clinton's defenders went after ken starr hard.enders and trump himself are going after robert mueller with abandon. but there is one notable difference between now and then, at least, because back then, in august of 1998 when bill clinton admitted he had lied and the prospects of perjury became real, fox news took a poll and they asked americans, what do you think of the investigation, of the job ken starr is doing as independent counsel? and only 36% said they approved of it. 44% said they disapproved of starr's work, as independent counsel. that was august 1998. now, fast forward 20 years to august 2008, to the president and fox news just took another poll. this time they asked, what do you think of the mueller investigation? and this time, they found broad support, 59% say they approved, 37% say they don't. the clinton attacks on ken starr resonated, trump's on robert mueller seem to be landing differently. it doesn't mean trump is doomed. we still don't know what, if anything, mueller will end up reporting back, we don't know

ken starr came out with a report accusing the president of a crime, perjury. the white house party, we tell you every time we're on this doing election previews this year, the white house party always loses seats. they gained seats. that told folks there was a backlash against the idea of impeaching clinton. this is the bottom line story of 1998. by the end of that year when impeachment was being pushed by republicans the question was asked, did the president of the united states commit a crime. the vast majority of americans said yes. bill clinton committed a crime, a perjury. those same americans were asked, okay, he committed a crime, should he be impeached? and the vast majority there said no. they needed democrats to go along to convict, and democrats looked otthose numbers, the election and said no, there's no need for us to bolt on this president. and they survived. >>> steve when we come back from a break will be joined by a guy who was there for it and witnessed it. that and more when we come back. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabete

to ask a president as part of an independent counsel, kind of what mueller was, he's working for ken starrou blush and wretch. but i will argue they'll make trump a lot more uncomfortable than you. why? next. ave moderate to severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. 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 should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other si

remember that when ken starr issued his recommendations on president clinton, one of the articles of impeachment was effectively for president bitten line to the public and for his public statements, basically saying that was an effort to obstruct justice. i do want to say was radical, but he bowled out for a ken starr at the time and it would be interesting to say that some team mueller adopts as well. >> something else in the fbi issues a report very critical of the way the clinton e-mail investigation was handled. the conclusions frankly are not that surprising. >> i think you have to focus on what were the actual conclusions and what were the statements about state of the fbi? the only sort of firm declarative conclusions that were drawn by the inspector general about real sort of misconduct was with regard to james comey of public statements in july and october. the report suggests either a shares are the fbi, appearance of bias, which is a concern. loretta lynch for example should've cut the meeting with bill clinton. but when it comes to actual decisions that were made by the

can you imagine if bill clinton had walked up to the podium and said, janet reno should fire ken starr. that would have provoked a cataclysmic scandal and a cataclysmic counter reduction, both democrats and republicans. the twit it's a heck of a me it's beneficial in other ways. it's the s ed 201 harry, are you a member of the club despite all of the great bylines. i may be a member. one confidante said that the president is, quote, in a dark place. the president has been furious. it's been building over the last couple of weeks. he was furious at the media the way that he felt that he was not given enough credit for the meeting with vladimir putin. putin was portrayed, he felt like he didn't get enough credit for meeting with kim jong-un in singapore. and you've got a president who feels the media is attacking him and the government is coming in and attacking him right now. you have in addition to the manafort trial on television, the president has been deeply shaken by the ongoing investigation of the audiotape and that set him off. the president is not in a good place. >> john heilm

involved in ken starr's commission investigating president clinton. he was dramatically and personally involved in it, is a you know from reading the document. a few years later he wrote an article for the university of law review where he reversed and came to the conclusion that a sitting president should not be subject to either indictment or investigation of prosecution. i him about this. it is a timely and important question. issue ofnow if this legal culpability is going to rise to the highest levels, but i would like to know how a new member of the supreme court of use it. he tried to draw a distinction university of minnesota long review did not have anything to do with the constitutionality of such a decision. he was, in his words, making a recommendation to congress that members -- that a president should not be prosecuted or investigated during the course of his time in office but only after he leaves office. that is much different than what we met -- read at the long review. there is no clarity in the position as to whether or not president

