this sunday, after mueller. president trp -- >> no collusion, no obstruction. >> and his allies -- >> reallthe best day since he got elected. c >>im total victory with the release of the mueller report. but the report paints an unflattering picture of the president and his campaign and lays out a pattern of obstruction, prompting him to bash the report with profanity, and democrats want to see the ole report and derlying evidence. >> we will subpoena that report. >> high guests, the chairman of the house committee, jerrold nadl nadler, and ent's lawyer, rudolph giuliani. plugs, the impeachmentate. some democrats say the time is now. >> this isn't about politics,

there is about principle. and that's why i've asked the house to start impeachment ai proceedingt donald trump. [ applause ] >> while others worry that the issue divides democrats and unites republicans. >> the avenue is not impeachment. to the american people.closure and look who's running -- joe biden ahead in theolls is launching his campaign this week. but previous front-runners often failed to win their party's nomination. how much does polling mean at this early stage of the race? joining me for insight and analysis are nbc news chief white house rerter hallie jackson. joshua johnson, host of 1a on npr, amy walter, and jonah goldberg senior editor of "national review."we ome to sunday, it's "meet the press." >>n,or nbc news in washingto the longest running show in television history, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. >> good sunday morning. we're going to get to the

mueller report in a moment. there was a terrible series of terror attacks in srlanka. the coordinated attacks targeted christian worshipperat celeg easter in churches and high-end hotels that are frequented by foreigtourists. the death toll will number into the hundreds. the attacks broke a long period of peace in sri lanka which has endured decades of civil war which come to a supposed end. turning to the mueller report, in so many ways the rollout reflected the divisions in this country. it was a tale two of reporters - o reports or, more accurately, two tales of one report, wh the divided public choosing the version of truth. president trump and his supporters high fiving, g with the help of the new attorney general before its release as an exoneration of a deustrated and angry presint. on the other hand there was the report itself which had 448 pages, incding many redactions, a far cry from the

president's favorite no collusion, hoe obstruction sound byte. it shows the eager tcept the help of russia and working to obstruct the investigation. mr. trump may have been save -- saved from a formal obstruction charge by aides who saved himself from himself. the mueller team writes, "the president's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely cause the persons who surrounded the president declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests." then there is this now-connick closing sentence -- "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crim it also does t exonerate him." a line that gives ammunition to both sides of the trump divide,n but that is likely to cloud the president's reputation whether or not he is re-elected. >> we need the whole report, cluding the underlying documents unredacted. >> the 448-page report details an aggressive and ultimately successful attempt by vladimir putin to interfere with e 2016 election and destabilize the united states.

>> i have nothing to dwith russia. >> i know from having been on the campaign that there was no contact with russians, no discussion with russians. >> reporter: the report lays out scores of links between the russian government and the trump campaign. among them, campaign chairman paul manafort regularly shared n podata with a russian intelligence agent and received a peace plan for ukraine that manafort acknowledged to the special counsel's office was a back door way of controlling the campaign. then there are the ties between the trump campaign and wikileaks. >> wikileaks, i love wikieaks. >> rrsorter: releases by membe of the campaign including the president who is described as taking a phone call and telling deputy chair rick gates that more releases of damagin , formation would be coming. there was the june16, trump tower meeting when donald trump jr., jared kushner, and paul manafort met with russians to get dirt on llary clinton. and remember this --le >> to be, mr. trump has nore

financial tionships with any russian oligarchs? >> if that's what he said, i -- that's what -- that's obviously what our position is. >> reporter: in fact, there were many contacts. arranged at the highest levels including a meeting between the head of russia's sovereign wealth fund and trump ally eric prince. on obstruction, mueller lays out ten possible episodes including the firing of fbi director james comey. the president's attempt to get attorney general jeff sessions to unrecuse himself.>> e took the job, and then he said "i'm going to recuse myself." i said, "what kind of a man is this?" >> reporter: and telling white house counsel d mcghan to fire mueller. he threatened to resign. the day mueller was appointed, may 17th, 2017, president trumpt qu slumped back and said, "oh, my god. this is terrible, this is end of my presidency.

