the court and proceeding increate increateme increatemently. we've already seen that they have indicated they are ready to undue a decision they issued a couple years ago, which found law and constitutional for putting real constraints on women's access to abortion and i think it could happen any time. >> and you only need four votes to take the case and the wring li wrangling begins. thank you for joining me. >> thank you. that is "all in "for th" fo evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. today i learned that president trump's campaign chairman is a lawyer, or at least he was a lawyer until today. you are forgiven if you haven't thought of paul manafort as a real legal eagle but today, i learned he was a lawyer when i learned he was formally disbarred in the district of

colombia because of his multiple felony convictions for crimes quote involving moralturpitude. he was sentenced to seventh and a half years in prison for multiple felonies. after his initial inprmprisonme in virginia, he was moved to eastern pennsylvania where he was pros selcessed to start his federal prison. manafort has settled into his forever home at fci loretto which is about half way between harrisburg and pittsburgh. fun fact about fci loretto. used to be a catholic seminary. now it's home to donald j. trump presidential chairman.

now, there is the possibility that mr. manafort will be moved out of fci loretto to be closer to his next round of trial proceedings. you'll recall mr. manafort was indicted on new york state charges after he got his federal sentence. but for now at least, he is at the old seminary in western p.a. and today, he was disbarred in the district of colombia. of course, the president's long-time personal lawyer also reported to federal prison this week. he rals got his number, michael cohen is federal inmate number 86067-054. i don't though what kind of access mr. cohen has while he's in prison to the news of the world, but it interesting to think of him going to prison this particular week, right? we don't know if michael cohen right now is aware of the news that donald trump junior was

subpoenaed to testify to the senate intelligence committee. he's reportedly planning to defy that subpoena and face legal consequences for doing so i mean, does michael cohen know that? he's just gone to prison and michael cohen has just gone to prison in part for arranging to pay hush money to two women before the presidential election. donald trump junior is one of the people who actually signed the checks that paid for that whole hush money scheme. but donald trump junior is at large. michael cohen is in prison. michael cohen is also in prison now for lying to the intelligence committees about the trump tower moscow real estate deal he worked to arrange throughout the campaign while the president was publicly maintaining he had no business deals in russia. well, this week donald trump junior is facing that subpoena to come back and testify again to the senate intelligence committee reportedly, specifically about trump tower moscow.

because of perceived problems with his testimony on that same subject before the same committees. i mean, inmate number 86067-054, the man on your left is in federal prison right now for felonies that he committed that did not benefit himself, right? the lies about the moscow real estate dealings with the kremlin and scheme to pay off the women before the election, those were crimes that did not benefit michael cohen. those were crimes that benefitted donald trump and the trump campaign and the trump family business. the president's son literally signed the checks in the hush money scheme and his testimony on trump tower moscow appears to hue very closely to what michael cohen said about the trump tower moscow plan for which michael cohen was sent to prison. so i mean, there has to be an awkward time in the president's closest circles right now, right? one of the things michael cohen

testified about before he went to prison were these financial statements he says were used by the trump organization and president himself when seeking loans from banks and as a means of describing the president's overall financial health while he was trying to get favorable treatment in the various insurance policies. michael cohen handed over the documents and bluntly told congress in his testimony these financial statements were false representations of the president's financial status. he told congress bluntly that these financial statements were used to commit bank fraud and insurance fraud. well, today, interesting turn of events. back on march 20th after michael cohen's testimony including about those financial statements, the oversight committee chairman elijah cummings fallowed up on cohen's testimony but requesting a boat load of documents from trump from the if i were that prepared those statements on trump's

behalf. the firm, their in234ish8 response is very measured and cautious when they first got this big document request from elijah cummings, they said he believes in the ethic rules that have the work and client interactions. soon mazars sent back this to elijah cummings. a lawyer letter telling congressman coummings, he canno turnover the documents sought in the request. emphasis on voluntarily because the firm went on to hopefully point out that were there a validly issue and enforceable subpoena telling them to hand over the documents, well then they wouldn't have a choice. then they wouldn't be voluntarily handing this stuff over and there would be no problem. and so behold a subpoena was born. and what happened upon the issuing of the friendly subpoena