mitch mcconnell during the bill clinton impeachment process of an independent counsel named ken starren to how he sounded, mitch mcconnell then and discuss how he's changed over the 20 years. >> our nation is indeed at the crossroads. where we pursue the search for truth or dodge and weave and avoid the truth? i'm talking of illegal conduct of the president of the united states. that the president engaged in a persistent pattern and path of obstruction. the attacks on kenneth starr are unconscionable. the attacks, the ruthless onslaughts carried out by the closest advisers to the president of the united states. i think it is important that the president and the people stop the smear campaign. let ken starr do the job and let the american people learn the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> that was then. >> this is -- and this is now. so, do i think that we're going to hear mitch mcconnell ever say that about robert mueller? no. when pigs fly. it's just not going to happen. unless -- once again, we don't know what robert mueller has to say. >> yes. >> if there is some

nothing to do with whitewater which is where ken starr began. don't remember republicans jumping up to bill clinton's defense saying, how dare you, ken starr. that has nothing to do with whitewater. now when they say it, and we don't know where robert mueller is going to end. we're in the early chapters. when sean hannitys and the united states senate say this has nothing to do with russia, why are we doing this? >> you have for the next number of weeks before the election an interesting pr battle. we'll see which side wins. on the whoonone hand, the repubs are betting they can make the pr case that they can undermine the credibility of all of these people. you saw them trying to undermine, well, cohen is going to have trouble. he doesn't have any credibility. the same way they've been consistently trying with the help of the president to undermine the credibility of mueller and the angry democrats and all of that. the democrats on the other side are -- having been given a gift of being able to describe a culture of corruption, right? and that's

to jennifer's point, they're looking at the bill clinton and ken starr model and playing this out justremember, i'm sure the president does not want to be in this situation, since he has to be, he looks at bill clinton, kind of turned out okay to him. i'm going to the air waves. i'm going to deploy rudy, i'm going to pitch our argument in the public domain and let the chips fall where they may and i have a pretty good chance of surviving this. >> just big picture, just that they're looking to the bill clinton model as donald trump given the 2016 election and who he was running against, we're in bizarre world. i appreciate that conversation. >>> coming up next on cnn, the president declaring victory in ohio even though the special election there is still too close to call. does the cliff hanger spell trouble for republicans ahead of the midterms? >>> and moments from now, republican congressman chris collins is set to be arraigned. we will take you there. jimmy's gotten used to his whole room smelling like sweaty odors. yup, he's gone noseblind. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom sme

that statement led to one lifelong republican who worked for ken starr's clinton investigation to now say he will vote for a democrat. joining us now is paul rosenswag, deputy secretary for policy department of homeland security and contributor to the law fair blog. i'm a fan boy of that. thank you for being with us, paul. i want to play that recording of devin nunes to hear it again. let's listen. >> if sessions won't unrecuse and mueller won't clear the president, we're the only ones. by the way i mean we have to keep all of these -- we're the only ones. >> meaning republicans in congress. what did you find so offensive in that that would lead you to for the very first time in your life as far as we know vote for a democrat? >> first time in a federal election. i voted locally in d.c. for a while and voted for some democratic candidates here. but really, it's the abdication of responsibility, the republican party seems to me to no longer deserve my support or frankly the support of anybody who thinks that the legislative branch should act as a check and balance against executive awe

you know based on the white water investigation ken starr, white water went to monica lunsky.el. >> yes. and why there has been a lot of criticism of the independent investigators and why there was a lot of criticism of ken starr 20 years ago and which there's been a reluctance to do that. so i think that is going to be a political question. it's going to be a question of do we really -- does it mean all -- anything that the -- the special investigator or the special counsel i should say wants to investigate. so i think that will be a political discussion point. but i think the more we get away from the russian collusion, if we do -- and you're right we don't know what the mueller report is going to be -- if it deviates from that substantially and goes to the matters regarding michael cohen, i think politically it favors the president. >> fair point. adolpho jenn, sarah korean thanks very much. a lot more to talk about. back to aretha franklin from former bill clinton to adriana granda moving tributes often musical to the queen of soul. aretha franklin in detroit. performances

