it's helping him. are they concerned.

it's not that there was no collusion, it's that there was no conspiracy to commit a crime with the russians to win the election. but i think one undercovered aspect of this report is just how hard as the russians were attacking the election, as they were hacking the democrats, as they were disseminating all of this information to sway the vote, the president was simultaneously directing his aides to find hillary clinton's missing emails. he was telling michael flynn then his top advisor for national security during the campaign to go out and even if it was on the dark web, even if it had to do with dealing with russian hackers, to find the emails. and then, you know, you have trump going out on stage and saying russia, if you're listening, and then russia of course actually is listening and goes and tries to hack hillary clinton personally for the first time. so these facts are extremely damning and i think the only thing that really saved trump

and his campaign from potentially facing a conspiracy charge was that share in confidence. watts the fact that they could not ultimately connect with the russian hackers to connect with and get the stolen emails. in the case of donald trump jr., ignorance of the law apparently was enough to protect him from being charged m in relationship to the trump tower meeting in june of 2016. >> tell that to the woman who didn't realize that she wasn't able to vote and typically ignorance of the law is no defense. i guess it was for donald jr. i guess the challenge for the spinmeisters on the trump side is that even some republicans who are otherwise unfailingly loyal to donald trump can't get away from what mitt romney said about him. this is what mitt romney said. he said it was good news that there was insufficient evidence to charge the president of the united states with a conspiracy with a foreign government, however, he said, i am sickened at the extent and pervasiveness of dishonesty and miss direction

by individuals in the highest office of the land, including the president. he says, i'm also appalled that among other things fellow citizens working in a campaign for president welcomed help from russia, including information that had been illegally obtained, that none of them acted to inform american law enforcement and that the campaign chairman was actively promoting russian interest in the ukraine. that from a republican candidate for president of the united states. your thoughts? >> yeah, but mitt romney is a susan collins and jeff flake. what is he going to do about it? he's not going to do anything. although i a plaut his statement, we have susan collins who has called it an unflattering portrayal as if she was reviewing a tv show. in the absence of republican leadership, we have the democrats who will have to exert leadership because it seems that the mueller report punts it to them. it's a damning portrait, joy. it's a venal corrupt government. we can trust our eyes and ears.

president trump invited russia to hack hillary clinton's emails, we've seen abuse of power, we've seen intimidation of witnesses, michael cohen's testimony. enough is there to create a damning portrait of this administration and now you have rudy giuliani who's slithering who now in the morning today said, hey, it's okay if a political campaign accepts material stolen by a hostile foreign government. the same man who said truth isn't truth. he's the same man who was sent out yet to be like luke gabrazi to be a hit man on donald mcgahn. so this creates, if you will, an increasingly damning portrait of a president. it's not a complete and total exoneration based on bob barr's cliff notes of the summary of the mueller report, and in the absence unfortunately of republican leadership which will do nothing except interfere on behalf of the president who now

represents the party, by the way, we need democrats and the rest of us to keep shining a light and doing the job that republicans will fail to do, which is have accountability. >> and matthew, to that very point, first of all, the idea that republicans wouldn't support an impeachment is irrelevant to previous impeachments historically. none have succeeded in the united states senate. the other two have been attempted. the other avoided it by resigning, richard nixon. is it true among people in that world, the justice department world, that if donald trump is -- he gets away with everything that's in this report, thick report full of potential obstruction. if his staffers are allowed to lie to congress and that is not held into account by congress, that impeachment as a thing will become irrelevant? and that the justice department's authority will become irrelevant? >> yeah, that last point is the absolute right one. i think the real concern is that if there is no sanction at all for donald trump, all of the behavior that's outlined in that report and the remarks you see from rudy giuliani today,

basically become the new norm. all of the obstructive behavior. donald trump interfering with the justice department time and time again, sometimes publicly, sometimes privately. that becomes the new norm of what's acceptable public behavior. what rudy giuliani said, that it's okay to go out and seek help from the russians. the wikileaks hack is the new norm and that's the acceptable way to run a presidential campaign. by the way, part of the concern is what bill bar did in his press conference. it would be one thing if at the end of a congressional investigation congress exerted its own will and decided not to hold the president accountable. you've had the very head of the justice department kind of excuse interference with the justice department's investigation. that sets a very -- i don't know if it's impeachment, censure or other presidents will feel it's okay to do this exact behavior. >> seems rather self-evident.

thank you very much. coming up, if you don't succeed, try, try, try again. we talk joe biden's 2020 presidential bid next. every day, visionaries are creating the future. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. e-commerce deliveries to homes car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana.

cake in the conference room! showing 'em you're ready to be your own boss. that's the beauty of your smile. bring out the best in it with crest 3d white. crest removes 95% of surface stains... in just three days.

with peak season berries, uniqcreamy avocado. and a dressing fit for a goddess. come taste what a salad should be. and with panera catering, there's more to go around. panera. food as it should be.

