thanks to you at home for joining us. happy friday. in july of last year robert mueller and the special counsel's office indicted a dozen russian military intelligence officers for their role in carrying out the russian gump's attack on our 2016 election. and the timing of when that indictment dropped seems like maybe somebody was making a point because three days later trump was set to meet with vladimir putin in helsinki. and they did go ahead with that summit. they had a public press availability, also they had a meeting behind the scenes, one of those times when trump insist that no other americans be able to listen in on their conversation. but this was right after that

gru indictment spelling out in painstaking detail the literal keystrokes of the russian intelligence operation, the times of day that specific officers were active in the plot, the specific named russian officers and what each of them individually did. that indictment was amazing in its detail. that happens, and then trump not only doesn't cancel his helsinki summit with putin, which is scheduled for three days later, he goes much further out on that shaky little limb than he'd even started on, and he said in helsinki that he absolutely believed vladimir putin when putin told him that russia didn't do it. never miend that indictment fro three days earlier, never mind what the u.s. government had to say russia did. he believed russia, not the

united states. trump also praised at the helsinki summit what he called an incredible offer from putin to embed some kremlin guys in the u.s. investigation of what russia did. wow, what an incredible offer. we can have some russian guys from your government embedded in our investigation? thank you. we won't have to hire temps. he also spoke positively about another great idea from vladimir putin, that he, vladimir putin and the russian government should have handed over to them certain americans they had pa wanted to get their hands on. named the russian government and described their exact actions against the u.s. in that operation targeting our election, trump met with putin and thought all of putin's ideas were amazing including him getting his hands on americans

that trump would hand over to him. that's what happens last summer, right after the gru indictment. well, now it's a couple of weeks after we got robert mueller's report released, and today we get word from the kremlin -- naturally it's always the kremlin that announces these things first. today we get word that our president spent more than hour on the phone today with vladimir putin. now, mueller's report starts with more than 200 pages of detail of the russian government's operation targeting our election including putin's role in it, him personally directing overtures from kremlin controlled oligarchs, and that just came out. did the president mention any of that to vladimir putin today? was the president prepared with any criticism whatsoever, any

challenge whatsoever as to how putin and his government interfered in our election, including putin's personal involvement? is there any possibility america's president might have told putin to back off our next edekz since fbi director chris wray, was there any mention of that right after mueller's report came out? here's the transcript from the informal press briefing today. reporter, mr. president, did you tell him not to meddle in the next election. president trump, excuse me, i'm talking you're very rude. reporter where did you tell him not to meddle in the next election. trump, we didn't discuss that, really we didn't discuss it. reporter did you tell him not to

meddle in the next election, trump says it didn't come up. propping up a venezuelan dictator there, it turns out president trump now says putin isn't doing that at all because putin told him so. the headline in bloomberg news today putin says he's not doing it, and so president trump believes it. and so, hey, john bolton, hey, mike pompeo, are you guys enjoying your jobs right now? you each thought your job this week was to name and shame and threaten and counter russian government involvement in venezuela while saber rattling about how everybody else better get out of the way because the u.s. is really mad about it. guys, it turns out your actual job is figuring out how and why you work for a u.s. president who says and does whatever

vladimir putin tells him. just to be cheer here, how do you come to work anymore if you're john bolton, his career, his track record, just think of john bolton as a human being. this is what john bolton, human being thought that was his job this week. whether you like what he's saying here or not, this is what they've had him out there saying. >> the trump administration has also made the claim that russia is very, very involved in propping up the maduro regime. secretary of state mike pompeo told wolf blitzer yesterday there was a many ready to take the russians to cuba but they talked him out of it. >> they'd love to get effective control of a country in this hemisphere. we've made clear to the russians in a lot of conversations and a lot of different levels why we

think this behavior is unacceptable to us. >> yeah, you thought that was your job, but it turns out not at all, not after vladimir putin gets done with president trump today. >> he is not looking at all to get involved in venezuela other than he'd like to see something positive happen for venezuela. >> putin doing anything in venezuela? who said putin's doing anything bad in venezuela? i'm with him. he says he's not. i mean, john bolton, god bless you, good luck delicately shaving around that impressive mustache when you have to look yourself in the coming days mr. national security advisor. you thought your job was to push russia back because of what they're doing in venezuela. the president spent an hour on the phone with putin today. now the new u.s. position of the u.s. government is that putin's not in venezuela.