and i think that he's going to try the ken starr route.ongressional election, i suspect like in '98 it will boomerang, and if he does it after, he'll see which way congress goes to see if he can get impeachment, although it's a fruitless exercise in the absence of any evidence that the public doesn't know. everybody saw the firing of james comey, everybody knows his story in the terms of what he did in these investigations. you know, the whole thing now has become a national waste of time and preoccupation when we should be debating the issues. david: in his defense, what he would say is, look, we found out things about the way the russians operated in the 2016 election that neededded to be uncovered, so there has been some progress made, there have been people indicted, etc., to which you say what? >> look, those were show indictments of russian intelligence. just before a summit. maybe we were trying to get a different relationship with russia so we could get help on iran, help versus china and north korea. he's influencing and affecting

at the time, clinton was trying to avoid questions from ken starr.the same way that president trump is trying to do right now with the russia investigation. well, kavanaugh wrote this memo encouraging prosecutors to question former president bill clinton in graphic detail about his sexual relationship with lewinsky. a source close to kavanaugh says looking back he might have changed some words at the time but he stands by the approach of trying to hold a president accountable for bad behavior. and that is newly relevant because if kavanaugh is confirmed, he could be asked to rule on issues surrounding the special counsel investigation and president trump, chris. >> jeff, thank you so much for that. also on judge kavanaugh's schedule today, senator claire mccaskill. a red state democrat in a tough re-election fight who faces mounting pressure from anti-abortion advocates to confirm that conservative judge. i traveled to missouri to meet with them. they think 45 years after roe v. wade, this could be their moment. in southern missouri, the t-shirts tel

one of our final trials was in the eastern district of virginia, when i worked for ken starr.he jury deadlocked 11-1 for conviction. we talked to the jurors afterwards. there was one person on that jury who was not going to vote against bill clinton. all you need is one juror. that's one of the things that makes the president's comments so very disturbing. >> so let's come back to the jury. it's a risky business. it's been a while, but i used to cover trials when i started this business. the jury comes back with questions. that's when everyone starts trying to get the ouija board. define reasonable doubt. does that tell you, what? are there any clues to that? should the prosecution be worried? they're not sure what reasonable doubt is? >> i would have been worried last night. as a prosecutor, you really don't like to even hear the phrase reasonable doubt. don't even like to say it in the courtroom myself when i was a prosecutor. the timing was worrisome yesterday. it seemed very early for them to be asking that. it could have indicated some dissension. on the other hand, it's

, did you see the memo that judge kavanaugh -- now judge kavanaugh wrote when he was working for ken starrresident, the questions that he wrote? the salacious and disgusting questions that's what's going to be the headline. a lot of people are going to avoid them. not me. but not for the reason that you think. what came before this page, this is so meaningful. why? because kavanaugh was working for starr, and he was under attack by then president clinton. and they came to really resent what was being done and created and hardness and a harshness on the team. that's what rudy has reason to worry about, that a memo like this is sitsiting on mueller's desk right now. look at some of the things that kavanaugh, this is the man the president wants to be our next supreme court just. this is what's coming out of him. we're not going to give him any break until he resigns or confesses to perjury. the idea of going easy on him is abhorrent to me. listen to the reason. what he's especially convinced me of, the appropriateness of obtaining his full and complete testimony, why? he goes onto talk about

i think the precedent to look at is the ken starr investigation of bill clinton.nd if you remember, the clinton lawyers and ken starr and white water prosecutors, one of whom i might add was brett kavanaugh now nominated for the supreme court engaged in a great deal of to limit interview in the end president clinton backed down from the interview. even though he could have said much like mr. giuliani is suggesting i don't have to cooperate. i'm not going to answer. i think clinton did the right thing. he is the head of federal law enforcement as president. he should cooperate because it sends a message throughout the whole legal system. if the president is going to cooperate, how is the justice department going to get people on the inside of mafia or drug cartels to cooperate with the government. i think the president is not just a private citizen. he is the hid under the constitution of all law enforcement. he should comply with his own prosecutors. if he thinks mueller is doing a terrible job, he can fire mueller and replace him with somebody else. but he still