to mazars was interesting. the president himself hired a whole new boat load of lawyers who are specifically charged with trying to keep his financial history and his taxes secret and those newly hired lawyers got right to work. they contacted mazars the accounting firm and told mazars they should not respond to the subpoena from congress and within a week the president's new hears hired to keep finances and taxes secret filed a lawsuit by the president, the president personally suing his accounting firm to try to stop them from compiling with the subpoena. the subpoena that orders them to hand over his financial documents including the financial statements that firm prepared that the president's lawyers said under oath he saw used to commit bank fraud skpin su -- and insurance fraud. they sue to try to stop them from handing over information about him and sues elijah cummings to try to stop him from demanding those documents.

now, that lawsuit the president filed here is not a thing of beauty as by all legal accounts but elijah cummings did agree, once that lawsuit was filed that he would delay the subpoena's deadline ordering that accounting firm to hand stuff over. he would allow for a delay. they would not have to meet the subpoenas that deadline. that's what they are pie paising for to try to keep his taxes and finances secret. i mean, that lawsuit that they filed at least buys trump time. it at least gets this thing into the courts and at least slows everything down, right? maybe he can drag this out forever now, right? maybe not. today the judge that the assigned to hear that case said you know what? i actually want to go fast here. next week was supposed to be an

initial round of stuff on there maybe being a preliminary injection in the case and maybe another round of stuff on maybe there being a permanent injunction in the case and maybe after that another round of stuff on the march rids of case and maybe get to the march rid some day down the road, the initial plan but today, nope. the judge said nope. there is no need for that kind of a drawn out schedule. let do all those things all together, all on the same day all next week. the judge said he'd go ahead and rule right then and there that day. the soul question before the court is the issuing of say sub valid exercise of legislative power. that sole question is briefed and the court can concern no benefit from an additional round of legal arguments nor is there any obvious need to delay ruling on the merits to delay ruling on

the record. bottom line, there is not going to be another round of arguments and weeks of competing motions and mismash here. in the is the judge saying you know what? i'm ready, let do this thing. let do the whole thing, injunctio injunctions, merits and do it all on tuesday. all that day. and then i'll rule. which means if the president's best hope here was to slow everything down as much as possible for as long as possible by getting into the courts, well, getting into the courts doesn't necessarily guarantee you it gummed up forever. sometimes the courts decide they don't want to go slow. i should mention that the president's new raft of lawyers that are just working to keep his taxes and his finances secret, i should mention that they also filed a basically identical lawsuit trying to block deutsche bank and another bank called capital one from responding to their own subpoenas that they got from the

intelligence committee and financial services committee. according to the "new york times", were it not for that lawsuit the president filed against those banks on monday of this week, deutsche bank was posed to hand over to the intelligence committee a huge trove of financial documents about their dealings with the president including years worth of material from his federal tax returns. so they were poised to hand that stuff over on monday. they did not hand that stuff over on monday because that deadline and that subpoena was delayed because of this lawsuit that the president filed so the president's private lawsuit did delay that at least for a few days. honestly, though, now that the twin to that lawsuit, the one at mazars that got put on warp speed but a judge that appears to not want to play along with the delay of game strategy, we have to see if that one blows up fast now, too. i mean, we're in this really

interesting moment and it's easy to get following picky detail with every different fight and rhetoric on both sides and i think it easy to get the sheer scope of the conflict. the sheer number of points of confrontation between honestly the white house and the mueller investigation, between the white house and congressional oversight. all right. we entered into this thunder dome of the president and white house saying we'll block all y subpoenas that and testimony. we'll assert executive privilege over everything robert mueller did. right? each of these is it's own interesting drama but i think because there are so many points of conflict right,because the assertions by the white house and president are so broad, stone wall on everything,

