how startling with don mcgahn, you know, don mcgahn's testimony will be great to hear what he has toxcept i think the american public should take a deep breath, because it's not going to happen live before them. it will happen first in private, which gives the white house and other people a chance to object if there is any concern over executive privilege. but to remind viewers the reason don mcgahn is so important as is outlined in the mueller report, is done began was asked by former president trump to fire robert mueller and he refused. that's not really the critical part. it's that when this came to light and the washington post reported on it, trump said i want you, don mcgahn, to lie about my request that you fire robert mueller, and don mcgahn said, i'm not doing that. and he was going to resign. a critical question to ask don mcgahn is if you didn't think he was committing a crime, or are you going to up and resign? you don't do that unless it's quite serious, being the white house counsel. and clearly, there was so much he was going to stomach. i think that would be damaging

it will be underath by don mcgahn.nt has, so it really is a question for this justice department as to whether they're going to hold a former president to account. for what he did. >> so we're looking at a possible $500,000 gift in effect from donald trump to allen weisselberg through some form or other. the irs gift limit is $15,000. you don't have the pay taxes on a gift $15,000 or below, but a gift above $15,000, which this sounds like, is a taxable gift some this looks like an area that could be really problematic. >> yeah, although i don't mean to again have cold water on people thinking this mighty vere that the manhattan district attorney's office has against weisselberg. in other words, he is the one who is receiving the gift. he is the one who has an obligation if he received $500,000 to report it as income on his tax returns. you don't overlook $500,000, even if you're very wealthy. and so to me it signals that the manhattan district attorney's office has not yet flipped weisselberg, and he really will be an

and so don mcgahn is going to testify to congress next week. don mcgann, he is going to testify to trump's potential obstruction of justice next week. he's going to testify for the first time on that matter and that will put all that alleged criminal obstruction of justice by president trump back in the public eye and sort of back in play. and none of those things are things that happened outside the statute of limitations. why was trump never criminally charged in conjunction with those serious allegations already? turns out that's a funny story about that, as well. it was the mueller report that laid out hundreds of pages of detailed evidence of trump allegedly committing felony obstruction of justice. right when the mueller report came out, as soon as it was submitted to the justice department, trump's attorney general, bill barr, immediately volunteered to the public and then to congress under oath that, no, despite all that evidence laid out so carefully by mueller, no, trump would not be charged with obstruction of justice. was that becaus

. >>> and what could we learn that we don't already know from don mcgahn. that's after the break.t's ak e possible at 40,000 feet. instead of burning our past for power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect. rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change. faster. vmware. welcome change. this is the sound of change. the sound of a thousand sighs of relief. and the sound of a company watching out for you. this is the sound of low cash mode from pnc bank, giving you multiple options and at least 24 hours to help you avoid an overdraft fee. because we believe how you handle overdrafts should be in your control, not just your bank's. low cash mode on virtual wallet from pnc bank. one way we're making a difference. >>> georgia congresswoman, marjorie taylor greene, seems to have finally crossed the line with republican leadership. house leaders are now both condemning her latest controversial comments that compared covid mask rules at the c

don mcgahn spoke to prosecutors in the mueller investigation, which is why we know he's the main witness for the most serious allegations when it comes to obstruction charges. but mcgahn has never testified about any of it. while trump was still in office, he blocked mcgahn from getting testimony. now that trump is no longer in office, mcgahn is not going to be blocked from testifying and it's a funny story as to why. it has to do with money and someone who's feeling a little cheap around the edges these days. this is from charlie savage at the new york times. immediately after -- a lawyer for mr. trump had conveyed and that the former president trump intended to intervene in the case. former presidents can't invoke executive privilege and he could've sought order blocking him from testifying. but late last week, that same lawyer for trump said that actually trump would not be intervening after all. trump's lawyer is said to provide no reason for the above phase. while he was president, mr. trump vowed to stonewall all congressional subpoenas and taxpayer funded lawyers with the justice

