concerted attack on our political system. the releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate. >> bob mueller gets the final word there, speaking to the stakes of his investigation in russian meddling that he indicted. that does it for our special coverage, but don't go anywhere, "hardball" is up next. it's now or never. let's play "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews from washington. to impeach or not to impeach, that is the question that now confronts house democrats. after special counsel robert mueller broke his silence today, the moment of decision has clearly arrived. if the house leadership doesn't start hearings now, i believe it's hard to see them ever doing it in the months ahead. again, now or never. having kept the remarkably low

profile for more than two years, robert mueller today delivered his first and only remarks on the findings of his investigation. in doing so, he made clear that he was found to the justice department's legal opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted while in office. but in a devastating blow, mueller specifically said that the evidence he gathered does not clear the president of obstruction of justice. >> if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. we did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. >> well, those remarks directly contradict the president's claim of total exoneration. the special counsel went further, citing the legal opinion of the justice department. he also made clear that only congress can charge a sitting president with wrongdoing. >> the opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice

system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. >> well, that's impeachment. as one author of a book on robert mueller wrote today on twitter, mueller is in his own mueller-like way screaming for presidential impeachment proceedings. but he's too respectful to say it as directly as america and congress evidently needs him to say it. likewise, congressman justin amash, the only republican lawmaker to publicly support impeachment said on twitter, the ball is in our court, congress. and while mueller's public remarks have fueled new calls for impeachment among democratic lawmakers, house speaker nancy pelosi remains cautious. here's what she said about the special counsel's statement today. >> nothing is off the table, but we do want to make such a compelling case, such an iron-clad case that even the republican senate, which at the time seems to be not an objective jury, will be

convinced of the path that we have to take as a country. >> i'm joined now by democratic candidate for president, former congressman beto o'rourke of beto, thank you. where are you on this. should congress impeach this president? >> for more than a year i've been saying that it's time for congress to act and begin impeachment proceedings. i think robert mueller made it as clear as day for all of us. of the hundreds of pages of his report, he chose to focus on the fact that our political system, our democracy, was invaded by russia. and then in between the beginning and the ending of his statement, he focused on president trump. and he said this. when a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation, or lies to investigators, it strikes at the very core of our government's ability to get to the truth and hold the perpetrators accountable. he's telling us if he want to prevent this from happening again to our democracy, we have

to hold those responsible accountable. the only method that we can do that is for our representatives in congress to begin impeachment proceedings. >> what do you make of the president's claim again today that he was kpaexonerated by th special counsel's report, that there wasn't evidence there to bring charges. >> i think he is try to kow those republican lawmakers who are looking at their next election instead of looking at the next generation of americans that are depending on our actions today. i hope they can put their country ahead of their polling numbers, of the next election of the president, of their own party and to what's right for america. that's what this moment calls for. at the ending of bob mueller's statement. he said that this systematic attack by russia on our democracy, demands the attention of every american. and the only way every american can be represented is through the house of representatives. if ever there were a moment to act, it is this one. i agree with you, if congress

fails to act now, it's hard to see them acting in the future. if they fail to do that, we have set the precedent that some people because of the position they hold are above the law in this country. that begins the end of our democracy an we cannot allow that to happen. >> now that mueller is not going to testify, i don't think they're going to subpoena him. it didn't sound like jerry nadler is in any mood to subpoena the guy. he's a hero to most americans. if there's not some reason to hold off, do you see any justification to put this off? it's now june next week. we're going into summer. fourth of july is coming. we're going to have the presidential campaign, which you're very much in the middle of coming in the fall. you guys will be competing in the iowa caucuses come this fall. i don't think there's an opportunity for hearings unless they get going now. what do you think? >> i agree with you. act now or lose our democracy

forever. that is the choice before us. and i'm grateful to those lawmakers, including republican justin amash, who have put this country ahead of their own political careers. and i understand political considerations. i've held elected office. i'm campaigning for one right now. but this moment demands more of us. and we will be judged by how we have faced these facts. for robert mueller to come forward today, someone who is famously reticent, and out of the hundreds of pages of his report, to focus on the fact that we were attacked by the russians and that there is somebody who obstructed justice and lied to investigators, and then to say the criminal justice system is not the way to hold this person accountable, there's another process under our constitution, he is clearly referring to impeachment. he is demanding that we do this now or forever lose the opportunity to act. so it's that clear to me. i hope it is that enclosure to those members of congress who have the opportunity to act while there's still time.