however sustainable this is, surely they can use the posture to delay everything for a long time, for months, for years, definitely until after the 2020 election. i understand why it tempting to feel that way because the amount of things they are fighting on feels so overwhelming but that may not be true. i mean, to the extent this stuff is headed to court judges don't have to be slow and some of them are already saying they are not going to be. today in the roger stone case, the federal judge in d.c. hearing that case just walked right up to what otherwise looked like a big knot and just cut right through it. roger stone demanded he be allowed to see the full unredacted mueller report to help him in preparing his defense. there are elements that pertain to the charges against him. the prosecutors said they objected to that. they didn't want him to get the unredacted report. the judge who is arbitrating in that case, the judge who is overseeing that case and those

disputes said in order to decide this particular dispute, she would need to see the material that the being fought over here. she said she would need to see the unredacted mueller report it self -- itself and the prosecutors said no, judge, we wouldn't be able to do that for you. we can't give you the unredacted report, judge. to which the judge just today said oh, yeah? you can't give that to me? how about i give you a court order that tells you to do that? to which the prosecutors today said ah, well, in that case, and so ordered. now the justice department has by monday to give judge amy berman jackson in d.c. the mueller report including the bits that are redacted for her to review. she wants the redactions revealed from those portions of the report that relate to defendant stone and/or the

desimilar natidesi decimation of hacked materials of volume one of the mueller report. we know from what we can see of mueller's report and the way the redactions are coded, the redactions she'll get to see the stuff that is blacked out to us that will not be blacked out to her includes different categories of redactions they made. investigative techniques that means intelligence sources and methods also personal privacy redactions and grand jury redactions, also harm to an on going matter, which in this case is probably a bunch of stuff that relates directly to the case against stone. i mean, we now know based on today's court order from judge jackson this judge is about to become one of a few people in the country that's seen everything in mueller's report on all of this stuff. and honestly, i have to tell you this is likely only the first federal judge that will get the unredacted mueller report. another judge in d.c. signalled

he may also get the full report minus all of it redactions as part of the freedom of information act lawsuits being fought out now by different entities trying to get the whole thing. so i mean, listen, all of these fights are interesting and you can -- i mean, you can follow any of them at any level of detail you want. they are all interesting. they although have two sides and the courts may move faster than you think when it comes to blocking the financial subpoenas that from congress, all right, likely to produce tons of financial information about the president and also tons of his federal tax information. the treasury department deciding not to hand over the president's taxes to the chairman of the weig ways and means committee. that the about to become it own legal fight. we expect richy neal to announce tomorrow if he's taking administration directly to court for defying that law that says

the irs has to give the taxes, we'll have news on that. i believe we have that exclusively tonight, nobody else reported that. you should also know the financial and tax materials that the president is trying so hard to block with this stand off involving the irs and with these lawsuits in federal court, even all those fights haven't stopped at least deutsche bank already and the insurance broker already from handing over subpoenaed financial documents and potentially tax documents already to authorities as he's fighting to keep that stuff secret through the other means he can. some of it has been handed over to authorities in new york state. new york state legislature is moving ahead with legislation to convey all of the president's state tax returns to committees including real estate and business taxes. at least one federal judge is now reviewing what was redacted

from mueller oos 's report. a second judge may follow. nothing is stuck. everything is moving. just because a fight has been declared, does not mean a stalemate is inevitable or if there is a short stalemate that it will inevitably become a long one. but in the midst of this and it a push me pull you at this point. stuff is happening in the middle of this, here is the question and i think it's answerable and the house intelligence committee chairman is here in part tonight because i'm hoping he can answer this. regardless of whether or not you think president trump should be impeached, regardless of whether or not you think the u.s. senate would vote to remove president trump were he impeached in the house, regardless of whether or not the democrats would find itted a veit ed it ed a venn day regardless of what you think about this stuff,

specifically, here is the question, would it help congressional democrats get some stuff that they otherwise couldn't get if they opened up formal impeachment proceedings in the house? would opening an impeachment inquiry open legal doors for them to get stuff the otherwise they couldn't get. would it give them a legal advantage in trying to obtain some of the information that the white house is fighting them on getting? the white house is asserting executive privilege in some blanket way over everything mueller did. that the a remarkable revelation of this week's news cycle, right? it amazing that they are trying to do that. in the long run will they get away with it? i don't know. in the short and medium term, they will use that it seems to try to block access to the rest of mueller's report that we haven't seen, to block access to the underlying evidence from mueller's report that nobody seen. they will use it to block not just don mceldercgahn but all m