. >> let me ask you a question about don mcgahn for a moment.allow former white house counsel don mcgahn to testify. how significant is this development? what are you hoping to get out of his testimony? >> well, again, the american people deserve to know the truth about what happens in their government. don mcgahn was an essential witness who, in the mueller report, in his interviews with the special counsel indicated that former president trump had tried to undermine the investigation into his conduct with respect to the 2016 election. don mcgahn had that evidence. he was subpoenaed two years ago and still hasn't appeared. it's really important that we hear what happened. >> and i know earlier this afternoon, congresswoman, the house administration committee held a hearing with the architect of the capitol, christopher vaella where he said the capitol, quote, excuse me, lacked emergency policies and procedures. what was your take away from that hearing? >> well, it's consistent with what we've had in a series of hearings now, involving the capi

it's been a long and winding legal road for don mcgahn.estimony. after joe biden withdraws elected, his administration inherited is the issue. two important questions remain. one, what if anything can lawmakers learn from mcgann? and can donald trump still mess things up for congress? let's bring in joyce vance. i remember your testimony around this topic. i wonder if can you speak to both questions. what could we learn we don't already know from don mcgahn, and talk about what is at stake in having millennium share what he knows with congress. >> there's such high value in having don mcgahn, who was the white house counsel, repeat under oath what reporters have reported on in the context of the mueller report, so perhaps it's worth rehearsing again giving the passage of time. the fact is that mcgann's torrie is trump asked him to seek to it that mueller was to be fired, and mcgann refused to do that. trump sequentially pressured mcgann to lie about those facts. he actually on three occasions had people approach mcgann or those around him

>> don mcgahn did a dodge in tells of having to be compelled to testify and the federal judge said he reached by mcgahn's defense counsel and the members of the house judiciary committee or the lawyers for the committee, a joint case report filed a couple of days ago saying that they reached quote an agreement in principle to be able to have mr. mcgahn testify to information that's personal to him and available in the mueller report. is there a value to this? of course there is. because a transcript will be made available and even if limited to the testimony of just what is publicly available in the mueller report hi can be asked whether or not donald trump tried to obstruct the russia investigation and whether or not the information contained within the report that is attributed to don mcgahn is accurate and correct. people are going to unearth the mueller report, and check it out and see whether or not they cross reference whether or not the testimony to congress is exactly what is included in the mueller report. >> manhattan prosecutors are still going after trump cfo. "the wall st

most of those incidents were described basically through the eyes of don mcgahn. mcgahn, as trump's white house counsel, gave multiple interviews over dozens of hours to mueller's prosecutors. and those prosecutors determines by the rules of the road that it wasn't their call as to whetherl or not an indictment should be the end purpose of mcgahn's testimony, whether they should take mcgahn's testimony about trump's behavior and use to it seek a criminal indictment of donald trump. they said they couldn't make that decision. they couldn't try to bring an indictment against trump because there was a justice department policy against indicting any sitting president. but they also said explicitly that that same justice a department policy, quote, also recognizes that a president does not have immunity after he leaves office. well, donald trump has left office. there is no justice department policy protecting him from being indicted now. the statute of limitations has not run on the conduct that was described in the mueller report. and the evidence against him in terms

don mcgahn will be testifying before the house judiciary behind closed doors. know you're on that committee. what kind of questions would you like him to answer? >> well, i am on the committee, i'm vice chair, so i'll be pleased to be there behind closed doors. what we'll finally be able to ask him is about what donald trump did in terms of possibly obstructing justice. you remember mueller report, volume 2, detailed many incidences of what appears to be obstruction of justice by the former president. don mcgahn testified, as was reported in the mueller report, that the president came to him and urged him to direct rosenstein to fire mueller, special counsel mueller. in fact, trump said to him, call me back when you have done it. obstruction of justice. that's just one incident. another incident that he testified to, and appears in the unredacted portions of the mueller report, is then trump went to him and said, change the documents, change the paperwork around this exchange. mcgahn wouldn't do either of those things. we want to hear from mr. mcgone about thos

a couple of years in the making. >> [laughs] don mcgahn is the leading investigator from the mueller report on president trump instructing justice on ten instances plus laid out in great detail in the mueller report. again, has never had to testify about. it this will be the first testimony we have heard. it happens just as the justice department is deciding, right now, whether or not they're going to release to the public the memo that bill barr justice department prepared about why trump shouldn't be prosecuted for any of those alleged incidents of obstruction of justice. it's kind of happening all at the same time. >> and because of the late hour at which this justice department memo is going to be released or not, we've actually kind of adjusted the scheduling of this show so that neal katyal can appear later in the show. we don't have the memo yet. there is kind of a whole, as i think you know, in the script here where that memo is supposed to go. >> yes, that's exactly right. >> i think you know what i mean. i think there might of been something like that in the 9 pm script. >>