>> if you were still in the house, would you vote to impeach? >> i would. and it's funny, i was asked this question more than a year ago by a conservative radio host in lubbock, texas, while i was running for senate. i said the same thing because it is clear to me that our very democracy, our political system, the future of our country is at stake. knowing that might not be the most popular thing to say in our home state of texas, i said it nonetheless, because we must have the courage of our convictions at this moment of truth. i just hope now that the mueller report has been released, that robert mueller has made this incredibly important claiclarif today, they will be rewarded by the judgment of history. it's important they do this while they still can. >> thank you for putting your beliefs and your commitment on the record. you would vote to impeach. thank you so much, beto o'rourke, candidate for president. i'm joined by joaquin

castro, democrat from texas and david frum a senior editor at "the atlantic." congressman, pelosi saying we need more information and there's only 38 democrats in the house that want impeachment, is that what you know? is the house really against impeachment, as the speaker says? >> i think most people believe the president should be removed from office, people within the democratic caucus and perhaps a growing number of republicans in the congress. i think the lingering question for people is when is the right time to do it. and then there's a concern because people are in politics about what the political effect will be of that. but, chris, i don't know whether there would be more damage to the democratic party or republican party politically if you go through impeachment. but whatever that damage is, it's not as bad to the long-term damage to the country if we do

nothing and we let donald trump get away with obstructing juc s justice and sit still and do nothing. >> why is speaker pelosi opposed to beginning hearings? >> well, i don't want to speak 23 for the speaker, of course. >> you raised the political calculation one way or another. there is a political calculation in her decision? >> well, i can tell you what part of the political argument is. i can't tell you specifically what she's thinking. but politically, the reason for caution is this. people think that the house of representatives will take up impeachment. the house of representatives will vote to impeach. and then it will go over to the senate and the senate will find the president not guilty and he will then use that in november of 2020 to say that i've been exonerated twice. first by bob mueller and then by the united states congress. and then he'll wrap up the election. that's the fear politically. >> where are you? again, you've given both scenarios. that i support

openinn impeachment inquiry. and i, knowing what i do having sat on the intelligence committee going through dozens of interviews, i believe that the president obstructed justice and i would vote to impeach. but i think at a minimum we ought to start that inquiry now. >> david, you know how to write a big story about a big question and here's the big question. will history judge the democrats in the house favorably if they take a bye on this? if they just say good opportunity, we don't think we've got the numbers, we're not doing it. >> if the process in the house ends with donald trump out of office, history will judge them favorably. if they start a process that ends with donald trump still in office, history will judge them unfavorably. it's very important not to hit it into the net. there are not 67 votes in the senate to remove. the congressman is absolutely right about the consequence of an acquittal of the president in the senate. even more seriously, to start an

impeachment process at this point means to rally a fissuring republican party around the president. >> it's already 90%, though. >> it's 90% of a much smaller party. republicans are now at 25% of the country. they used to be 35. you rally people to him. success is crucial. if you're not going to succeed, don't start. >> let me go back to the congressman on the base question, because we all know there's a younger democratic party. in many cases, people of color who got involved in politics lately, the last couple of years. they're very idealistic election returns as much as they're looking at the right thing. can this house of representatives say we're going to walk on this one, it's not good politics, and let the president get away with everything he got away with? it's not impeachable? >> yeah, i think in terms not only politically in terms of the message that that sends to democratic voters and to all americans, the poor message that