what's your job? today was nutty on a lot of levels, but i think it is worth preparing ourselves for the fact that this weekend might be even a little bit nuttier, and that's because for all the weirdness we've just been through, we are heading right into a whole bunch of stacked up deadlines that i think are really going to put whipped cream on cherries. first of all monday morning is when the president's long time personal attorney, his long time employee at his business, the trump organization, michael cohen is due monday morning to report to federal prison to start serving his three-year prison sentence for among other things a felony campaign finance scheme to pay two different women about a quart of a million dollars in hush money right before the presidential election so they wouldn't publicly make claims ubhaving had affairs with president trump so his campaign would not be adversely affected by any intended publicity.

prosecutors have been explicit in saying president trump himself was not only a participate, he directed the commission of those felonies, he was the sole beneficiary of those felonies, but it's michael cohen going to prison for them and the president's not. all the president got out of it was a cute little nickname, individual 1. and i mention this thing about monday morning not just to keep track of what's going on in michael cohen's life and in that case but i think it's sort of prudent to be on the lookout overnight tonight and through this weekend to see if michael cohen may have one more rabbit he wants to pull out of a hat in order to potentially give prosecutors something new and valuable they could use in a case against somebody else that could potentially cause them to intervene, to cut down and delay him from serving his sentence. i mean it's also possible we may hear from him in a way that isn't directly designed to reduce his sentence but it could

be designed just to equal the cosmic score a little bit between he going to prison and the guy who directed him to commit those felonies who's not going to prison. again, michael cohen's report day is monday morning. this last weekend is his last week of freedom before he's in the prison system. and that is going to loom large until he is locked up. monday is also coincidently the deadline treasury secretary steve mnuchin -- i'm sorry, steven mnuchin. monday the is the deadline that treasury secretary steven mnuchin set for himself as the date by which he will respond to the house ways and means committee. now, this tax returns thing is not a friendly request from congress to get president trump's tax returns. it is a legally binding demand. there is clear black letter law that has been in place since the

warren g. harding teapot dome scandal which says the chairman of the ways and means congress will be given any tax returns. so far they have not, and now the treasury secretary himself has gotten involved to try to block the irs from handing over these tax returns. he says that by monday, this upcoming monday he's going to have some further assertion about what he and the irs are going to do on this issue. honestly, it's really not their call. they do not have any legal wiggle room here as any previous treasury secretary who's commented on this matter has attested to. but on monday we're going to find out what exactly they're going to try to do. monday is also the response deadline on the subpoena that was sent to capital one bank and deutsche bank requiring those two financial entities to hand over voluminous information about their financial dealings

with president trump and the trump business. those documents are due to be handed over monday to the house intelligence committee and the house financial services committee. now, the deadline on that subpoena for them to hand all that over, it's monday may 6th, but it came about through an unusual process, and it's sort of since been shifted. the financial editor of "the new york times" wrote about this this week, he says, quote, lawyers for deutsche bank has spent months cooperating with investigators from two democratically controlled congressional committees. once the requests from the committees reach a certain point the banks asked and issued what one lawmaker calls a friendly subpoena. that was a couple of weeks ago in mid-april. so the banks were already preparing to hand over lots of information, everything the committees were asking for. a cup of weeks ago the banks asked, please may be have a subpoena. it's not that we're not cooperating, but they wanted a subpoena basically to cover

their butts, so legally it would be clear they would no chance but to hand over these documents. and got some incredible detail about what exactly the banks have been preparing, have been putting together to hand over to adam schiff and maxine waters, the two chairmen of the committees that have requested this information. quote, the rich trove of records held by toich bank includes internal corporate documents, descriptions of the value of mr. trump's assets and portion of his business and personal tax returns. the subpoena casts a wide net for documents related to trump's businesses and other entities including family trusts. quote, the subpoena demands deutsche bank hands over subpoenas to the trump family companies including parents, subsidiaries, special purpose

entities, joint ventures, did we miss anything? in terms of the character of the materials the banks planned to hand over, quote, bank officials have compiled reams of material to hand over. included in those documents are multiple pages from each of mr. trump's annual federal tax returns. again, venture and capital one have been cooperating on this. they've been working for months. they asked please may we have a subpoena, congress said yes, you may, here we go. the congress says the documents have to be handed over by monday. this upcoming monday, may 6th. and then president trump sued the banks to stop them from replying to the subpoena. now, it's interesting. the democratically controlled committees have decided they're basically going to go along with that lawsuit. they're not insisting that the subpoena stands and its deadline stand. they're not insisting these