we have late word tonight from "the new york times" that don mcgahn is likely to testify next week on wednesday to the house judiciary committee. that is breaking news a couple of years in the making. >> well, you know, don mcgahn is the lead witness from the mueller investigation on president trump obstructing justice. all of those, you know, ten instances, ten instances plus of alleged criminal obstruction of justice laid out in great detail in the mueller report. mcgahn has never had to testify about it. this will be the first testimony that we've heard about it, and it happens just as the justice department is deciding right now whether or not they're going to release to the public the memo that bill barr's justice department prepared about why trump shouldn't be prosecuted for any of those alleged incidents of obstruction of justice. it's kind of all happening at the same time. >> and because of the late hour at which this justice department memo is going to be released or not, we've actually kind of adjusted the scheduling of this show so that neal katyal can appear later in the

threats to fire robert mueller and don mcgahn's elaborate threat to quit, packing his office and not quitting and attempts to use corey lewandowski, and attempts to influence manafort's testimonies about the trump tower meeting. it was detailed and it was extensive and don mcgahn was the narrator of donald trump's ongoing and fevered attempts at obstructing the russia probe. what was the reaction at the time from inside the mueller probe and inside of the witnesses and experiences that bill barr did what he did and is now being rebuked for? >> the problem at the heart of a lot of this was the fact that mueller did not make a decision whether to prosecute because that opened the door for barr who has a very expansive view of the attorney general's powers and saw himself as the ultimate decider in the case. it will be interesting to see what it is in the memo that led the judge to claim -- that barr, for some reason didn't have to make a decision or shouldn't have made a decision and rapted that. i'm anxious to find out what that is. what i think, more even so, of the decision that bar

. >>> after a year-long legal battle, former trump white house counsel don mcgahn has agreed to testify the mueller report the questioning will be confined to what is in the mueller report and about any comments made by trump about his role in the investigation. the transcript of the hearing will be made public a week later. >>> lawmakers in texas passed a bill allowing residents to carry handgun withes without a permit. the governor will sign it into law. the gun control advocates are blasting the open carry bill arguing it strips safeguards from the gun pebuying process. >>> p and a big moment for phil mickelson and apology from the pga. an statement issued for spectators at the pga championship overwhelming security and making players and caddies feel vulnerable. that was the scene on sunday as phil made his way to the 18th hole pushing through the crowd of people as he went to the green. brian, this is what you were talking about yesterday. weird watching the mob of people crowd phil as he approached the 18th there as if we're not just crawling out of a deadly pandemic >> yeah. i tu

we have a late night -- note of don mcgahn is sluggishly to testify next week on wednesday

all that comes amid news that don mcgahn, he has agreed to testify behind closed doors about trump's efforts to obstruct the russian probe. he was going to testify in 2019 but he refused on trump's instructions. the former president was furious about taking notes about the interactions. the news tonight from the washington post, and the ap about the decision, the long standing department of justice policy, the federal government cannot indict presidents, ex-presidents can face all sorts of chargers when they leave office. >> could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? >> yes. >> you believe he committed -- you can charge the president with obstruction of justice after he left office? >> yes, sir. >> earlier today, you stated that a seated president cannot be indicted. >> correct. >> and upon questioning this morning, could a president be indicted after their service, correct? >> yes. >> and your answer was they kuld. >> they could. >> shayna jacobs is the co- author of that bombshell report in the "washington post," and congrats on this very, very big scoop. >>

we have late word tonight from "the new york times" that don mcgahn is likely to

. >> in addition to this, don mcgahn will now testify behind closed doors to members of the house judiciary week. there are severe limitations about what he can ask and what he can't be asked. what questions would you ask him? what will this reveal? >> well, one question is, how -- what did he see as far as the president obstructing the investigation? again, this piece again relates to the very first impeachment of president trump which had to do with, in part, his obstruction of the russia investigation. and so the questions that the house judiciary have for former white house counsel mcgahn have to do with whether what he observed in his capacity of working with the president he saw him obstruct justice. he saw him try to quash the investigation in a way that was corrupt. now one with the agreement that they have worked out, the former white house counsel might still assert that certain communications he had with the former president are privileged. and so we still don't know whether this interview will actually be satisfying or whether, in some circumstances, to some questions, he might