i'm f'd." adding, "this is the whing that ever happened to me." though the term attorney general -- the attorney general claims -- >> the white house fully cooperated with the special counsel's >>vestigation. eporter: in fact, the report details how individuals lied or deleted communications and the president refused to sit for an interview with the special countrl. president p responded to written questions about some version of, "i do not recall" or "i do not remember" 37 times. now some democts are pressing for impeachment proceedings. >> we have a constitution of tha united ss, and it says when a president engages in this kind of activity, then it's time for impeachment. >> reporter: house democratic leaders led by nancy pelosi are puttneg the brakes on saying o step at a time. >> the avenue is not impeachment. the avenue is further discmesure to the arican people. >> and joining me now is the president's personal attorney, rudy giuliani. mr. mayor, welcome back to "meet the press." >> thank you. thank you, chuck. >> let me start with some of the frontline conclusions from

report itself. which is square one. the first is this -- "the russian govement interfered in the 2016 presidential election e in sing and systemic fashion." do you andhe president accept that as a fact? in from this report? >> we do -- there's no reason noto accept it. the president accepts it, as well? >> i'm sure he does. >> the next fact is this, "the special counsel's investigation established that russia interfered in the 2016 es prential election. principally through two operations -- first, a russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential campaign donald trump and disparaged hillary clinton." do you and the president accept the idea that the ru interference was designed to help president trump? i >> believe it was. i can't tell you for sure. i haven't examined all the no reason to dispute it. >> does the president accept that? >> i have no reason to dispute it. i think so does. obviously that wasn't part of defending him. >>rto, but a lot of the repo seems to indicate that he feared that the idea the russians helped him was going to delegitimize his presidency.

>> whether he did or didn't, there are a lot of factors tt go into any election. the reality is he was elected president. there are a lot of good reasons that he was elected president and she wasn't elected that havi nothing to do this. it's hard to believe this was a decisive factor. they don't find that. >> let me say this -- >> did alli hat happen? agine it did. i can't dispute it >> okay. let me put this up. "russian intelligence service conducted computer intrusion operatio against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the clinton campaign and the release of the stolen documents." >> you agree and the president agrees that this operation was designed to hurt hillary clinton and in turn help donald trump? >> i haven't examined all the details, and i find in other parts of the report that there are substantial inadequacies, even in putting forth other testimony that makes it false or other versions, assuming that that's a straight analysis, i can't object to it.

>> let me go through again, this is on the first two pages of this report. this additional fact that they declare. erhe investigation established that the russian gent perceived it would benefit from a trump presidency and work to secure that outcome and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through the russian efforts."s it's thilast part, the campaign wanted -- knew that the russians were helping and were waiting to -- i >>as on the campaign for four months. i probably -- probably as close to donald trump as anybody could be. i saw no evidence of that. so that one i'd have to examine much more critically. i saw no evidence of anybody talking about russia, involved with russia. one of the reasons why i volunteered to defend him, i was a false ly allegation. a why did the president trump say wikileaks soin times? >> they were putting out things that weren't true and very, ver damaging tllary clinton. of course, of course you would want things that are -- >> but you at the time even sort

of knew that these were stolen by feign folks. >> i did not. it would be like the pentagon papers. pentagon papers were stolen. ey were stolen from the department of difference. my god, that's horrible, during the -- >> this is a foreign adversary. a foreign adversary, someone who -- >> what's the difference between a spy and a foreign adversary? >> one works for the united states of america and one doesn't. doesn't one work for the united states of america and the other -- >> stealing classified documents is theft. now there are overriding reasons for it, but it's still theft. legally it's the same thing. moral it's the same thing. here's the thing that's interesting about it -- and i don' want to dispute this too much, but everything they put out on hillary clinton was true. they didn't make things up. they shouldn't have stolen i but the american people were given more information about how deceptive, how manipulative her people and her campaign were. in other words, if the russians had stolen the information and

it showed hillary clinton to be just a wonderful person and they were all terrific, would have helped her. if it hu at all, it only hurt because the american people got information that was gotten in the wrong way. but it all was true. all that stuff that -- all that stuff that backfired on her -- >> but in 2016 -- i'm curious, in 2016 the intelligence services knew that wikileaks was not a journalistic enterpris anymore. it may have started that way. that it was serving as a front for essentially foreign adversary intelligence dumps. >> right. p >> why did thesident think it was ethical to essentially trumpet what wikileaks was dog? >> in law enforcement if i'm running an investigation and evidence igiven to me about the criminality of the person i'm investigating, even if it comes from a questionable source, i'm going to use that information. there was nothing to suggest that this was manufactured evidence. everything printed --