banks still have to hand thesis materials over by monday. the democratically controlled committees have allowed for a delay until this can be adjudicated in court. the bank related subpoena to deutsche bank and capital one, that will have its day in court on may 22nd. after the court rules on that subpoena and whether or not the banks have to comply, the banks say they'll comply with the court's order. that is the same basic dynamic that happened with the other congressional subpoena targeted at the president's accounting firm. subpoena went out from the oversight committee a few weeks earlier. the deadline from that one to and over all their financial materials related to president trump and their businesses, their deadline for handing stuff over was april 29th. but again trump sued to stop them from handing over material. again the democratically controlled committees decided to respect that lawsuit. they delayed the production date on that subpoena, on that one

involving the accounting firm. and again the court will rule and they'll comply with whatever the court order is. now, honestly, i have not talked to a single legal expert or even a single well-informed reporter who believes that the trump lawsuits to stop those lawsuits are going to succeed in the long run. but they have succeeded in the short run, right? they've already caused delay. we would otherwise be expecting reams of trump financial documents including pages from each of his federal tax returns to be handed over to congress on monday. that has temporarily been paused while they fight this out in court. but that delay is only going to last so long. nobody thinks those lawsuits are going to succeed in the end. they're going to succeed in delaying it until they fail, but the delay itself may be what they're after. and then tuesday is the deadline for don mcgahn, the president's

former white house counsel who did dozens of hours of interviews with special counsel mueller. don mcgahn is cited more than 150 times in mueller's report including as a key witness and a key character and in many of the president's -- and immediately after the mueller report was made public the judiciary committee announced that the first witness from the mueller report they wanted to appear before them was don mcgahn. and they issued a subpoena to compel don mcgahn to issue documents and testify in person. well, the deadline to hand over documents comes first, and that's tuesday, next week. now, the white house has insisted that they will fight the don mcgahn subpoena and they don't want him to testify. they insist they have to means to stop him from handing over documents and testifying. don mcgahn and his attorney have not commented directly on their plans in terms of responding to this subpoena. we ask mr. gakpen's lawyer

tonight if he intends to comply with a portion of that subpoena that requires mcgahn to hand over documents to congress by tuesday. so far we've not heard back. we'll let you know if we do. but you can see why we're in this unsettled moment where all these deadlines are coming up, and the president says he's going to block all of this somehow. forget that black letter statute about handing over anyone's tax returns. the ways and means committee just can't see his taxes. we'll tell you more on monday. all right, forget that subpoena. those companies can't hand over those financial records either from president trump's banks or from his accounting firm. forget those subpoenas. they're just not going to -- forget that other subpoena to the white house counsel. he can't hand over documents, he can't testify. in fact the white house now asserts and the president now asserts nobody can testify, nobody can hand over documents. the president said this past

week, we are fighting all the subpoenas. and that is a little nutty, right? that is little crazy. but that is also what it was like at this moment exactly 45 years ago in may 1974. nbc presidential historian michael beschloss was tweeting about this today. but you see the headline there from "the new york times," may 1974, nixon rejects subpoenas, tells rodino he'll get no more watergate data. he had the job then jerry nadler has today. there's nixon saying rodino will get no more watergate data. oh, how far we haven't come, right? and looking back on what nixon was trying to do back then, looking back now with the

advantage of hindsight, we of course know nixon was doomed to fail in that hard line stance. but back in may 1974 americans didn't know how that was going to end up. congress didn't know how that was going to end up. it was a time of uncertainty and frustration, and honestly some fear. >> good evening, president nixon today laid down one of the strongest challenges any president has ever put to any congress. he told the impeachment investigators in the house of representatives that he will not comply with the judiciary committee's latest subpoenas for 11 white house tapes, and the president added that he will decline to comply with any future subpoenas. he told the committee he had given it all the watergate material it needs as he has said before. >> president nixon used familiar white house arguments and firm language in refusing to answer the judiciary committee's subpoenas. he wrote chairman rodino, quote, the committee has the full story

of watergate. production of these additional conversations would merely prolong the inquiry without yielding significant evidence, but it does not spell out an easy solution to this kind of confrontation. congress could vote to cite the president for contempt but that would not produce the evidence and mr. nixon and his lawyer are confidence that a contempt citation would not be enough. >> no member of the judiciary committee appeared surprise at the president's refusal but they were disturbed and unhappy about it, republicans and democrats alike. other members had this response. >> i think he does hurt his cause before the committee by his failure to comply with what i think is reasonable request for information which the committee ought to have. >> it's very difficult to determine what their plan of action is over there.