let me ask you, after two years we know that former white house counsel don mcgahn has finally agreed to answer questions in private from the house judiciary committee. you serve on that committee. under the agreement mcgahn will only be questioned about information attributed to him in publicly available portions of the mueller report. so what are you hoping to get from him? and to what effect two years later? >> well, you know, that saying better late than never? i'm not sure that principle applies in this case because it sure would have been nice if mr. mcgahn would have testified during the impeachment inquiry. i think that he has direct knowledge about those ten, i thought it was 12 incidents of obstruction of justice and we need to know as the president's attorney what role he played, what actions the president was engaged with, i think he has some pertinent information to give our committee, and i'm glad to see an agreement has been made in this process. >> okay. before you go, i have to ask you about the florida governor's race because it looks like it is already under way. an

and it would have to be brought by the federal authorities, that obstruction of justice case with don mcgahnctor and the purpose behind that is a pretty clean-cut case. so i don't think the biden doj is going to do it but if they did that would be another area along with the new york face where there would be significant personal liability potentially. >> so much to unpack here. jennifer rodgers, coy talk to you for hours. thank you so much for getting up. >>> all right. to -- americans are returning to the skies again but brian chess key told poppy harlow business travel won't go back to the way it was before the pandemic. >> the far is now higher to get on a plane to do a meeting. now have what they didn't have a year or two ago. many people have flexibility, flexibility about where they travel, live and work and they're starting to combine all of those. once people have something they won't want to let go of it. >> he said airbnb is seeing travel activity back to the 2019 levels. he said almost a quarter of airbnb's bookings in the% quarter were for stays of 28 days or more. pent up deman

we are now learning donald trump's former white house counsel don mcgahn is expected to appear before the house judiciary committee behind closed doors on monday morning. he is answering questions on russian interference and conducted by special counsel by robert mueller and allegations of obstruction of justice. that interview will be transcribed. let's go right to msnbc's amanda golden on capitol hill. how are democrats reacting to the riot commission being blocked. >> democrats are not remaining silent, that's for sure. they are not planning to talk about this commission and further investigation into january 6th, we've already heard from senate majority leader chuck schumer who has it to bring to the vote against the senate floor and it will not get the ten senators needed to break the 60-vote filibuster threshold. we only saw in the vote that happened just yesterday, the six republican senators that allowed democrats to break party in order to move the commission forward. those six senator, we can put up a full screen so you can see include mitt romney, ben sasse, senators bill c

who knows how that turns out, but we know from the don mcgahn testimony is this could be litigated forrs. this is all about the politics of 2022. republicans are gambling that the american people will care less about them filibustering an independent commission than what they could learn from an independent commission. i expect republicans to continue to forestall this as long as they can and paint it as a democratic investigation solely for partisan measures. >> daniel lippman, talk to me about the filibuster. this was the first filibuster for the republicans. we certainly know it's not going to be the last. how does this filibuster debate loom over this larger conversation especially major spending legislation the biden administration wants to get through. the republicans have already been vocal they're not for. >> it just gives much more ammunition to the democratic senators you were saying enough is enough. we can't have these types of fake filibuster, where it's not even a real filibuster. it's just basically not a talking exercise where senators are speaking for 24 hours straight