. >> ken starr is, in fact, a hero. >> kavanaugh has long-time links to ken starr, working as the lead the controversial "starr report," looking at clinton's scandals, and praising starr at an appreciation dinner in 1999. >> maybe i'm an optimist, but one day, i, for myself, hope to be able to call him mr. justice starr. >> of course, now, it is brett kavanaugh who could end up being justice kavanaugh. much of this strategy that was put together by the white house and team kavanaugh was, in fact, designed and tailors to susan collins, to show that kavanaugh, in their view, is a qualified judge and not a partisan figure. collins said, that's part of it, but i want to make sure somebody has good judicial precedent and understands the importance of it. all eyes on collins today, jeff. >> she said it is important to uphold roh v-- roe verse wade. >> he considered it precedent. that was my judgment, as well. i was glad to hear him say that at that time. obviously, it is an issue that i'm going to raise with him. >> so, that is clearly part of the playbook for her today. >> absolutely. it is

the clinton attacks on ken starr resonated, trump's on robert mueller seem to be landing differently. it doesn't mean trump is doomed. we still don't know what, if anything, mueller will end up reporting back, we don't know how the public will process it. but for now, the public at least seems more willing to hear him out than they ever did with ken starr. that is "hardball" for now. thanks for being us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now ppt. >>> tonight on "all in" -- >> hello, florida. >> -- primary night in america. >> do the people in this room like sheriff joe? >> tonight, why the president is now warning supporters of violence if republicans lose the midterms. and the latest on all the big races in arizona and florida. >>> then, paul manafort's new request as trial number two ramps up. >> that's obviously what the opposition is. >>> plus, a new entry on the list of trump scandals republicans refused to investigate. >> was anyone else at the white house involved with briefing you? >>> and a grim update on the devastation in puerto rico. >> what is your death count as of

, or if he had taken to the op-ed page of "the new york times" and said janet reno should fire ken starr, that would have provoked a cataclysmic reaction, both democrat and republican. that's a long time ago. twitter is a sewer, a cesspool, a horrible medium in some ways, beneficial in others, but it's the same thing as the podium and it's the same thing as the op-ed page of "the new york times" in 2018. >> those words are hanging out there tonight. harry, are you a member of the club, despite all the great by-lines tonight, that will believe a mueller/trump meeting when you see it? >> in other words, i'll believe it when i see it, i don't think it's going to happen. i'm a long term card carrying member of that club. however much they pare it down, it will be questions that if he answers them falsely, he will be subject to criminal penalty. and they're not going to be softballs like, did you have corrupt intent. they'll be things like, for example, did you know flynn was under investigation when you told comey to let up on him. we've just had new reporting that shows he does. there are p

on many levels, this is payback, this is interesting, for the ken starr fiasco.was tasked with whitewater and went into all new areas. now, politically, when the complaint comes in from you and i, wait a minute, he was supposed to look at russian collusion with the trump campaign and you have people in the media saying his campaign manager was just convicted of a crime and tloohey leave it ther. it was ten years before he was involved with the campaign. fact of the matter is to your question, finally, honestly, i agree with you. i don't think these guys necessarily have a lot to offer. that's the part everybody wants to gloss over in their zeal to get the president. you have guys on tv all day today, now that manafort has been convicted, now will he cooperate. guess what, in the real world, when you make prosecutors go through a full-blown trial, they almost never want to hear from you. john: the ken starr investigation led to impeachment, which was the worst thing they could do because people turned on them. who would they be doing this in favor of? is this the