that sends, but also i think at this point it's a matter of doing the right thing. i would ask you if -- when is it appropriate to start an impeachment inquiry on a president if not this one for everything this president has done, but particularly with respect to obstruction of justice. if you're not going to invoke it here, then what does it take for a president to do to invoke an impeachment inquiry? >> but the choice is not impeachment or do nothing. congress has set in motion a series of events. the subpoena for the president's financial records from his accountan accountants, the claim for the president's tax returns. congress has set in motion a series -- >> to what effect, though? >> and i agree, david. but i think you know those cases can be wrangled in court for another year and a half or two years. you go to the district court and win, you lose in the appellate court and it goes to the supreme court. they could tie that up basically forever potentially. >> the tax return case that may happen to but the accounting

records looks like it's going fast. trump has lost twice. >> what's the sanction for the president after all the hearings if it's not impeachment? >> what is going to happen is i think the release of these documents is first is its own sanction to him. it tends to split the republican coalition. it tends to cast light where exactly -- he's telling you -- he's like in the old colombo detective story, he's telling you that's the door not to open. >> the person responsible for holding impeachment proceedings, chairman jerry nadler of the house judiciary committee, vowed to hold the president accountable but again stopped short of calling for impeachm t impeachment. >> mueller again highlighted this morning it falls to congress to respond to the crimes, lies and other wrongdoing of president trump. we will do so. make no mistake, no one, not even the president of the united states, is above the law. with respect to impeachment question at this point, all options are on the table, and

nothing should be ruled out. >> i can't read into the mind or heart of the speaker, guys, but there's one thing that i think that the pelosi mind thing is worrying about. her mine field ahead of her is this. if you begin the hearings with a split house, with republicans not supporting it, amash, sure, nobody else. you walk into probably a year in which the president is the victim. the president plays the demagogue. we know he's nimble at this. he plays it brilliantly. the deep state has now arose. i told you they were coming to get me. the bureaucracy, the prosecutors, the fbi, the justice, all those people and those liberals and the media. all those people you don't like, all those liberals, they are coming out to get and take back what you voted for in the electoral college in 2016. they're coming to ruin our democracy, save me. congressman, is that the fear, that dark knight of terror that trump would know how to play if he had to play it? >> oh, i think that's absolutely

part of it, chris, yes. in terms of the political messaging, of the political vulnerability of pursuing an impeachment, yes, it's all of that. but again, i think when we think about this historically and the moment that we're in, if a president is allowed to obstruct justice the way this president has and the evidence suggests, then what does it mean for the rule of law and for our democracy? what does it say to a future president, whatever their political party, about the power of the presidency to ignore the law and usurp power from congress and basically break the law. there's longer term damage that's at stake here. >> i was thinking about that old skit that barbra streisand did, coffee talk. i think everybody watching right now, have the debate at home right now. is it smart? is it right for the democrats to impeach right now? i don't think they'll do it in three or four months or next

year. i think now they've to make that decision, yes or no, it is existential. but it's time for coffee talk. discuss it among others. thank you, u.s. congressman joaquin castro. i'm serious, the whole country should talk about this, especially democratic liberals. coming up, how mueller pushed through the falsehoods and misrepresentations of president trump and his protector. this is roy cohn himself coming back. william barr will do anything for his president and he's never going to get fired. bolton will get fired, not this guy. plus rashida tlaib joins me. and the russian threat. mueller began and ended his statement today with a dire warning about the systematic efforts to interfere in our election and how it deserves the attention of every american, republican and democrat. so what, if anything, is being done about it? be sure to watch our "hardball" live town hall monday night

where you'll hear from mayor pete buttigieg. that's monday night at 7:00 p.m. eastern live in fresno state in california. much more ahead. stick with us. ore ahead. stick with us. with priceline, bundling our lowest prices on flights, hotels and rental cars means you spend less time planning

and more time travelling. we like that! by the way, these chairs are ours. everyone is already sitting. so should the way you bank. virtual wallet from pnc bank. just one way pnc is modernizing banking to help make things easier. pnc bank. make today the day. pnc bank. moving? that's harder now because of psoriatic arthritis. but you're still moved by moments like this. don't let psoriatic arthritis take them away. taltz reduces joint pain and stiffness and helps stop the progression of joint damage. for people with moderate to severe psoriasis, 90% saw significant improvement. taltz even gives you a chance at completely clear skin. don't use if you're allergic to taltz. before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection, symptoms, or received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz,

including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. for all the things that move you. ask your doctor about taltz. [ slurps ] gwho's a good boy? it's me. me, me, me. hey guys! you're gonna want to get in on this. i know how to those guys in here. let's pause the internet on their devices. wohhh? huhhhh? [ grumbling ] all: sausages!