certainly it is to delay and obstruct and make our job as difficult as possible. >> see, there's nothing new under the sun. i mean, the president now is literally saying congress shouldn't be looking anymore, this is all, it's done. he says he will not allow white house counsel don mcgahn to testify. we know he's now suing in court to stop the hand over of any documents related to him and his campaign and his white house. the presidents have tried this before. look again at that headline. nixon tells judiciary chairman he will get mow more watergate data. that was 45 years ago this month, and now of course we look back on that headline from may of 1974, and we know how that worked out in the end, right? we know now that was a nice try by nixon, brave face forward and all that, but now.

i mean by july of that year nixon was told he must surrender. nixon pledges full compliance. look at the subhead there, president bows. look at the subhead under that, too. they're still trying to slow it down even when they had lost that dramatically. yes, this feels like a very unsettled time. you are right to feel that way with what we've been through over the past couple of weeks. with what we went through just today, with the other world president sticking his hand up the back of our president's suit jacket and moving our president's mouth. it's okay to feel unsettled by that. with these deadlines bearing down just in the next couple of days as the white house and the president and the president's lawyers and his attorney general all seem furirmly set on the course of massive confrontation, of blowing through the guardrails orof getting what

they want at any cost, but they're not the only players on the field. and honestly it's not like we're a country that hasn't dealt with this sort of thing before. we've dealt exactly with this kind of thing before and we know how it worked out. today demanded the justice department's inspector general open an inquery into whether president trump has been telling his justice department to start investigations into his political enemies? it's the scariest possible allegation, right? and when people have fought back against that in history, the people fighting back against it have won. these fights, they're not unprecedented. these fights are now fights of our generation, too. and senator kamala harris is going to join us live on set next. going to join us live on set next at hilton.com,

i can choose from all their different hotel brands... like a doubletree for my cousins. a homewood suites for my uncle. a hampton for my sister and her kids. and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. can i get a..? thank you. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? book at hilton.com go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray only relieves 6 symptoms, claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. ♪ mmm, exactly!ug liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice! but uh, what's up with your partner?

oh! we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. ya... he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ my copd medicine... ...that's why i've got the power of 1 2 3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment . ♪trelegy. ♪the power of 1-2-3. ♪trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy. with trelegy and the power of 1 2 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush,

pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1 2 3. ♪trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com

attorney general barr, has the president or anyone at the

white house ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone? >> i wouldn't -- i wouldn't -- >> yes or no? >> could you repeat that question? >> i will repeat it. has the president or anyone at the white house ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone, yes or no, please sir? >> the president or anybody else? >> seems you'd remember something like that, be able to tell us. >> yeah, but i'm trying to grapple with the word suggest. there have been discussions of matters out there that they've not asked me to open an investigation. >> perhaps they suggested. >> i don't know, i wouldn't say suggest. >> hinted? inferred? you don't know? >> attorney general william barr never answered that question from california senator kamala harris. today senator harris followed up

in a letter to the inspector general at the department of justice i write to explain grave concern under the leadership of attorney general william barr, on may first attorney general barr appeared to discuss the conclusion of special counsel mueller's investigation. in response to my questions during the hearing attorney general barr appeared unable or unwilling, an alarming response that strikes at the very harlt of the rule of law and threatens to undermine the long-standing independence of the justice department. in light of the disturbing conduct documented in the special counsel's report as well as attorney general barr's failure i urge the department of inspector general to investigate whether the a.g. has received or acted upon requests, suggestions whether implied or implicit to investigate had president's s r

perceived enemies. joining us now is kamala harris, a 2020 presidential candidate. thank you for being here. >> of course, of course. >> so that moment from the hearing has been seen as a sort of crystallization about not only the attorney general facing tough questions about also of the can of worms that has opened here. the mueller report was very in small ways if the president was opening investigations about his perceived enemies. was the attorney general's response actually a surprise to you? i wondered if you expected him to be able to give you a clean no. >> i'd hoped he would give a clean no, but i think we also knowing something about attorney general which is he is smart enough to know the words he speaks and to speak them in a way he can actually read them on

