ale alexi, harry litman, frank figliuzzi and joining us from "the washington post" phil rucker. phil rucker i'll with you. a more astute white house watcher does not exist from you. even for donald trump, i was emotionally drained by 10:00 a.m. >> it was a busy morning, nicole. look, the president clearly rattled and agitated by bob mueller's appearance yesterday it wasn't just this morning. he was up late into the night, at 11:00 at night he called bill o'reilly, o'reilly revealed in an interview this morning that the president called him from the white house to complain about mueller to say mueller is a never-trumper, to exclaim these conflict of interests. the president told reporters this morning that mueller came in to be interviewed to be fbi director, wanted the job and trump told him no. that's not quite right. mueller was brought in to the white house, to the oval office to meet with president trump in the wake of firing jim comey but more to seek his advise. the aides thought mueller might be able to explain to trump the origins of the fbi's independence, why it's impo

harry litman and george ken starr, thank you both.re are several female contenders in the 2020 democratic field, so how are female voters feeling about president trump this time around?r stick around for some surprising new numbers. introducing... smartdogs. the first dogs trained to train humans. stopping drivers from: liking. selfie-ing. and whatever this is. available to the public... never. smartdogs are not the answer. but geico has a simple tip. turn on "do not disturb while driving" mode. brought to you by geico. if you have moderate to little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor shou

. >> harry litman once served as deputy assistant attorney general and harry nice to have you on. and we're waiting for this big house vote on contempt this hour. so if the a.g. is, in fact, held in contempt of congress, what happens, what are the actual ramifications of that? >> okay. first i think it is important to say they are really still at the pressa pis, the house is about to grant in committee the authority to go through contempt but not the actual vote. and laura's point, there is a nuance that is important, what they have asserted now is protective executive privilege, that is they're saying there is some stuff in there that might fall under executive privilege so whole throw a blanket over it for now to protect our ability to do it. i think for this particular fight, in other words, they still have a couple of moves to go and it is -- it still might resolve short of an actual court fight. the broader thrust is clear. we have a real sort of stonewall on many fronts that is coming to a high boil between the executive branch and congress. >> let me hit pause on all of thi

i'm also joined by harry litman, former u.s. attorney and assistant attorney general. we've got 30 channels of news on this as we get the showdown between the president and congress. i want to start on the first and in some way the biggest, the judge's 41-page opinion saying to the president's argument that congress can't investigate you, no way, that this doesn't work. i'm not a lawyer, but it felt like a fairly scathing argument -- opinion. what did you think? >> yeah. so it's a complete slapdown, and it's not just -- this is the argument trump made to cummings but it's been made across the board. it's the same argument, for example, that mnuchin has made in resisting the tax subpoena. no legislative purpose. and of course it's the exact opposite argument that the administration has made in other litigation where they said you have to defer to us, you have to trust us. what the district court said is same thing for congress. i'm not going to try to psych analyze them, there is a valid oversight purpose here, that's all we need to know, end of story, and forget any ki

harry litman, who is still with us. harry, in plain leenglish, who' going to stop mueller from testifying? >> nobody except his own rectitude there. that letter, as we said, was a strong rebellious act for him, but it was still internal to the attorney general and still respectful. one point i want to add, by the way, it doesn't matter so much did barr provoke it or not. it mattered that mueller said the public is being confused and barr should have acted completely. when mueller testifies, and i think he will, his strong instinct will be to stick to the written record and not put the knife into barr or anyone else. on the other hand, gloves are sort of off and people are beginning to talk. i think people on mueller's staff will be beginning to talk in leaks to the papers, et cetera. we'll learn more information, but i don't think mueller is going to play a totally open hand when he testifies. >> two points there. number one, it wasn't by accident that the leak happened last night on the eve of the barr hearing that this

harry litman, what kind of protections does donald trump jr. not have because he is a private citizen as compared to somebody who perhaps works in the white house and might benefit from some cover? >> he basically possesses no information that belongs to the white house. they can't order him to stand down. anything you talk to his father about would not be covered by executive privilege. he has to walk right into the buzz saw of the possible perj y perjury, but i'm sure he's thought about that and i doubt there would be much of an appetite at the department of justice as well. i want to double back quickly on the point that carol and betsy made, it is dead on the house will win on the notion that they have oversight. what cipollone is saying is you must have a legislative purpose, but it is clear from the court that the legislative purpose gives rise to the oversight. so there is really no precedent for saying congress can't go here. it is only negotiating the terms and trying to bargain for time on the white house's part. >> and time of course