senator joe biden joined the democratic race for president launching a campaign in which biden is campaigning that his politics of passion will impress the voters. >> he said last year that you would make a decision january of '07. >> yes. >> are you running for president? >> i am running for president. >> third time's the charm. after several months of flirting with the prospect of another presidential run, former vice president joe biden is expected to enter the 2020 race this wednesday. his candidacy brings many questions with it, chief among them, can he bridge the divide between working white class voters and the racially diverse base. joining me is ayesha and amy fowler. let's do both of those things first. let's start with that question. here's the polls.

bernie sanders and joe biden are at the top of all of the different polls. is the fundamental question that these democrats who are in these polls are looking at, do we want somebody to bring white working class voters over or is it anxiety about having a nonwhite male candidate? >> honestly, i think it's super early. so many polls are about name i.d. i think that bernie sanders had so much hype in 2016 that people are interested to see about the next. joe biden, look, is uncle joe. when he left the white house people felt warm about him. folks are looking forward to what he's going to do. i've got to tell you, it is really, really early. i don't think joe pied den is going to capture the hearts and minds of the base in the way that he's banking on it. >> let's see about that. one of the interesting things that's happening, amy, welcome to the show. jermaine lee, we sent him out to

speak to the black voters. let me just play it for you. it's in ohio. >> surprisingly more than half the group liked joe biden. they said they need someone that is a public servant and has the experience of reaching across the aisles to fight back against donald trump. they believe that if there is a unifier, it is joe biden, not necessarily kamala harris, not a cory booker. >> then there's this article in "the new york times" that the headline is should a white man be the face of the democratic party in 2020? there is a lot of anecdotal evidence and polling evidence that even voters of color feel like only a white male candidate can beat donald trump? >> no, that's based on an old playbook. i think for 2020 we have to look at who are the candidates. the calculus about how to win, particularly in swing states in the south and southwest has to be based on a simple fact.

that is one of five primary voters in the democratic primary are women of color and in swing states like georgia, florida, texas where we'll be next week, that's one of four. 25% are women are color. so instead of the call cue wlus about we need a white man to beat a white man, you need to look at can joe biden inspire, motivate and speak to women of color in these key swing states, states that trump won, and that's what's really going to determine what he does in this primary. look, if we take a look at the mistakes that were made in 2016, one of the biggest mistakes was not to embrace and recognize the most progressive powerhouse important voting blocks in the party. joe biden, i think, is in a very crowded race and he already hasn't demonstrated a capacity and competency to speak authentically to women of color. >> joe biden and a second guy

that's a white guy, will voters of color line up for that? >> no. the lesson of 2018 is that what galvanizes and excites people are the candidates. you look at florida, you look at georgia. the races there, even though the democrat didn't win, they got more votes, more turnout in those mid term elections than democrats have in many, many years. the only way democrats win in 2020 is to get people electrified and excited and i do not think that -- one, i don't think someone that's been around a long time is going to excite the enthusiasm of young people and i certainly don't think that just the same old same old is going to get people of color off their chairs and out to polls. >> we're going to have you come back. this is the thing that people are talking about in my twitter feed constantly. who's going to get the nomination. more "am joy" after the break. i was cured and left those doubts behind. i faced reminders of my hep c every day.

but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. the 2019 subaru outback is how safe is the car you're considering? an iihs top safety pick plus. the honda cr-v is not.

sorry, honda. which suv would make the best investment? the subaru outback has the best resale value in its class for 2019, according to kelley blue book. even better than the toyota rav4. sorry, toyota. it's easy to love a subaru.

we turn our attention to our han knit if i watch on the radical socialist democratic party. heading into the 2020 election you saw crazy bernie on the air tonight. whew. that was hard to watch. bernie sanders for two hours. wow. >> good morning. welcome back to "am joy." well, earth two must have felt like they were on a whole other planet when self proclaimed democratic socialist bernie sanders appeared on the network in the second town hall of the election cycle. several contenders are doing the

unexpected and directing their outreach efforts to fox news viewers. and the success of the sanders town hall, which was the most watched town hall so far, is only driving more candidates in that direction. democratic senator amy klobuchar announced she will hold a fox news town hall next month and other 2020 dems are in talks to do the same. this despite the democratic national committee shunning fox news. bottom line, is appearing on fox news a way to win the democratic nomination for president? and are there -- are there democratic primary votes to be found on earth two? joining me is angela of media matters, corinne, shawna thomas and tiffany cross, co-founder and managing editor of the bdc. angela, i'm going to start with you. what do you make of this embrace, i guess you could call it, by individual democratic candidates? we know that mayor pete

buttigieg is in advanced talks with the network. julio castro is close to signing on, kirsten gillibrand, cory booker all saying they're open to doing town halls on fox news. >> there are two things going on at the same time and i want to split them. one is whether or not it's okay to partner. they're not appearances, have you to partner with them. it's a media partnership for one event. there's one question there. the second one is one of timing. should they be doing it right now in this moment? one of the reasons fox has been aggressively reaching out to the campaigns now is because they're desperately trying to reach their marks for selling all of their ads for next year. there is the period called the up fronts where they sell their ads in the future. fox news has been having trouble. it was to signal to advertisers they were getting serious. in this moment there's no reason for any democratic or presidential candidate to be giving fox news the life line