mmm, mmmm. bon appetite. make time for what matters. pause your wifi with xfinity xfi and see the secret life of pets 2 in theaters. there has been discussion about an appearance before congress. any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. it contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. we chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. the report is my testimony. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was special counsel robert mueller today, actually this morning, pointing to his 400-page report as the definitive account of his investigation. in his statement today, mueller was very clear about the conclusions of his work, often directly rebutting attorney general william barr's

trump-friendly interpretation of its findings. last month barr said mueller's decision to not prosecute president trump had nothing to do with the justice department's legal opinion on charging a sitting president with a crime. here it goes. >> he was not saying that but for the olc opinion he would have found a crime. he made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime. >> under long standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. that is unconstitutional. charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider. >> mueller also disputed attorney general barr on whether the president obstructed justice or not. >> the deputy attorney general and i concluded that the evidence developed by the special counsel is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction of justice offense. >> if we had had confidence that

the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. we did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. >> despite mueller's emphasis that he didn't clear president trump of obstruction of justice, the president again claimed exoneration late today tweeting nothing changes from the mueller report. there was insufficient evidence and, therefore, in our country, a person is innocent. the case is closed. that's the president tweeting. i'm joined by peter baker, chief white house correspondent for "the new york times" and nbc reporter julia ainsley. what's the big story tomorrow on this? >> i think the special counsel came out and refused to exonerate. that means the president is not free and clear of any allegation. it doesn't mean he's committed a crime or that special kocounsel- >> how about referral to congress? >> he's operating under special counsel rule not an independent counsel rule. unlike ken starr, he doesn't

have the authority to refer to congress. he did tell us that's what he was doing. he said that's the next obvious step. there are other bodies that can judge this, not me as special counsel. he didn't directly say it. he didn't say it in a way that we'd play in a loop on cable television or twitter saying the house must investigate. i think that's actually helpful to president trump. >> he's not robert de niro playing him. he's not to tough, brooding power figure. he came off as a civil servant today. the guy doing the limit of his authority, but not exceeding it. >> he's very small c conservative. he's never going to be as explicit as the public wants him to be. and i think that we're seeing this and this confusion over the obstruction question. the president actually stepped right in it in his tweet when he said there was insufficient evidence. that is not what robert mueller said and it's also not what william barr said. william barr was more careful and tried to get into this but for the olc opinion. there was confusion and we just

got a statement from the justice department right before we came on air where they're trying to say there's no daylight between william barr and robert mueller on this issue, but there is insofar as the attorney general is trying to make the case that he would not have -- he didn't even need the olc opinion because he'd be cleared. but that's not what robert mueller is saying. robert mueller is saying we never got to that fork in the road deciding about charging and not charging because there was the olc. >> that's a good argument. he's saying, peter, and clearly what he said was i didn't consider charging the president because you're not supposed to do it under the constitution as we interpret it at the justice department. if that's true, if he knew from the time he got this commission two years ago that he could not indict the president and, therefore, it would be unfair to accuse him if you can't indict him, why didn't he say so the first day of the job. because we've been waiting for two years, all of america was

waiting for him to come out and give us a verdict. he didn't give us a verdict. he said it's up to congress to have the verdict. >> well, if he had said it more explicitly, that would be one thing. he didn't say it quite that explicitly. we want to investigate the president but you can't indict him if you finding anything wrong and you can't tell congress to impeach him because that's exceeding your mandate. >> i was thinking he could have told us that part of the process. >> under the law that has now expired, an independent counsel was required, not just enabled, but required to go to congress and say i found things that i think could be high crimes and misdemeanors. that's what ken starr did 20 years ago. what was robert mueller's judgment with regard to issues? we don't really know. >> except he couldn't exonerate. >> he couldn't exonerate. >> well, i think that frustration is legitimate. we had this cloud hanging over the president. whether or not you like him or not, there's a cloud hanging over him for two years. robert mueller tried to lay that