>> but does it bother you at all that a foreign adversary wanted to -- >> sure it does. absolutely. >> why participate in helping in their manipulation? >> nobody's participating in it -- >> trumpeting wikileaks is participing. >> that's not at all participating. that is like the guy who drops -- i tell you in the middle of this investigation, my co-counsel received four documents that indicated that the special counsel was using exceedingly unethical tactics in trying to get jerome corsi to testify. now i don't know where they came from. i went to the fbi. i gave them to the fbi, and then we used those documents. i didn't steal them, didn't take them.om they came fr legitimate source. the reality is when you get information about your opponent and it's true -- >> even if icomes from a foreign entity? even if it comes from a foreign entity?id whyt donald trump jr. called the fbi when the russians offered dirt on hillary clinton? >> i wonder if there isn't an argument that the people had the

right to know that about hillary clinton. people had a right to know that hillary clinton and the people h around were as dishonest, deceptive as they are? >> why not run an honest campn gn -- don't use a foreig campaign, don't use a foreign adversary -- >> but why -- you're not changing -- >> donald trump jr. accepted the wikileaks -- >> i let you read all that, but i notice you didn't read that there was no evidence ofus con by trump or anyone on the trump campaign. there was involvement. but they wanted to. >> my goodness, if somebody on the campaign wanted to do something wrong -- a lot of people in hillary clinton's campaign wanted to do someing wrong. the legal standard that makes it possible that we're not going to be prosecuted for our thoughts is every single line, we go tght to the fact that did trump or anyone from themp campaign participate in the anssemination of hacked material, and ther is no. it had already been disseminated. so he is free, clear of an

allegation -- this investigation wasn't night news, international news for three years because the russians tried to invade our election.ri th done that before. we just caught them this time. and other countries do it, by the way. >> s-- >> the real news here -- wait, the real news here is donald ump conspired with the russians to do this. tomaking him almost a trai that turns out after two fbi investigations. 3 unter intelligence seven months, this one 1months, not true. >> why isn't the president angrier at the russians? why is he so angry at bob mueller?? don mcghan why isn't he angry with the russians? the russians are the ones that have created the impren that his election was illegitimate. >> why wouldn't you be -- why aren't you as interested now -- we have time on this -- >> i'm not finished. >> why aren't you now intereed in -- how is it that two investigations proved the charges were false and nobody is investigating who started the

investigation? isn't that a horrible thing? do you think they were manipulating thelection also? do you think that papadopoulos getting that information from the maltese undercover guy, do you think that was accidental? come on. american intelligence, foreign intelligence -- >> you're painting -- you're painting generated this idea iaat the russians hacked and stole this materl, the russians -- these are facts. >> i'm not saying they didn't. >> okay. but you are creating -- you're going off into another direction. >> no. i'm going to the folng direction. any responsible direction other than the prosecutor would have followed. when you find out the information is untrue about the man you're invtigating, you rn around and investigate how did it happen. i've had investigations like that. i had one during the commission where two police officers were falsely accused. when i found out they were falsely accused, i found out the reason why they were falsely accused. mueller has no interest in that. he has no interest in the fact

the people in the meeting in june 9, they met with the head of the gps, promoting the steele dossier, the day bef, e, the day ofd the day after. >> and donald trump jr., said if it's what you say it is about hillary clinto i'm happy -- >> who set up the meeting? an operative from gps.>> n objectrative from the russian government? >> who knows. will let me answer the question? vesnilskya met with th-- wait, please. it's complicated. ed had the of gps for three years -- wait. nobel peace prize. it's complicated. it's not just one fact. it's not just one fact. they met the day before the meeting with donald trump jr., spent hours together having dinner. they met the morning of the meeting with donald d ump jr., aney met the day after. they had set up the meeting on the grounds that it was about dirt on hillary. they never spoke about dirt on hillary. theypoke about russian

adoptions and never followed up. to me in the justice department for 17 years, that's a clear a s possibup as you can get. >> why did donald trump jr. embrace the idea that russians could have dirt on hry clinton? >> why did the special prosecutor come to the conclusion it wasn't obruction? that particular one he clears them of completely. because he's very embarrassed. he knows that he didn't follow up on all the suggestions that it was a setup. that's why this was a one-sided investigion. the biggest takeaway of all is where's the interest in trying to figure out how could it be that the fbi investigated this in two separatinvestigations, used four wiretaps in order to do it, fr -- four electronic survedllances, talko 500 witnesses, spent $40 million, and the answer is there was no, not the slightest bit of evidence, of conspiracy tween trump, anyone on the trump campaign, and the russians. that was the story, not this stuff underneath it.