witnesses and handing overall documents and use that assertion of privilege to try to block mueller himself from testifying. okay. procedurely would it help congress defeat those efforts by the white house? would it help them get witnesses and materials and testimony if democrats in the house took the formal step of opening an impeachment inquiry? does having an impeachment inquiry open an on going give them more legal leverage to obtain these things? if so, why wouldn't they just formally open an impeachment inquiry? regard loss of all of the things impeachment down the right might mean, why wouldn't you start that proceeding? there is this political worry saying the democrats want to impeach trump so therefore you can't open an impeachment inquiry. republicans will say that anyway whether or not the democrats are tick in this casely formally doing it. the republicans are already

trying to get political advantage. the president is already trying to get political advantage saying democrats are coming after him trying to impeach him. so that is baked in. there is no way you can avoid an attack from republicans by not formally opening an inquiry. but when legal observers say opening an inquiry, opening an impeachment inquiry would give the house more tools to actually get the stuff they are seeking, that it would disadvantage the white house and they are now ramped up on going efforts to block all forms of congressional oversight, are those legal observers right and if so, is that the grounds on which democrats might see clear to proceed to that step and open up an impeachment inquiry, not because they are sure they were going to impeach donald trump let alone remove him from office but only because they need to start that inquiry to get access to the information, testimony, and documents they would otherwise be getting when the president and white house not fighting them the way they are. intelligence committee chairman

adam schiff is suggesting that may be what is about to happen here and he joins us live next. n here and he joins lusive next this is the ocean. just listen. (vo) there's so much we want to show her. we needed a car that would last long enough to see it all. (avo) subaru outback. ninety eight percent are still on the road after 10 years. come on mom, let's go! liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection.

only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ yesss, i'm doing it all. the water. the exercise. the fiber. month after month, and i still have belly pain and recurring constipation. so i asked my doctor what else i could do, and i said yesss to linzess. linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess is not a laxative, it works differently. it helps relieve belly pain and lets you have

more frequent and complete bowel movements. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. i'm still doing it all. the water. the exercise. the fiber. and i said yesss to linzess for help with belly pain and recurring constipation. ask your doctor. woi felt completely helpless. trashed online, my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. they were able to restore my good name. if you're under attack, i recommend calling reputation defender. and consider joining their groundbreaking campaign to give every american the right to remove old, inaccurate search results by going to righttobeforgotten.org. vo: if you have search results that are wrong or unfair,

call reputation defender at 1-877-492-6705. here'sshow me making it. like. oh! i got one. the best of amy poehler. amy, maybe we could use the voice remote to search for something that you're not in. show me parks and rec. from netflix to prime video to live tv, xfinity lets you find your favorites with the emmy award-winning x1 voice remote. show me the best of amy poehler, again. this time around... now that's simple, easy, awesome. experience the entertainment you love on x1. access netflix, prime video, youtube and more, all with the sound of your voice. click, call or visit a store today.

it's barely a year ago adam schiff was writing democrats should not be considering impeaching president donald trump. well, this week congressman schiff faced with across the board fight all the subpoenas that stone wall effort now, congressman schiff tells "the washington post" these continued acts of willful obstruction add new weight to those who advocated impeachment. a fascinating interview schiff says the case for impeachment will be weighty still if starting impeachment proceedings could allow congress to breakthrough white house obstruction in a way they currently cannot. if congress' legal right to the materials they otherwise can't obtain will be strengthened if they formally start impeachment proceedin proceedings. this is a question democrats are wrap