. >>> meanwhile, former white house counsel don mcgahn has agreed to testify before the house judiciaryt week about former president donald trump's efforts to obstruct the russia information. according to two people familiar with the matter. "the new york times" reports an nbc news confirmed that the mcgahn testimony will take place behind closed doors under a deal he struck with lawyers for house democrats and the justice department. according to a court filing there will be strict limits on the testimony mcgahn will provide and only asked about information attributed to him or events involving him in the publicly available portions of the mueller report. scheduling was delayed for weeks while the parties waited to see whether trump would issue a legal challenge. after initially indicating he would intervene, late last week a lawyer for the former president said he would not, providing no reason for the about face. in 2019, the house judiciary committee wanted to question mcgahn over his role as a key witness in the mueller information of russian interference in the 2016 election but h

battle between house democrats and the trump administration, former white house trump council don mcga mcgahnto testify next week. democrats who run the committee have sought mcgahn's testimony for two years as part of their obstruction investigation into former president donald trump. the questioning will be confined to what's in the muller report and about any comments made by trump about mcgahn's role in the investigation. the transcript of the hearing will be made public a week later. >>> after a stunning 17 nights in the oregon wilderness, one man is back with his family. 69-year-old man was reported missing. they left packages of food along. on the 16th they found a tackle box and make-shift shelter but no harry a week later they discovered a second make-shift shelter. what a survival story for this guy. >> glad we could bring you that good news. nbc meteorologist janessa webb joining us now take a look outside on this tuesday. good morning, janessa. >> good morning. i wish i could bring you some better news with the weather we have some severe storms going to spark up for the central u

what about don mcgahn as we look ahead to friday?s, of course, the white house counsel under donald trump. he's scheduled to testify before the house judiciary committee. you're on that committee. what kind of questions do you have for him? >> well, it's mostly going to be a staff driven, as i understand it, hearing, and they're going to ask most of the questions and we're not in session until june 14th, so i don't think there will be many members there. i think it's been staff. it was limited in what they could get into in the agreement that the committee made with justice, and so i don't think there's going to be too much to come out of it. it's unfortunate -- public and it's not going to be more in depth. >> but it is going to be transcribed so you could direct staff to say, ask this question, right? give me the one question you want to have done that way. >> do you think donald trump, when he asked you to go to justice and was trying to obstruct justice? i mean, he instructed mcgahn to take actions with the justice department and

the report issued by the special counsel, robert mueller, president trump vocally took issue with don mcgahn taking notes and asked "what about these notes, why don't you take notes, lawyers don't take notes, i never had a lawyer who took notes." mr. smith, in your opinion, is it ever appropriate for a president to attempt to destroy records of meetings with foreign leaders? mr. smith: well, i think in terms of the presidential records act, congressmen, the president has certain responsibilities to preserve records. rep. johnson: my question is, is it ever appropriate for the president to destroy records of meetings with foreign leaders? mr. smith: again, the president has certain responsibilities to maintain certain records in the course of conducting the business of the united states. rep. johnson: mr. brookwood, is it ever appropriate? >> i think the answer to this question is to ensure transparency and accountability we want to strive to keep all records that will help the public know what is going on, but at the same time there are responsibilities and powers a president has to make sur

according to the report issued by special counsel robert mueller, president trump took issue with don mcgahn taking notes and asked, what about these notes? don't take notes, i've never had a lawyer that took notes, end quote. mr. smith, in your opinion is it ever appropriate for a president to attempt to destroy records of meetings with foreign leaders, particularly those with demonstrated records of adversary to the united states of america? >> i think in terms of presidential acts, the president have responsibility for records-- >> my question is is it ever appropriate for the president to destroy records of meetings with foreign leaders? >> well, again, congressman, the president has certain responsibility under the presidential records act to maintain certain records in the course of conducting the business of the united states. and-- >> let me ask mr. brookwood the question. is it appropriate for a president to destroy records of meetings with foreign leaders? >> i think the answer to this question is to assure transparency and accountability we want to strive to keep all records to he

so with all of those constraints, what could don mcgahn provide to help us understand what might haveell us why the president wanted people fired. he talked the president out of things that never happened, and it goes to the heart of the president's motivation to obstruct. so in my mind, he provides evidence, further corroboration of what mueller found, which is there are charges of offenses related to obstruction. that's where i see the value in mcghan. don't rule out the possibility he points to possible obstruction charges, lying under oath in the president's submission of written responses to mueller. this is significant. >> the new podcast is "the durio with frank figliuzzi." thank you very much so much. we appreciate you being on this morning and for the podcast. >>> antony blinken is meeting with israel's leaders today following the deadly conflict with hamas. in addition to visiting israel, the state department says he will have discussions with leaders in the west bank, jordan and egypt. as for what's on the agenda, the white house says blinken will affirm, our, quote, ironcl