k it is now okay for political campaigns to worwith material stolen by foreign adversaries? >> it de nds on the stolen material. first of all, was it all right for "the new yk times" and the "washington post" to print against the objection of the president -- >> you're putting the pentagon papers and vladimir putin on the same level of morality? >> no. the theft. the theft. how often have newspapers and ol you covered st classified material? >> i hope not often. oni hope not often to be hest. >> you do, you do, you justify it. i don't know if nbc was path of it, but media went to court to defend doing that because it's part of the public's right to know. i guess the public didn't have the right to know how sneaky and dishonest and hillary was -- >> you said something interesting about hillary clinton and the fbi interview a that she was part of."s you said claims 37 times she can't remember things. this has to be a lie. otherwise she has such a bad memory she should be going

somewhere for memory lessons than running for the president of the united states." the questions you helped the president answer, the answers you help with the president of not recalling or not remembering i think the number 7 waimes. >> i think it was 22 times. in any event, jim comey about 101 times. it wasn't i don't remember -- it's to my best recollection. i will never let a witness answer a question that he -- >> he wasn't as forthcoming as he could be. of course he was. >> as he could have been? >> he was as forthcoming as the question demanded. i don't allow any witness to get trapped into perjury. i'll give you an example. the president says that the events described by michael cohen, the the first not, up the second.

the guy lied on television, theh guy lied in last hearing before the congressman when he said i didn't -- >> do you represent the most truthful cli t you've ever had in donald trump? >> i represent probably the most important client i've had with regard to their future in the united states, yes. he's been a great president. >> do you feel like he's truthful? >> i believe he's truthful as much as you can be in a world in which every single word you say is pinged apart. if you say four and it's five they claim you're lying. >> i want you to spendf we had confidence that the president didn't commit obstruction of justice we would so state. based on the facts we were unable to make that judgment." this is not an exoneration by mueller. >> why would you read that when 80% is helpful in obstruction. he was an innocent man -- >> don mcghan saved him. why is the president angry? >> don mcghan didn't save -- >> he didn't carry out an obstruction. firing mueller -- ght to ad the perfect fire mueller.

mueller, at that timal he had severood reasons to fire mueller. mueller had substantial conflicts of interest, he had hired a staff so prejudiced it shocked any prosecutor who was there. he hired the chief cel to the clinton foundation to investigate donald trump. my god. if i were investigating hillary clinton and hired the person who ran the trump foundation, i think the media'd go nuts on me. that would a legitimate reason to fire mueller for very, vent bad judgme he's the president of the united states. mueller is not an independent counsel. he works for the justice department. he could have been fired at any moment. asn't you could show he going to replace him with somebody to take over like comey, you had no obstruction.e he could hred him. >> you don't believe that mcghan saved president? that saved him from an obstruction of justice charge -- >> no. in one circumstance, down month -- in one circumstance, don mcghan gives three versions of the truth, and the another version. sloppy -- that entire report and

the way you presented it is all from the point of viewf let's see if we can hang donald trump. and also the standards of proof, go to page two. the president's got to prove he's innocent. they have to be convinced that didn't do it. when is that the standard ever in america? how can you prove a negative? if that -- that has to be pointed out and never used again because innocent people will ger tarred and fea with this. the question for anybody who w nts justice should be hod this happen, who started it. i think you may find that the clinton campaign may he interfered in this election even more than the russians did. >> i can't get into it now. you said --k >> baracama, it says or at least it raises the specter with two texts between struck and his -- between strzok and his girlfriend, they said the obama people are keeping in close uc towith this. those -- that's the execution of the steele dossier. >> could also be that the

russian government is infiltr e infiltrating -- >> why do you laugher that way? >> because you're making an assumption that it's some nefarious thing. >> no. i was in the government for 17 years -- >> why wouldn't the government be concerned about russian interference into the presidential --n' >> why wouldthe government be concerned about an investigation opened up right after you clear hillary clinton on donald trp based on seven words that were said to papadopoulos that don't even suggest a ssible crime? it says russians have dirt on hillary clinton. t say stolen, taken, and nothing connects it to donald trump. why didn't they tell him this was a problem like they did with feinstein which she had a chinese communist spy influence her? >> i want to -- >> let me finish. they told her, they told her she had a spy working fodnher. trump di have a spy working for him. trump turns out to be totally innocent. >> why so angry at the russianse >> becauhe russians didn't try to frame him.

he's angry at the russians for interfering in the election. he's angrier at the people who tried to take away his pr idency based on a plan done by strzok, prevent and remove. and you avoid it. e slightest evidence about trump, boom, tids is real evence. it's real evidence that the steele dossier is phony. that it was a fraud on the court. >> all right. steele dossier barely mentioned in the mueller report for what it's worth. i think this has beeor-- >> yeah, f good reason. you make my point. for good reason. it makes him innocent. anything that makes him innocent is ignored by e report. and something like the steele affidavit in which four people signed under oath and never gave the court the information about it. >> you have two other intervie to get you t >> i do. >> i have to let you go. >> and a big investigation to oume. i hope yover it. >> you want bill barr to start a new investigation? >> do i want him to? i've the it for a year. justice requires it -- i've wanted it for a year.