>> there is an historical precedent for bill clinton testifying aer leengy negotiations with ken starr's team. clinton insisted that the interview be held at the wte house. he didn't want theagery of going somewhere else on starr's turf. there was a limit to the time, four hours and also the lawyers were present. the president's lawyers were present for the interview,hich is unusual in the case of grand jury testimony,o there is historical precedent for a president cooperating. of course that interview laid the groundwork for the articles of impeachme that were drafted against bill clinton. robert: what's the real story, phil. the president's lawyers keep saying they're not going to answer obstruction questions. is this all a delay tactic to try to prevent the subpoena from coming out before the mid >> a lot of it we've seen in the past few mths is a p.r. battle between the president's legal team and the mueller side, which is invisible to the public in is negotiation back and forth. there could be some sort of an interview. it seems like there's a little bit more willingness on the pres

clinton stood up in the white house press office in 1995 and said, i think janet reno should fire ken starr, we would all, everyone would have had a ka nipgs. it would have been the obvious thing in the world. it is now 2018. this is the equivalent of bill clinton standing up in the white house press office saying janet reno should fire ken starr when donald trump does it to his twitter followers, tens of millions of them, it's the same thing. >> you know, i figured out all the reporting you and your colleagues have done about all of the white house staffers that have gone into mueller's investigation offices and testified to all of what john heilman just detailed. hope hicks has been with mueller's investigators. reince priebus has testified, steve bannon has testified. there are witnesses to everything everyone is talking about. the firing of jim comey, the desire to fire jeff sessions, the desire to fire bob mueller. what is the purpose served? is it simply to sort of play the last card that they're holding or the last chip to carry over heilman's poker analysis and say all we've got is

there's no precedent for and i've been over president in fact former special counsels including ken starr have delayed indictments or pursuing criminal prosecutions of presidents until they've left office so the precedent set is that they don't indict sitting presidents ok we have though seen legal troubles for the trump team for the president before him talking about general michael flynn impregnated of course in a potential wrongdoing allegations at least is the cohen case different yes it is in some ways i mean when you talk about michael flynn when you talk about paul metaphor these are really associations. and there's a lot of correlations there but there's no causalities with michael cohen you have a direct causal relationship you know we have these tapes that cohen himself or at least where he's discussing payments to appear mcdougall so we have much stronger evidence that there's a smoking gun here ok doesn't let's let's get our viewers the background now in that second case that could put pressure on the u.s. president another former trump associate his former campaign manager pa

he worked with ken starr. just an outstanding, influential jurist. quite a shrewd choice by president trump. it will be an interesting battle. thank you very much. great conversation. i appreciate it. we will be right back. [applause] >> you're watching coverage from the 2018 resurgent gathering in austin, texas, hosted by erick erickson. selena zito discussed the populist movement in the 2016

one of the most -- he worked with ken starr. just an outstanding, influential jurist. choice byrewd president trump. it will be an interesting battle. thank you very much. great conversation. i appreciate it. we will be right back. [applause] >> you're watching coverage from the 2018 resurgent gathering in in austin, texas, hosted by erick erickson. discussed the populist movement in the 2016 election and how she knew president trump would win the presidency. so i am really excited. i was telling her that i wanted to invite her to come but i did not want to invite her to come because i know she is really busy, and she is flying in today to hang out with us and then literally has to fly back home because she has got an even tomorrow that she has to be at, so she came in just a couple hours ago and will leave again. we are not going to have an opportunity to do the cooking show i want to do with her. notve a copy and i have read it yet because i am doing phd work and i am reading lots so i have not had time for normal books, but i intend to read it. i have been reading h

one of the most -- he worked with ken starr. just an outstanding, influential jurist. choice byrewd president trump. it will be an interesting battle. thank you very much. great conversation. i appreciate it. we will be right back. [applause] >> you're watching coverage from the 2018 resurgent gathering in in austin, texas, hosted by erick erickson. discussed the populist movement in the 2016 election and how she knew president trump would win the presidency. so i am really excited. i was telling her that i wanted to invite her to come but i did not want to invite her to come because i know she is really busy, and she is flying in today to hang out with us and then literally has to fly back home because she has got an even tomorrow that she has to be at, so she came in just a couple hours ago and will leave again. we are not going to have an opportunity to do the cooking show i want to do with her. notve a copy and i have read it yet because i am doing phd work i