out a little bit today of why he didn't clear that up in the beginning that he wouldn't make a charging decision. one, you want to investigate so you memorialize everything when it's fresh and you get the evidence. there could be other people related to the obstruction probe apart from the president. >> that's all true, he said all that, the special counsel today. but he never said why he didn't tell the american public and those interested parties i can't indict. >> and he said he won't explore hypotheticals, but we can. let's do the hypothetical if he came out and said i can't charge a president with obstruction. that would allow the president to meddle all he wanted. >> i'll have to think about that. much of what mueller said also contradicted what the president has been telling us the last two years. >> i have president putin. he just said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. >> russian intelligence officers who are part of the russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system.

>> this is a hoax. >> they used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the clinton campaign. >> how could you obstruct when there's no crime. >> when a subject of that investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth. >> they're trying to get a redo. >> the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. >> the mueller report came out and they said he did nothing wrong. >> he did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. >> it was a complete and total exoneration. >> if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. >> what's so powerful here is here's a civil servant, a soft spoken guy. >> yeah. >> saying that the russians

through their defense intelligence operation, which goes way back to the stalin days, to do all the subversion. elizabeth bentley, all that stuff was being worked back then by their grandfathers. they did it again this time in the russian republic. they're doing the same ole game of subversion. >> yeah. >> and the president won't even acknowledge it. >> yeah. well, because he sees an attack on him, right? there are two different issues here. did the president do anything with russia and did russia do something? we know russia did something. everybody said so but the president of the united states and vladimir putin. but the president can't acknowledge that because it attacks the legitimacy of his election. he's not a legitimate president as he sees it. to acknowledge that is to admit that he might not be legitimately elected. he won't do that. >> or even to suggest it is treason now. >> it doesn't mean that he was

elected because of the russians. >> okay. where's narcissism fit in history? the whole world revolves around me. if it has anything to do with me, i will deny it. >> he has a hard time understanding the definition of treason. but separating himself from the presidency. loyalty to the president or the candidate is not the same as loyalty to the country. i think he's had a hard time separating that. but there was a warning shot or a warning that we got from robert mueller as he left the podium and his office today. this is still continuing and we have to invest in our infrastructure to protect our voter bases and our social media, which he very meticulously laid out. >> i think it was a mauodern da farewell address to say look out, they're coming for us and they're coming with more forces in 2020. >> i know he did not specifically address this investigation of the investigation, which william barr has started. but i think there was an element of that in there when he was going through the legitimacy of

this investigation, what they found. >> right. >> why they needed to do this. and so the fact that these people are now being investigated for the first fisa warrants should not be. >> that's one reason why he doesn't want to testify on the hill. if he testifies for the house committee with nadler, he has to go to the senate and let the republican jackals go after him and go back to the dossier and stuff like that. he doesn't want to do that the rest of his life. thank you, peter baker. thank you, julia ainsley, what a world you're conquered the last several months. nancy pelosi says house democrats need to present an iron-clad case to the american people before moving forward for impeachment. that's a hell of a bar. congresswoman rasheed talib joins us in just a moment. i think she says the day is here and already here for a long time. we'll be right back. we'l l be right back.n.com, i get the price guarantee. and i can choose from their 14 different hotel brands, so i get the right hotel for every member of my family. like a doubletree for my cousins who love their warm chocolate chip cookies. a homewood suites for my uncle

who likes a long stay. a hampton for my sister and her kids. that's a lot of syrup and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. but i thought your family vacation was in miami? it is. i hear they're having a great time. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay.

oh! oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens.

don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ ask your healthcare provider today about once-weekly ozempic®.

welcome back to "hardball." house speaker nancy pelosi has remained opposed to impeachment. but as more democratic lawmakers come out in favor of a impeachment inquiry, will they hold to that position? some are calling for impeachment just hours being sworn into congress. let's watch. >> people love you, and you win. and when your son looks at you and says, mama, look, you won, bullies don't win. and i said, baby, they don't. we're going to go in there and impeach the [ bleep ].