justice fires it. they tried to frame the president of the united states -- >> you think bob mueller tried to frame him? >> no, i think the people who eg made the allions and started it. i think mueller was derelict in not investigating it. the prosecutor is supposed to thmaintain the hypothesis this man was innocent. she was incapable of entertaining it, otherwise he would have looked at the other side -- how did it happen?lu no colsions. how did it happen? happy easter. >> happy easter, mr. mayor. well, when we come back, i'll be joined by the chair of the house judiciary committee, this is decision tech. it's screening technology th based on what's trending or an investing goal. it's real-time insights and information, om in your own ed view of the market. it's smarter trading technology,

for smter trading decisions. and it's only from fidelity. open an account with no minimums today. but you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rate won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands? ♪ ♪ do i can more to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and i take trulicity onca week to activate my body to release it, like it's supposed to. trulicity is not insulin. it starts acting in my body from the first dose and continues to work when i need it, 24/7. trulicity is an injection to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or if you ve type 1 diabetes don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer,

you're allergic to trulicity, nd or have multiple erine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a ioserious allergic reactn, a lump or swelling in your neck, . or severe stomach pa serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicityr ith a sulfonylurea oinsulin increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to hydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

back to all this. also from the report, unlike cases in which a subject engages in obstruction of justice to cover up a crime, the evidence we obtained did not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime reled russian election. the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of the

presenent's intt and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct. they go on to state that whether -- whether you thi it'sdistasteful or not, a political motivation, meaning the president concerned about his political standing might not be an illegal reasoning behind sort of having concern about this case. >> no. the mueller report goes on to ate that there may be other considerations that are not crimes that nonetheless, prosecute predicates from the obstruction of justice. that happens all the time, to save your reputation, other reasons. what mueller says, and this i where barr deliberately -- or one of the places barr deliberately misled the american people. what mueller says although a thorough fbi investigation might very well show the evidence of ob truction of justice by president, we're not going to do that because of the department of justice legal opinion that a sitting president cannot be

indicted. it would be unfair to lay out the facts without an indictment without giving the president in a trial to clear his name.ca bee of that legal doctrine we're not going to charge him with obstructions of justice. barr misinterrupted that to say they intnt find obstruction of justice. they say in so many words, if we per pursue this, we would have to charge the. the with a crime which justice department won't permit us to do. >> do you assume that the reason bob mueller did not charge anybody with conspiracy with the russns is because he has found no conspiracy took place or that he didn't have eugh evidence sustain a conviction? and is there a distinction, in your mind? >> well, obviously, there's a distinction. but he -- he pretty much states in most cases, first of all, here's again where barr misled the american people. he said there was no collusion.

collusion is a term that is not a legal term. the special prosecutor found, mueller found, as you put on tv a little while ago, that there was plenty of evidence that the russians intervened in the election to help trump. plenty of cases the russians knew about that, wanted it and knew about some of the wikileaks dumps of stolen information supplied by the russians in advance. what he couldn't prove is that there s beyond a reasonable doubt, is that there was a criminal conspiracy. although in the one case i do not understand why he did not charge don junior and others in that meeting with criminal conspiracy. he said he didn't charge them because you couldn't prove that they willfully intended to commit a crime. you don't have to prove that. l youave to prove for conspiracy is that they entered into a meeting of the minds to do something wrong and had one overt act. they entered into a meeting of the minds to get a meeting to get stolen material on hillary.s

that conspiracy right there. >> they have another issue, and i wonder if this is a flaw in the code or the way our intended law is made, our campaign finance laws. one of the other reasons he declined is because they couldn't figure out how to value cyber material when looking at it through stolen property, the legale that has to do with physical merchandise. it seems to me that mueller was all but saying to congress, hey, guys, your law -- the way you wrote the campaign finance laws stink. ry well, that may be. i think it's a veonservative reading of the law. because certainly people are willing to pay a lot of money for oosition research. just look at that so-called dossier that started out as opposition research against trump, financed by -- some big republican donor, and then when trump became the nominee, they shifted the financing over to hillary. so, campaigns are willing to pay

a lot of money forn oppositio research. the key is here thatr bar clearly misled the american people on obstruction of justice. there was plenty of evidence polaid out in the re. again, he didn't say there was no obstruction. he said, we can't prove -- we can't prove the negative because there's too much evidence for that. and we can't charge him because the justice department won't let him charge us so we're not going to look for thaen evid. >> but -- >> let me just say, we have to get -- some of this, we have to -- is why weea have to h from barr, we have to hear from mueller, we have to hear from other people like don mcgahn, o we're going to call, we have to get the entire report, including the redacted material so we can evaluate it so the american people can know what was going on to make judgments. >> you havef all this case of obstruction presented in the mueller report, as you just stated. some might askwhy haven't you