a transcript and he's smart enough to know if he speaks certain words he will perjure himself and face criminal charges himself. and so i think he was buying time for himself by asking that the question be repeated and he was parsing his language, knowing if he answered explicitly the question asked and with a yes or a no, either he opened up a can of worms if the answer is yes, or if the answer is no, he would have perjured himself, so he didn't answer. >> do you believe it's possible he has been getting direction from the white house or from the president about opening investigations into the president's perceived enemies? do you think that's what's happening? >> based on his non-response i'm now suspicious. >> because of course the attorney general is supposed to act on behalf of the people and not as the president's henchman. and if in fact there's been any

influence we should know that and that's something that should be investigated and disclosed, obviously. >> is there any other way to get at that? obviously the judiciary committee has a lot of high profile roles including interrogating witnesses but also you have oversight of the justice department. is that something the committee should be investigating directly? >> i believe we should be. i don't know that we will. you know, the chairman of the committee has said even when we've requested that bob mueller come to give us direct information about the -- about his investigation and the report, the chairman of the committee has rejected that request. so i don't know if it will actually happen. it should happen, rachel. it absolutely should happen. i mean, part of the issue that is really at play is the integrity of our system of justice, literally. this is the top law enforcement and top law official of the united states department of

justice who through his testimony and then all of the weeks leading up to him testifying before us has called into question his integrity, has called into question his ability to be unbiased, to do the work of justice, to do the work of pursuit of truth, pursuit of fact. this has now been called into question. and rachel, the way i think about it also is every day in america there are people walking in the courthouses around our country, state courthouses, federal courthouses, and they're going to walk into those courthouses skeptical the way justice actually occurs in those places, and that is real, that is real consequence when we see the kind of behaviors we've been seeing out of this administration. it is undermining peoples confidence in our democracy, and that is not an understatement. not to mention what we're communicating to our friends and

foes around the world. one of it greatest strengths of who we are it's almost intangible but very real, one of the greatest strength of our nation is we have a system of democracy that we will fight for and die for. and one of the most significant pillars in that system is our justice system. now, we know it is imperfect and deeply flawed in many ways, but when the highest official in the land presents himself to the world in the way we just witnessed i think it calls into question the integrity of the system of law. >> i want to play you one more little piece of sound from the hearing. you guys, this is in the control room. this is sound number one. this was senator graham actually asking the attorney general some fairly low-key questions, and they ended up veering in a way that i certainly don't think senator graham expected, they veer pretty quickly into the

attorney general explaining why he thought it was legal and not obstruction of justice for any president to fire any prosecutor investigating him or her if the president didn't think the investigation was a good one. it was a short construct, but this is what he said. >> if it was based on false allegations the president does not have to sit there constitutionally and allow it to run its course. the president could terminate that proceeding, and it would not be a corrupt intent because he was being falsely accused. >> if the president believes that he or she is falsely accused, that he or she is legally or constitutional empowered to fire anybody who investigated that president. that right at the beginning of hearing and i thought let's all go home now. what happens now he's asserted that? >> so let's also point out that

the flaw in his logic is that he is then reinforcing the idea that justice is a subjective concept. depending on how you perceive the treatment that you receive, you can make decisions about how the system works. >> everybody knows the people who know they are good people don't get arrested. i know i'm a good person, therefore i'm immune to arrest. therefore. >> right, and so when we're talking about people who are in a position to make decisions about the lives, the liberty of other people such as the attorney general of the united states, the president of the united states, we need to have integrity in that system. and the suggestion by this attorney general that the president of the united states could shutdown an investigation because he perceives it to be unfair is ridiculous. i mean there are legal terms, but it's actually just ridiculous. and it further -- the statement

further reinforces the point, which is that this attorney general does not think of himself as being an objective neutral player on this issue. but then we know because he actually submitted a 19-page résume for the job. and then only two days after receiving the mueller report, which was a report based on two years if you can believe on around the clock investigation by some of the top lawyers in the justice system ever, in two days he submits a summary clearly designed -- his so-called summary to influence the public's perception of the nature and the finindings of th investigation. he clearly waited a long period of time before then sharing that report with the public. remember part of his testimony, he talked about the fact barely