>> we had to bleep that part out. joining me is democratic congresswoman rashida tlaib of michigan. what did you make of mueller today, congresswoman? >> well, i think from the beginning the mueller report is an impeachment referral to the united states congress. it's a clear that he is asking the united states congress to take up their responsibility to now hold an impeachment inquiry into these offenses. i think it's very clear that for many american people that i have spoken to, they don't want a lawless king-like president. to continue to not be held accountable to the united states constitution and so many things that are so interconnected to the work that we're trying to do on their behalf. >> the downside -- first of all, let me ask you about speaker pelosi. she was speaking at the commonwealth club out in san francisco, her hometown. she said only about 38 democrats in the house, her caucus, are for acting on impeachment and 200 are not. how do you see the numbers? >> well, for me i've always

looked at the numbers of the turnout that we saw in the last election that gave us one of the largest, most diverse class to the united states congress. if you see us taking on the majority, it's because more people like myself and others that really want to hold this president accountable came out to vote. to me it was a referendum. if you look at the numbers across this nation, it was very clear that many people came out because they wanted to elect a jury that would impeach this president, but also to always uphold the united states constitution. it was very clear, because people like me, regular folks, that are not your polished politicians, that don't look at polling or these political strategies from this other lens but are looking at what is the best interests of the american people, we're regular folks that are now leading this fight to say that we have to hold him accountable. you know, chris, it's very important for people to know we cannot separate the fact that we're out there fighting to lower prescription drugs, we're fighting to deal with the crisis at the border. we can't sit there and separate

that from the fact that the president, the most important position in this country, is not upholding the united states constitution. thus, thus impacting and directly impacting, endangering this institution and the american people. it is our job and our duty and responsibility, just like the watergate class when they came in. they didn't run away from their responsibility and their duty. they may not have campaigned on impeaching the president, but at the end they did what was right for the country and they put the people first before they chose any kind of political stance when it comes to all of the different pundits that are out there saying it's not time. it is definitely time. the evidence is overwhelming but also the american people are hurting every single day that we don't act. >> i hear your passion and i feel it and i share it. i just want to say one thing. pelosi is sitting there. she's a pol and she's a good one. she's saying wait a minute, there's a lot of excitement. once you get into a war, and it will be a war with trump.

he will declare the fact that you and your caucus are trying to upset the american people's decision of 2016. that you and the deep state he'll call it and the fbi and the media are all out to turn against the american people and this will be a coup, it will be an attempt to destroy our democracy and he'll do this every single hour that the impeachment exercise is at work. can your leadership withstand that attack? can you as a democratic party withstand that kind of attack? >> look, chris, i tell the president bring it. 10 million people siengned a petition to impeach this president. i bet i can get 10 million more people. from organizations across this country talking to people at home, they are very clear, no one should be above the law. no one should sit there and become a king-like president. it endangers our well-being, our future. what precedent do we set when we don't do anything? inaction is basically saying what he is doing acting above

the law and not upholding his oath as the president of the united states, i say to people, please, understand that this is not about this president who's a me, me, me president, this is about people, about government, which is supposed to be about people and upholding the most brilliant, awesome document we have in this country, which is the united states constitution. that is my responsibility. i know many of my colleagues gl agree. we cannot run this country based on political strategy and it has to be so centered around what's doing right for our country. that's what many of us and of the millions of people that support this effort in saying enough is enough, this is so much impacting us trying to do our job around prescription drugs, around health care. my god, the education crisis that we have in our country. we can't do our job when the man that is in charge in the oval office is endangering our country and our democracy. >> thank you so much for coming

on, congresswoman. please come back again. >> of course. >> i like clarity. thank you for coming on because i now know where you stand. let's see what happens the next couple of days. i think the team for action is now. thank you so much. up next, well, robert mueller says every american should be concerned about foreign attempts to interfere in our elections. why are so many americans, including some republicans, not listening to a threat to our country? back after this. back this is the couple who wanted to get away

who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go. expedia. has four levels of defenseremium gasoagainst gunk, wear, corrosion and friction. that helps keep your engine running like new. it's fuel for thought. you eat right... mostly.