opened an impeachment query, or in fairness, is that what you're doing right now?'t >> i don think we're dooling that. we may get to that, we may not. it is our job to go through all the evidence, to -- all the information -- >> do politts impac this? how much do politics matter. >> and to go where the evidence leads us. >> how much do politics impact this? a as you know, impeachment gets political sized so you have a legal case, but the politics dictate somethingelse, how much is that going to influence this decision? >> i don't know. that will come down the road when we see -- >> is this in nancy pelosi's nd ha >> among others. she's not the only person. she's certainly the leader of e democratic caucus, speaker of the house. it's partly her and partly at lot of -- >> do you think this is itch peopleable? -- impeachable? >> yeah, ido. if proven -- if proven, which hasn't been proven yet. some of this -- if proven, some

of this woulde impeachable, yes. obstruction of justice would be impeachable. >> you're going to go about to see if you can prove itre >> we'oing to see where the facts lead us. >> congressman nadler from new york, thank you for coming onha and sng your views. >> thank you. one item worth noting before we go to break, trt mueller realidates most, not all, but most of the reporting done by major news organizations throughout this investigation. mahe, many of t stories we were told that were fake news show up as reported in the mueller report and confirmed by firsthand accounts. it's something worth considering the next time you hear someone use thephrase, fake news, so loosely. d we dear tech, let's talk. you blaze trails... but you have the power to do so much more. let's not just develop apps, t' 's develop apps that help save lives. let's make open source software the standar

let's create new plastics that are highly recyclable. it's going to take input from everyone. so let's do it all, together. ♪ ♪ let's expect more from technology. let's put smart to work. ♪ ♪ ar (burke) at fso we know how toalmost evercover almost anything. even rooftop parking. strange forces at work? only if you're referring to gravity-and we covered it.o talk trmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

welcome back. panelists, joshua johnson, amy editor, hallie jackson, and jonah goberg. hallie, let me start with you. one thing we will never get is a counter report from rudy giuliani or the lawyers. eeey don't want to put it out. >> for w we've heard they probably would not do that or we're going wait to wait until the report was out to decide.g interestinw, they want to turn the page, close the case in their view, and muddy the waters. and i think the last 12 minutes th we saw with rudy giuliani and you did -- did just that. >> let's talk about the two big things that i think came out of both interviews. first on the rudy giuliani interview, jonah goldberg, which is the defense says anybody would have done it, so what with foree.n interferenc >> yeah. i think it's nonsense. but rudy giuliani is playing the spin cycle. i think llie's right that,

look, i mean, the notre dame fire was less tha a week ago, that feels it was in the kcrut o o us era, they want to move on and i think he's opening a huge can of worms going forward that we're now legitimizing hacking in and of itself. >> so that if a campaign in 2020, 2024 gets information from a foreign adversary, that accord to giuliani was trg , as l what was hacked by a foreign government and given to you was true it's usable. >> neeveryo going to have their own suwallenpaupacpac pa s interference? >> iteration just signal the russians, rey, help us find. go found

emails.te buttigieg >> are we financing this -- none of us are, rudy giuliani is trying to.hy that's w it is incumbent on lawmakers on, presidential candidates, people in the political sphere to make sure that does not become acceptable to amy's point. >> d buttigieg's emails will be in norwegian so it's not a problem. >> jerrold nadler said he does think the offenses are impeachable. then heap said the caveat -- assuming that we prove obvious obstruction true. what part of the 4-page document did not not read? >> there was a deep pregnant pause where he went, yeah, i do. 448 pages, racted that have laid out a great deal about the president -- >> in fairness, it was light redaction. >> it was fairly light. >> and they seemed to be legitimate redactions in the moment.s ther lot of cases out there. >> the reality is, i mean, you know, we talk with politicizing the impeachment process. impeachment is an inherently

political process. all the people who arenvolved in the process are political appointees, members of congress. there's kinds of -- kind of no way to separate. that the idea that congress would lk away, to your point about nancy pelosi, that they would walk away as a matter of course from even considering impeachment, i think that's one of those things as we getcloser the election a lot of democratic voters are like, way, wait. the constitution says, this is your job. aren't you supposed to do this part of your job? >> we have atwo-track view of bizarre world views which i feli at one me was like hannity talking points in one place, then the reality of where we live here. but jerry nadler'soing to have one investigation, and lindsey graham, jonah goldberg, will have one on peter strzok. it's obviously peter strzok's going to be a star f republicans regardless of whether the dossier, all those things -- they're not even relevant points in the actual at investign. >> also there's this investigation of the i.g. and to defend the republicans slightly this one, do -- use