grappling with with the task of trying to impeach the president, setting that aside is an impeachment proceeding basically, procedurely the path they need to go down if the white house is going to fight the way they are to block access to the mueller investigation and to block access to everything else in which the congress wants to investigate or exert oversight? joining us now is congressman adam schiff, mr. chairman, thank you for making time tonight. nice to see you. >> good to see you. >> am i right characterize that shift in your position over time, you've been articulate why it wasn't an appropriate time to move on impeachment? the way i hear you now is that you may think that impeachment proceedings might be sort of helpful, simply to obtain information that you can't otherwise get. >> when i wrote that op ed and that was over a year ago, i was urging that we wait and see what the results of the investigation

are before we form a judgement because we ought to know what the evidence is but also because if we had to do an extraordinary step, we should communicate this something we're not eager to do but something we're reluctant to do. have t we have the report and barred from the moment from hearing from the man who did the investigation, mr. mueller and i think this does give weight to the -- those calling for impe h impeachment because after obstructing the investigation in a criminally way, donald trump is now obstructing congress as a legal matter there are a few discrete areas where it may make a difference and most of the document demands, it shouldn't make a difference whether it an impeachment proceeding or oversight. the claims of executive privilege could be advanced in either proceeding but there are provisions like the grand jury provision, the exception for grand jury materials that make reference to a judicial

proceeding that was the basis in which those materials were made available to congress during watergate but there is also language in that provision that says preliminary to a grand jury proceeding which i think applies here but is possible that a court might find otherwise to me, though, the justice department really shouldn't be able to maintain a position. you can't indict a sitting president. you can only impeach one and by the way, we're not going to give you the yoifd neevidence you ne you begin an impeachment. if that argument prevails in court, yes, it would militate into initiating a proceeding if that the the only way to overcome the white house' obstruction. >> there is a matter i want to disinta disentangle with you because it being discussed more and more in the media and this confrontation with the white house over what is happening to mueller's findings and sometimes being conflicted. you have now issued a subpoena

to the justice department for the unredacted mueller report and information pertaining to the report. you have also made a request to be briefed on the intelligence findings of mueller's investigation. now, should we see as two different requests and how should we expect those two tracks to proceed if in fact, those are two different things. >> they really are two different things. there is a lot of over lap. roughly, you can look what the committee is doing sent around the second article of the mueller report, the second section on obstruction and we're focussed on the first section and that is all of the contacts with the russians, all of the potential counter intelligence problems and threats, this investigation after all began as a counter intelligence investigation, it then later became both counter intelligence and criminal. we still don't know what the counter intelligence findings are. we know from the mueller report he had embedded counter

intelligence fbi agents in his team that wrote their own reports back to headquarters. they aren't in the mueller report and we have a separate basis, legal basis to get that information from the judiciary committee, statutes on point that say any intelligence matter must be given to the employee upon request and say we have to be kept currently informed with significant intelligence or counter intelligence activity. there is a separate grand jury exception that says you can provide foreign intelligence and counter intelligence investigation to any counter intelligence officials that have a responsibility here as we do. so we have independent basis for getting much of the same information and then some that pertained to the counter intelligence findings. >> and yet, you haven't been getting it. >> we haven't. >> is the remedy there to take them to court? is the remedy there to pass a bill? is the remedy there to turn

these requests into subpoenas that? it's hard for me to see how the path here proceeds in terms of what leverage you have to obtain and by statute you should have gotten them. >> we were getting counter intelligence briefings up until comey was fired and then it stopped. and that really is a violation of the legal requirements. you know, the remedies that we have are the same as the judiciary committee and ways and means committee. we can enforce it in court but that takes time. that really doesn't necessarily change in an impeachment proceeding where they can fight us light wise but there is another remedy we need to consider that may be quicker than an impeachment proceeding and that is reviving congress' inherent power of contempt, something we utilize up until the 1930s where we in effected do our own judicial proceeding in the congress, have a little

mini trial in the congress and hold people in contempt and responsible and compel their production without going to court. now used to be we imprisoned people but we could also fine them $25,000 a day until they compile or some other number. that may be an even swifter remedy if we need to embark on it and we may have to. >> congressman adam schiff, chairman of the house intelligence committee. you make news every time you're on the show, sir. appreciate you. >> thanks. amy klobuchar is here next. i'm very excited about that. stay with us. i'm very excited about that. stay with us allergies with sinus congestion and pressure?