one of the most -- he worked with ken starr. just an outstanding, influential jurist. choice byrewd president trump. it will be an interesting battle. thank you very much. great conversation. i appreciate it. we will be right back. [applause] trump would win the presidency. so i am rea >> i was excited. her to come because i know she is really busy, and she is flying in today to hang out with us and then literally has to fly back home because she has got an even tomorrow that she has to be at, so she came in just a couple hours ago and will leave again. we are not going to have an opportunity to do the cooking show i want to do with her. notve a copy and i have read it yet because i am doing phd work and i am reading lots so i have not had time for normal books, but i intend to read it. i have been reading her for years. please welcome salena zito. [applause] >> we were having this discussion offstage about it. my wife from south georgia, i told her a pecan is something you flesh, but she is committed to it being applied. salena: we are going to do a cooking book and w

one of the most -- he worked with ken starr. just an outstanding, influential jurist. choice byrewd president trump. it will be an interesting battle. thank you very much. great conversation. i appreciate it. we will be right back. [applause]

we remember when ken starr issued his report after many, many boxes on the other side of the capital. robert mueller will make a decision he has a lot of evidence already right now. it would be highly relevant for the midterm elections. >> norms are a little ambiguous guided by the desire not to be involved that is so hard that the answer is in late october i could not find a way to avoid inaction even if i desperately wanted to but i don't know his degrees of freedom because no wendy except where is. >>host: what a great audiences is then. it's impressive how many people lined up and how long in your questions are thoughtful questions. this is from a 15-year-old from the lab say at what point you sure respect and trust for trump? [applause] mag who let that kid in here? [laughter] my concern about the president telling the truth really this is overtime i was concerned enough it was important to document my first meeting but there is also another zurn there was an accounting of the meeting before i did the private peace thereafter was increasingly concerned that i was interacting abou

i can remember what the clinton administration did to ken starr to delegitimize anything he would come with. remember what the bush administration did, bush 41, did to lawrence walsh. this is not a new playbook. everybody when you're being investigated by someone in this circumstance does that. >> when you're ken starr and spend three years to affirm that, yes, vince foster did indeed commit side, there's a need to delegitimize that. >> where you stands depends on where you sit. by the way, this started as was there collusion and we're watching a trial this week against paul manafort about conflict that happened in 2005 regarding taxes that's being brought by a special counsel. >> and that's how these things work. i'm sorry that trump didn't know this. >> my point isn't that that is a valid prosecution. my point is to patrick's point. that's what happens to special counsels and that's why there's delegitimatization by all these folks. >> i think there's a determination that perhaps manafort had a reason why he had to rely on russian oligarchs which speaks to the issue of collusion. >>

. >> ken starr is, in fact, a hero. >> kavanaugh has long-time links to ken starr, theead investigator at the clinton scandal. >> maybe o i'm animist but one day i for myself hope to be able toallim mr. justice starr. >> and what else can you tell us about kavanaugh and what we should be watching. >> reporter: a big day and morning for him. he is going to have the mos important meeting of the whole process so far, the one withsa collins of maine. she's a moderate republican,er cons a pivotalwing vote. it feels like everybody on both sides of this are familiar with the stakes here. the official said the entire h pa been designed partly to appeal to collins to show that he is a qualified judge and not we asked collins about that, she said that's part of what she nts to see, but she's looking for someone who respects dicial precedence. >>> much more to get to this morning, including the investigation into a rare and deadly alligator attack in south caroimna. the vi a woman who was walking her dog at the time. here's nbc's kerry sanders. >> reporter: it was a routine walkk that t an unthin

. >> as you know, i spent a year fighting ken starr because i thought this was the wrong direction, a wasted year for the country then. and i think it is a wasted year here in so much airtime with mueller. i was stunned when they got him to plead guilty to things that were not even crimes to reach out to implicate president trump related to this campaign contributions, which frankly should and a civil matter even if they were campaign contributions, which i highly doubt they are based on my long experience with campaign. lou: and your judgment that hillary clinton gives every appearance of being far guiltier than anyone assist he did with a special counsel, at least the targets of this special counsel at this point. she was given a free pass. give the president some counsel here tonight. >> well look, the president has got to defeat the mueller investigation. he's doing basically the right thing. i think his tweets often times go over the top. but i think when you go back, as this investigation by a? yes it is. was the foundation corrupt? it really was. the more you look at what happe