that it needs. >> we reached out to fox news to hear what know said. fox news had a very successful up front presentation where we walked away feeling valuable about our story and we expect no change in our business going forward. >> my response is, one, they had to change the programming of that event because it was a massive demonstration and protest outside. two, tucker carlson was supposed to speak at that event and did not because of what was going on in the news at that time. if you notice what she didn't say is they signed contracts at that event. they have a lot of trouble selling ads in the room. the conversation ended upturning into whether fox news is a toxic asset. that's why they doubled down on the democratic town halls. what they tried to do is get some of the big candidates to come on the network, to partner with them. their theory was that would signal to media buyers and advertisers it was safe to come back in the water. that's what the strategy is. i don't think it's making sense to do it.

i'm willing to have a debate. in this moment, it is nothing but destructive and undermines all of the work to hold fox news accountable. >> there has been a real openness to it. andrew yang who we had on this program a couple of weeks ago, 2020 democratic candidate, for what it's worth, i'd be happy to do a town hall on fox news or msnbc. or just about any other platform. the question is twofold, one, the question that angela raised, is this a time to be legitimizing fox news or are there democratic voters to be had on fox among that audience? >> first of all, i want to thank angela and media matters for the great work they are doing. they are the reasons why advertisers are fleeing by exposing fox and so great job to them. look, joy, fox, you turn on fox any day, any moment of the day and you're going to see lies, you're going to see fear mongering, you're going to see flat out racism and there's no reason why in this moment like

angela was saying that we should be propping up -- proffering up -- democrats should be propping up fox. by doing that they're propping up hannity, they're propping up tucker. i mean, it is just a bastian of conspiracy theory and just ugliness every hour of the day. i mean vgs this is a way to look at it, joy. literally, fox is going to -- not only are they a propaganda machine for donald trump and for this white house, but they're going to be playing a super pac. you look at them come november of 2020. they're going to be attacking the democratic nominee using lies and nastiness and fear mongering. we should not be helping them. we should not be throwing them a life line and i think what we're doing by what democrats -- presidential democrats are doing is incredibly dangerous. it is not 1992. this is not the only way we can reach voters. there are plenty of other ways to reach voters and so this should not be happening with

democrats going on this network in this moment in this time serving as trump tv. >> and shawna thomas, first of all, welcome to the show. i'm glad to have you on. i want to say corinne is echoing what a lot of democrats are saying on social media and dan pfeiffer said the following. i understand the short-term incentives for bernie sanders and pete buttigieg to appear on fox news, but putting an imprimatur of let get ma si is dangerous. does that make sense? >> i understand where dan pfeiffer is coming from, but i also think in an incredibly crowded field of democrats where anyone is trying to get information, get their information out there, the idea of sort of turning down a venue that's willing to give you an hour, and that hour might be combative and some of bernie sanders on fox news was combative, that hour might be you pushing back on fox news if you do not believe what they

believe. but this is free advertising for a political campaign at the very beginning of when people are trying to set themselves apart. now some people are going to judge the amy klobuchars and bernie sanders of the world for going on fox news and as some of your guests have said, propping them up, but some people are going to hear them for the first time. and i don't think you can -- i don't think you can decide that because there are aspects of that venue that you don't like that you're totally going to turn your back against that venue. i also think in another way we keep talking about democratic primary voters. i understand that, but there are some states out there, the texass of the world, virginias of the world that have open primaries. i'm not saying the base of fox news voters are going to cast a primary vote for bernie sanders in the state of virginia. i don't think they will. but if there are some people on the edge that give you an edge in that particular state, i don't think you can turn down free advertising. and that's a -- that's a purely

political if you're running a campaign, that is something that you have to factor in. >> let me go to tiffany on that. i guess the question would be, in the cold calculus of primary politics, what you want, are democratic primary voters or in open primaries democratic leaning independents. in your experience, are there people, substantial numbers, they have a large audience, is there a substantial share that in any circumstances are going to vote for democrats? >> no. let me say it one more time for people in the back, no. there are not substantial voters who are looking at fox news who are even open to voting for a democratic presidential candidate. i don't understand this obsession for going after these voters. you didn't see tons of republicans trying to appeal to the obama voters. they doubled down on their base. i'm not sure why democrats tend to do that and think they can walk the middle of the road and appeal to fox news or maga hat wearers. the horse that you're trying to lead to water, he will not drink

it. he will turn around and drink you in the easter eggs. what is the point? i'm not discouraging people. i do take shanna's point. they have a large venue and a lot of people watching them. i'm not sure -- i'd be curious of any data of how many people who were even open to voting for this person switched after they saw a town hall. i really don't think it will be that many. let us not forget, your base are the people who brought you. dance with the ones who brung you. in 2018 during the mid terms there were key con stistituency groups. there are pockets where asian-americans were the deciding factor. they're the fastest growing demographic. for the first time in 2020 latino voters will make up the largest portion of voters. eligible voters. if they registered they would take up a sizeable portion of voters, if they register. i don't understand why there's