michael schmidt is with us, anny carney and harry litman returns to our broadcast, doj veteran. these days he happens to be the creator of the new podcast called talking feds. michael, i would like to begin with you. with the president talking spying, with the president having found a perfectly pliant, it seems, attorney general on this front, what have you heard about the seriousness of purpose behind this investigation of the investigators? >> well, that's what we sort of don't know. we reported this week that barr has asked the u.s. attorney in connecticut, duram, to look at this, but he would simply be reviewing the counter intelligence investigation and how it all began. at the heart of this issue is the fact that the president has finally found someone to be his attorney general that will do the things that he wants. sessions wouldn't do that. rosenstein wouldn't do that. but here you have barr echoing the president's talking points and doing it in an effective way. barr has figured out a way to stay on message on these issues and to keep it alive and allows the president

harry litman is here, he was former deputy attorney general.cerns about the declassification of this information? >> yeah, i really do. it's not just significant authority, it's unilateral, absolute authority. the attorney general can do whatever he wants selectively. there are two big problems. the first is it runs roughshod over the intelligence agencies and changes the normal dynamic. and of course, that also sends a perhaps chilling signal to anyone who would be sharing information with us in the future. and the second concern is it really does seem based on the track record to date that it's at the service of a political narrative and agenda of the president and not overall national security information. so we might have a dribbling out of information that somehow supports this witch hunt narrative which i think is bogus. setting that aside, it's not meant to give a full account. both things i think are matters of really significant concern. >> you have the president in the white house on one hand stonewalling on everything from documents

shannon: former deputy assistant attorney general harry litman, former independent counsel kenneth starrome to both of you. comey sounds very confident that in an opinion piece in the hell under the headline james comey is in trouble and he knows that the author who has a long history of is a special agent says after investigations by the inspector general michael horwitz and us attorney john huber along with william barr, comey's mishandling of the illegal processes likely will be fully exposed, james comey is right to be apprehensive. >> complete speculation right now completely fanciful. if something comes out in the horwitz report fine but the sort of feverish way in which everyone has already rushed to judgment on this is really crazy. one thing that is particular crazy, it is simply wrong to say this was the origin of the reported wrong also to say that is why it was renewed 3 times. it was renewed 3 times for other reasons. kenneth starr will know and affirm the fbi is not a road deep state doing all this crazy stuff and even if there were individual bad actors, the entire regime

i want to bring in shimon prokupecz, juliette kayyem and harry litman. thank you all for joining us. shimon, you have covered every twist and turn of this investigation for the last two years. i don't envy you, much closer than i have had to. how stunning is this news, the news of this letter from robert mueller? >> it's pretty stunning when you think about the fact that we have not really heard from robert mueller throughout this entire investigation, throughout in entire process. the only time we have heard from his team is through court records. and what we're seeing here is obvious disagreement from the mueller team, from robert mueller himself in this letter to the attorney general, and it's all about context. it's all about nuance. it's all about how they handled the beginning stages of releasing this report in that four-page letter that was ultimately released where he made the -- the attorney general made some statements that now mueller and his team have disagreed with. and it set the tone. it set the tone in terms of how this went from that day

harry litman is here. barr was.is arms around mueller in his confirmation, now he's throwing him around the bus. >> he's completely renlting what he did. a root and branch rejection of what mueller did over 22 months the whole idea of it. barr sat there and said, i don't even know what mueller with you thinking. that's a hell of a thing to say. he second-guesses every evide evidentiary determination. now it's war. the most telling piece of testimony yesterday was when barr said, bob, why did you put this in a letter? why didn't you tell me? that means trouble for me. >> i said, bob what's with the letter? you know, why didn't you just pick up the phone and call me if there's an issue. i don't consider bob at this stage a career prosecutor. he was the head of the fbi for 12 years. >> he's a career law enforcement professional. >> right. but he was also a political appointee and a political appointee with me at the department of justice. the letter is snitty and i think it was probably written by one of his staff peop

former deputy assistant attorney general harry litman and tom dupree, thank you for joining us. let's talk about this ruling. robert barnes says this in a tweet. "another obama appointee rubber-stamped one of the most invasive subpoenas in american history. privacy. from spying politicians is dead if this remains the law." there is no general authority of individuals. does this go all the way to the supreme court and should people regardless of either side of the aisle that they are on be worried about the potential release of any president's personal finances? >> not this one. there are other issues that may but this is a standard subpoena of the sort that congress and prosecutors would do, any and every day for any investigation. the argument on the other side and it's the same one by the way significantly that he is saying, there is no valid legislative purpose and what both judges have said now is the same thing they have said in favor of trump on the immigration order. we don't second guess here, of course there could be a valid purpose. possible financial conflicts of inte

our legal eagles are here, the former deputy assistant harry litman. welcome.t to play some about what rush limbaugh had to say today about three investigations going into the origins of what happened might have been tongue-in-cheek and we will let you decide. >> the next thing to keep a sharp eye out for and that is people fleeing the country. if you see james comey in argentina or if you seek james clapper somewhere where they can't be extradited and you will know that we are getting close. these people start leaving, i'm half-joking because it hasn't started yet but they are nervous. >> shannon: he says i'm half-joking but who do you think should be most nervous? >> i think both of them should be nervous. both the fbi director and the cia director. the reason why is because of the appointment by attorney general bill barr of the u.s. attorney and connecticut to take a look at all of this and the reason why is if bill barr who is no anti-deep state guy, he started in the cia. if bill barr appointed a u.s. attorney that means he thinks there are some grounds f