can you imagine if bill clinton had walked up to the podium and said, janet reno should fire ken starr. that would have provoked a cataclysmic scandal and a cataclysmic counter reduction, both democrats and republicans. there are a lot of things about twitter. it's a heck of a medium in some ways. it's beneficial in other ways. it's the same thing that the op ed is in "the new york times" in 2018. >> those words are hanging out there. harry, are you a member of the club despite all of the great bylines. i may be a member. you'll believe a mueller/trump meeting when you see it? >> in other words, i'll believe it when i see it like i don't think it's going to happen. i'm a long term card carrying member of that club. i think however much they pare it down, it will be questions if he answers them falsely he'll be subject to criminal charges. there will be questions did you know flynn was under investigation? we have new reports that shows he was. there are probably half a doze other thing that trump doesn't know and mueller does and, yeah, i don't see his sitting down with them under any

this was really anon extraordinary unusual access and there was former whitewater ken starr investigatorso say they would've loved this kind of access, like having the keys to the kingdom. >> i want to dig into one part of "the new york times" article. allison touched on it. i want to pop it up on the screen because it is critical to this whole conversation. mr. mcgahn and his lawyer could not understand why mr. trump was so willing to allow mr. mcgahn to speak freely to the special counsel to take the blame for any possible legal access of obstruction. they devise their own strategy to do as much as possible to cooperate and demonstrate they did nothing wrong. if that turns out to be true in fact cannot independently confirm it's true, but if it turns out, if mcgahn was so worried he would throw him under the bus, couldn't the strategy backfire? >> it certainly could. many legal observers say that this is crazy that the president would allow his lawyer, the white house lawyer to go and talk to an investigator who's investigating potential crime that the president and the president's camp

in the last investigation of a president, ken starr, when he was an independent counsel, disagreed with that. he said you can indict a sitting president. although, in that case, he decided not to. but current doj guidance says you don't indict a sitting president and bob mueller is governed by that. that itself not to say bob mueller can't -- >> it can't be changed. >> that's right. >> i heard all week long, i heard this whisper down the lane all week long by legal pundits, accepting this as gospel, guidance can be changed and the reason mr. garber that i ask you not only about mueller and the southern district but also the new york attorney general and the manhattan da is for sure the latter two wouldn't be obligated to follow that standard. >> no, although, you know the notion of a state indicting and prosecuting a sitting president raises all sorts of constitutional issues. i doubt the state would go out on a littleb and potentially mess up a federal investigation by doing that. i think right now the state investigations are probably more concerning for, football onnumb post-presiden

i fought ken starr in 98 and i've been outspoken i think this investigation is wrong.nk judge ellis clearly knows that manafort is on trial by the independent counsel with the entire weight of the largesr prosecutorial machinery almost ever built only because he spent two months as trump campaign manager, he might've had a trial but not two indictments, even without bail, even harvey weinstein is out on a million dollars bail. this is not the way anybody really expects the american justice system to work. i am puzzled -- hatred of trump is so broad, people are forgetting the first principles is that we all have to agree on a system that's fair to all. >> mark: will get into judge o ellis and the manafort trial later on the show. mark zuckerberg has more of your personal information than anyone in human history but he's not done enough and he wants more. he's asking banks to shareny thr customers financial information, that's up next. ♪ it is such a good time to kiss ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to [ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ sc

. >> ken starr give the subpoena. the issue may have never reached the supreme court. >> jennifer rubin, that possibility that if the special counsel, mueller and his team do feel it is essential to sit down with president trump and get to this state of mind question, what do you think happens if there is a subpoena? >> well, i think there will be a subpoena if unless he is very satisfied that he really has him dead to right. whether he would, for example have to come into a grand jury without his lawyer and done on videotape, those sorts of logistical tape. not the subject matter. what happens when he gets the subpoena, his lawyers say we don't have to respond to this. we are above the law or some other reason. the prosecutor goes to court and says please order mr. trump to show up. he gets an affirmative ruling or not. if at some point he gets a ruling that he has got to show up and trump doesn't show up, we continue to the supreme court and ultimately the supreme court is going to have to decide does the president