not a big appeal. i know telemundo is doing a town hall or presidential debate. why waste your efforts going after this? let me say quickly about klobuchar, i think this is one of the challenges. when you see her, what voters value is authenticity. when you see people who are one person among one crowd and somebody else the next day, it doesn't resonate well. if you want to come across as minnesota nice one day but then we find out that you're pretty abusive to your staff the next day, now we find out you're going to go talk to fox viewers, that's going to be a challenge. i think people have to decide who they are, get in the lane, stay in it and appeal to the base. the strong base. the path to the white house leads directly through the path of the black voters. >> to that poirchlnt, angelo, f news put out a statement praising bernie sanders. we're pleased that bernie sanders and dnc agree with fox

news that successful democratic presidential candidates must engage directly with our large, diverse audience. on that large, diverse audience. large part is true, diverse, we've done a study of this audience. is this an audience that contains dshs we know that bernie sanders base contains a lot of independents. >> that's right. >> a lot of people not registered democrats. maybe there are some of those. does this audience contain a lot of voters who have a venn diagram with democratic candidates and voters? >> no. that's an important point. i've seen a lot of this being circulated. they point to some of the self-identified independents that watch fox news. those independents say that they're independent because the republican party is too liberal for them. >> too liberal? >> exactly. that's a critical part here. they have actually abandoned the party because they've moved further to the right. fundamentally that gets to the

issue. especially after "the new yorker" article we've talked about in a lot of these campaigns, they talk about the fact that fox news is racist, misogynistic. they call it propaganda. if you make charges like that, you say it politically. i don't know why pretending like you can partner with them in a meaningful way giving them that legitimacy, it undermines your own critique. if you care about whether or not they're out there trying to kill ilian omar, ginning up this antagoni antagonism, you're going to make that charge, you have to act accordingly. >> shawna, i wonder about that. if you then have the town hall airing and then not too long afterwards you have some of these incendiary segments, what is a democrat going to do with that footage? can you put that in an ad that you were on that network if people feel fund amountly that network is there to serve donald trump and in some ways to attack people like representative omar in ways that could be damaging.

>> you have to do what bernie sanders did, push back if you are on that network. if bernie sanders gets the nomination and becomes president of the united states, that the not me predicting anything, but if he does, the people who watch fox news will also be part of the people he represents. and going on fox news and saying -- and being, to get to tiffany's point, authentic, i think bernie sanders was authentic at least to him in that town hall is showing the world what you are, who you are and you can stand up to this if that is how you are going to take it. i just think that at this point you cannot -- you -- you can't turn anyone down. i think there are very extreme things you can turn down. you have to use every opportunity to make yourself stand out. on top of that, this particular segment that we are on on "am joy" proves something worked for bernie sanders. yes, we are grappling whether he

should go on. you did an entire segment talking about him and pointing out the other candidates that were going to go on. so he got a second chance at the advertising from it. so if this conversation continues, there are multiple ways to get attention from this. and i think purely politically i don't know how you turn that down right now. >> corinne, is all attention good attention? much of what we've talked about is where he was at was toxic and how few democratic base voters was there. as a matter of strategy, is what sanders, buttigieg and klobuchar running a strategy. >> i'm still stuck on getting kicked in the easter eggs. >> she'll drop one like that. >> happy easter, everybody. look, one of the -- one of the other things that happened last week when bernie sanders went on is that donald trump tweeted about it, right? he clearly got under be his skin

and because he was on trump propaganda tv so he got truly angry and started calling bernie crazy bernie. but here's -- i guess here's the part. putting politics aside, and i get it, i get what shawna's saying. i understand there's about 20 people in the race. everyone is trying to figure out their lane. everyone is trying to get attention, but in the moment that we are in, it is incredibly divisive and partisan right now, not even partisan, it's just ugly. the politics is so ugly and fox news is such a part of that. i mean, the flat out racism, the conspiracy theories, the lies. we cannot be propping that up. democrats should be doing better and not propping that up. and what we're doing is, i can loo i said before, we are throwing them a life line. advertisers are questioning fox in particular because of their primetime lineup of shawn hannity and tucker. it is just -- we're in really dangerous times and we have too -- we cannot be helping fox

news out. >> i wish we could go on with this debate longer but we have to go to a commercial so i'm going to take it. that's another cable tv thing. got to go. thank you very much. coming up, your moment of maxine next. some things are out of your control. like bedhead. hmmmm. ♪ rub-a-dub ducky... and then...there's national car rental. at national, i'm in total control. i can just skip the counter and choose any car in the aisle i like. so i can rent fast without getting a hair out of place. heeeeey. hey! ah, control. (vo) go national. go like a pro.

itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking "slow turkey."