you make time... when you can. but sometimes life gets in the way, and that stubborn fat just won't go away. coolsculpting takes you further. a non-surgical treatment that targets, freezes, and eliminates treated fat cells, for good. discuss coolsculpting with your doctor. some common side-effects include temporary numbness, discomfort, and swelling. don't imagine results, see them. coolsculpting, take yourself further.

welcome back to "hardball." the first few words special counsel robert mueller shared today were a disturbing description of how russia successfully infiltrated the american political system to manipulate it. here he goes. >> russian intelligence officers who were part of the russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. they used sophisticated cyber

techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the clinton campaign. they stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization wikileaks. the releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate. >> well, russian interference is a fact that president trump has been reluctant, let's say, to accept. >> did you ever notice anything that goes wrong, they blame russia. russia did it. they have no idea. we're being hacked because we have people that don't know what they're doing. >> you don't think it's phony that they, the russians, tried to meddle in the election? >> that i don't know. >> we didn't win because of russia, we won because of you. they said they think it's russia. i have president putin. he just said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. i accept our intelligence

community's conclusion that russia's meddling in the 2016 election took place. could be also people also. there's a lot of people out there. >> it's like one of those pows speaking for the record when they know not a word they say is true. despite the president's skepticism there, the robert mueller's investigation charged 30 russian officials or companies for their roles in the election interference. it doesn't end there. just two weeks ago. florida governor ron desantis, a republican, confirmed that russian hackers had in the year 2016 gained access into a network of two county election systems in his home state. so the question is, what are president trump and congressional republicans doing about it? stay tuned. by the way, giving this away now. nothing! stay tuned, though. nothg!in stay tuned, though est. 's kind ot safe drivers have to pay as much for insurance... as not safe drivers! ah! that was a stunt driver.

that's why esurance has this drivesense® app. the safer you drive, the more you save. don't worry, i'm not using my phone and talking to a camera while driving... i'm being towed. by the way, i'm actually a safe driver. i'm just pretending to be a not safe driver. cool. bye dennis quaid! when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless. who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go.

expedia. ohone day you'll tell yourse grandkids about it. and they'll say, "grandpa just tell us about humpty dumpty". and you'll say, "he broke his pelvis or whatever, now back to my creamy heinz mayonnaise". heinz mayonnaise, unforgettably creamy.

he said it a number of times that there was interference and now we're taking steps on how we stop it from happening again. you guys constantly want to attack this president, but the reason that we're in this mess in the first place is because the previous administration failed to do their job. >> that's a stupid job that she's got. welcome back to "hardball." that was the white house press secretary, sarah sanders, againiagain defendinging -- defending the

president and instead blaming the obama administration for the russian hacking. special counsel robert mueller's final word is a sober reminder of what's at stake for the democratic process, lower case d. >> i will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments, that there were multiple systematic efforts to interfere in our election. that allegation deserves the attention of every american. >> for more, i'm joined by david corn and malcolm nance. we saw sarah sanders having the stupid job of doing what trump is doing on purpose, denying the russian interference. trump, i don't know -- is this narcissism, saying in the face of the investigations, indi indictme indictments, the russians didn't do anything wrong?