have a big chunk of the country who thinks this was launched for fraudulent reasons. it is worth informing the american people about the truth of that, periods. i'm one ofhese guys who i think the mueller report basically confirms all of my positions, a common thing in washington these days. i never felt that the hard case about trump being a putin puppet and that you wiall that stuff w. we know this reflects his character and that he was willing to collude and just didn't. >> you know, the most amazing thing -- i want to put up thele list of peopthat saved the president from obstructing. look at the pictures of these people. hallie, they all have one thing in common, whether it's you, don mcghan, k. it -- k.t. mndcfar reince priebus, john mccain, what priebus, john kelly, what's the

commonality? >> they don't. i think it says a lot about theonstration athe administration and the west wing. the president has been mounting this "i am living my best life" p.r. strategy. that's not the case. talking to sources last night and yesterday morning say he is furious. he's been watching the coverage. he's really mad at one of the guys in the picture, don mcghan in particular -- >> saved him. saved him from an impeachment proceeding and probable abduction charge. >> tesre is second-gusing about why mcghan was allowed to sit for 30 hours with the special counsel in the first place -- >> talk john dowd and -- >> who said open the door. if there's nothing to hide, talk about it. there's relief in the west wing that the ire from the president is not being directed at the people that are still there. >> the president's legal strategy of letting everybody particate got him out of a jam, and yet he still didn't like what it did. >> the central theme and really when youhe read t second volume of this report, it reads like a aracter novel. like it just -- it lays out -- a

character study. i'm sorry. it -- it is -- >> written by bob mueller t it is. for peoplenking i shouldn't read this, there's too much in it, actually road i-- actually read it. it comes down to who this is, and one word, legitimacy. what he is always worried about and anything that questions his legitimacy is worth fighting back against. >> kudos who wrote the actual narrative. it iswr well ten for a legal document. >> like a lawyer with an english minor. >> easytoead for the lay person. joe biden is launching his campaign this week and leading in the polls. but how significant are early comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget beyond having questions. to getting answers.

"a ivecore, how's my network?" en "all sites are gre." all of which helps you do more cu than your stomers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast. kevin, meet yourkeviner. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin vin kevin kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you. i have heart disease, watch what i eat, take stans, but still struggle to lower my ldl bad cholesterol. which means a could strike without warning, pullinme away from everything that matters most. (siren) because withigh bad cholesterol, my risk of a heart attack or stroke

is real. ♪ repatha® plus a statin seriously lowers bad cholesterol by 63%. and significantly ops my risk of having a heart attack or stroke. do not take repatha® if you are allergic to it. repatha® can cause serious allergic reactions. signs include: trouble breathi or swallowing, or swellinof the face. most common side effects include runny nose, sore throat, common cold symptoms, flu or flu-like symptoms back pain, high blood su or bruising at the injection site. i won't let a heart attack or stroke come between me and everything i love. neither should you. tell your doctor to lower your ldl and reduce your risk with repatha®. pay no more than $5 per month with the repatha® copay card. welcome back. "data download" time. former vice president joe biden is expected to announce his presidential bid this week. he's ahead in the polls and has been for weeks.

history isn't always kind to early front-runners. at this point in the cycle, in april of 2007, hillary clinton was ten points ahead oenher party's al nominee and president barack obama. and in may of 2015, jeb bush was on top, and dona trump was all the way at the back of the field. of course, democrats are still a long way away from choosing a nominee. if you're joe biden, you have to hope at least this history does norepeat itself. en we come back, end game and en we come back, end game and the democratic party's debate as my broker --what am i paying you to manage my money? it's racquball time. ahhh! carl, does your firm offer satisfaction guarantee like schwab does. guarantee? carl, can you remind me what you've invested my mey in. it's complicated. are you asking enough questions about how your wealth is being managed? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management.

dad, it's fine. we have allstate. and with claimrateguard they won't raise your rates just because of a clai that's why you're my favorite... i know. are you in good hands? essential for the cactus, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once-daily pil for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. xeljanz xr can reduce pain,ng swelli and further joint damage, even without methotrexate.xe anz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, includmphoma have happened. as have tears in the stomach or intestines, ,rious allergic reactions

s, low blood cell count highers 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 somewherfungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some things. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about an "unjection™".