talk to your doctor about chantix. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. did you know comcast business goes beyond fast with a gig-speed network. complete internet reliability. advanced voice solutions. wifi to keep everyone connected. video monitoring. that's huge. did you guys know we did all this stuff? no. i'm not even done yet. wow. business tv. cloud apps and support. comcast business goes beyond at&t. start with internet and voice for just $59.90 a month. it's everything a small business owner needs.

comcast business. beyond fast. well, already, mr. chairman,

elizabeth warren, alexandria occasion yes cortez, maxine waters, julian castro have said we should begin proceedings to impeach the president. are you there yet? >> i'm not -- i'm not there yet, but i -- i -- i can foresee that possibly coming. >> some democratic leaders may not be there yet but my next guest was calling for the impeachment of the mueller report. joining me for your moment of maxine, maxine water, chair of the house financial services committee. happy easter. >> thank you. delighted to be here. >> let's talk about this. you really were there first -- >> yes. >> -- in terms of calling for impeachment. congressman al green also very early on. >> that's right. >> saying that he would like to put on the floor article of impeachment. it's been slow in getting the leadership to come on board. after the mueller report, do you believe that democrats need to do additional hearings or some other interim step before

proceeding to impeachment? >> let me say that i have been calling for his impeachment for a long time because i understood very clearly who this man is, how he conducted himself during his campaign and the kind of information that we learned about him even before mueller came on board. we've been waiting for mueller to make us comfortable with the fact that he's deplorable, and find all of the evidence, and we thought barr, despite his background and what we know about him was going to step up to the plate and now we're waiting on the public to make us do it. the congress really does have to. really does have to step up to the plate. >> and, congresswoman, there's evidence that the polling is going really inipsos poll that asks the question should donald trump, should the president be impeached.

after the barr memo it's39%. that was after barr's characterization of what was in the mueller report. now that's ticked up 1 point to 40%. of people who say he should not be impeached, that is down outside the margin of error. it's gone down from 49% to 42% another thing from the same pole, whether or not people believe the president of the united states believe he broke the law. are you more or less likely to believe he broke the law? after barr's characterization of it, 49% said they were more likely to believe. 41% less likely. look at the change. now 68% of respondents said they're more likely to believe that the president broke the law and 28% say they're less likely. this is moving in your favor. >> well, absolutely. and, again, like i've said, you know, we've been waiting on everybody else to come up with

the information and the facts and the public is waiting on us. now we still don't have, you know, the kind of coming together that we need to have in order to do the impeachment. however, i know that we're going to move forward with hearings and i know that we're going to be trying to get mueller to come before our committees. i also know that there's some people calling for those who were called by mueller who testified against him should be coming before our committee. all of that is good. all of that is something that could be done, but the fact of the matter is, i think that when you look at this report, you can see that there is enough information there not only on obstruction of justice but also on collusion or conspiracy, whatever you want to call it, to move forward with impeachment on this president. >> and let me play for you the chairman of the house judiciary committee, jerry nadler, who was

on "meet the press" this morning talking about this very issue. >> do you think this is impeachable? >> yeah, i do. i do think -- if proven -- if proven. which hasn't been proven yet. if proven, some of this would be impeachable, yes. obstruction of justice if proven would be impeachable. >> you're going to go about to see if you can improve it? >> well, we're going to see where the facts lead us. >> that is a very different demeanor than we saw during the bill clinton presidency when people like lindsey graham, who was in the house at the time, and 13 other current united states senators on the republican side not only wanted bill clinton to be impeached overlying about a sexual affair but voted to convict him. what do you make of the fact that people who at the time said that obstruction of justice and getting witnesses to lie was impeachable are now silent on

the republican side? >> well, if you're referring to lindsey graham, you know that his word cannot be trusted. remember when he used to be a friend of john mccain's and remember when he turned on him? i don't know where he would go with this except to say he's now in bed with the president of the united states of america and whatever he does now is about protecting this president no matter what he does. and so lindsey does not have any real credibility and i pay no attention to what he has to say. one of the things you have to think about is this. who are the patriots? who will stand up for america when our obvious enemy is basically hacking into our electoral systems? who is going to stand up for america and claim to be a patriot when they see that there are many people around this president who have interacted with those from russia, from the kremlin, and with putin?

where are they coming from? and i think when you ask yourself this question, you'd better be concerned about whether or not these are real patriots or whether or not they're in the pockets of the president of the united states wishing to gain favor from the president and they're going to stand up for him no matter what. and so i call out their patriotism at this point this time. you take a look at this report and you will be shocked at the information that's unfolding. i'm not shocked because, you know, i and my staff began to look very closely at this president early on, and when we looked at all of his allies and the people who were connected with him and with putin and the kremlin and with the oligarchs of russia, we determined something was very wrong and we dubbed them the kremlin klan. the kremlin klan as identified has been on my face page, twitter for almost two years. we know who they are and this report only confirms that. what more do we need to do?