you won't find relief here. 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.

but allstate actually helps you drive safely... 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? well, here's to first dates! you look amazing. and you look amazingly comfortable. when your v-neck looks more like a u-neck... that's when you know, it's half-washed. try downy fabric conditioner. unlike detergent alone, downy helps prevent stretching by conditioning and smoothing fibers, so clothes look newer, longer.

downy and it's done. the united explorer card hooks me up. getting more for getting away. traveling lighter. getting settled. rewarded. learn more at theexplorercard.com.

do not sleep in tomorrow, set your alarms if you're me. tomorrow is decision day for richard neal, chairman of the house ways and means committee now that the treasury department officially said no to his demand for the president's tax returns, the chairman told reporters today he will make a decision by tomorrow about what he's going to do to response and the drama here isn't just what is in the president's taxes and why is the president turning himself into a gigantic presstzel to block peoe from seeing him? chairman neal's request is not a real thing. they are required by law to give the chairman of the ways and means committee anybody's tax returns for any legislative purpose because he said he wants to see them. that's why chairman neal is signaling he might skip

subpoenas that go straight to the court to get this settled and to get the president's taxes like he's supposed to do. while we wait for that court fight to start over the tax returns which we'll hear about as soon as tomorrow, one little piece is worth sticking a pin in. this is michael desmond, the head lawyer, chief counsel the number two job at the irs and he was hand picked by the president for that job. specifically he was hand picked and then he was also hand pushed through his confirmation by president trump, "the new york times" report aed ahead of his confirmation, the president intervened to push along the confirmation. the president personally asked the republican leadership in the senate to prioritize this guy's confirmation vote ahead of the confirmation for william barr to be attorney general.

wow, the irs chief counsel not only hand picked by the president but seen as more important a bigger priority than even the attorney general. turns out surprise michael desmond previously advised president trump's businesses on tax issues. oh, so maybe that's why trump wants him to be the top lawyer at the irs. at the time, michael desmond said nobody should worry about conflict or loyalty issues there, a spokesman for mr. desmond said if he was confirmed and something involving trump came up, mr. desmond would seek advice from ethics officials. right? that makes sense. he worked on tax issues for trump's businesses if trump's taxes come up while he's the led lawyer at the irs and number two official at the agency would seem like a conflict. he should get ethics advice. now, mr. desmond is the chief counsel. he's at that job. he got confirmed.

most definitely has come up. the treasury department, the irs said no, no, no, we're not going to hand over the president's tax returns despite the law that says we have to. question is, did the irs chief counsel michael desmond ever consult ethics officials like he promised? is he recused for matters having to do with the president's taxes given the fact that he advised the president's business on tax issues before his confirmation? has he been recused from dealing with those things at the irs? if not, how has he been involved? advice has he been given? we don't know. so we tried to ask the irs on tuesday for three days we didn't get so much as a tumble weed blowing our way from the irs in response to our calls. we tried calling, we tried emailing and tried sending smoke signals and finally heard back. this is what the irs is willing

to tell us about chief counsel who advised trump's business on tax matters, whether he is recused for making decisions at the irs about releasing the president's taxes. they told us this, quote, federal privacy laws prohibit us from commentsiing on individual tax questions. not what we asked and his chief counsel and whether he's working on this to have a big conflict. we tried following up to get an answer, we never heard back. so i mean, we've been asking for three days now, just stick a pin in this. the irs and the treasury department are gearing up for what looked like it's going to be an unprecedented court fight over the sitting president's taxes and the treasury department and the irs defying black letter law that says the president's taxes have to be handed over. the irs and treasury department saying no, we're not doing it and the top lawyer at the irs we're not allowed to know. the irs will not give a straight

answer whether or not the top lawyer is recused from participating because he used to advice the president on his taxes. we would ask for three days to keep going. we'll ask for more. watch this space. going we'll ask for more watch this space (music throughout)