>> it's narcissism and disinformation. his own personal narcissism feeds into him saying, it's a hoax, there's nothing to it. he knows by exonerating russia and himself and throwing smoke up into the air, he can now create a narrative that he wants, which is no collusion, no obstruction. all of it is a lie. the worst part is, this is all straight from the kgb playbook. this is old school. he is good at it. >> this nationalist, remember trump was a nationalist, defending the actions of an adversary country to underminus. >> i'm glad mueller ended that way. >> he meant it. >> the central sin of the trump scandal is that while russia was attacking the united states and attacking american democracy, donald trump was saying, it's not happening. he was echoing russian disinformation.

he was seeing to benefit from it. then his people were meeting with russians while this was happening. he denied this happened. he gave cover. he helped whether he was in on it, criminal conspiracy or not, he gave cover. he helped putin get away with this. if it's not criminal. it's betrayal. it's trecher treachery. >> i heard jerry nadler say that today. he said that, maybe it wasn't a comprehensive conspiracy, but they were welcoming and benefitting from the hacking. they were -- it's like going to a city and have somebody give you a key to the door to the city. here is the key. come on and blow this place apart. >> yeah. you are right. what really gets me about this whole denial of conspiracy, that

the evidence that he had did not rise to the level of criminal conspiracy was, there is evidence where they were actually involved in the pathway leading to criminal conspiracy. robert mueller also said something very particular in the report everyone should remember. he said that information was destroyed, encrypted applications were used and they were erased. people lied to him. people withheld documents from him. people who were involved in this who could prove conspiracy were also kept overseas and not allowed to come to the united states outside of the jurisdiction of the fbi. also, that this information could change due to future information acquired by another prosecutor. this story is not over. there is a conspiracy out there. we have seen quite a bit of it. just because it didn't rise to the level of an indictable charge does not mean it didn't exist. >> next election, 2020 is a close one in the electoral

college. it comes down to a couple votes. one of the states -- something went wrong with the machinery. we don't have a clear result. the russians did that and it screwed up. >> one county in one state. >> both sides claim victory. >> that could happen. trump was heading in that direction in 2016. saying things were rigged. they were rigged. >> suppose it happens. >> the russians were trying to rig the election. you can't tell me that a massive disinformation campaign and dumping all those podesta e-mails on every day of the of the end of the campaign. we will have another tight one. why does trump not want to talk about election security? because he is right. it does taint his election. >> i think -- that's all we need in this country is a count that isn't clear. thank you.

thank you for your brains, wisdom and passion. i like the passion. up next, how impeachment could become a defining factor for the 2020 presidential candidates. i'm talking about the people on the left fighting it out. -we bought a house in a neighborhood with a lot of other young couples. then we noticed something...strange. oh, could you, uh, make me a burger? -poof -- you're a burger. [ laughter ] -everyone acts like their parents. -you have a tattoo. -yes. -fun. do you not work? -so, what kind of mower you got, seth?

-i don't know. some kid comes over. we pay him to do it. -but it's not all bad. someone even showed us how we can save money by bundling home and auto with progressive. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto.

progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. don't stoop to their level. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. it extends with a protective shield and targets weeds more precisely. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root while guarding the good. roundup sure shot wand. got bugs too? roundup for lawns bug destroyer kills and prevents them, even grubs. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years.

today was a day of history. the country's top investigator of an american president shifted the verdict on the president's

guilty or innocence to the u.s. congress. as i said earlier, the question now is to impeach or not to impeach. for the two leading progressive challengers to trump, the answer is different. elizabeth warren said the constitution leaves it up to congress to act, that's impeachment. sanders said, if the house judiciary committee deems it necessary to open an impeachment inquiry, he will support the decision. that's a difference. it's a case study in how these two are competing for the democratic left. warren has been out with proposals fillin s filling a pl topics. her rival sanders is working what's been called a makeover, putting forth his own life experiences to back up his progressive positions. for whatever mix of reasons, warren leads sanders in a couple of recent polls of voters who identify with the left politically. that's interesting. the difference on the issue of impeachment could emblemize

their difference and where they stand. thanks for being with us. tonight on "all in". >> if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. >> robert mueller finally speaks. >> we did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. >> and tells congress effectively, it's their job to deal with the criminal president. >> the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. >> tonight, what we learned from today's statement from the special counsel. >> this is stronger than the language in his report. >> what democrats plan to do about it. >> we want to do what is right and what gets results. >> how robert mueller's statement underscores bill ba