okay, so if we cannot decide, if the democrats cannot decide that they're going to move with impeachment, i guess they're going to go on with these investigations, how long are they going to go on with them? what more do they need to prove? i can only tell you i for one have been for impeachment for a long time. i'm going to continue to be for impeachment. i think he should have been impeached a long time ago and the american people are waiting on us to provide the leadership. >> congresswoman maxine waters, never one to mince words. thank you so much for sharing some of your easter sunday with us. thank you so much. >> you're welcome and thank you, joy. >> thank you. coming up, rudy giuliani says there's nothing wrong, nothing wrong, listen to this, with getting information from an adversarial foreign power, russia, nothing wrong with that in the united states of america. seriously. seriously. this is the story of john smith.

not this john smith. or this john smith. or any of the other hundreds of john smiths that are humana medicare advantage members. no, it's this john smith. who we paired with a humana team member to help address his own specific health needs. at humana, we take a personal approach to your health, to provide care that's just as unique as you are. no matter what your name is. ♪

woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira.

woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action.

we are following the deadly attack in sri lanka this easter sunday where the death toll is rising in a series of blasts in and outside the capitol. at least 207 people were killed and nearly 450 injured after eight near simultaneous explosions at several churches

and hotels. so far no group has claimed responsibility but the country's defense minister says seven suspects have been arrested. we'll continue monitoring the story and we'll be right back on more on how the white house is spinning the mueller report. is spinning the mueller report. ma. i'll take you there. take this left. if you listen real hard you can hear the whales. oop. you hear that? (vo) our subaru outback lets us see the world. sometimes in ways we never imagined. when heartburn hits, fight back fast with tums smoothies. it neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪tum tum tum tum smoothies. also available tums sugar-free.

there's nothing wrong with taking information from russians. >> there's nothing wrong with -- >> depends where it came from. >> it is now okay for political campaigns to work with material stolen by foreign adversaries.

>> depends on the stolen material. was it all right for the "new york times" and washington post to print against the objection of -- >> you're putting pentagon papers and vladimir putin on the same level of morality? >> no, the theft. it's part of the public's right to know but i guess the public didn't have a right to know how sneaky, dishonest and. >> another head scratching defense from trump's television lawyer rudy giuliani. back with me, shawna and natasha and joining the discussion, jason johnson. i'll start with jason. matthew miller who was on the show earlier tweeted in response to rudy giuliani, a former u.s. attorney and former mayor. this is an invitation for the russians to hack trump's opponent again in 2020. your thoughts? >> joy, here's the thing. whenever he does my cousin vinnie schtick and completely abuses the law to explain anything trump does, it's a reminder of the lawlessness of this administration. during this week when we have

the mueller report, we genesee republicans blocking funding for election security in 2020. so rudy giuliani is sending a message to america, he's sending' message to trump, he's sending a message to the base. we are a lawless administration. we will continue to encourage lawlessness. if the democrats are not willing to stand up for yourselves, we'll do it again. >> to that very point, natasha, according to the mueller report, russia sought bang channels through his business ties. part of a broad make shift effort to establish this from trump. they led to the conflation of diplomatic and financial interests that was a stark departure from the carefully calibrated context. you've seen this president not welcome the russian ambassador into the oval office. you've seen him take phone calls with vladimir putin without notetakers present. you've seen him take meetings with vladimir putin that were

claimed not to happen and then they happened and no one found out until afterwards. he's expressed as per the mueller report a desire to do things with russia. he still has the same pecuniary business interests as before. donald trump believes it's legal, what is the incentive for the campaign in 2020 not to simply seek a redo? >> there's zero incentive, joy. i think that's a really important point. i mean, i also don't understand how rudy giuliani can on the one hand say there was no collusion which is not what the mueller report says but on the other hand say it was perfectly acceptable for the trump campaign to have been willing to accept this dirt from the russians because in the end it was a quit prd pro quo, right? they wanted donald trump elected for a reason. if the campaign was going to help them disseminate this information that they stole from the democrats, that was pretty much the definition of collusion, in order to sway the election. but, look, i think one of the biggest unanswered questions

from the mueller report, something that he apparently did not want to go into because this may have more to do with the counter intelligence investigation, who really knows, is donald trump's financial history. is the question of who does the president owe money to? who is he indebted to? how is that affecting the decisions that he makes with regard to our foreign policy and in keeping quiet about that very important national security issue, mueller has effectively again kind of handed this either to the fbi or to congress to further investigate because if the president is still beholden or is beholden to russian interests as of 2020, then we're going to see a repeat, as you said. not just russians but the saudis, the chinese. this is a very serious national security crisis that needs to be addressed one way or the other. >> shawna thomas, if there is a smorgasbord open that foreign countries can come in, attempt to use business ties to sway the president of the united states and nothing's being done about that other than we know that

there are 14 investigations still ongoing, we know that -- we only know what two of them are, and that donald trump is not necessarily out of the woods and he and his folks are not necessarily out of the woods yet, but the question i guess goes back to william bar. is there any sense on capitol hill among republicans or democrats that william bar will intervene to try to save donald trump from the other 14 investigations that could still have him in jeopardy? >> i mean, i -- i -- i'm not sure capitol hill has quite gotten there yet. i know that there have been some congressmen who have said that basically the attorney general can't be trusted anymore, but i also think william bar knows that these other investigations are hemming. he knows that there's an investigation in the southern district of new york. there's still the roger stone issue in the district of columbia. there are other things that we don't -- we are not privy to yet, and i believe that as attorney general he is not going to step into those investigations and stop them from happening. they are continuing to go on.