z35k8z z16fz y35k8y y16fy

back with "end game." check out the different responses you get from presidential candidates on the "i" word. take a listen. >> so i've been really careful about talking about what we would do if an impeachment came before us. >> first i'd want to hear from bob mueller. >> i'm focused on replacing him the old-fashioned way. >> we should ogsn proceedinn

the house and then the house can take a vote. >> joshua, it's interesting there, kamala harris says i want to hear mrom bobller like -- first it was the report. what more do you need from bob sflurm. >> you've got a -- mueller? >> you've got a ream of paper from mueller. redacted, i know, redacted. here's the thing -- we've hard enough. like enough. can we just do the "tv guide" version of this? if they can summarize an episode of "game of thrones" before every show, we can do the repo s. the reports the president of the united states engaged in behavior that, per one commentator, sou could it's lawful but awful. that prosecutors didn't have enough legal basis to press charges for constitutional and legal reasons, the president is not kpoexonerated and the peopl have to do something. t that is "tv guide" summary of what happened. if you need more information to

know whether you're in or out, what game are you playing? now, i'm not saying what the outcome should be. but at a certain point, you kn, the light's green. are you going to go or pull over? >> mueller's grandkids still haven't testified yet. >> exactly. and i think part of the -- >> there is going to be -- there is this desire to have the aha moment, to have that jack nicholson i ordered the code red. that's never going to happen. it's never going to happen. bob mueller's not going tots --a >> ts the value of the interview she gave. i think it's the power of it because it allowsnt the preside leading into 2020 to still have a foil. remember what rudy giuliani said, wouldn't you be jeb bush set, too, if someone who tried to frame you, and that i think is part of the political powert of donald p. is having -- >> you have to accept the premise. >> yeah. but having a foil in d.c. gives the president something to talk about in the2020. >> i'm old-fashioned about this. i find all of the talk about

this -- about impeachmentbeing a legalistic criminal matter to be flawed. basically impeachment is about breach of trust with the public. you and you can impeach anybody for anything. it's the political eequivalent lent of an indictment. the recall -- >> right. >> i mean the senate will never remove. to me this is puly a political question. do the democrats think they could get enough votes? is it worth -- is it in their eolitical interests to do it? will any rblicans go along? will it appear a voitory if it goes to the senate and is not taken up. they're talking about the smoking gun but it taking legalistic -- >> mind meld. he loves a foil. i'm told he's been telling friends and allies the phrase, e look at what happened to republicans during the clinton impeachment era and look at what happened to bill clinton. he is ready for a fight. he thinks it t could help with people who support him. >> can i tell you what's sitting

out there that we haven't talked about -- i apologize for control room because i'm going to ask for something, the 12on cases that n of us know. >> yeah. >> 12 -- yes, we know. but these are unknown cases. these were stuffhat fell outside the parameters of russia. here it is. 12 unknown cases. we know michael cohen, greg craig, where mueller to ship it off to another entity. that's -- these are little land mines that we don't know what they will explode when they explode. we know israel and uae and saudi arabia, they're l these other reign entities that were involved in stories with the seychelles islands. there's more land mines for the president. >> do we k either of those will change, the political or the legal calculations for president or those we know immediately in his circle? no. >> the question for democrats, too, is about the same issue they havreis what thedent is worried about, too. legitimacy. that has framed this entire issue of russia for him. at -- whatever his been done to him has been done to

undermine the credibility his whim. for democrats i think the legitimacy question is this -- if we go down an impeachment path, are we then building this narrative forim h with a better legitimacy to beat him in an election. >> vladimir putin. the most successful campaign he could ever have imagined. look what we're doing. >> through the russian military. it issit from new enland. the im-- it is frightening. the import of this. you're right the 12 matters are consequential. could i stepack from the beltway quickly. it's easter. it's passover. it's a gorgeous day. i got a brand-new harley i'm eager to ride as soon as the show is over. i think for people watching is, take a breath. the system is designed ed ted through this. >> we're all hoping the system works the way it's supposed to wo f. that's all today. thank you for watching here. we're wishing everybody a happy easter. happ passover, happy articly ride. we'll be back -- happeny harley ride. we'll be back bext weekecause if it's sunday it's "meet the

press." z388qz z16fz

y388qy y16fy

sri lanka in shock after bombs ripped through easter celebrations at churches across the country, killing nearly 300 people. now there is new scrutiny, whether the governmentould have prevented the attacks. plus -- >> there is nothingrong with taking information from russians. i probably wouldn't. i would have advised don't do it. >>resident trump's attorney kicking up a new controversy while defending his boss in the wake of theueller report. >> a dark chapter in the history. w slave owners turned the bible into