he worked for ken starr on the bill clinton investigation in the 1990s.ever voted for a democrat. now he says in the midterms he will vote for a democrat because he thinks what the republicans are doing with regard to the mueller investigation is inn excusable -- inexcusable. this is what he is saying. the president will get the support he needs. paul will be here to say why he is voting for a democrat. >> i'll stop by to talk about harley-davidson and the president talking about boycotting an american company. remarkable. >> i'm glad you are doing that story. the idea of a republican going head-to-head with harley. i would never have said that is possible. >> thank you, john. >>> a crisis in turkey. rattling stocks. europe opene eed lower. erdogan's government to step in to stop the currency crisis in turkey. the lira fell 11% overnight before recovering. the central bank stepped in. lira fell 20% last week. inflation is rising. the president is feuding with president trump. what happens in turkey matters. this nato ally shares a border with syria. the c

the issue hasn't been litigated but in the past bill clinton sat down with ken starr in part becausethat the signal it sends to the american public if you refuse to answer yeses about your behavior is dramatic and as republicans brace for what's happening in ohio today win or lose this kind of thing reinforces the doubts among the white collar voters that trump has been driving away from the republican party so while there's a legal debate about whether it makes sense, the politics of this seem to me very somes now and dangerous for the president to refuse. >> but don't forget his win was politically incredible. his win went against the polling, right? so this may continue to be different territory. when you look, renato, legally at this, the president's story changed about why the trump tower meeting was taken, what is your read on why his legal team is worried about these most recent tweets. >> well, this is a matter, kate, that is under investigation by the special counsel and i will tell you now that i'm on the other side and represent clients under investigation i would not want

if the president admits that he knew about the meeting down the president did something that both ken starr, and the nixon prosecutors, archibald cox, as that was an impeachable offense and that is using the instruments of the government to lie to the american public. the instruments of the government would be air force one when he dictated the statement saying it was just about russian adoptions. so the president's knowledge is key here to drawing the president into this, but it is not key to drawing donald junior in and he's already in. >> sandra: judge andrew napolitano, thanks for being here tonight. here now are michael cavuto, former trump campaign senior advisor and jonah goldberg. i know a lot of people at home or having hard time keeping track of who said what, and when people said what and who was when, where. so what conclusion can you draw from all of this? >> it's a hot mess. i think the judge had it pretty well -- i think collusion cuts both ways in president trump's favor and against him because it's not a legal term. because it is not a crime, i think this meeting does quali

the parallel to the '90s when bill clinton was under investigation by ken starr and the economy boomedpeople didn't really care about the investigation. if that's the case here, it benefits donald trump and republicans. >> dana: any concern for that deirdre was reporting because of the trade issues, prices are going up, even coke a cola saying they'll to have raise their prices a little bit. middle class wages, low income going up, but do they get eaten up by cost increases? >> everything feels different these days, with donald trump. inflation unless it's rampant doesn't hurt you as much as if your wages are not going up f your wages are going up you feel better. you don't foo notice that your coke costs five cents more or airline ticket costs 5% more. you're making more money week-to-week. >> dana: and maybe your anxiety is alleviated and that makes you feel better about things. i want to ask about this, the economy is so good, should we be trying to make hay while the sun shines, in terms of the structural problems? there's a problem with pensions, people forget about pensions, we d

of questions about the pier 1 was the mission, the strongest kitchen where he was number two to ken starrccording to reports he was the most aggressive on the staff. he was according to some, a partisan hatchet man pretty push to investigate whether there was a suicide or murder when there was absolutely no evidence that it was murder. he was a push can start to ask very aggressive questions about bill clinton's sexual history which many thought was just over the top. and then in the bush administration, he first started as deputy to gonzales as general counsel when huge important decisions were being made. there was absolutely unprecedented. he was, he had to admit part of that. it will be important to know what role he had, what he thought and what he had to say. and then to a more influential role, staff secretary. it is not simply a traffic cop. you can look at who did what and who moved from which positions to tell that harriet myers had the position, gonzales, who does not come out well in this period, was general counsel, white house counsel, gonzales moved to be attorney general.