we know that they are looking into, you know, trump's -- the i inaugural committee. we know that people are still looking into trump's businesses. we still don't know what allen weisselberg who is the cfo of the trump organization, what exactly his role is and what the southern district of new york talked to him about, and those things are still going on. so i think that means in some ways the justice department is doing what it's supposed to do. and only time will tell if he decides to step in and try to save the president. i think the one thing that we should all hope for because part of what we learned from the mueller report was that, you know, in some ways it was like the people around the president of the united states or the then candidate trump couldn't really pull off what it seemed they kind of wanted to do. hopefully what they've learned is they've learned a little bit about law, they learned a little bit about campaign finance law that they actually take that report, see what the campaign stepped almost up to the line to and actually try to figure out a way to not do that.

let's hope that we are not reading "new york times" and washington post pieces about them doing the exact same thing again. i guess it used that mueller report as a prescription report to do better. >> the question i guess to you, natasha, is there any chance of that? because it does seem that william barr, if you go back to the 1980s, has sort of rinse repeat when it comes in to see how he protected presidents. what incentive is there? why wouldn't he step in? or kellyanne conway this morning was out on tv saying the investigators should be investigated, that he should launch a special counsel probe of the people who investigated trump. why shouldn't we expect him to do that? >> joy, he's already intervened. he's already intervened when he said that, you know, spying happened in 2016 on the trump campaign. he has essentially intervened in, you know, the ongoing investigations by focusing people's attention on whether or not the fbi acted improperly by

infiltrating the trump campaign which, of course, there's no evidence of. he has already kind of launched his parallel investigation to what the inspector general is looking at into, you know, the fiso warrants, all of the things that happened in 2016 about the investigation itself rather than the outcome of the investigation. and so i think that what we're going to see moving forward over the next year and a half before the election is an effort by the inspector general, by the attorney general to put the emphasis back on the fbi, back on the justice department and relitigate what happened in 2016 that allowed this investigation to move forward even though we now know it's been established by mueller that the russians attacked and that the trump campaign welcomed it. that is where the emphasis should really be. for now i think barr is going to do everything that he can to put the ball back in that court. >> meanwhile, jason, because republicans don't have -- don't seem to have the same inhibition about using investigative

resources in order to advance their political prospects, right? so if you have william barr do as we just heard natasha say and try to turn the ship of state towards focusing, put the eye of saran on the investigators, on the democrats, maybe even hillary clinton, maybe revive that. he could theoretically do that as a campaign strategy. here are the democrats agonizing over whether or not the mueller report is enough for impeaching. here is adam schiff. >> the obstruction of justice in particular in this case is far worse than anything that richard nixon did. the break-in by the russians of the democratic institutions, foreign adversary, far more significant than the plumbers breaking into the democratic headquarters. so, yes, i would say in every way this is more significant than watergate. >> if it's worst than watergate, why the hesitation? >> because they're cowards, joy. i want to be -- cowards and

treasonous cowards. i want to be clear about this. if you think that what donald trump did is a danger and a threat to democracy, then the democratic party is failing in their responsibility to put a check on this presidency. a month and a half ago we were saying nancy been pelosi. now she's the head of a group of feckless democrats who refuses to go ahead with the information that they wanted to see that says we have a criminal empire mass cure raiding as an administration. i'm offended. it's too much trouble, it's too busy. this is what the base asked for. this is what the american constitution demands and if you have any interest in a fair and open election next year, you have to hold this accountable. >> i've said it before not because it's game of thrones sund sunday. they are not the lanisters, they end up with their heads on

spikes. >> get stabbed. >> there's one aria. right now it seems like elizabeth warren. girl has no more time. shawna thomas, natasha, thank you very much. jason, we'll be right back. coming up, my guests will tell us who won the week. e week. when your flight gets in late, it's never too early for coffee. oh no no no. your new boss seems cool, but she might not be sweatpants cool. who is that ready this early? it's only 7 am. somebody help me. close call. not quite ready to face the day? that's why we're here with free hot breakfast and a warm welcome. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. hampton by hilton. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. one ptwo parts incredible.ibs. steak & ribs starting at $14.99, with your choice of sauce or dry rub. and back again is our 3-point rib bloom, topped with cheese fries and barbecue ribs. and try our everyday lunch combos, starting at $7.99.

every day, visionaries are creating the future. ♪ so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. ♪ the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ because the future only happens with people who really know how to deliver it. because the future only happens with people since my dvt blood clot i was thinking... could there be another around the corner? or could it turn out differently? i wanted to help protect myself. my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot... almost 98 percent of patients on eliquis

didn't experience another. ...and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be surprising. ask your doctor about eliquis.