what's going on? it's the 3pm slump. should have had a p3. oh yeah. should have had a p3. need energy? get p3. with a mix of meat, cheese and nuts. 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. joining us here now on person, in person, onset, on person, in set is senator amy klobuchar of minnesota. she's in the running to be the democratic nominee for president of the quiunited states and ser on the senate judiciary committee that i fell in love with because of the list of questions of things that should be asked about robert mueller's report. how are you enjoying running for president? i love it. you get to talk to people. you get to talk about your ideas and it is really a moment in time as you know like we've never seen before in this country. i was in milwaukee last night talking to voter there is and did a town hall. i did one in new hampshire

earlier and i can tell you that people are concerned about the rule of law in this country but they still are asking about those bread and butter issues as the president gloats about the economy, people are worried about losing their health care. i put out a proposal on mental health and addiction and loats f interest in that because a lot of people feel like they don't know where to go for help and you got people that just simply are having trouble getting by and this president seems to act like he should be celebrating every day when in fact, there are so many people that still are having trouble in this economy. >> i saw the announcement you're headed to puerto rico soon, as well. i wondered if what happened to puerto rico with hurricane maria is such an epic tragedy in it own terms and the size of that tragedy compared to the attention that it got as a matter of government accountability, that ratio is

unbelievable and a moral stain on our country. i wonder if the presidential campaign might actually be a way to get accountability and have oversight and attention to what went so wrong with the government's handling. >> exactly. a lot of it is to do with this president that wants to look at puerto rico in a different way when in fact there are citizen there is and people, this is a u.s. territory and he is someone that just wants to look at them and let them go i guess when in fact you have people that need so much help, that lost everything, that lost their homes and hospitals, that lost her schools and one of the things i'm doing there is to go to see some of the efforts underway to make things better but the help that they still need and of course, that's why the house of representatives come pined this with all of the other tragedies we've seen. with the fires from california, with the floods in iowa and missouri and the help they need and of course, in florida. not too far from puerto rico.

so you have this combination which is what we do when a disaster strike oursours countrd people. we helped them. when north dakota needed help, with grand forks in that flood, we helped them. we come together as a nation and this is just one more example and i believe in the end we will come together. i know senator shelby, lahey, republican democrat are working on the appropriations side and getting in arguments with his own republican party white house because we want to do it the right way and this president just looks for divides. he wants to blame people in puerto rico and immigrants and he wants to blame people of color. every day if there is a divide, he looks for it. >> literally -- i'm sorry, i exclaimed for a moment. i got upset. the president literally pulled

out a piece of paper at the rally to gin up anger in the crowd he was speaking to in florida about puerto rico getting too much aid. he had this totally false graph that was not true information showing puerto rico receiving a disproportion anytime amount of funds to egg the crowd at being mad at that and booing that and talking about a zero sum game where florida is denied. you are being denied because puerto ricans are getting everything. >> we want to help both places, right? when in fact, there are so many puerto ricans that call florida home, and the florida representatives traditionally tried to help both puerto rico and florida as have other people in this country. you just don't treat your fellow citizens like this. you just don't do it. >> and try to leverage anger about it to sew that resentment. >> that the when he did. >> i want to talk to you about a whole bunch of different things including what is happening on the judiciary committee.

can you stay with us? >> yes. >> senator amy klobuchar is here with us. we'll be right back. amy klobuce with us. we'll be right back. ancestry is celebrating all the one-of-a-kind women we call "mom." with an engaging new experience... ...ancestrydna can help her uncover her history... ...to tell a story as unique as she is. order a kit for mom (or dad) at ancestry.com [ chuckles ] so, what are some key takeaways from this commercial? did any of you hear the "bundle your home and auto" part? -i like that, just not when it comes out of her mouth. -yeah, as a mother, i wouldn't want my kids to see that. -good mom.