10% has been redacted. then, why did it take him so darn long to redact the thing? you could summarize the thing in two days and it takes you that long to redact it? so the logic does not hold. and when he then makes a statement to say the president can shutdown an investigation because he doesn't like the way it's working is absolutely ludicrous. >> and the question of course is whether it's controlling precedent now that he's articulated that as attorney general. we're going to take a quick break. stay with us. we're going to take a quick break. stay with us

if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. draw the line with roundup. the sure shot wand extends with a protective shield to target weeds precisely and kill them right down to the root. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years. (vo) be the first to play console quality multi-player games on the go. be first to real time with verizon 5g ultra wideband. get the new samsung galaxy s10 5g. on verizon. rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis. when considering another treatment, ask about xeljanz xr, a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. it can reduce pain, swelling, and significantly improve physical function. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers,

including lymphoma, have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, serious allergic reactions, low blood cell counts, higher liver tests and cholesterol levels. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. your doctor should perform blood tests before and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you've been somewhere fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. don't let another morning go by without asking your doctor about xeljanz xr.

you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist.

you can barely feel. check out this time-space wormhole i created. - how's it work? - let me see your togo, and i'll show you. - earl! you have my lunch. - pretzelrami is back, with our famous pastrami and a bigger soft pretzel roll. and try the new turkey bistro with warm turkey and smokehouse bacon. or the new hot club chicken dijon with black forest ham. the new hot pretzels, only at togos. how far would you go for a togo? joining us once again is senator kamala harris, democratic of california and a leading 2020 presidential candidate. now one thing that feels now very much like an open question is what robert mueller is going to be able to say for himself. senator lindsey graham, the chairman of your committee in the senate today sent him a

letter on something that specifically came up with attorney general barr. we have had reported that nbc news although not confirmed by more than one source that the house judiciary committee is negotiating directly with robert mueller to get his testimony. attorney general has said he doesn't object. let's say we do get testimony from him, attorney general barr has been saying ever since the mueller report was submitted that robert mueller screwed up by deciding not to make a charging decision on obstruction of justice. he doesn't understand why he didn't do it. it seems to me he's inviting robert mueller now to make his charging decision, to proclaim based on what he found, whether or not the president should be charged with obstruction of just. he's holding that to him account for not doing that in his report. should mueller be asked that question out loud in testimony

before congress? >> i think if he testifies he will be asked that question. but i think there's another issue that is also at play, which is that the attorney general is underemphasizing, de-emphasizing the office of sitting counsel's opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. is that the reason you didn't return charges, and did you decide instead -- and he says specifically it is within congress' ability -- i don't know if he says duty, i don't have the exact words in front of me, but it is within congress' jurisdiction to take responsibility and act. i think what he was signaling is the office of legal opinion to

indict a sitting president might have been in the way, but there's enough here that congress could take the next step and carry the ball from here. and i think that, you know, thank god for jerry nadler and what they're doing over in the house. i think they will take the ball and do the next thing in pursuit of justice. >> and you think they should open -- i know you have allergies. i was just going to say just to follow up there, you have said you think the house judiciary committee should open impeachment proceedings? >> i do think they should begin the process. >> you're running a very active campaign, you're one of the leading contenders. how does this ongoing presidential scandal, including the testimony this week? you got a lot of attention for the way you interacted with attorney general barr this week. how does this fact into your campaign? obviously you're talking to

people about all sorts of issues, you're building your campaign about issues you most care about. is it more central to what you're doing on a day-to-day basis? >> it is central in this way, rachel. what i talk about everywhere is that this is an inflection moment in the history of our country. it's a moment in time that is requiring us to look in a mirror and ask a question. that question being who are we as a nation, and i think that the answer to that question includes that we are better than this. so i think of this, all that we are talking about right now and what we've been seeing of course over the last couple of years as in that context, which is that these are moments and these are issues being raised that really do present a question about whether this is reflective of our values, is it reflective of the ideals that we're part of the foundation of our country, is it reflective of who we are and who we think of ourselves to

be? and so i think of it in that context. i also think of it in another context, which is there are a lot of people who are rightly feeling a great sense of distrust in our government, its institutions and leaders. and when we see displays like what we have seen just this week, it reinforces that distrust. so the way i think of it then in the context of my campaign and what i hope to offer the american people is to vow to work on restoring that trust and restoring the importance of justice in our country and the concept of justice. and that means speaking truth, which is one of the foundational elements of any relationship based on trust. we must speak truth, and we must fight for the truth, and we must fight for justice. so i look at this in that context as well because i do strongly and deeply believe we are better than this. i think this is low point. as someone who has, you know,