nbc white house correspondent peter alexander, phil rutger, msnbc contributor ruth marcus and harry litman. welcome all. peter, first to you. you press the president and it was extraordinary that response. tell me what was going on there and your reaction to what you hear. >> this was a dramatic news conference. we were a matter of feet away. the president was there to announce something on a totally different issue. he took our questions. he looked at me directly and asked if i had any. he focused on this issue which is something that he has just listed repeatedly, this idea that these adversaries committed vees treason. he doesn't understand the definition of treason, disloyalty to the president and then a private citizen is not treason. what struck me in that moment is when i told the president that the constitution says the treason is punishable by death. it's federal law that says it. the president nodded approvingly and named all these names. with the announcement just hours later about the new authorities that he's granting to attorney general, this is effective for a president that

also harry litman, former deputy assistant attorney general understand president clinton. what are the president's lawyers arguing today? >> reporter: that the house doesn't have business asking for these records. and this all started when michael cohen, the former fixer for the president said that the trump administration or the trump organization had overstated its profits in some cases and understated them in others to try to get either better loans or more favorable insurance rates. the committee has said it wants to know whether this is accurate and has subpoenaed the documents. the lawyers for the trump companies say, you know, the committee is trying to act like the justice department. this is not a legitimate use of the committee's subpoena power. the judge had said this would be a hearing today by request for the lawyers of the trump organization to temporarily stop the subpoena from going forward. while the judge decides whether or not the house has the authority to do this. the judge said you know what? i've got enough information, let's go ahead and get on with

the with me, harry litman. mr. nichols, we'll start with you. this all seemed to catch the white house a bit off guard. >> it did. and this is something that the white house would like to get a head's up on precisely so they can answer questions about what their response will be. now, they would point out that he is a private family member, they wouldn't necessarily go through the white house, but listen to what we heard from mick mulvaney last night, listen to how he said it was kind of bad etiquette. >> the fact that the president's son got a subpoena from a republican-led committee, i have no difficulty with the bipartisan, but to subpoena the president's son and not get a head's up was let's say bad form. >> now, for the white house, this is an indication that congress will continue to investigate him, it won't just be the house committees or house judiciary. there is the senate as well controlled by republicans. and it is also an indication that committees on both sides of capitol hill take their investigative purpose, their investigative m

the former deputy assistant general harry litman and former cia analyst buck sexton.come to both of you. >> good to see see you. >> ed: buck, the latest count is 51 house democrats, breaking tonight, it has reached that number, now saying that to speaker nancy pelosi, we want to see impeachment proceedings move forward. at a time when the president today said impeachment is a "dirty, filthy, disgusting word." where are we tonight? speak of this is exactly what i think the purpose of the mueller press conference was. it is quite obvious that it was to revive the issue and put a little bit more wind in the sales of the pro-impeachment crowd on capitol hill. i also think the democrats all along have been looking for the opportunity despite all the hemming and hawing about how trump has been so unethical and terrible. they are not sure they have enough to impeach him yet. if it were that day or a threat to the country into our institutions, you would think ty would already know that and they would not be making obvious political calculations whether they should do this. i

. >>> let's bring in paul butler, former federal prosecutor and an msnbc analyst, and harry litman, former deputy assistant attorney general during the clinton administration. he's also the creator of the podcast "talking fed." paul, the president was on the south lawn this morning and he was asked about impeachment. here's how he responded. >> i don't see how they can because they're probably allowed, although i can't imagine the courts allowing it. i've never got into it. i never thought that would be possible to be using that word. to me it's a dirty word, the word impeach. it's a dirty, filthy, disgusting word. it had nothing to do with me. so i don't think so because there was no crime. >> so the president says there was no crime. but to remind folks, robert mueller said yesterday plain as day, if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. so what's your reaction to president trump's defense of himself? >> you know, the politics may counsel against impeachment for speaker pelosi, but trump is running scared. he does not want mueller to

thank you, harry litman, susan page, julia ainsley and donny deutsch. >>> the house judiciary committeeoves to hold attorney general william barr in const t contempt. >>> president trump ran against so-called stupid wars now he and his national security adviser, the neocon-john bolton appear to be ginning up wars with iran and even venezuela. why do they want to hear this tough hawkish talk? much more to come tonight. stick with us. e to come tonight stick with us. introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger, it's the right gear. with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough. featuring three new dishes that are planked-to-perfection. feast on new cedar-plank lobster & shrimp. or new colossal shrimp & salmon with a citrusy drizzle. tender, smoky, and together on one plank... ...but not for long- so hurry in! i'm missing out on our family outings because i can't find a bladder leakage