-to see -- wait. i'm sorry. what? -don't kids see enough violence as it is? -i've seen violence. -maybe we turn the word "bundle" into a character, like mr. bundles. -top o' the bundle to you. [ laughter ] bundle, bundle, bundle. -my kids would love that. -yeah. bundle, bundle, bundle. (indistthat was awful.tering) why are you so good at this? had a coach in high school. really helped me up my game. i had a coach. math. ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum- just to help you improve your skills. boom! mad skills. education to take your trading to the next level. only with td ameritrade. ♪ with venus, you're in charge of your skin. so, write your own rules. because no one gets an opinion on why you shave - or how you show your skin. ♪

ifor another 150 years. the fire going ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

thank you for sticking around. you wrote a letter to robert mueller after the hearing in the senate judiciary committee where you questioned attorney general barr pretty sharply including about this very discreet issue about whether or not mueller looked at president trump's financial history and his taxes

as part of his investigation. and he responded and said i don't know. and you asked if you could follow up with a written question. >> it was worse than that. he said, well, i don't know. >> that's a better impression. >> and i said, well, you don't know. i was surprised. i thought he might look at the president's financial documents. he's the attorney general, highest law enforcement officer in the country. >> he oversees that investigation. >> and he says you'll have to ask bob mueller when he comes, and i said okay, that's what i'll do then. now we have senator graham telling us he's not going to be caller mueller except for some very narrow things. that's why i wrote the letter to mueller himself asking for those tax returns and financial documents. i haven't heard back yet, and we're waiting and as you know proceedings are going on in the house as well. after you just pointed out in your last segment the mnuchin

and the treasury department and everyone else decided not to release the tax returns. i think when you step away from all this, though, as you so well pointed out, this is really about the rule of law. it is thomas paine and common sense who once said in america the king is not the law, the law is king. and so this is about the law and our country and holding the president accountable. but it is also about making sure that our election is not invaded by a foreign power again. and they didn't use tanks, they didn't use missiles but they invaded our election all the same, and we have an opportunity to protect it. and i will tell you one thing, when you talk to people out there, while this is not the first issue on their mind when you're in new hampshire or nevada or south carolina, it's not the number one thing they

say. but when you start talking about the rule of law and having a president in the white house that obeys the law and believes in the truth, that's what they want to hear, and that's what they care about. and they understand that we can do two things at once. we can pursue an economic agenda that's positive, and we can get to the bottom of what happened here. >> how do you think it's going to resolve -- i mean let's take the microcosmic issue of that letter you wrote to robert mueller and you haven't gotten a response yet. it's a direct question. william barr said he didn't know. it's a really interesting important point, did mueller ever look at the president's financials. it's a huge issue. how will you get that answer? how will that be pursued? how will that resolve inthey'd? they're trying to block access to everything mueller did. >> they're trying to get it in other ways, i think that's important. we also know that the house now has a case that can go to court to try to get those taxes because they were denied access.

and the house also has a lot of power. the democrats will run the house. they don't as you know run the senate, so they have the ability to get that. and i think that's all important. but i think our job right now in the senate is to push on this issue of foreign interference in our election and make sure people understand what happened. this isn't meddling. this was an invasion by a foreign power, and we now know as we look at all of this evidence that's come out, and that's why we did all those questions. we know that we can't ask mueller right now, and so we have to do everything to get him before congress. for the american people. and at some point he won't be special counsel anymore, and then we'll have another way to get him to testify. but we have to move forward. >> senator amy klobuchar of minnesota. democratic candidate for president. senator, good to have you here. we'll be right back. stay with us. u here we'll be right back. stay with us introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger, it's the right gear.

with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough.

my time is thin, but so is my lawn. now there's scotts thick'r lawn 3-in-1 solution. with a soil improver! seed! and fertilizer to feed! now yard time is our time. this is a scotts yard. so this is an important announcement about this show and

something that's going to happen here tomorrow. you just heard senator amy klobuchar describe what russia did to our democracy in 2016 as an invasion. that was the word she use. when it came to that investigation of that invasion and its implications the fbi director james baker at the time was there from moment zero as the top legal official in the federal bureau of investigation. now, baker has been pillary by republicans and conservative media by taking on the responsibility of uncovering what russia did to us in 2016. thus far he's been able to publicly talk about that experience and explain what he did. but now he can't talk about it. with the redacted mueller report out and with house republicans having released his closed door testimony former fbi general counsel james baker is going to be here tomorrow night as a guest on this show. he will be talking about a number of these issues for the