done the work of being an attorney general and i ran the second largest department of just in the united states, the california department of justice, second only to the united states department of justice. and the people who work in these offices are charged with an incredible and awesome duty and responsibility, which is to do their work on behalf of the people. that's not what we've seen. >> i have one last question for you and we're going to take a quick break. kamala harris who is braving tree pollen allergies to be here. we'll be right back. stay with us. be here we'll be right back. stay with us . with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth...

are you in good hands? and relief from symptoms caused feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin by over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear. 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. onmillionth order.r. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order?

ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering. do your asthma symptoms ever hold you back? about 50% of people with severe asthma have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions.

fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. . . back with us again is senator kamala harris, democrat of california, leading democratic candidate for president. thank you again, senator. >> of course. >> when i learned from the kremlin today that president trump had had more than an hour-long conversation with vladimir putin, he got off that call and told him putin said he's not meddling in venezuela. he wanted to convey that to the

american people. it got me wondering about the senate intelligence report. obviously we've got the mueller report out, but in the intelligence committee, we're still awaiting your committee's report, including on potential difficulties in the relationship between trump and russia. is that full steam ahead? should we have high expectations for that report? >> well, expect that the report will be published, and i cannot and do not want to set your expectations on what it will be. >> okay. >> but expect that it is something that is definitely a work in progress. >> can you tell me if the intelligence committee is still interviewing witnesses? is it still a live inquiry? >> it is still a live inquiry. >> are you confident in the leadership of that committee? there was an allegation in the mueller report about senator burr seeming to -- it was implied that he shared information from a gang of eight briefing with the white house on an investigation into the white house. is that a problem on your committee given his chairmanship? >> i will say that. i serve on many committees, homeland security, intelligence,

budget, judiciary. of all of the committees on which i serve, the senate intelligence committee, at least as of today, has been probably the most bipartisan. >> mm-hmm. >> and frankly at times nonpartisan thankfully. i think that the issue of national security should not ever be a partisan issue, and when we are talking about a foreign government, an adversary who has interfered in the election of the president of the united states, i hope and trust that we all understand this is not a partisan issue. this is a national security issue. and we should approach it that way. >> senator kamala harris, i know you are even more busy than usual at this moment. thank you so much for making time to come in. >> thank you, rachel. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized

car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

nueven if you try to eat well,. you might fall short in key nutrients. get more by adding one a day. it's the #1 multivitamin uniquely designed for men and women. one serving, once a day. one a day. and done. for people 50 and older colat average risk.ing honey have you seen my glasses? i've always had a knack for finding things... colon cancer, to be exact. and i find it noninvasively... no need for time off or special prep. it all starts here...

you collect your sample, and cologuard uses the dna in your stool to find 92% of colon cancers. you can always count on me to know where to look. oh, i found them! i can do this test now! ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

-while you ponder that, consider adopting a rescue pet. there are 6.5 million of them; they all need a forever home. it would mean the world to them, and they will love you forever. all right. busy friday. busy week. busy weekend ahead. keep in mind that monday is not only the day that michael cohen reports to prison, it is the deadline set by the judiciary chairman jerry nadler for the justice department to hand over the unredacted mueller report. 9:00 a.m. monday is the deadline. today nadler said the committee will move to contempt proceedings if the justice department doesn't comply. monday is also the treasury

secretary's deadline for telling the congress whether he's going to give them presidential tax returns or not. there's a lot going on right now. there's a lot to sort of worry about over the weekend. but monday and tuesday are going to be a little bit nuts as well. so stay on your toes. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you again on monday. tonight on "all in." >> did you tell him not to meddle in the next election? >> excuse me. i'm talking. i'm answering this question. you are very rude. >> a president who want talk to robert mueller about vladimir putin talks to vladimir putin about robert mueller. >> did you ask him not to meddle? >> we didn't discuss that. >> tonight the growing fears and new evidence that the 2020 election could be a replay of 2016. then -- >> the way to handle this now is for us to have walters call pat gray and just say, stay the hell out of this. >> carol leonnig on the mueller evidence that could be as