it's time for you to find out what you wanted to know all week. you waited long enough. we're going to find out, right now, there it is, who won the week. week? my "game of thrones" super panel has been formed. tiffany cross, who won the week? >> i put two different type of movies together like that. >> joy, i know you win who won the week every time, but i think i got you beat this time. hbcu. let me tell you why. beyoncé dropped homecoming this week. if you have not seen it, it is a spiritual experience. it celebrates everything amazing and beautiful. it came at an amazing time because they are putting together a hearing this week or in the next few weeks, i'm sorry, to talk about hbcu receiving less funding, which is

very timely. and it came at a time when right here in d.c. at howard university there are a lot of gentrifiers who use it as their open personal space, and they interviewed some of the students and some of the neighbors, and one man said if they don't like it, they should remove their campus. which i think blew everybody's mind because it came at a time where we just saw all these tears and 24 hours of breaking news at the burning down of the notre dame cathedral in paris. i totally understand that and respect that, but in the same way some people value that institution, black worshippers value their black churches. native americans value their land that you ran pipelines through and hbcu students respect the yard. to have somebody say if you

don't like me letting my dog poop on your campus, you should move it. it baffles my mind. when i say homecoming for the eighth time, i'm filled with pride. the poor man's tiffany cross, jason johnson teaches at hbcu. so i just want to shout out to hbcu today. >> jason, that was strong. >> you get me every time. >> it's for the brand. it's what people expect. give them what they want. we're going to let you respond. we aren't going to make you stay silent. i'm going to stop speaking. i'm not going to cease -- i'm just kidding. go ahead. >> my winner of the week, my winner of the week is ebony kay williams, a former political and

legal analyst at fox news. she did a fantastic interview this week where she talked about how fox was created to demonize african-americans. not only is that a valuable explanation as to why we get the white nationalism light but also because she made all of us winners by speaking truth to power. we all talk about this on and off camera. there is 20 or so african-americans who get to be on the air, share our experience and our expertise, me, malcolm nance, michael steel, the other ladies on the other side of the camera, only a few of us get to do this work on a regular basis. so when someone speaks to the challenges we all face both in front and behind the cameras, she speaks for the next group of voices. for me, eastboushe is the winnee week. >> these are strong contenders because you are right. it is valuable. air time is very valuable and there are not many people of the

color, african-americans and other people of color who get to do it. i agree with that. these are very good options. however, as the mother of dragons has said, only one person wins the week. that is me. it is i. i am going to pick somebody who dove tails with tiffany. when everyone saw the notre dame fire, i think the whole world was shocked by seeing it burn. 850 years of history up in flames. but for a lot of people it made more poignant and painful the loss of three sang warctuaries louisiana. but the loss of those sanctuaries was also poignant and tragic for those con questicon. look at the donations that

poured in. when it was pointed out to people, principally by a friend of mine, who is a wonderful journalist, a wonderful friend and person who took it upon himself to tweet about a gofundme that was raising money for these churches. the goal was to raise $1.8 million. before long, celebrities joined in, people on the right and left and ended up giving up to, you can see now more than $2 million for those churches. they deserve to also be rebuilt. god bless you, all of the people that donated. that's my who won the week. i had to pick that because those churches deserve to be rebuilt. there they are. i do have an honorable mention, a young man who ran against duncan hunter jr. and duncan hunter jr. is a guy who had some felony issues. he is not supposed to lead the united states. but let me play you a little bit of the stunt he pulled this week

in arizona. >> so here is the grand border wall in arizona. this is what we expect to stop people trance national terrorists, all illegal aliens coming across the border. this is it. it looks pretty tough to cross. let me see if i can do it. hey, there we go. that's how easy it is to cross the border here in arizona. >> okay. he didn't cross the border. that is not the border. he's like 95 miles from the border because he's not allowed to leave the united states. he's just at a fence inside the united states. it was a total stunt. you know what? you are the runner-up to who won the week. thank you jason johnson and christy johnson. more a.m. joy after the break. h. more a.m. joy after the break. to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal?

it isn't. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ♪ ♪ (gasp) (singsong) budget meeting! sweet. if you compare last quarter to this quarter... various: mmm. it's no wonder everything seems a little better with the creamy taste of philly, made with fresh milk and real cream.

i couldn't catch my breath. it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. they said i had afib. what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. my doctor and i chose xarelto®. to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. in a clinical study, over 96% of people taking xarelto® remained stroke-free. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding.

before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from a stroke. ask your doctor about xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. how janssen can help, a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast.

that's our show for today. we will be back tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. up next alex witt, my new "game of thrones" sister. >> i'm now a "game of thrones" fan, you are the catalyst. >> we will be watching tonight together. >> thank you so much and happy easter. a good day to all of you from new york. high noon in the east. welcome to weekends with alex witt. new reporting this hour about the president's public reaction to the mueller report. >> the president over the last 48 hours has been mounting this